Basic HTML Version
196
enabled to keep the lower propensities and desires in due subjection. When man fell, he lost
that original righteousness, but the original constitution of human nature remained intact. The
natural man is now exactly where Adam was before he was endowed with original
righteousness, though with a somewhat stronger bias towards evil.
3. RATIONALIZING VIEWS.
Pelagians, Socinians, Arminians, Rationalists, and Evolutionists, all
discount the idea of a primitive state of holiness altogether. The first four are agreed that man
was created in a state of innocence, of moral and religious neutrality, but was endowed with a
free will, so that he could turn in either direction. Evolutionists assert that man began his career
in a state of barbarism, in which he was but slightly removed from the brute. Rationalists of all
kinds believe that a concreated righteousness and holiness is a contradiction in terms. Man
determines his character by his own free choice; and holiness can only result from a victorious
struggle against evil. From the nature of the case, therefore, Adam could not have been created
in a state of holiness. Moreover. Pelagians. Socinians, and Rationalists hold that man was
created mortal. Death did not result from the entrance of sin into the world, but was simply the
natural termination of human nature as it was constituted. Adam would have died in virtue of
the original constitution of his nature.
QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY:
What is the precise distinction which Delitzsch makes
between the soul and the spirit in man? How does Heard make use of the tripartite conception
of man in the interpretation of original sin, conversion, and sanctification? What accounts for
the fact that Lutherans are prevailingly Traducianists, and Reformed prevailingly Creationists?
How about the objection that Creationism virtually destroys the unity of the human race? What
objections are there against realism with its assumption of the numerical unity of human
nature? What criticism would you offer on Dorner’s view, that the theories of Pre-
existentianism, Traducianism, and Creationism, are simply three different aspects of the whole
truth respecting the origin of the soul? How do Roman Catholics generally distinguish between
the “image” and the “likeness” of God? Do they believe that man lost his justitia or natural
righteousness by the fall or not? How do those Lutherans who restrict the image of God to
man’s original righteousness explain Gen. 9:6 and Jas. 3:9?
LITERATURE.
Bavinck, Geref. Dogm., II, pp. 566-635; Kuyper, Dict. Dogm., De Creaturis C. pp. 3-
131; Vos, Geref. Dogm. II, pp. 1-21; Hodge, Syst. Theol. II, pp. 42-116; Dabney, Syst. and Polem.
Theol., pp. 292-302; Shedd, Dogm. Theol. II, pp. 4-114; Litton, Introd. to Dogm. Theol., pp. 107-
122; Dorner, Syst, of Chr. Doct. II, pp. 68-96; Schmidt, Doct. Theol. of the Ev. Luth. Church, pp.
225-238; Martensen, Chr. Dogm., pp. 136-148; Pieper, Chr. Dogm. I, pp. 617-630; Valentine,
Chr. Theol. I, pp. 383-415; Pope, Chr. Theol. I, pp. 421-436; Raymond, Syst. Theol. II, pp. 7-49;
Wilmers, Handbook of the Chr. Rel., pp. 219-233; Orr, God’s Image in Man, pp. 3-193; A.