, , , , ,

Jonathan Edwards thought the doctrine of original sin was important, and so he said in his preface to his book on the doctrine.

I look on the doctrine as of great importance; which everybody will doubtless own it is, if it be true. For, if the case be such indeed, that all mankind are by nature in a state of total ruin, both with respect to the moral evil they are subjects of, and the afflictive evil they are exposed t, the one as the consequence and punishment of the other, then doubtless the great salvation by Christ stands in direct relation to this ruin, as the remedy to the disease; and the whole gospel or doctrine of salvation, must suppose it; and all real belief, or true notion of that gospel, must be built upon it. Therefore, as I think the doctrine is most certainly both true and important, I hope, my attempting a vindication of it, will be candidly interpreted, and that what I have done towards its defense, will be impartially considered, by all that will give themselves the trouble to read the ensuing discourse. (pg 103 in the Yale ed.)

Note how Edwards argues the doctrine’s importance here; it is in its connection to the gospel. To abandon the doctrine of original sin, he argues, would necessarily result in a parallel abandonment of the doctrine of the cross.