COURSEWORK FOR

TH502 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY II

ANGELOLOGY, ANTHROPOLOGY

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO

LOUISIANA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY

SEMINARY DEAN: DR STEVEN R PETTEY spettey@lbu.edu

318.688.2360 318.688.2148 FAX

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE

TH502 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY II

BY

EDWARD G. RICE

9511 W. WANETA LAKE ROAD

HAMMONDSPORT NY 14840

6301 WESTPORT AVE. SHREVEPORT LA 71129 PHONE 318.686.2360 FAX 318.688.2148 WEB: WWW.LBU.EDU

ASSIGNMENT

TH502 SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY II

TEXT: Thiessen, Henry (rev. by Doerksen), LECTURES IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., any date is acceptable

COURSE OBJECTIVE: The doctrine of sin and man are carefully considered from the Scriptures with comparisons of various theological approaches. The angels and forces of evil are also considered as to origin, activity, and ultimate end.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS:

(1) Read chapters thirteen through twenty (13-20) of the textbook for understanding. Mark listings, Scriptures and information you wish to quickly locate for outlining each of the above chapters and for preparing the required questions and answers which are described below.

(2) Prepare a detailed outline of each chapter (at least three or four full pages per chapter) in such a way that it can be used for teaching a series of lessons about these theological subjects to your college class, church congregation, staff members, or Sunday school class. Attach at the end of your other materials.

(3) Select another conservative theology book and read what the author teaches about the subjects shown above under “Course Objective”. Document what you learned from this reading on the enclosed “Required Supplemental Reading Report” and submit with your course.

(4) From each of the above chapters, prepare and show the answers to at least eight (8) questions (true or false, fill in the blank, multiple choice or listings of important facts) which you feel could be an appropriate final exam if you were actually developing this course for a college or Christian school. Indicate the page number where you found each question and its answer, and place these questions and answers after your reading report.

SEND ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO:

LOUISIANA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY

6301 WESTPORT AVENUE

SHREVEPORT, LA 71129

Detailed Chapter Outlines – TH502 Systematic Theology II

Part IV Angelology

Chapter 13 The Origin, Nature, Fall, and Classification of the Angels pg 191-203 (r 133-143)

Chapter 14 The Work and Destiny of the Angels pg 204-212 (r 144-150)

Part V Anthropology

Chapter 15 The Origin and Original Character of Man pg 215-222 (r 151-157)

Chapter 16 The Unity and Permanent Constitution of Man pg 223-237 (r 158-167)

Chapter 17 The Fall of Man: Background and Problems pg 238-249 (r 168-177)

Chapter 18 The Fall of Man: Fact and Immediate Consequences pg 251-258 (r 178-184)

Chapter 19 The Fall of Man: Imputation and Racial Consequences pg 259-266 (r 185-190)

Chapter 20 The Fall of Man: The Nature and Final Consequences of Sin pg 267-273 (r 191-198)

Outlines of Chapter 13 The Origin, Nature, Fall, and Classification of the Angels

pg 191-203 (r 133-143)

1. The Origin of Angels

   1. They are created beings

      1. Neh 9:6 Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.

      2. Psalm 148:2 Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts....5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.

      3. 1Tim 6: 15 ... who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light...

   2. The Time of their creation is UNCERTAIN.

      1. Gaptist¹, of course like to set it in a fabricated, fictitious gap after Gen 1:1 and before 1:2

      2. They were early in the 6 day creation process: Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

   3. Their number is great:

      1. Dan 7:10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.

      2. Matt 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

      3. Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

2. The Nature of Angels

   1. They are not Glorified Human Beings

      1. Matt 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

      2. 1Cor 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

      3. Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,... and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

   2. They are incorporeal.

      1. Ps 104:4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: ... Heb 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

      2. Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

      3. They do not have flesh and blood Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

         1. If they do not have flesh and blood they do not have reproductive organs!

         2. Gen 6:2 does NOT refer to angels Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

   3. They are a company and not a race:

   4. They are greater than man in Knowledge, though not Omniscient.

3. The Fall of Angels

   1. The Fact of the Fall

      1. Evil exists in the universe

      2. Angels were created good, 'and it was good' stated 7 times

      3. Evil had an entry into the universe

      4. Angels left their own principality and proper abode.

   2. The Time of their Fall

      1. Gaptists place the fall in a fictitious and great catastrophe after Genesis 1:1 and Gen 1:2. Thiessen prefers such folly.

      2. In literal Bible interpretation the fall had to occur after the 6 day creation when every thing created was good, and the temptation of Eve in the Garden of Eden.

   3. The Cause of their Fall

      1. Thiessen believes that God decreed everything that happened, like a good Reformed Augustinian Theologian must, and thus he spends 2 paragraphs trying to defend his misconstrued God.

      2. In Ezek 28:11 the Tyrian king symbolizes Satan and is lifted with PRIDE

      3. In Isa 14:13,14 the King of Babylon symbolizes Satan and is lifted with PRIDE

      4. In 1Tim 3:6 a bishop is “Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.” i.e. the devil was lifted up with PRIDE

4. The Classification of the Angels

   1. The Good Angels

      1. The Angels = meaning messenger of God, thousands of thousands

      2. The Cherubim, probably also the 'living beings' of Revelation

         1. Guard of the entrance of Eden, and guard of God's holiness

         2. Two cherubim were placed on top of the ark in the tabernacle and temple

         3. Cherubim were wrought into the texture of the inner curtain of the tabernacle and the veil.

      3. Seraphim mentioned only in Isa 6.

         1. God is seated above the Cherubim but the Seraphim stand above Him.

         2. They lead heaven in worship and service

         3. Tasked with worship and holiness, while Cherubims with justice and might

      4. The Archangels

         1. Occurs in 1Thes 4:16, Jude 1:9

         2. Michael is represented as having his own angels

         3. Gabriel qualifies as a second archangel

         4. For what it is worth the Apocryphal book of Enoch, ch 20:1-7 enumerates six angels of power, viz., Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Zariel, and Gabriel. A variant reading adds Remiel as the seventh.

   2. The Evil Angels

      1. Logically there would not be different classes of fallen angels than of good angels, but that logic escapes Thiessen, and more so by Doerksen

      2. Angels that are kept in Prison 2Pet 2:4, Jude 1:6

      3. The Angels that are Free, usually mentioned in relation to Satan their leader

      4. Thiessen considers Demons (Latin transliteration) (Devils in English and KJB) as a separate class.

      5. Satan

         1. Satan Job 1:6

         2. Devil John 13:2

         3. Dragon Isa 51:9; Rev 12:3,7

         4. Serpent Rev 12:9

         5. Beelzebub Matt 10:25

         6. Belial 2Cor 6:15

         7. Lucifer Isa 14:12 i.e. light bearer

         8. The Wicked One Matt 13:19

         9. The Tempter Matt 4:3

         10. The god of this World 2Cor 4:4

         11. The Prince of the Power of the Air Eph 2:2 (Leader of evil angels)

         12. The Prince of this World John 12:31 (Influence over governments)

Outlines of Chapter 14 The Work and Destiny of Angels

pg 204 -212 (r 144-150)

1. The work of the angels

   1. The work of the good angels

      1. In connection with the life and ministry of Christ, an intimate relationship

         1. Gabriel informs Mary

         2. Joseph assured by an angel

         3. Angels announce to the shepherds

         4. Angels cane and ministered to Christ after the 40 days of temptation

         5. Jesus told Nathanael that they would see angels ascending and descending upon Him

         6. An angel from heaven cane and strengthened Him in the Garden

         7. He could ask the Father for 12 legions of angels to come to His help.

         8. An angel tolled away the stone from the sepulchre

         9. Angels accompanied Christ at the ascension

         10. That angels will accompany Him when He comes the second time

         11. That angels are eager to look into the plan of salvation

      2. In General

         1. They stand before God and worship him

         2. They protect and deliver God's people

         3. They guide and encourage God's servants

         4. They interpret God's will to men (Worded poorly! Don't wait on an angel to know God's will!)

         5. They are executors of judgment toward individuals and nations

         6. They carry the saved home when they fall asleep in Jesus

      3. The future ministries of angels

         1. The Lord's return into the air will be accompanied with the voice of an archangel

         2. They will together the elect when Christ returns

         3. They will separate the true from the false at His coming

         4. They will stand before the gates of the New Jerusalem

   2. The work of the evil angels

      1. Thy may be cast of God among an evil people

      2. They endeavor to separate the believer from Christ

      3. Thy oppose the good angels in their work

      4. They cooperate with Satan in the carrying out of his purposes and plans

   3. The Work of the Demons (Thiessen incorrectly distinguishes these Latin evil angels as a separate category)

      1. They inflict disease

      2. They cause mental disorders

      3. They lead any into moral impurity

      4. They disseminate false doctrine

      5. They oppose God's children in their spiritual progress

      6. They sometimes possess human beings and even animals

      7. They are sometimes used by God in the carrying out of His purposes and designs, especially during the tribulation period

   4. Three types of demonology

      1. Fortunetelling

      2. Direct worship of demons

      3. Spiritualism, .. spiritism – communicating with the dead; necromancy

   5. The Work of Satan

      1. I will make myself like the Most High

      2. Kill the Messiah

      3. Use methods to attack God's master-creation, man

         1. lying

         2. tempting

         3. hindering

         4. sifting

         5. imitating

         6. accusing

         7. smiting with disease

         8. possessing

         9. killing and devouring

2. The Destiny of Angels

   1. The Destiny of the Good Angels

      1. Continue in the service of God throughout eternity

      2. Angels were at the 12 gates of the New Jerusalem

      3. If any are in service, all are in service

   2. The Destiny of the Evil Angels

      1. they have their part in the lake of fire

      2. meanwhile kept in chains and under darkness unto the day of their judgment

      3. be judged by believers (1COr 6:3)

   3. The Destiny of Satan

      1. First found in heaven

      2. Fell from heaven

      3. In the Garden of Eden as the agent of mans fall

      4. In the air (his new headquarters) with access to both heaven and earth

      5. Cast down to earth at the midpoint of tribulation Rev 12:9

      6. Cast into the 'bottomless pit” for 1000 years, Thiessen thinks “abyss” is the only proper translation of 'abussos' but we dare not trust his anti-KJV Greek abilities

      7. Loosed for a 'little season'

      8. He and his angels will be cast into hell, their final destiny, where they will be tormented for ever and ever.

Outlines of Chapter 15 The Origin and Original Character of Man

pg 215 -222 (r )

1. The Origin of Man

   1. The Meaning of Species The work of the good angels

      1. In botany “A species is a collection of all the individuals which resemble each other more than they resemble anything else, which can by mutual fecundation produce fertile individuals, and which suppose them all to have sprung from one single individual.

      2. In zoology “A species, in the usual acceptation of the term, is an animal which, in a state of nature, is distinguished by certain peculiarities of form, size, color, or other circumstances, from another animal. It propagates, after its kind, individuals resembling the parent; its peculiarities, therefore, are permanent.”

      3. Hodge, Thiessen, and even Augustus Strong, dislike this definition because:

         1. “it makes community of origin the criterion of sameness of species.”

         2. “diversity of origin would not prove diversity of species”

         3. It throws a wrench in their inclinations toward any theistic evolution.

   2. The Immutability of Species : There is no proof of the evolutionary origin of species and tat species are immutable.

2. The Original Character of Man

   1. In the image and likeness of God

      1. It is not a Physical Likeness, since God is spirit.

      2. It was a Mental Likeness

         1. God is Spirit the human soul is a spirit.

         2. A spirit is a rational, moral, and therefore also, a free agent.

      3. It was a Moral Likeness

         1. both his rational nature and his moral conformity to God.

         2. An intelligent voluntary agent

         3. Had original righteousness and holiness

         4. holiness is more than innocence

      4. It was a social Likeness

         1. affections

         2. seeks, finds and communicates with objects of his love

         3. God made man for himself, and man found supreme satisfaction in communion with his Lord

         4. God made woman for man, and woman (Lord help her) finds supreme satisfaction in communion with man.

Outlines of Chapter 16 The Unity and Permanent Constitution of Man

pg 223 -237 (r )

1. The Unity of Man

   1. The Argument from History

      1. So far as the history of nations and tribes in both hemispheres can be traced, the evidence points to a common origin and ancestry in central Asia. Augustus Strong.

      2. Sheds light on 'prehistoric' races

   2. The argument from Physiology

      1. Mankind traces to a single pair

      2. Darwin himself concedes such

      3. All races are fruitful one with another.

   3. The Argument from Language

      1. Comparative philology points to a common origin of all the more important languages, and furnishes no evidence that the less important are not also so derived. Augustus Strong

      2. “The Unity of Origin of Language” - common origin of all languages

   4. The Argument from Psychology

      1. The existence, among all families of mankind, of common mental and moral characteristics, as evidenced in common mazims, tendencies and capacities, in the prevalence of similar traditions, and in the universal applicability of one philosophy and religion, is most easily explained upon the theory of common origin.

      2. Accounts of Creation, traditions of the fall, longevity, the flood and the tower.

2. The Constitution of Man

   1. Man's Psychological Constitution – material and immaterial nature.

      1. The Dichotomous Theory – psyche = nature looking earthward and pneuma = nature looking God ward

      2. The Trichotomous Theory – body, soul, and spirit

         1. The body the material part of our constitution; the soul the principle of animal life; the spirit the principle of our rational life.

         2. extremes hold that at death the body returns to the earth; the soul ceases to exist; and the spirit alone remains to be reunited with the body at the resurrection

         3. Word of God indicates the body soul and spirit are three distinct parts of man's nature. i.e. dividing soul and spirit

         4. Never mind the Bible, Strong and Thiessen like the higher and lower power in a dichotomous theory.

   2. Man's moral Constitution pg228

      1. Conscience -judges according to the standard given to it.

         1. not destructible – no where intimated in Scripture

         2. not infallible – Scriptures speaks of it being 'defiled' and 'seared'

      2. Will

         1. inclination

         2. volition

         3. Jonathan Edwards “Freedom of the Will” held that every act of the will is excited by a motive and that motive is the cause of the act of the will.

            1. denied that the will has the power to choose between motives, i.e. to initiate a course of action contrary to the motive which had been previously dominant

            2. is therefore unable to explain the fall of man, but well grounded to tenaciously hold to a total depravity and individual soul selection.

         4. Is the will Free? What is meant by Freedom?

            1. it is the power of contrary choice, to choose contrary to Edwards' “singular motivational drive”

            2. according to Reformed Augustinian theology when man fell he lost “the power of contrary choice” and must choose depraved evil on his own.

            3. Reformed Augustinian theology reasons that “God cannot change His requirements of man simply because he (man) has lost the ability to choose to the contrary.”

            4. Man cannot take the initiative in salvation – God must do that. This is the latent philosophical error in 5 point Calvinism and has its basis in the strange idea that man lost his free will in the fall, this seed error then permeates their whole fictitious philosophy!

            5. “We seem to come upon a contradiction” EXACTLY and Thiessen venture off into Soteriology here to try and resolve the blaring contradiction that Reformed Augustinian theology has purposely stuck in its own craw! pg 230-231

   3. The Origin of the Soul pg 232

      1. The Theory of Pre-existence = souls existed in a previous state and enter the human body at some point in the early development of the body.

         1. has no warrant in Scripture, ill informed think the disciples believed it “Who sinned, this man, or his parents, that he should be born blind?”

         2. Plato, Philo and Origen taught it to explain man's possession of ideas which he had not derived from sense.

      2. The Soul Creation Theory = the soul is an immediate creation of God, which enters a developing body which is propagated from past generations, contending that traducians make the soul material.

         1. In contrast with the traducian theory that the soul is inherited from the parents..

         2. Aristotle, Ambrose, Erome, Pelagius,... Anselm, Aquinas, and most Roman Catholic and Reformed theologians have held soul creation theory.

         3. Scriptures intimate that God is the creator of the soul, but so to the body, these are mediate creations rather than immediate creations, else where do we account that children resemble their parents in intellectual and spiritual as well as in physical respects.

      3. The Traducain Theory = that the human race was immediately created in Adam and that both body and soul are propagated from him by natural generation.

         1. Tertullian seems to have originated this view but with a more materialistic concept of the soul. (Likely not originated it but first worded it for the unregenerate philosophers)

         2. Lutheran theologians strongly hold this view against the Catholic influences contrary.

         3. It accords with Scripture

         4. It accords with Theology

         5. It accords with a proper conception of human nature.

      4. Objections to the Traducianism

         1. Christ must have taken into union with Himself the sinful nature of Mary = but his human nature was perfectly sanctified in and by his conception by the Holy Spirit, OR the human nature which he took from Mary was sanctified before he took it into union with Himself. (not Mary's human nature sanctified lest we ill conceive an immaculate conception of Mary idea which is error)

         2. Implies a division of substance in that all divisions are divisions of substance = but God can divide immaterial as well as material, either or and both.

         3. The first sin of Adam and Eve was imputed to man because of the natural headship of our first parents, then all their sinful acts ought to be imputed to their posterity as well = the initial sin differs from their subsequent nature of sin.

Outlines of Chapter 17 The Fall of Man: Background and Problems

pg 238 -250 (r )

1. The Background of the Fall

   1. The Law of God = the expression of will enforced by power

      1. The meaning of the Law of God

         1. Elemental Law is inwrought into the elements, substances, and forces of rational and irrational creatures, physical or natural law..

         2. Positive Enactment is the expression of God's will in published ordinances, i.e. moral precepts, some eternal (no other gods), some perpetual (not kill) some temporal (priestly).

      2. The Purpose of the Law of God

         1. NOT given as a means of Salvation

         2. Was weak through the flesh

         3. speaks ideally as if man had no carnal nature

         4. Given to Intensify man's knowledge of Sin

      3. The Believer's Relation to the Law of God.

         1. Present Age compared to the Past

         2. as moral precepts, some are eternal, some perpetual and some temporal.

         3. forth commandment is considered temporal with the other ceremonial laws.

         4. Knox, Luther, and Calvin said .... quote taken from Fisher's “History of Christian Doctrine.” pg361 I gotta have this 1896 book!

         5. The Westminster Confession² (1646) declares the 4^th commandment, keeping the sabbath day is a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, only the resurrection of Christ changed it the the first day.

         6. Schofield declares “The Christians first day, the Lord's day, resurrection day, ... in all respects is in contrast with the sabbath.” Gotta lean toward C.I. on this one.

   2. The Nature of Sin

      1. Larger Catechism says “Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, any law of God given as a rule to the reasonable creature.” capturing the following profound ideas:

         1. Sin is specific kind of evil

         2. Sin is a want of conformity to, or transgression of

         3. Sin is a principle or nature, as well as an act

            1. Men universally attribute both vice and virtue to dispositions and states as wall as to conscious and deliberate acts.

            2. Sin includes guilt and pollution; the one expresses its relation to the justice, the other to the holiness of God. Charles Hodge

         4. Sin is essentially selfishness

2. Problems connected with the fall. (pg 247)

   1. How could a Holy Being Fall

      1. Internal fall- Adams originating and starting of a wrong inclination

      2. External fall- Adams exertion of a wrong volition prompted by a wrong inclination

      3. BUT, says Strong “The mere power of choice does not explain the fact of an unholy choice.”

      4. The act of will which, though inclined toward God, was not confirmed in virtue and was still capable of a contrary choice.

      5. The exercise of this power in a sinful direction cannot be explained with reason.

   2. How Could a Just God Justly Permit Man to be Tempted?

      1. The need of Probation = God endowed man with the power of choice which enabled him to choose contrary to the know will of God, this endowment must needs be tested

      2. The need of a Tempter = Satan fell without an external tempter, had man fallen without a tempter, he would have originated his own sin, and become a Satan instead of a redeemable entity.

      3. The Possibility of Resisting Temptation = in the temptation itself there was no power to make man sin; he had to choose to obey or choose to disobey

   3. How Could So Great a Penalty be Attached to Disobedience to So Slight a Command?

      1. The principle involved = a slight simple command is the best test for the spirit of obedience.

      2. The significance of the command = God's claim to eminent authority, The command taught Adam that God had the right to make demands on him.

      3. The announced penalty = Adam was not left in ignorance about the seriousness of obedience

      4. The condition revealed = mans ambition to be as God revealing a heart of ingratitude, unbelief, ambition, and rebellion.

Outlines of Chapter 18 The Fall of Man: Fact and Immediate Consequences

pg 251 -258 (r )

1. The Origin of Sin in the Personal Act of Adam

   1. Sin is not eternal = there is no cosmic dualism of self existent good and evil

   2. Sin does not originate in sensuousness = of or pertaining to the senses. Schleiermacher held that it did and thus the senses were evil.”James 1:13 ¶ Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.”

   3. Sin originated in the free act of Adam = Satan's temptation made Adam desire what God had forbidden, Christ, the second Adam, withstood that temptation.

2. The Immediate Consequences of Adam's Sin.

   1. Its effect of their relation to God = broken fellowship

   2. Its effect on their nature = innocent and holy to shame, degradation and pollution.

   3. Its effect on their bodies

      1. dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return, death began

      2. man was created mortal but had the privilege of attaining immortality by means of the tree of life

   4. Its effect on their environment

      1. serpent cursed

      2. animal creation suffered

      3. cursed is the ground, plants

      4. restoration to its pristine condition and beauty is future Isa 35

Outlines of Chapter 19 The Fall of Man: Imputation and Racial Consequences

pg 259 -266 (r )

1. The Universality of Sin

   1. All have sinned

   2. So universal an effect must have a universal cause = Adam & Eve

2. The Imputation of Sin

   1. The Pelagian Theory

      1. Pelagius was a British? monk born 370 AD pronounced his doctrine in Rome in 409 AD and was condemned by the Council of Carthage in 418 AD, Socinians and Unitarians advocate his scheme of teaching

      2. Adam's sin effected only Adam, straightway God immediately creates every human soul in innocence, free from depravity and able to obey God as was Adam; the innocent soul is imputed only for sins that they personally and consciously perform.

      3. Does not Align with Scripture at all

   2. The Arminian Theory

      1. Arminius (1560-1609), a professor in Holland, developed an interpretation called Semi-Pleagianism, held by the Greek Church and the Methodist body.

      2. Man is sick, by nature physically and intellectually destitute of original righteousness but at the dawn of consciousness God, to be just, bestows a special influence of the Holy Spirit sufficient to counteract the inherited depravity and enable an obedience. Cooperate with the Spirit, and obedience is possible for anybody.

      3. This denies Rom 5:12, Death passed unto all man, indeed is born in sin

   3. The Federal Theory

      1. Held by Covenants (Protestants) stemming from Augustinian theory but differs in several particulars

      2. Adam is the representative of the race, and God entered in covenant with him to bestow eternal life upon him and his posterity if he, as federal head, obeyed God, and if he disobeyed to pronounce punishment and a corrupt nature and death upon him and all his descendants. God thus reckons the descendants as sinners, and condemns them because of Adam's transgression.

      3. There is no mention of such a covenant in Scripture. It is fiction.

      4. They still consider the immediate creation of each soul, now he creates the soul with a corrupt nature which immediately leads men to sin. Awkward.

   4. The Theory of Mediate Imputation pg 263

      1. Placeus (1606-1655), professor at Saumur, France, worded a doctrine leaned to by H.B. Smith who finds it “not wholly satisfactory.”

      2. man born physically and morally with a native depravity which is sin itself and the source of all actual; the soul, immediately created, becomes corrupt when united with the body; this native depravity is imputed as a consequence of Adam's transgression not as a penalty for it.

      3. In the Federal theory, imputation is the cause of depravity; on this theory depravity is the cause of imputation.

   5. The Augustinian Theory

      1. Elaborated by Augustus (354-430 AD), Luther, Calvin and the Reformers generally (except Zwingli) held this view, as do Shedd and Strong.

      2. God imputes the sin of Adam immediately to all his posterity, because in Adam the will of the race revolted from God and the nature of the race corrupted itself in Adam.

      3. Note that the imputation of Adam's sin does not herein form an exact parallel to the imputation of Christ's righteousness.

Outlines of Chapter 20 The Fall of Man: The Nature and Final Consequence of Sin

pg 267 -272(r )

1. The Nature and Extent of Depravity

   1. The Meaning of Depravity = Man's universal want of original righteousness and of holy affection toward God, the corruption of his moral nature and his bias toward evil.

   2. The Extent of Depravity = a total spiritual inability in the sinner in the sense that he cannot by his own volition change his character and life so as to make them conformable to the law of God, nor change his fundamental preference of self and sin to supreme love for God, yet he has a certain amount of freedom left.

      1. NOT that every man is devoid of all qualities pleasing to men

      2. NOT that he commits, or is prone to every form of sin

      3. NOT that his is bitterly opposed to God as it is possible for him to be

      4. Traces of man's original condition are visible, even as war destroyed cathedrals in Europe bear traces of their original beauty and architecture.

      5. NOT that man is totally destitute of that love to God which is the fundamental requirement of the law

      6. NOT that he is supremely given to a preference of himself to God

      7. NOT that he has an aversion to God which on occasion becomes active enmity to Him

      8. NOT that every faculty is disordered and corrupted

      9. NOT that he has no thought, feeling ,or deed of which God can fully progress in depravity, from which he can in no wise turn away in his own strength.

      10. Smith says “Depravity, or the sinful condition , of man infects the whole man: intellect, feeling, heart, and will and ... in each unrenewed person some lower affection is supreme.”

2. The Nature and Degrees of Guilt

   1. The Meaning of Guilt = the desert of punishment, or obligation to satisfy God.

   2. The Degrees of Guilt = shown in OT by the variety of sacrifices for various transgressions but erroneously distinguished by the Roman Catholic Church

      1. Sin of Nature and Personal Transgression = guilt of inborn sin

      2. Sins of Ignorance, and Sins of Knowledge = determined by the amount of information possessed.

      3. Sins of Infirmity, and Sins of Presumption = dependent on strength of will

      4. Sins of Incomplete, and Sins of Final Obduracy = unreceptive to grace

   3. The Nature and Character of Penalty

      1. The Meaning of Penalty = that pain or loss which is directly inflicted by the Lawgiver in vindication of His justice, which has been outraged by the violation of law.

      2. The Character of Penalty

         1. Physical Death

         2. Spiritual Death

         3. Eternal Death

Supplemental Reading Report - Angelology

The angels and forces of evil are considered as to origin, activity, and ultimate end.

Required Supplemental Reading Report 1 of 2

I have select and read for understanding the appropriate portions of a supplemental book on this subject: AUTHOR:August Hopkins Strongs, D. D., LL. D.

TITLE:Systematic Theology (Volume II)

PUBLISHED BY:Philadelphia: The Judson Press YEAR PUBLISHED: 1907

I have read pages 443-464 (21 pages) and found that this author and Thiessen disagree as presented below:

I have select and read for understanding the appropriate portions of these supplemental books on this subject: AUTHOR:Hodge, Charles (1797-1878) D.D.

TITLE: Systematic Theology - Volume I-III

PUBLISHED BY:WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING CO., GRAND RAPIDS, MICH.

YEAR PUBLISHED: 1940 I have read pages 637-646 and found that this author and Thiessen disagree as presented below.

When considering “the angels and forces of evil, as to origin, activity, and ultimate end,” in supplemental reading, I found Augustus H. Strong and Charles H. Hodge give extensively more insight and information than did Thiessen or Doerksen. Augustus H. Strong (1836-1921) is the only Baptist who had his volumes of systematic theology attain any recognition. He considers this topic in 25 pages (pg 443-464) of Section IV of Chapter IV “The Works of God” in Volume II of his extensive Systematic Theology. Thiessen examined none of the scholastic debate about angels but Strong covers Thomas Aquinas' extensive debates, Dante's formulation of theories and Milton's fiction of angels being created 'ages before the creation of man.' (Milton's folly would likely be appealing to a 'gaptist', but not a 'biblicalist' .)

Thiessen's development of the attributes of angels follows Strong's outline pretty closely but Strong puts great effort in detailing the 'employment' of angels where Thiessen's coverage of the work and destiny of angels is considered in a new chapter and has no systematic value. He has an impressive 'laundry list' of things angels do in Scripture, but until he works the list into a systematic consideration of the existence and purpose of angels his work should not be called systematic. Even his Scripture list of angel deeds is not well organized nor thought out. He says that angels interpret God's will to men and cites Job 33:23 but such rash generalization of angel employment and misapplications of Scripture leads one to look to angels to find God's will for their lives and its is certain that this is not Thiessen's intent. Angels were used in a limited way to interpret God's prophecy to Daniel, but that should not be overgeneralized.

According to Strong, the good angels are employed with a) worship of God as they stand in His presence, b) rejoicing in God's works, c) they execute God's will working in nature and d) they guide the affairs of nations. The evil angels are employed in a) opposing God and striving to defeat His will, b) they hinder mans temporal and eternal welfare, c) they execute God's plans of punishing the ungodly and are even d) employed in chastening the good.

With regard to the Cherubims of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel, and the Seraphims of Isaiah we must consider Strong wrong in considering them as “not actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity...” Strong here abandons the literal interpretation of Scripture for a symbolic, figurative, mystical one. Doerksen abandons all systematic consideration in his classification Thiessen gets all tangled in the Latin linguistics of 'demon' vs the English 'devil' and he to has little systematic consideration of the classification of angels. (Hodge spends no effort at all on the various classifications of angels.) If we extend Thiessen's classification into a more systematic approach we could surmise that there are 4 classes of 'angels' the created being which are spirit, incorporeal, greater than human, lesser than God. These classes listed by Thiessen as 1) Archangel – as leaders, 2) angels – rank and file spirits, 3) Cherubims – as guardians and 4) Seraphims - as worshipers. These were each given a “period of probation, during which their obedience or disobedience determined their future destiny.”³ If some angels in all four of these classes fell, one would now expect four classes of fallen angels and still these same four classes of good angels. Creating new classes for distinguishing fallen angels from un-fallen angels is not systematic. Thus, supposing some of each classification participated in the fall, the fallen angels could systematically be categorized as 1 ea . archangel – leader of hosts of angels, Lucifer, one third of the rank and file angels being those evil angels, evil spirits and demons (Latin) devils (English) which occupied man in Jesus' time, some 4 ea. Cherubims – guardians fell referenced as reserved in chains in Jude 1:6, and loosed in Rev 9:14; and many Seraphim fell becoming xworshipers, cast down to hell in 1Pet 2:4, and coming forth like smoke in Rev 9 and “They had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his mane Apollyon.” Rev 9:11. This, very systematic classification of the angels is shown in the table below and its simplicity is nowhere detailed by the systematic theology books I have examined.

Such a systematic consistency in classification of angels can be enlightening in proper interpretation of Scriptures about angels, their purpose, and their employment. And insightful when one considers the possibility that God the Father has an archangel – Michael, God the Holy Spirit has an archangel – Gabriel, and God the Son had an archangel- Lucifer. The redeemed saints with robes of white are to be united with God the Son as the replacement for his fallen archangel. Such a consistent systematic view of all time and creation is only attainable by a consistent systematic consideration of God's angels. Thiessen approaches such a systematic consideration, but Doerksen's revision quickly detracts and departs from it.

Certain areas of theology have been hermeneutically investigated, systematically thought out, and thoroughly documented by learned authors. Such is the state of angelology. Charles Hodge (1797 – 1878), the Princeton theologian, great defender of Calvinism, and author of three volumes of systematic theology, has thus documented angelology. In these last of the last days, wherein knowledge has increased, access to knowledge has over swelled, and the deceiver of mankind has pressed with new tact, even angelology should be revisited with another “hermeneutical spiral”, but alas Thiessen coupled with Doerksen as a reviser is not one to make such a spiral.

Where Thiessen abandons much of the previous work on angelology and attempts to restructure and re-outline the consideration, Hodge succinctly and systematically summarizes the previous efforts and errors in a very readable dense- pack of thorough coverage. Where Thiessen and Doerksen encumber themselves with much analysis of the origin and classification of good angels and then evil angels, Hodge carefully summarizes the extensive research of previous council's (Council of Nice AD 784 and Council of Lateran AD 1215) on the nature of angels. Where Thiessen departs on a linguistic tirade because the KV uses the English word 'devil' instead of his preferred Latin transliteration 'demon', Hodge centers his efforts analyzing the power and agency of evil spirits and expounding profound insight on demoniacal possessions.

I am sure Thiessen had noble purpose in teaching what he taught on angelology, but his lectures did not capture the insight and work of Hodge. Hodge's work could use another hermeneutical spiral and certainly additional emphasis, but one would be hard pressed to expand on his work. Thiessen does not capture it and Doerksen digress with it.

Supplemental Reading Report - Anthropology

The doctrine of sin and man are carefully considered from the Scriptures with comparisons of various theological approaches.

Required Supplemental Reading Report 2 of 2

I have select and read for understanding the appropriate portions of a supplemental book on this subject: AUTHOR: Cambron, Mark G.

TITLE: Bible Doctrines

PUBLISHED BY:Zondervon Publishing House.

YEAR PUBLISHED: 1954 I have read pages 155-175 (20 pages) and found that this author and Thiessen disagree as discussed below.

Although Cambron and Thiessen were contemporaries their systematic Theologies could not be further apart. The disparities are marked in the consideration of anthropology, the doctrine of man. Mark G. Cambron, a gifted Bible doctrines teacher at Tennessee Temple Bible School, as a Baptist is ever careful to use the Bible as his sole authority. While Thiessen, a theology professor at Wheaton College, Ill., then Masters College⁴, Ca. , as a Reformed Augustinian Theologian, is ever tiptoeing around and reforming again, the aged Catholic doctrines of error, and trying to reconcile them with Scripture. Only a couple areas of anthropology need to be considered to contrast the two approaches.

While Cambron succinctly states the origin of man as God declared it, and abruptly dismisses every form of abiogenesis and spontaneous generation as ludicrous, unprofitable, balderdash, Thiessen is very careful to give ample latitude to his theistic evolutionist colleagues. He braces up theories that Adam, Eve and the Serpent may be allegorical teachings , like his mother Church purported a thousand years earlier.

He left amble breathing room for his 'scientist' contemporaries, who had 'scientifically proven' the Genesis account of creation to be fallible. While Cambron presents the Bible details that considers the original state of man and the result of his fall, Thiessen drolls on endlessly about 'how' sin is imputed to man and a God who decrees everything is just in this imputing about when 'original sin' gets into man and about Adam's sin initiating the Catholic and Augustinian error of 'Total Depravity”.

Reading Cambron's “Bible Doctrines, Beliefs That Matter,” while reading Thiessen's “Lectures in Theology” highlights the cumbersome burden upon the reformed Theologian and the crisp clear theology from one who holds emphatically to the infallible, inerrant, plenary, verbal inspiration of that soul authority.

Q&A From Chapter 13 The Origin, Nature, Fall, and Classification of the Angels

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 191-203 (r )

1. Thiessen uses the word 'incorporeal' to define angels; give a dictionary definition.

Ans pg 192 (r 133) incorporeal adj. lacking natural form or substance (American Heritage Dictionary)

2. Under the nature of angels Thiessen includes consideration that Genesis 6:2⁵ may be referencing angels who copulated with humans; Doerksen then considers these genital laden angels as an added classification of angels called 'Sons of God'; how does Thiessen differ from Doerksen in dealing with such a ludicrous interpretation?

Ans pg 192, 196-199 (r 134, 139) Genesis 6:2 “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.” has been controversial and used by anti-semitic groups to devise an evil half angel half human race present in their theology. Thiessen justly contributes that “Gen 6:2 probably means the descendants of Seth as compared with the sons of Cain.” Thiessen also clarifies “In view of the fact that the angels are represented as neither marrying nor giving in marriage, this seems an unlikely interpretation.” Thus Thiessen shuts down the unlikely deviation. Doerksen, however, presents this twisted root of anti-semitic interpretation with a more positive treatment stating that “Some hold that the Sons of God mentioned in Gen 6:2 are angels who cohabited with women. It MAY, however, have referenced to the godly line of Seth.” Thiessen's treatment of this dangerous interpretation that the human race is not pure human containing angel DNA is not firm enough but much stronger than Doerksen's 'tip toeing'!

3. Thiessen supports the creation of sinless angels with God's 7 declaration of “all that was made was good” but then announces his preference that a great catastrophe places the fall of angels between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2, before these 7 declarations. Is there a conflict in this reasoning? Why or why not?

Ans pg 194-195 (r 136) 'Gaptists' often want it both ways, i.e. God created the universe in 6 days, but not exactly, all that he created was good, but not exactly. Thiessen and Doerksen are clear that the time of the fall of the angels is unclear. But it must have occurred after their creation, where they were 'very good', and the temptation of Eve in the garden of Eden recorded in Gen 3:1, where they were quite evil.

4. Thiessen, following the way of the higher critics, casts dispersion on Ezek 2 and Isa 14 'seeming to speak' about Satan but then relies on them as a revelation of why angels fell; what is therein presented as the cause of the fall?

Ans pg 194-196 (r 134-136) “I will exalt my throne above the stars of God” (Isa 14:13) ... “Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee” (Ezek 28:15) Thiessen equates this to “their deliberate, self determined revolt against God”. He states as well “Undue ambition and the desire to surpass God seems another hint.” Also Thiessen examines other invalid solutions and cites their sources while Doerksen revised out most of this input and all of the sources, stating only that “some say ....” and “some suggest ...” Doerksen regularly dummies down 'systematic theology' into 'slight theology.'

5. What are the five results of the fall of the evil angels?

Ans pg 196 1) all of them lost their original holiness and became corrupt; 2) some were cast down to hell, 2Pet 2:4; 3) Some are loose and engage in opposing the work of good angels; 4) Thiessen, as a 'gaptist' contends, with no Bible evidence, that “there may also have been an effect upon original creation”; and 5) They will in the future be cast to the earth, judges and cast into the lake of fire.

6. What are the 4 classifications of good angels made by Thiessen and the three added by Doerksen?

Ans pg 196-199 (r 137-139) 1) Angels ... thousands of thousands of them, 2) the Cherubim of Gen 3:24, Ezek 10, 3) the Seraphims of Isa 6:2,6 and 4) the Archangels of 1Thes 4:16, Jude 1:9. To these Doerksen adds 5) the living creatures of Rev 6:1, 15:7, which Thiessen classes as 'Cherubim', 6) The watchers of Daniel's vision recorded in only 4:13, and 17. and 7) the 'sons of God', a bogus classification that Doerksen invents to amplify the inept anti-semitic interpretation of Genesis 6.

7. What are the four classifications of evil, fallen angels which Thiessen differentiates?

Ans pg 199-201 (r140-141) Evil, fallen angels are classed as 1) Angels kept in prison 2Pet 2:4, Jude 1:6, 2) Fallen angels free and mentioned in connection with Satan, Matt 25:41, 3) The demons (Latin), devils (English) which seem to be disembodied angelic spirits differing, according to Thiessen, from other fallen angels, (others do not make this a separate classification from #2 above), 4) Satan himself. (It would seem more systematic to have only 4 classes of angels some before the fall, some after the fall, Thiessen invents new classes after the fall)

8. To contend with modernist teaching that Satan is just an evil presence, Thiessen lists 12 names of this fallen personality; what are they with brief clarification of each?

Ans pg 202 (r 142) The names Thiessen lists for Satan are a) Satan = adversary, b) Devil = accuser, c) Dragon = serpent/sea monster, d) Serpent = crooked/deceitful, e) Beelzebub = lord of the house, f) Belial = worthlessness, g) Lucifer = morning star – Venus, h) The Wicked One = cruel/tyrannical, i) The Tempter = incite to sin, j) The god of this world = with ministers, doctrines, sacrifices, synagogues and a religion for natural man, spirit man, cultist man and christian man, k) Prince of the Power of the Air = leader of evil angels and prince of demons, l) The Prince of this world = influence over governments of this world.

Q&A From Chapter 14 The Work and Destiny of the Angels

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 204-212 (r )

1. Angels were very activity during the life and ministry of Jesus Christ; What three activities did they do for his birth? And what forth work did Thiessen not mention?

Ans pg 204 (r 144) 1) Gabriel informed Mary of her selection, 2) Joseph was assured by an angel that “That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost, 3) the angels announced to the shepherds the birth of Christ. The angel activity not mentioned by Thiessen was the angel that appeared to Zacharias to announce the birth of John the forerunner of Christ in Luke chapter 1.

2. What part did angels play in Christ's early ministry?

Ans pg 204 (r 144) 1) They ministered to Christ after the 40 days of temptation, 2) He told Nathaniel he would see angels of God ascending and descending upon Him, 3) an angel came and strengthened him in the garden, 4) He could ask the father for 12 legions of angels, and 5) that angels accompanied him at his ascension.

3. Name is general works of good angels.

Ans pg 205 (r ___) Good angels a) stand before God and worship Him, b) they protect and deliver God's people, c) they guide and encourage God's servants, d) they reveal prophecy (i.e. not reveal the will of God) to Daniel, e) they execute judgment against individual and nations, f) they carry the deceased saints home.

4. What are the four listed future ministries of angels?

Ans pg 206-207 (r ___) They will accompany Jesus when he comes and meets his saints in the air, b) they will gather together the elect when Christ returns, c) they will separate the true from the false, and d) they will stand before the gates of the New Jerusalem.

5. Since Thiessen considers demons separate from fallen angels he finds it difficult to list works of fallen angels. What does he find to consider?

Ans pg 207 (r ___) Evil angels a) may be cast among evil people, b) they endeavor to separate the believers form Christ, c) they oppose good angels, and d) they cooperate with Satan in opposing God.

6. What are four works of devils which Thiessen insists be called demons?

Ans pg 208 (r ___) Devils or demons a) inflict disease, b) cause mental disorders, c) lead many into moral impurity and a) they disseminate false doctrine.

7. What are three types of demonology?

Ans pg 209 (r ___) Three types of demonology are a) fortune telling, b) direct worship of demons c) spiritism or believing that the living can communicate with the dead.

8. Thiessen does not address the role of evil angels during the tribulation period, but does try to 'correct' the expert Greek of the KJB translators when covering their final destiny. How so?

Ans pg 212 (r ___) The evil angels end up in the lake of fire with Satan. It is also called the 'bottomless pit' in proper translation no matter what Thiessen thinks.

Q&A From Chapter 15 The Origin and Original Character of Man

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 215-222 (r 151- )

1. Why does Thiessen spend more effort detailing what is not true about the origin of man than detailing what is true?

Ans pg 215-219 (r151-154) Satan has made great strides and had great success in deceiving man on the important question “Where did I come from?” The Biblical answer is clear and purposed, descriptive and focused. The deceit of man is murky and confused, vague and diffused.

2. God was emphatic that creatures reproduce after their own kind and the botanist and zoologist use this quality to define a species; What are their definitions?

Ans pg 216-217 (r152-153) The botanist DeCandalle states “A species is a collection of all the individuals which resemble each other more than they resemble anything else, which can by mutual fecundation produce fertile individuals, and which reproduce themselves in such a manner that we may from analogy suppose them all to have sprung from one single individual.” While the zoologist Sampson states it “A species, in the usual acceptation of the term, is an animal which in the state of nature, is distinguished by certain peculiarities of form, size, color, or other circumstances, from another animal. It propagates after its kind, individuals resembling the parent; its peculiarities, therefore are permanent.”

3. Hodge and Thiessen are opposed to using a definition for species that relies on creatures reproducing after their own kind or a creatures origin. What is their reasoning and it is sound?

Ans pg 217 (r 153) It is not surprising That Doerksen's 1979 revision of Thiessen completely removed his and Hodge's contention to the sound and Biblical definitions of species provided by botany's and zoology's expert witnesses. They contended that criterion for species should not rely on “community of origin” because, they continue, 'diversity of origin would not prove diversity of species.” They likely feared what might come of Darwin's 1859 book “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection.” We now know that nothing Christian came of Darwin's folly, and that God's contention that creatures producing after their own kind does indeed prove that species are immutable.

4. Doerksen's 1979 revision of Thiessen's 1949 work completely omitted the immutability of species argument, God's genuine defeat of all forms of evolutionary theory, but did capture an excellent clarification of the value of God's literal teaching; What it it?

Ans pg ___ (r 153) “The concept of the origin of man taken literally from Scripture gives man a dignity of being, and a position of responsibility that no other theory does, and lays the foundation for a sane system of ethics and redemption.”

5. While Shedd, Hodge, Strong and even Thiessen were in throws of evolutionists, thought to be respected, learned, scientists developing a scientific theory; Doerksen, who revised when their theory was known to be unscientific and even ludicrous, lists six Biblical arguments for believing God on this matter; What are they?:

Ans pg ~~~ (r 153-154) Doreksen's six Biblical reasons for discounting all evolutionary hypothesis and believing God are 1) The literal teaching of Scripture. 2) Simultaneous creation of Adam and Eve as male and female, 3) Eve was made directly by God, making it only reasonable that Adam was too, 4) Man comes from the dust (not a beast), 5) Man became a living soul AND a living creature, and 6) The Bible distinguishes between animal flesh and human flesh, (beast, fish and fowl as well)

6. Man's original character was “in the image and likeness of God'” What four observations are made of this description?

Ans pg 219-222 (r 154-157) “In the image and likeness of God” is 1) Not a physical likeness, 2) was a mental likeness, 3) Was a a moral likeness, and 4) was a social likeness.

7. How do the 4 increases in Jesus, as listed in Luke 3:52 align with Thiessen's four image and likeness analogies?

Ans pg 219-222 (r 154-157) Luke 3:52 says “And Jesus increased in wisdom (mental likeness) and stature (physical likeness), and in favor with God (moral or spiritual likeness) and (favor with) man (social likeness).

8. Differentiate between 'original holiness' and 'perfected holiness'.

Ans pg 222 Thiessen defines 'original holiness' as a “tendency of man's affection and will... in the direction of the spiritual knowledge of God and of divine things generally.” While 'the perfected holiness of the saints' as a “holiness which has developed and been confirmed by temptation.”

Q&A From Chapter 16 The Unity and Permanent Constitution of Man

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 223-237 (r 158-167)

1.Although the Scripture clearly insists on the unity of man, to fend off evolutionary doctrines Thiessen gives four additional arguments for it. What are thy?

Ans pg 223-225 (r 158-159) The unity of man can be defended with 1) arguments from history, 2) arguments from physiology, 3) arguments from language and 4) arguments from psychology.

2. Ignoring the Bibles differentiation between soul and spirit and purporting that no one can consciously discriminate between them, Thiessen gives six 'facts' supporting the dichotomy of man; What are they?

Ans pg 226 (r 160) The six 'facts' which are given to support the dichotomy of man are 1) God breathed in only one principle, 2) soul and spirit seem to be used interchangeably, 3) both spirit and soul are ascribed to brute beasts, 4) soul is ascribed to the Lord, 5) the highest place in religion is ascribed to the soul, and 6) body and soul constitute the whole man.

3. Thiessen , ever careful not to mention Scriptures declaration that Christ's body went to the grave, while his spirit went to God, and his soul went to hell, and careful to avoid 1Thes 5:23⁶ and Heb 4:12⁷, favors a dichotomy of man lists four heretical groups as trichotomous teachers; What are they?

Ans pg 227-228 (r 161 -167) Thiessen disfavors the trichotomy truth by linking it to Gnostics, Apollenarians, Semi-Pleagians and Annihilationists, while avoiding the Scripture that do differentiate between soul and spirit.

4. What does Thiessen mean by man's moral constitution?

Ans pg 228 By man's moral constitution we mean those powers which fit him for right or wrong action Strong says”These powers are intellect, sensibility and will, together with that peculiar power of discrimination and impulsion which we call conscious.”

5. Half of our moral constitution is our conscious. Is it infallible? Is it indestructible?

Ans pg 228 (r ~~~) “Conscious, is undeveloped in infant, and very imperfectly developed in the savage; and, moreover, after a long habit of inattention to its voice and violation of its law, the individual sinner is often judicially given up to carnal indifference; his conscious for a time lying latent. Yet it is certain that it is never destroyed” Hodge pg 285 via Thiessen pg 228

6. Reformed Theology, with all its decrees, cannot resolve man having the second portion of man's moral constitution, 'will.' Their errant contention that God choose who will be saved and who will be lost insists that when man fell, he lost the power to choose good over evil. What three questions does Thiessen project in this contradiction?

Ans pg 231 (r x163) “Why appeal to mans will if he can will only that which is wrong? We seem to have come upon a contradiction. If God has to take the initiative in salvation, how can man's will be appealed to? If man can 'will to do his will' then how can God be said to take the initiative?” Thiessen's valid contradictory 2 ½ page struggle with this dilemma is completely revised out by Doerksen.

7. Reformed Theology, with all its decrees, and its errant contention that God choose which souls would be saved and which souls would be condemned to hell, cannot justly resolve 'The origin of the soul' and has spent centuries debating the trivial. What three theories does Thiessen present and which does he seem to favor?

Ans pg 232-237 (r 164-167) IN the conflict of justice perpetuated by the error that God creates some souls for eternal destruction and no free will to change that, three theories for the origin of souls have been perpetuated. 1) The theory of pre-existence, wherein souls created before the foundation f the world are inserted into human bodies in their early development. 2) The (Soul) Creation Theory, wherein these predestined souls are immediately created by God and installed in the human body early in its natural human development. And 3) The Traducian Theory, wherein the soul and the body are propagated from Adam by natural generation. Thiessen, entangled and entrenched in the dichotomy of man ideology, and hopelessly engulfed in Reformed Theologies predestination of souls to heaven or hell, had to choose the later theory because it alone has any hope to align with Scripture.

8. Reformed Theology cannot rest comfortably with any theory concerning the origin of the soul, What are the areas of objection for the traducian theory?

Ans pg 236-237 (r 167) The traducian theory complicates Reformed Theology because of catholic consideration of immaculate conception of Mary then Christ, the artificial division of substance of body and soul (they already disregard the Biblical trichotomy of man in their debates) and the propagation of a sin nature through a natural headship found in Adam.

Q&A From Chapter 17 The Fall of Man: Background and Problems

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 238-249 (r 168-177)

1. Why is the doctrine of the fall of man of peculiar interest in Christianity?

Ans pg 238 (r 168) Because Christianity has a God of moral character that provides a remedy for sin “We inquire most carefully after the nature of sin and the true remedy for it.”

2.. What is a definition of the Law of God?

Ans pg 238-239 (r 168) The Law of God is the expression of His will enforced by His power.

3. What is the purpose of the law?

Ans pg 240 (r ___) The law was not given as a means whereby man might be saved from sin nor be made righteous, but to intensify man's knowledge of sin. Viewed in that sense the law of God given to Adam is properly focused as is the law given to Moses.

4. Reformed Theology is especially troubled about the law of God given in the 4^th commandment; How did the Westminster Confession wade the theologian deeper into such error?

Ans pg 241 (r ___) The Westminster Confession of 1646 declares the forth commandment a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, only the resurrection of Christ changed it to the first day of the week.

5. How does the Larger Catechism define sin?

Ans pg 242 (r ___) The Westminster Larger Catechism, along with the Westminster Shorter Catechism is a central catechisms of Calvinists in the English tradition throughout the world, and it defines sin in Question #24 What is sin? As “sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature.”

6. Answer the first of the three difficulties related to the fall, How could a Holy being fall?

Ans pg 247 Shed states that the first sin of Adam was internal, with the originating and starting of a wrong inclination, and external with the exertion of a wrong volition prompted by the wrong inclination. Thus inclined to self (the creature) rather than to God (the Creator) his sin was the origination from nothing of a sinful disposition in the human will when there was no previous sinful disposition to prompt it or to produce it.

7. Answer the second of the three difficulties related to the fall, “How could a just God justly permit man to be tempted?”

Ans pg 248 The permission and temptation of man was less an act of justice and more an act of benevolence in that there was a need of probation that would enable man to choose for himself, there was a need of a tempter, so that man per say did not originate his own sin as Satan had, and could therein experience redemption and there was a possibility of resisting temptation, in the temptation itself there was no power to make sin, note that the first son of God, Adam, failed the temptation but the second son of God, Christ, overcame the temptation.

8. Answer the third of the three difficulties related to the fall, “How could so great a penalty be attached to the disobedience of so slight a command?”

Ans pg 249 The great penalty for the disobedience of so slight a command is appropriate because 1) of the principle involved, that of a proven or dis-proven loyalty, 2) because of the the significance of the command, being God's claim to eminent authority, 3) because of the announced penalty, Adam was not left ignorant of the seriousness being a matter of life or death and lastly 4) because of the condition revealed, i.e. that of mans ambition to be as God and so was revealed a heart of ingratitude, unbelief, ambition, and rebellion.

Q&A From Chapter 18 The Fall of Man: Fact and Immediate Consequences

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 251-258 (r 178-184)

1. Why is it important that sin is not eternal?

Ans pg 251 The fact that good is eternal and sin is not defeats all ideas of cosmic dualism … the eternal struggle of good and evil,

2. What does Thiessen list as the two places sin did not originate and one place it did?

Ans pg 252-253 Sin does not originate in mans finiteness, i.e. the limitations of our being is not to blame; nor does it originate in man's sensuousness, i.e. our sensuous nature cannot be blamed or attributed as evil; but sin originated in free will act of Adam.

3. Why does Thiessen use a whole paragraph talking about allegorical literature, Adam, Eve and serpents?

Ans 253 When documenting a systematic theology which often relies on allegorical interpretation and Scripture taken out of context one must often subjectively delineate how far is to far in departing from the literal renderings of Scripture.

4. The Reformed Theologians refusal to acknowledge and inability to comprehend man's free will requires rationalization about the origination of sin. How does Thiessen thus rationalize?

Ans pg 253-254 Thiessen first considers that Adam, Eve, and the serpent may only be allegorical, then that the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” must surely be allegorical, and then he tries to assure that his God, who decrees everything that happens, not bare any blame for mans apostasy.

5. Thiessen tries to address Eve's temptation, Adam's sin, and the essence of the sin of our first parents without reference to 1John 2:16. What does this reference teach that Thiessen misses?

Ans pg 255 Thiessen considers much of what man has said in times past about the origin of man's sin, but nothing of 1John 2:16 “For all that is in the world, the lust of the f, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.” Such a characterization of the origin of sin must needs be considered for both Eve and Adam.

6. What are the four immediate consequences of Adam's sin?

Ans pg 255-258 Four immediate effects of Adam's sin were 1) the broken fellowship with God, 2) a nature that now knew shame, degradation and pollution, 3) A body that now began to degrade back to the dust it was made from, and 4) a living environment which was now under curse.

7. Cambron⁸ contends that “Innocence is sinlessness that has never faced trial. Righteousness is innocence that has been tested and tried and has come out victorious.” What does Thiessen contend on this?

Ans pg 256 Thiessen, who believes that God decrees everything that happens, and choose who would be saved for heaven, and who would be eternally lost to hell, contends, without a single Scripture reference, that God created man not only innocent, but also holy.

8. Resurrection being part of redemption by inference implies what about death?

Ans pg 257 Resurrection being part of redemption by inference implies that the physical death of the body was part of the penalty of sin and that man then became mortal.

Q&A From Chapter 19 The Fall of Man: Imputation and Racial Consequences

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 259-266 (r 185-190)

1. What is established as the two attributes of sin?

Ans pg 259 Sin is an act and a principle both guilt and pollution.

2. What are four OT verses used to show the universality of sin?

Pg 259 1Kings 8:46, Ps 143:2, Prov 20:9, and Eccl 7:20

3. What are 13 NT verses used to show the universality of sin?

Ans pg 259 Luke 11:13, Rom 3:10,122,19,23,Gal 3:22, Jas 3:2, 1John 1:8, John 3:18, 36, 1John 5:12,19.

4. Reformed Theologians with God decreeing everything that happens, have trouble comprehending the imputation of sin; How man theories of it does Thiessen supply?

Ans pg 260- 265 Thiessen provides 5 verbose theories for the imputation of sin.

5. In which century did Augustine elaborate his theory about imputed sin?

Ans pg 264-266 Augustine lived 354-390 AD which is the 4th century.

6. The Bible does not concern itself at all about HOW sin is imputed through the lines of man; speculate why Reformed Theologians speculate MUCH about this question.

Ans pg 264-266 I suppose that Roman Catholic doctrine, which had found a fake cure to original sin in infant Baptism, troubled them greatly, but not enough to abandon infant Baptism.

7. Augustinian theory contains in embryo all of Catholic doctrine; Although it is very abstract, state his theory of imputed sin.

Ans pg 264 “Adam's sin is, therefore, imputed to us not as something foreign to us, but as properly ours.”

8. Why does consciousness have anything to do with the discussion of Adam's sin being imputed to us?

Ans pg 265 It might at least be possible that infants commit sin before they are really “conscious” and thus infants might be responsible and polluted by sin before the priest can get them washed in holy baptismal waters. Reformed theologians seem to be extremely vexed if one is held responsible for sins we did not personally originate.

Q&A From Chapter 20 The Fall of Man: The Nature and Final Consequences of Sin

Fill-In and Short Answer Test: Please put short answers in complete sentences. pg 267-273 (r 191-198)

1. Thiessen boasts to have shown “the method by which the consequences of Adam's sin have passed over to the race.” What important Biblical subject does he address in chapter 20?

Ans pg 267 Finally Thiessen comes to deal with the precise nature of the consequences of the fall, the ''depravity', guilt and penalty of sin.

2. Depravity is a Catholic word not a Bible word; Where in the Bible is its root 'deprive' used?

Ans pg 267 In Genesis 27:45 Rebekah feared she might be 'deprives' of both Jacob and Esau in one day (Hbrw 'shakol' by analogy, bereaved) In Isaiah 38:10 Hezekiah, King of Judah, prayed to God crying “I am 'deprived' of the residue of my years.” (Hbrw 'paqasd' by analogy to miss) (Coincidently God heard Hezekiah's prayer and CHANGED his appointment with death!) An lastly in Job 39:17 The ostrich was so 'deprived' of wisdom that sh would step on her own eggs. (Hbrw 'nashah' to forget, neglect or remove.)

3. What meaning is assigned to the overpowering word 'depravity'?

Asns pg 267 “By depravity we mean man's want of original righteousness and of holy affections toward God, AND ALSO the corruption of his moral nature and his bias toward evil.

4. What does Thiessen site to prove depravities existence?

Ans pg 267 To prove depravity in man exists Thiessen sites only man experience and the Scriptural fact that man needs to be born again.

5. Reformed Theology depicts man's depravity as his being totally and absolutely dead in trespasses and sin; How does Thiessen try to lighten the ludicrousy of this extent of depravity?

Ans pg 267 Thiessen first purports that depravity does not mean 1) That man is devoid of man pleasing qualities, 2) NOT that he commits every form of sin, 3) NOT that he is bitterly opposed to God. But that it does mean 1) man is 'totally destitute of love to God, 2) that man's supremely given to a preference of himself to God, 3) that man has an 'aversion' to God, 4) that his 'every faculty' is disordered and corrupted, 5) that man has no thought, feeling or deed of which God can 'fully' approve and 6) that man id on 'a line of constant progress in depravity from which he cannot in his own strength turn.”

6. The Reformed Theologian exaggerates and exasperates “total depravity” in order to strengthen an idea that God chooses who gets saved and who gets damned to hell; What few things does Thiessen leave in mans will?

Ans pg 268 “He can, for instance, 1) choose not to sin against the Holy Spirit, 2) decide to commit the lesser sin rather than the greater, 3) resist certain forms of temptation altogether, 4) do certain outwardly good acts, and 5) even seek God from entirely selfish motives . Strong adds that he can give attention to divine truth.

7. Guilt is not a feeling but the _______?

Ans pg 269 “The deserving of punishment or obligation to satisfy God.”

8. The one word that describes the penalty of sin; What three aspects are addressed by Thiessen?

Ans pg 271-272 1) Physical death= separation of soul and spirit from the body, 2) spiritual death is separation of the soul from God and 3) eternal death completion of spiritual death.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Holy Bible

Cambron, Mark G., (Professor, Tennessee Temple Bible School, 1954) Grand Rapids, Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House, 1954

Evens, William, (1870-1950), The Great Doctrines of the Bible, Chicago, Mood Press, 1912, The Internet Archive http://www.archive.org/details/thegreatdoctrine06038gut

Hodge, Charles, Systematic Theology: Volume I, Grand Rapids, Mich., Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1940 , The Internet Archive http://www.archive.org/details/systematictheolo01hodg

Miley, John, (1813-1895, Methodist Theologian), Systematic Theology, Vol 1 & 2, The Internet Archive http://www.archive.org/details/systematictheolo01mile

Shedd, William G. T., Dogmatic Theology, General Books, 1888, The Internet Archive http://www.archive.org/details/dogmatictheology01sheduoft

Strong, Augustus H., Systematic Theology:Three Volumes in 1, Philadelphia, Valley Forge PA, The Judson Press, 1907, 35^th printing 1993

Thiessen, Henry Clarence, Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Mich., William B. Eerdman Publishing Company, 1949

, Lectures in Systematic Theology – Revised by Vernon D. Doerksen, Grand Rapids, Mich., William B. Eerdman Publishing Company, 2006