Christianity (Paper 3)
,Augustine’s teaching on human nature
,Augustine’s teaching on human nature - AO1 We have a broken human
nature and are inherently
sinful (original sin) because
Adam and Eve lived in a state we are seminally present in
Pre-Fall: of concordia (perfection), Adam – we are inherently
experiencing caritas (agape, drawn towards sin
selfless love and friendship) (concupiscence)
Due to our inherently sinfu
Evil was introduced into the world
nature, we can never earn
through a misuse of human free
Fall: salvation (e.g. through work
will (original sin) and caused the
or good deeds) so can only b
previously perfect human nature to
saved through God’s grace
be ruined
but we do/can not deserve
Only through God’s grace ca
Human nature was broken so that we achieve the greatest goo
we experience concupiscence (summum bonum), but
Post-Fall: should strive to be as close
(sexual lust, tendency to sin) and
cupiditas (selfish love) this as possible in life
, Augustine’s teaching on human nature – AO2
• - other prominent Christian theologians, such as Aquinas, oppositely teach that, although flawed, our nature is st
overwhelmingly inclined towards good rather than evil, as Augustine believes
• - it is not right to apply his own personal experiences and feelings (e.g. a personal inclination towards sin) onto a
humanity – generalising that there is a distinct universal human nature based on a singular individual experience
• - implies that, even if a person is incredibly good, selfless and charitable in their actions and attitudes throughou
life, they should still be considered sinful simply because they are human (illogical to argue that any small amou
sin discounts the overwhelming good of some people)
• - the idea that we can only experience salvation through God’s grace contradicts the message behind Jesus’ Para
the Sheep and the Goats which implies salvation through works (rather than grace or even faith – not necessarily
need to be religious to achieve Heaven)
• - the idea that people cannot be good/ that we cannot deserve salvation through works provides no incentive no
give into satanic temptation to do evil and may inadvertently encourage sinful behaviour, leading to a less ordere
more chaotic society
• - judging all of humanity for the sins of their ancestors does not seem in line with God’s just nature
• - scientific evidence (e.g. Darwinism, Big Bang) discounting the verity of Genesis as a factual/historical event mea
that Adam and Eve likely did not actually exist as historical figures, so the whole argument becomes void if we a
actually seminally present in Adam and could not inherit original sin in this way
• - God must have allowed the possibility of evil and, if his nature is omniscient, he must have known Adam and E
would give into Satanic temptation, meaning humanity cannot be held solely responsible for unleashing evil into
world
,Augustine’s teaching on human nature
,Augustine’s teaching on human nature - AO1 We have a broken human
nature and are inherently
sinful (original sin) because
Adam and Eve lived in a state we are seminally present in
Pre-Fall: of concordia (perfection), Adam – we are inherently
experiencing caritas (agape, drawn towards sin
selfless love and friendship) (concupiscence)
Due to our inherently sinfu
Evil was introduced into the world
nature, we can never earn
through a misuse of human free
Fall: salvation (e.g. through work
will (original sin) and caused the
or good deeds) so can only b
previously perfect human nature to
saved through God’s grace
be ruined
but we do/can not deserve
Only through God’s grace ca
Human nature was broken so that we achieve the greatest goo
we experience concupiscence (summum bonum), but
Post-Fall: should strive to be as close
(sexual lust, tendency to sin) and
cupiditas (selfish love) this as possible in life
, Augustine’s teaching on human nature – AO2
• - other prominent Christian theologians, such as Aquinas, oppositely teach that, although flawed, our nature is st
overwhelmingly inclined towards good rather than evil, as Augustine believes
• - it is not right to apply his own personal experiences and feelings (e.g. a personal inclination towards sin) onto a
humanity – generalising that there is a distinct universal human nature based on a singular individual experience
• - implies that, even if a person is incredibly good, selfless and charitable in their actions and attitudes throughou
life, they should still be considered sinful simply because they are human (illogical to argue that any small amou
sin discounts the overwhelming good of some people)
• - the idea that we can only experience salvation through God’s grace contradicts the message behind Jesus’ Para
the Sheep and the Goats which implies salvation through works (rather than grace or even faith – not necessarily
need to be religious to achieve Heaven)
• - the idea that people cannot be good/ that we cannot deserve salvation through works provides no incentive no
give into satanic temptation to do evil and may inadvertently encourage sinful behaviour, leading to a less ordere
more chaotic society
• - judging all of humanity for the sins of their ancestors does not seem in line with God’s just nature
• - scientific evidence (e.g. Darwinism, Big Bang) discounting the verity of Genesis as a factual/historical event mea
that Adam and Eve likely did not actually exist as historical figures, so the whole argument becomes void if we a
actually seminally present in Adam and could not inherit original sin in this way
• - God must have allowed the possibility of evil and, if his nature is omniscient, he must have known Adam and E
would give into Satanic temptation, meaning humanity cannot be held solely responsible for unleashing evil into
world
