the doctrine of original sin begain in 354.
the doctrine of original sin begain in 354.
when did the doctrine of original sin begin?
354
the concept of original sin was first alluded to in the 2nd century by irenaeus, bishop of lyon in his controversy with certain dualist gnostics. other church fathers such as augustine also shaped and developed the doctrine, seeing it as based on the new testament teaching of paul the apostle (romans and 1 corinthians ) and the old testament verse of psalms . tertullian, cyprian, ambrose and ambrosiaster considered that humanity shares in adam's sin, transmitted by human generation. augustine's formulation of original sin after 412 ce was popular among protestant reformers, such as martin luther and john calvin, who equated original sin with concupiscence (or "hurtful desire"), affirming that it persisted even after baptism and completely destroyed freedom to do good. before 412 ce, augustine said that free will was weakened but not destroyed by original sin. but after 412 ce this changed to a loss of free will except to sin. modern augustinian calvinism holds this later view. the jansenist movement, which the catholic church declared to be heretical, also maintained that original sin destroyed freedom of will. instead the catholic church declares "baptism, by imparting the life of christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards god, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle." "weakened and diminished by adam's fall, free will is yet not destroyed in the race."
original sin
in the second version of the original sin hypothesis, barry eichengreen, ricardo hausmann and ugo panizza in 2002 discarded the domestic element of original sin and redefined (international) original sin as a situation in which most countries cannot borrow abroad in their own currency. they showed that almost all of the countries (except us, euro area, japan, uk, and switzerland) suffered from (international) original sin over time. eichengreen, "et al." concluded that weaknesses of national macroeconomic policies and institutions are not statistically related with original sin and found that the only statistically robust determinant of original sin was country size. moreover, they claimed that international transaction costs, network externalities, and global capital market imperfections were the main reasons (which are beyond the control of an individual country) of the original sin. hence, as a solution for the original sin problem, they proposed an international initiative and recommended development of a basket index of emerging-market currencies so that international financial institutions could issue debt denominated in this index until a liquid-market in this index had developed. burger and warnock (2003) suggested inclusion of information on domestic bond markets to account for the possibility that foreign investors were holding local-currency emerging market bonds to analyze the determinants of original sin. using this expanded measure, they showed that emerging markets economies could develop local bond markets (in which they can borrow in domestic currency) and attract global investors with stronger institutions and credible domestic policies. reinhart, rogoff and savastano (2003) criticized the suggested international solution for the original sin problem by claiming that the main problem of emerging market economies is to learn how to borrow "less" (debt intolerance) rather than learn how to borrow "more" in their domestic currency.
original sin (economics)