Five problems for the moral consensus about sins
A number of Christian theologians and philosophers have been critical of overly moralizing approaches to the doctrine of sin, but nearly all Christian thinkers maintain that moral fault is necessary or sufficient for sin to obtain. Call this the “Moral Consensus.” I begin by clarifying the relevance...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Springer Nature B. V
2021
|
In: |
International journal for philosophy of religion
Year: 2021, Volume: 90, Issue: 3, Pages: 157-189 |
Further subjects: | B
Defeasibility
B Moral faults B Pedagogical evil B Dilemmas B Sins |
Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | 1775525473 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20211027042635.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 211027s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11153-021-09795-x |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)1775525473 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1775525473 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
084 | |a 0 |2 ssgn | ||
100 | 1 | |a Ashfield, Mike |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Five problems for the moral consensus about sins |
264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a A number of Christian theologians and philosophers have been critical of overly moralizing approaches to the doctrine of sin, but nearly all Christian thinkers maintain that moral fault is necessary or sufficient for sin to obtain. Call this the “Moral Consensus.” I begin by clarifying the relevance of impurities to the biblical cataloguing of sins. I then present four extensional problems for the Moral Consensus on sin, based on the biblical catalogue of sins: (1) moral over-demandingness, (2) agential unfairness, (3) moral repugnance, and (4) moral atrocity. Next, I survey several partial solutions to these problems, suggested by the recent philosophical literature. Then I evaluate two largely unexplored solutions: (a) genuine sin dilemmas and (b) defeasible sinfulness. I argue that (a) creates more problems than it solves and that, while (b) is well-motivated and solves or eases each of the above problems, (b) leaves many biblical ordinances about sin morally misleading, creating (5) a pedagogical problem of evil. I conclude by arguing that (5) places hefty explanatory burdens on those who would appeal to (b) to resolve the four extensional problems discussed in this paper. So Christian thinkers may need to consider a more radical separation of sin and moral fault. | ||
601 | |a Problem | ||
650 | 4 | |a Pedagogical evil | |
650 | 4 | |a Defeasibility | |
650 | 4 | |a Dilemmas | |
650 | 4 | |a Moral faults | |
650 | 4 | |a Sins | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t International journal for philosophy of religion |d Dordrecht : Springer Nature B.V, 1970 |g 90(2021), 3, Seite 157-189 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320442098 |w (DE-600)2005049-5 |w (DE-576)103746927 |x 1572-8684 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:90 |g year:2021 |g number:3 |g pages:157-189 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-021-09795-x |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
935 | |a mteo | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
ELC | |a 1 | ||
ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
LOK | |0 001 3996673256 | ||
LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
LOK | |0 004 1775525473 | ||
LOK | |0 005 20211027042635 | ||
LOK | |0 008 211027||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-10-26#08B5E76DC1A0FF02EFDE5095601C223CCEAA264C | ||
LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a zota | ||
ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
REL | |a 1 | ||
SUB | |a REL |