No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
There are many idealists who have no conviction of sin. They are not immoral; indeed they are quite aware of the difference between good and evil, and in certain cases they are anxious to do what is good in their own lives, and in national and community life. They are conscious also of faults both in themselves and in their surroundings, and certainly do not think that everything is perfect. They lack, however, conviction of sin. They interpret the faults which they see as imperfections which are to be explained by the fact that the ideal or the good can be only partly achieved because of circumstances. They have no sense of guilt. Rather than speak of human sin, they speak of human frailty and of the recalcitrance which exists in human nature and which prevents more than the partial realisation of the ideal.
page 389 note 1 Scottish Journal of Theology, vol. ix, pp. 337ff.Google Scholar
page 392 note 1 Scottish Journal of Theology, vol. vi, pp. 113ff.Google Scholar