Preachers like Rauschenbusch have a tendency to veer into "Christ without a Cross" theology. While I don't think he goes that far, he makes a serious error in his attribution of the source of sin. Well meaning HT.
Please elaborate. Are you referring to the 'Fall of Man' as depicted in Genesis? Rauschenbusch was not a biblical literalist and so would not attribute sin to the creation story.
Bad wording on my part.
I can't say this for certain without reading some of his work in depth (I'm working from Wikipedia
), but his distinction between social and individual sins is unnecessary in my view and has the effect of abstracting the personal need for salvation in the eyes of the laity.
Poll
