Dear Dr. Craig, thank you for your thoughtful exploration of the doctrine of sin. Your rejection of the doctrine of imputed sin is a refreshing and much-needed

voice, and I appreciate your dedication to grounding theology in Scripture. As I reflect on your

suggestion that Adam and Eve required a super-added grace to avoid sin, I wonder, isn't it also plausible

that they were created with a capacity to

choose obedience or disobedience, and that the temptation of Satan rather than any innate weakness,

was the catalyst for their fall?

Genesis 3, 1 through 7?

Doesn't the scriptural description of humanity as very Good, Genesis 1.31, and Made Upright,

Ecclesiastes 729, suggest a nature inclined toward good, but with the freedom to choose otherwise?

Regarding infants and salvation, might it be plausible that infants who die before reaching moral

understanding are not in need of atonement, since sin, by its biblical definition, requires

the knowledge of right and wrong?

Deuteronomy 139, Romans 4, 15, 5, 13. Doesn't Jesus' affirmation of childlike innocence, Matthew 18, 3 through 4, 1914,

align with this view? I appreciate your willingness to entertain plausible explanations

when Scripture does not give explicit answers.

Could it be that rather than inheriting a sinful nature, we inherit a world where temptation

abounds, and Satan is active, 1 Peter 5, 8?

But we are each created with a heart capable of seeking God, Acts 17, 27, Romans 1, 19 through 20. Thank you for your

scholarship and your gracious approach to these deep questions. Warmly, Alan, United States.

Thank you, Alan, for your very measured comments on my proposal. As you note, I think that the systematic theologian

is free to propose models which are not explicitly taught by Scripture, so long as they are

consistent with Scripture. That goes as well for models of the doctrine of original guilt,

...