Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Both Jacob and Esau were justly subject to condemnation p... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Both Jacob and Esau were justly subject to condemnation prior to any works of their own.

    Afterlife & Death
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Both twins were 'by nature children of wrath,' not because of any works of their own.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.They were both bound in the fetters of damnation originally forged by Adam.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral condemnation requires the capacity for voluntary agency; inherited guilt from Adam violates this by punishing beings for acts they could not have chosen.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant's categorical imperative establishes that persons must be treated as ends in themselves, making punishment for unchosen inherited sin categorically impermissible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Ezekiel 18:20 explicitly repudiates inherited guilt, stating 'the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father,' grounding anti-hereditary-guilt objections within scripture itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Pelagius argued, against Augustine, that humans retain genuine free will uncorrupted by Adam's fall, making 'original damnation' a category error rather than a theological datum.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If both Jacob and Esau were equally condemned prior to works, God's subsequent election of Jacob over Esau collapses into arbitrary predestination, undermining the justice the claim purports to establish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Afterlife & DeathEternal Conscious Torment

    Related

    Both twins were 'by nature children of wrath,' not because of any works of their...Ezekiel 18:20 explicitly repudiates inherited guilt, stating 'the son shall not ...If both Jacob and Esau were equally condemned prior to works, God's subsequent e...Kant's categorical imperative establishes that persons must be treated as ends i...
    +3 moreShow less
    Moral condemnation requires the capacity for voluntary agency; inherited guilt f...Pelagius argued, against Augustine, that humans retain genuine free will uncorru...They were both bound in the fetters of damnation originally forged by Adam.

    Similar

    This condemnation applies even to those who never personally commit an...76%Original sin is a just basis for condemnation.72%They were both bound in the fetters of damnation originally forged by ...71%Therefore, in either case, it is not possible that S should reject the...69%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: heaven-hell
    View source passageHide passage
    Second, virtually all retributivists, with the notable exception of the Augustinian theologians, reject as absurd the whole idea of inherited guilt. So why, one may ask, do so many Augustinians, despite their commitment to a retributive theory of punishment, insist that God could justly condemn even infants on account of their supposedly inherited guilt? Part of the explanation, according to Philip Quinn, may lie “in a homuncular view of human nature itself” (Quinn 1988, 99) or in what some philosophers might label as a simple category mistake. A good illustration of the homuncular view, as Qu...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit