AS Christian Thought Essay Plans
1. Augustine & Human Nature
Are Augustine’s teachings on a historical Fall and Original Sin wrong?
St Augustine was a 4th century theologian and prolific writer. He wrote extensively on human nature
and used biblical Scripture to justify his views. His views centred around the notion of original sin,
where he explored ideas around the implications of the disobedience from Adam and Eve which
caused a turning point for humanity.
P1 – they are not wrong
Strengths of Augustine’s view
⁃ Simplicity of the argument - provides a substantial explanation to the presence of evil and
existence of a God (addresses the problem of the inconsistent triad - JL Mackie).
⁃ He is realistic about human temptation, and uses his own experiences and weaknesses to
highlight such issues
⁃ Many Christians take the Bible as the literal Word of God – thus we should take everything it
says literally, and not symbolically or as a metaphor. His views are appealing to them.
⁃ Encourages humanity to take responsibility for its own actions and recognise its failings
⁃ He makes valuable distinctions between the love of materials goods and love of others
⁃ He recognises his own weaknesses and is willing to engage with everyday human experience
- recognition of human imperfection leads to moral progress
⁃ However, main criticism is his literal interpretation of events of the fall - this is not helpful
for those who read it as a metaphor, and so cannot connect with the idea that we are all
direct descendent of Adam and Eve, and have been passed down this corrupt sin from
ancestors.
⁃ The idea of a loving God punishing people for sins committed by others can seem hard to
accept
P2 - too pessimistic, and multiple inconsistencies – against Augustine
- This view of transmission of sin is flawed - Richard Dawkins advocates for the theory of
evolution, which directly contradicts biblical scripture that say we come from Adam and
eve
- Also, Steven Pinker’s Humanitarian Principle can counter views of Augustine
- Dawkins is strong as uses empirical observation and scientific evidence to show evolution
rather than everyone direct descendants of Adam and eve. Many Christians take the bible as
symbolic – including creation genesis story and the story of Adam and Eve.
- Pelagius would argue sin is freely chosen rather than accepted. There is no physical evidence
we have a natural inclination for sin. Aquinas would argue instead due to synderesis, we
have an innate inclination to do good and avoid evil.
- Not compatible with an all-loving God. Seems contradictory for such a God to grant salvation
only for some, yet emphasis how we are all corrupt from the moment we are born. This
distorts the hopeful Christian message of the goodness and love of God and the promise of
salvation. Is there any point trying to be good if we cannot do so through our own efforts?
- Neihbur argues no action is truly good – what about good intention?
- However, radical protestants agree with Augustine and original sin due to the idea of
predestination – we are corrupt for its Gods choice. Calvinism. But in Catholic Church
whilst accepting original sin, the tradition from Aquinas has been to focus on reason and
good works.
, P3 – his assumption of human nature - it is wrong to say humans are fundamentally corrupt
- Bring in views from Kai Nielson – argues that there is no one unified human nature.
- John Locke argues instead we are born morally neutral with a blank slate – ‘tabula rasa’
- Thomas Hobbes would agree with Augustine as he argues that in our state of nature, we are
nasty brutish and short.
- But Rousseau would say we are in fact born free but are just detrimentally affected by
society. It is reasonable to conclude this.
Is Augustine’s view of human nature pessimistic or optimistic?
P1 - no it is realistic (strengths of Augustine).
- Allows for moral progress once we acknowledge this
- Recognises human flaws and imperfect actions in the world
- Helps address the inconsistent triad argument by JL Mackie
- Offers hope that some of us can be saved by the grace of God
- However, is it cruel of a God to punish the future generations for something two people (and
which many people did not actually happen, as passages in the Bible are just symbolic)
P2 - yes, it is - due to emphasis on nothing we can do to change this
- Augustine is flawed to take a literal interpretation of genesis, whereas many belief it should
be taken metaphorically. Counter - the bible should be demythologised.
- his focus on sin and corruption distorts the hopeful Christian message of the goodness and
love of God and the promise of salvation. Is there any point trying to be good? Does it really
mean babies are born morally corrupt? This seems unreasonable.
- John Locke’s argues we are born morally neutral, known as ‘tabula rasa’
- Jean-Jacques Rousseau argues we are born with a morally good disposition but detrimentally
affected by society.
P3 - Augustine is pessimistic - errors with the idea about transmission of sin
- Richard Dawkins uses the theory of evolution to direct contradict the idea that we all come
from Adam and Eve
- Steven Pinker’s humanitarian principle also contradicts that view are innately sinful
- Counter with the grace of God = Augustine it optimistic because he does say there is some
method of salvation – offered through the grace of God. However, this is not helpful because
still uncertain for people. Link with idea about election and predestination - one feels
powerless and out of control.
2. Death & Afterlife
Assess limited election / ‘Everyone goes to heaven’ – Discuss.
P1 - election is limited - Augustine and John Calvin (does this compromise free will)
- Due to original sin and events from the fall, all humans are innately sinful and are
undeserving of salvation from God. However, God chooses to save some of us due to his
omnibenevolence.
- Counter = this view is reliant on a literal interpretation of the events of the Fall. Many
Christians take it instead symbolically or as a metaphor. Thus, it is unhelpful for people who
are not fundamentalists.
P2 - everyone goes to heaven - Hick, a universalist.
- He argues that everyone will be saved eventually, whether Christian or not.
1. Augustine & Human Nature
Are Augustine’s teachings on a historical Fall and Original Sin wrong?
St Augustine was a 4th century theologian and prolific writer. He wrote extensively on human nature
and used biblical Scripture to justify his views. His views centred around the notion of original sin,
where he explored ideas around the implications of the disobedience from Adam and Eve which
caused a turning point for humanity.
P1 – they are not wrong
Strengths of Augustine’s view
⁃ Simplicity of the argument - provides a substantial explanation to the presence of evil and
existence of a God (addresses the problem of the inconsistent triad - JL Mackie).
⁃ He is realistic about human temptation, and uses his own experiences and weaknesses to
highlight such issues
⁃ Many Christians take the Bible as the literal Word of God – thus we should take everything it
says literally, and not symbolically or as a metaphor. His views are appealing to them.
⁃ Encourages humanity to take responsibility for its own actions and recognise its failings
⁃ He makes valuable distinctions between the love of materials goods and love of others
⁃ He recognises his own weaknesses and is willing to engage with everyday human experience
- recognition of human imperfection leads to moral progress
⁃ However, main criticism is his literal interpretation of events of the fall - this is not helpful
for those who read it as a metaphor, and so cannot connect with the idea that we are all
direct descendent of Adam and Eve, and have been passed down this corrupt sin from
ancestors.
⁃ The idea of a loving God punishing people for sins committed by others can seem hard to
accept
P2 - too pessimistic, and multiple inconsistencies – against Augustine
- This view of transmission of sin is flawed - Richard Dawkins advocates for the theory of
evolution, which directly contradicts biblical scripture that say we come from Adam and
eve
- Also, Steven Pinker’s Humanitarian Principle can counter views of Augustine
- Dawkins is strong as uses empirical observation and scientific evidence to show evolution
rather than everyone direct descendants of Adam and eve. Many Christians take the bible as
symbolic – including creation genesis story and the story of Adam and Eve.
- Pelagius would argue sin is freely chosen rather than accepted. There is no physical evidence
we have a natural inclination for sin. Aquinas would argue instead due to synderesis, we
have an innate inclination to do good and avoid evil.
- Not compatible with an all-loving God. Seems contradictory for such a God to grant salvation
only for some, yet emphasis how we are all corrupt from the moment we are born. This
distorts the hopeful Christian message of the goodness and love of God and the promise of
salvation. Is there any point trying to be good if we cannot do so through our own efforts?
- Neihbur argues no action is truly good – what about good intention?
- However, radical protestants agree with Augustine and original sin due to the idea of
predestination – we are corrupt for its Gods choice. Calvinism. But in Catholic Church
whilst accepting original sin, the tradition from Aquinas has been to focus on reason and
good works.
, P3 – his assumption of human nature - it is wrong to say humans are fundamentally corrupt
- Bring in views from Kai Nielson – argues that there is no one unified human nature.
- John Locke argues instead we are born morally neutral with a blank slate – ‘tabula rasa’
- Thomas Hobbes would agree with Augustine as he argues that in our state of nature, we are
nasty brutish and short.
- But Rousseau would say we are in fact born free but are just detrimentally affected by
society. It is reasonable to conclude this.
Is Augustine’s view of human nature pessimistic or optimistic?
P1 - no it is realistic (strengths of Augustine).
- Allows for moral progress once we acknowledge this
- Recognises human flaws and imperfect actions in the world
- Helps address the inconsistent triad argument by JL Mackie
- Offers hope that some of us can be saved by the grace of God
- However, is it cruel of a God to punish the future generations for something two people (and
which many people did not actually happen, as passages in the Bible are just symbolic)
P2 - yes, it is - due to emphasis on nothing we can do to change this
- Augustine is flawed to take a literal interpretation of genesis, whereas many belief it should
be taken metaphorically. Counter - the bible should be demythologised.
- his focus on sin and corruption distorts the hopeful Christian message of the goodness and
love of God and the promise of salvation. Is there any point trying to be good? Does it really
mean babies are born morally corrupt? This seems unreasonable.
- John Locke’s argues we are born morally neutral, known as ‘tabula rasa’
- Jean-Jacques Rousseau argues we are born with a morally good disposition but detrimentally
affected by society.
P3 - Augustine is pessimistic - errors with the idea about transmission of sin
- Richard Dawkins uses the theory of evolution to direct contradict the idea that we all come
from Adam and Eve
- Steven Pinker’s humanitarian principle also contradicts that view are innately sinful
- Counter with the grace of God = Augustine it optimistic because he does say there is some
method of salvation – offered through the grace of God. However, this is not helpful because
still uncertain for people. Link with idea about election and predestination - one feels
powerless and out of control.
2. Death & Afterlife
Assess limited election / ‘Everyone goes to heaven’ – Discuss.
P1 - election is limited - Augustine and John Calvin (does this compromise free will)
- Due to original sin and events from the fall, all humans are innately sinful and are
undeserving of salvation from God. However, God chooses to save some of us due to his
omnibenevolence.
- Counter = this view is reliant on a literal interpretation of the events of the Fall. Many
Christians take it instead symbolically or as a metaphor. Thus, it is unhelpful for people who
are not fundamentalists.
P2 - everyone goes to heaven - Hick, a universalist.
- He argues that everyone will be saved eventually, whether Christian or not.
