|
|
|
- Preaching
the Living WORD through the Written WORD - 2 Tim 4:2 - |
|
|
|
STUDY OF MAN (ANTHROPOLOGY) (The Bible Institute
of Texas extension) Pastor I. THE ORIGIN
OF MAN A. Definition of Anthropology 1. The word
“anthropology” comes from two Greek words, ánthrōpos, which
has the general meaning for man or human being, and lógia, which
infers study or science. 2. In its most basic meaning, anthropology means
the branch of science, which studies humankind. B. Approaches to Anthropology 1. Anthropology
can be broken up into two approaches: the first being a secular approach,
which observes man’s demographic origin, natural history, and social
development. 2. The second approach is a theological
approach, which uses the Bible as its textbook and deduces man’s origin,
nature, and moral condition. It is this second approach that is pursued in
this class. C. Views Concerning Man’s
Origin 1. There
are three major views about man’s origins. Each view is based on an
interpretation (or theory) since no human being was present at the time of
creation. Roger Patterson states, Just as evolutionists weren’t there to
see evolution happen over several billion years, neither were creationists
there to see the events of the six days of creation. The difference is that
creationists have the Creator’s eyewitness account of the events of creation,
while evolutionists must create a story to explain origins without the supernatural
(Evolution Exposed, pg. 27). 2. The three major views concerning man’s
origin are Evolution, Theistic Evolution, and Creationism. a) Evolution (1) Evolution
is a theory based on naturalism and precludes any supernatural intervention
by God. (2) It is the major modern scientific theory
that depends on time and chance. It is based on mutations and the “survival
of the fittest.” b) Theistic
Evolution (1) Theistic
Evolution is a theory based on naturalism and limited supernatural
intervention by God. (2) It attempts to bridge the gulf between
Evolution and Creationism by means of divine sparks of life and divine jumps
across species. c) Creationism
(1) Creationism
is a theory based on biblical revelation and the sole supernatural creation
of God. (2) The Bible clearly states that God created
man in His image from the dust of the ground (Gen 1:27; 2:7). (3) Creation scientists recognize that true
science supports biblical revelation. D. Evolution 1. Formula a) In order for
Evolution to work as a theory, three major components must exist: spontaneous
generation (S), natural selection (N), and time (T). b) The formula could be represented as, S + N
+ T = Evolution. 2. Spontaneous
Generation a) Spontaneous
generation is the idea that living organisms could emerge from nonliving
materials (Morris, Henry, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science, pg.
231). b) Spontaneous generation says that through
the right chemical reactions, living organisms can suddenly appear. c) In 1953, Stanley Miller (Miller-Urey
experiment) supposedly simulated the primordial conditions of earth and
demonstrated spontaneous generation. Certain gases (water, methane, ammonia,
and hydrogen), when charged by electricity, emitted amino acids. The problem however,
was that amino acids are a far cry from life as we know it. In addition, the
emitted amino acids, when exposed to an electrical charge, disintegrate. d) Louis Pasteur’s experiments with germs and
bacteria in 1861 proved that life could only come from life. Therefore,
spontaneous generation is scientifically impossible. e) Furthermore, the First Law of
Thermodynamics simply put says that energy cannot be created or destroyed. f) Only God can generate spontaneously. In
other words, only God can create out of nothing (ex nihilo, Ge 1:1;
Heb 11:3; Jn 1:3; g) Biblical miracles are divinely generated
spontaneously at God’s command. (1) Fish and
bread (Jn 6:9-11) (2) Grapes for wine (Jn 2:7-10) (3) Healings (Mt 12:10, 13) (4) Fish on the fire (Jn 21:9) (5) Adam and Eve (Ge 2:4-8; 2:20-25) 3. Natural
Selection a) Natural
Selection can be defined as the evolution of living organisms through
adaptations and mutations. b) “Adaptations” are the gradual processes of
adjustment to new physical conditions exhibited by living organisms (i.e.
“survival of the fittest”). c) Creationists agree that horizontal
adaptations (microevolution) due to elements and conditions occur within a
species such as, different strains within a species (ex. dogs or cats),
predators and prey, pecking orders etc. d) However, Creationists do not agree with
vertical adaptations (macroevolution) which cause a change of species. There
are horses and dogs but we will never have horse-puppies. e) Vertical adaptations (macroevolution)
were not part of the original creation (Ge 1:29-30; 9:1-3). Nor are they
apart of God’s future program (Is 11:6-9; 65:25). f) In fact, there are many difficulties in
the Vertical Adaptation (macroevolution) Theory. (1) For
instance, the Bombardier Beetle could never have successfully adapted from
another species. The Bombardier Beetle has two chambers that contain harmless
solutions by themselves. However, when alarmed, the beetle mixes the two
solutions together which create a potent noxious spray and creates a small
explosion. If the Bombardier Beetle would have had to depend upon trial and
error, chance, and time, beetles would be blowing themselves up with
regularity and the species would never have survived. (2) Another example is the Giraffe, which
possesses a long neck. When standing erect the heart pumps volumes of blood
through the neck to the head. When the Giraffe bends down to drink water, the
volumes of blood do not rush causing him to pass out. Instead, the arteries
in the heart have valves that close when the Giraffe bends over. If the
Giraffe would have had to depend upon trial and error, chance, and time,
there would be multitudes of unconscious giraffes, and the species would
never have survived. (1) Another
example, which denies Vertical Adaptation, is the complexity of the human
eye. Only a fully developed eye is useful. It is difficult to imagine such a
complex organ developed from trial and error while the entire human race
remained blind. The eye is furnished with automatic aiming, focusing, and
aperture adjustments. It can function in almost pure darkness to bright light
and is able to see objects from over fifty miles away to the close inspection
of a fine hair. Even b) Further
difficulties (1) The 2nd
Law of Thermodynamics contradicts the process of Natural Selection. In a
nutshell, the Law states, every system left to its own devices tends to move
from order to disorder (Scott Huse, The Collapse of Evolution, pg. 112).
Since everything is basically in a downward spiral, Natural Selection,
involving macroevolution, is virtually impossible. The explanation of the 2nd
Law of Dynamics is the fall of man (Ge 3:17-19) and at some point in God’s
divine plan creation will be delivered from its continuous corruption (Ro
8:18-23). (2) A prime example of entropy (gradual
deterioration) is a hybrid (the offspring of dissimilar parents or stock,
i.e. a mule). While hybrids may be advantageous, one disadvantage is their
inability to reproduce. Created organisms reproduce after their own kind as
represented in the Bible (Ge 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25 cp. 1Co 15:38-39). (3) Mutations, which are necessary for the
evolutionary system, are structural changes within a gene or chromosome of an
organism. However, the problem is that mutations are almost always (99.99
percent) biologically harmful, if not fatal. When they do occur, they are
weaker and have a marked disadvantage in the survival of the fittest. 2. Time a) Time, for
the evolutionist, is the key for all evolutionary processes. Its natural
processes and chance needs time in order to jump one organism into another. b) But is there enough time to support
evolution? Could life evolve by chance? According to, Astrophysicist Sir
Francis Hoyle, the probability of forming a single-celled organism by chance
was less than 1 in 1040,000, a number so small it defies
understanding. The chance of such probability, stated Hoyle, was that it was
more likely for a tornado blowing through a junkyard to build a 747 than for
life to be the result of chance! The fraction is so small that its
probability is considered zero. c) In The Collapse of Evolution,
Scott Huse writes, The probability of life arising in [a purely accidental
and aimless natural process] is comparable to the probability of a monkey
typing a perfect unabridged dictionary. d) Fossils are the proof of evolutionary
theory since they are the remains of animals and plants from the past.
However, the problem is that evolutionists claim that fossil dating is
compatible with their theory even though it is without evidence. (1) Evolutionists
use circular reasoning to determine the date of fossils. Fossils are dated by
the strata in which they are found and strata are data by the fossils
contained in them. A perplexing problem to evolutionists is that some fossils
of simpler forms are found above fossils of more complex forms. (2) Carbon 14 dating is no longer universally
accepted as an accurate method to determine age since we cannot be sure that
the rate of radioactive decay has remained constant. (A candle can burn
faster depending on the amount of oxygen it receives.) (3) Furthermore, no intermediate forms (“missing
links”) between species have ever been found. (a) Dr.
Austin Clark, a leading biologist of the Smithsonian Institute in (4) Those
fossils that at one time were credited by “expert testimony” and supported as
the “missing link” have all been discredited. (a) Java
Ape-Man: a skull, thighbone, and molar teeth discovered in 1861, though not
together, were later concluded as not coming from the same creature. (b) Piltdown Man: the bones of which were
allegedly discovered in 1912, were found to be a hoax through discoloration
and filing of teeth. (c) (d) Neanderthal Man or Men: skeletons, which
imaginative evolutionary anthropologists constructed, that were simply human
skeletons with osteoarthritis. In fact, the cranial capacity was 13 percent
greater than that of modern man. (e) Lucy: a disfigured skeletal by-product of
bones from different strata and more than 200 miles away, believed to have
walked upright. However, the features are apelike in spite of museum
enhancements of human hands and feet. (5) The
Archaeopteryx fossil was once hailed by evolutionists as an example of a
reptilian bird. Though it appeared to be a “transitional link” between a
reptile and a bird, most scientists classify it as a true bird. No
intermediate links have been found between reptiles and birds but other birds
have been found in the same rocks. In addition, the difference in the
structure of lungs (reptile lungs are tiny air sacs, bird lungs consist of
tubes) between the two is too great to imagine a gradual evolution. 3. Conclusions a) Evolution
is foolish: It is the fool who says in his heart that there is no God (Ps
14:1, cp. Ro 3:10-12). b) Evolution is false: The Scriptures teach
that God is the sole Creator (Ecc 12:1; Is 40:28; 1Pe 4:19). c) Evolution is false worship: When
man denies the Creator, he turns to false worship (Ro 1:25). d) Evolution is ignorant of true science:
Creation is to bring scientists to the understanding of the intelligent
design of a Creator (Ro 1:20). e) Evolution is ignorant of man’s lofty
origin: When man denies the Creator, he denies that he was created in the
image of God (Ge 1:26-27). f) Evolution is ignorant of elementary
truth: Those who know the Scriptures have more insight than their
teachers (Ps 119:99). g) Evolution is deceptively persuasive:
The believer is not to wander from the truth of the Scriptures especially by
pseudo science (1Ti 6:20). A. Creationism 1. Creationism
is based alone on the biblical record of God as sole Creator. It is based on
the literal interpretation of the Bible and not an allegorical
interpretation. At least 17 times in Genesis, God is said to be the Creator
as well as numerous times throughout the Bible (Ex 20:9-11; Ps 8; 104; Mt
19:4-6; He 11:3). 2. God created everything that came into
existence and He created out of nothing (creatio ex nihilo - Lat.
creation out of nothing, Ge 1:1; Heb 11:3; Jn 1:3; 3. Faith in the word of God is required
since God was the only witness. However, even those who embrace Evolution
must supply faith (it can be debated that it takes more faith to believe in
Evolution) since no one but God was there in the beginning. 4. Creationism is supported by true science
and not every secular scientist supports Evolution, some support Intelligent
Design. 5. There are various views within the
proponents of Creationism. They are: a) The
Literal 24-Hour Day Theory b) The Gap Theory c) The Day Age Theory 6. The
Literal 24 Hour Day Creation Theory a) The word
“day” in Genesis 1 and 2 usually refers to a literal 24-hour day. (1) The
Hebrew word for “day” is yom and while it can refer to long periods of
time (Ge 2:4; Job 20:28; Ps 20:1), the
context of Genesis suggests that it is a literal 24 hour day. (2) When yom is used with numerals, it
always refers to a literal 24 hour day (Ge 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31). (3) In this context, the phrase, “…there was
evening and there was morning,” refers to a literal 24 hour time period as it
usually does in the Pentateuch (cp. Ex 18:13; 27:21; Nu 9:21; De 16:4). (4) The seven-day pattern for man given by God
is taken from God’s seven-day creation week (Ex 20:9-11; 31:15-17). (5) When God calls the light “day” and the
darkness “night” in Ge 1:5, it is consistent with the literal 24-hour day.
Not only does God accomplish this on the first day, but it agrees with the
usage of day found in Ge 1:18 in speaking of the greater and lesser lights
(sun and moon). b) The
creation chronology makes sense with a literal 24-hour view. (1) In Ge
1:11-13, God created the vegetation and the plants on the third day but the
sun was not created until the fourth day. If the days were geological ages,
no plant life would have survived without the sun. For that matter, nothing
on earth would have survived during those geological ages without the sun. (2) Also in Ge 1:11-13, God created the fruit
trees on day three before creating marine life on day five. This is in direct
opposition to Evolution’s timetable, which has marine life before the fruit
trees. (3) God created insects (“creeping things”) on
the sixth day after the plants (Ge 1:24). According to Evolution, plants
would not have survived without insects. (4) Finally, God created the birds on the same
day as fish (fifth day - Ge 1:20), but according to Evolution, birds followed
reptiles. 7. The Gap Theory a) The Gap
Theory (also called the Ruin-Reconstruction Theory) attempts to harmonize the
biblical account of Genesis 1 and geological time periods. b) Specifically they allege that there is a
gap of time between Ge 1:1 and Ge 1:2. c) During that “gap,” the earth was
populated with Pre-Adamic plants, animals and men. It was at that time that
Satan rebelled and God destroyed the earth by a universal flood. All of the
fossil records and geologic timeframes come from this Pre-Noahic Flood. God
then re-created the plants, animals, and humankind (from Adam) that we see
today through the six-literal day time period recorded in Ge 1:2ff. (1) Arguments: (a) In Ge
1:2, the word “was” (haya) should be translated “became” and thus
supports a reconstruction creation and not the one original creation. (b) The phrase “formless and void” (tōhu
and bōhu) reflects an evil sense and is used elsewhere to
refer to God’s judgment (Is 34:11). (c) The word “darkness” is quite often used as
a symbol of sin and evil. (d) The Hebrew word asah (“made or
fashion” from existing material) is not a synonym of bara (“create” Ge
1:1, 21, 27) in the creation account. Therefore, Ex 20:11, which uses asah,
argues for a reconstruction not an original creation. (2) Problems: (a) While haya
can often be translated “became,” “…the word order and sentence
structure in Genesis 1:2 (and in a number of other passages [cp. Ge 29:17])
does not permit this translation.” (Whitcomb, John, The Early Earth,
pg. 146). Furthermore, “…the Hebrew verb haya usually is followed by
the preposition le when it means ‘become,’ and that is not the
case here [cp. Ge 18:12]. (MacDonald, Believer's
Bible Commentary in loc.). If the Ruin-Reconstruction Theory were true,
then the fossil record contained in the earth would have no connection with
our reconstructed world. (b) There are certain instances where tōhu and
bōhu (“formless and void,” Is 34:11) suggest an evil sense or
judgment from God, however, there are instances where that is not the case. Tōhu
can also mean desert or space such as in Dt 32:10 and Job 26:7. Since we
read of no biblical account of Pre-Adamic inhabitants or judgment, and since
God pronounces His work “very good” (Ge 1:31), Ge 1:2 should be interpreted
as a formless and void world that God made inhabitable. In addition,
futility, death, and judgment were not brought into the world until the fall
of Adam (Ge 3:1ff; Ro 5:12; 8:20-23). (c) Darkness is a symbol in the Bible that has
many connotations, evil being one of them (Jn 8:12; 1Jn 1:5). Yet darkness is
quite often literal and not symbolic (Ge 15:12; Ex 10:21-22; Dt 5:23; Ps
104:20). It seems quite natural in Ge 1:4-5, 18, to take “darkness” as
literal and therefore Ge 1:2 should be taken in the same sense. (d) While asah can suggest, “fashioning
from existing materials,” it can also be a synonym for bara. Ge 2:4 is
a prime example of the synonymous use of asah. Ge 1:21 states that God
“created” (bara) fish, reptiles, and birds. According to the Gap
Theory those categories would have to have been leftovers from God’s first
creation (cp. Ge 1:1). It would also state a contradiction in Ge 3:1. Therefore, asah, in Ex
20:11 would have to be declared a synonym of bara. 8. The
Day-Age Theory a) While
proponents of the Day-Age Theory believe God is the creator, they see the
word “day” in Ge 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, and 31 alluding to geological ages
instead of a literal 24-hour days. b) Some take the word day as a literal
24-hour day but have ages in between each day of the creation week. (1) Arguments: (a) There can
be no solar days without the sun, which was not created until the fourth day
Ge 1:16). Therefore, day had to mean and age. (b) God’s rest is more than a day according to
Heb 4:9-10 and fits into the Day-Age View. (c) Other writes think in terms of the Day-Age
Theory, for example, in 2Pe 3:8, Peter suggests that to God, a day is as a
thousand years. (d) Since the appearance of the earth is
ancient, the word “day” in Genesis 1 must refer to an age. (2) Problems: (a) Once
again, though “day” (yom) can refer to periods of time, it also can
refer to literal 24-hour days. However, only its context can determine its
meaning. Furthermore, if the term “day” means a “solar day” on the fourth day
(Ge 1:14-19), then “day” would mean a solar day (literal 24-hour day) before
the fourth day. (b) The word “rested” in Heb 4:9-10 is used in
a soteriological sense that exhorts man not to attempt to work his way to
heaven but have faith in Christ. But the word “rested” in Ge 2:2-3, is used
in a literal sense from which God designed man’s week (Ex 20:9-11; 31:15-17). (c) 2Pe 3:8 is not speaking in terms of
creation but with reference to God’s judgment. Note that it says that a day
is “like” (hṓs) a thousand years, not that it actually is a
thousand years. (d) It should not surprise us that an
all-powerful God can accomplish in a short amount of time what it takes man
in long periods of time. When God supernaturally creates, it quite often
contains what appears to be age and maturity. However, the Bible implies that
Adam and Eve were created with age and maturity (Ge 2:4-8; 2:20-25). Trees
bearing fruit were created with age and maturity since they were created
already with fruit. In addition, God gave permission to eat fruit from any
tree except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Ge 1:29; 2:16-17;
3:2-6). What evolutionists believe took billions of years in producing the
right atmospheric pressure and oxygen level, God did supernaturally in order
that man could inhabit the world. James Ussher (1581-1656), using the
chronologies of Genesis 5 and 11, along with other passages arrived at the
conclusion that creation began on October 23, 4004 BC. Even if the
chronologies contained some gaps, it would gives us an earth approximately
somewhere between 6 -12,000 years old. II. THE NATURE OF MAN A. The Image of God 1. At
Creation (Ge 1:26-27) a) In Ge
1:26, it is apparent that man’s creation was accomplished by a divine
Creator. In fact, we see evidence that the entire Trinity was involved with
man’s creation. Note the use of the first person plural in the expressions,
“Let Us,” “Our image,” and “Our likeness.” The evolution of man is refuted by
the fact that man alone was created in the image of God, being the pinnacle
of God’s creation. b) The passage states that man was made in
God’s “image.” The Hebrew word for image is tselem and means a
representation or likeness sometimes in a concrete sense. (1) Adam’s
offspring was in his own image (Ge 5:3). (2) Man is not to commit murder because man is
created in God’s image (Ge 9:6). (3) Deified idols were also called “images” (Nu
33:52; 2Ch 23:17) and their worship was prohibited (De 4:15-19). (4) Likeness (demuth), is a
synonym of “image” (tselem) and means resemblance or similitude (Ge
1:26 cp. 27 cp Ge 5:1) and sometimes in an abstract sense. c) Together,
these words were the author’s description of the complex idea of man created
in the image of God. In order to understand the phrase “image of God” certain
deductions can be made from the Scriptures that fit within the range of these
words. (1) “The
“image of God” does not mean that man was created to look like God because
God is a spirit (Jn 4:24). However, man is in the image of God in the sense
that he was created as God’s representative to rule and exercise dominion
over all the earth and its creatures (Ge 1:26; Ps 8:4-8). (2) The image of God included intellect and
rational ability such as to exercise dominion and carry out responsibilities
(Ge 2:15, 19-20). This is evident with respect to man’s ability to understand
and interpret God’s revelation from His Word (2Ti 2:15; 2Ti 3:16-17). (3) It included a spiritual dimension in which
man could worship and have fellowship with the Creator (Ge 2:7; 3:8-9; Ps
95:6; Ecc 12:1; Ro 1:25). This is especially true when man becomes
spiritually alive in Christ through the Holy Spirit (1Co 2:9-16; Ep 2:5). (4) It included God’s communicable attributes
and a moral conscience to distinguish and choose between good and evil (Ge
2:16-17; Ge 3:1, 6, 10). (5) In summary, God created man in His own
image to be a spiritual, moral, intellectual, volitional, and emotional
representative of Himself. 2. As a New
Creation a) The
question can be asked, “When man sinned did he destroy the image of God?” The
answer is that man did not destroy the image of God when he sinned but he
marred it. b) Sin has affected every part of man as a
spiritual, moral, intellectual, volitional, and emotional being, and thus
explains the term, “total depravity.” c) However, when a person becomes a believer
he is a new creature in Christ and God begins to renew in him the “image of
God” ( d) In fact, God’s goal of sanctification in
the life of every believer is to conform him to the image of Christ (Ro
8:28-29). (1) God uses
all things and every situation to accomplish this. (2) God has predestined all things to
accomplish this. (3) God’s ultimate goal is for every believer
to be in the likeness of Christ, who Himself is not only God, but the perfect
“image of the invisible God” ( B. The Immaterial Aspect of
Man 1. The
discussion between Dichotomy (“cut in two parts”, i.e. body and soul) and
Trichotomy (“cut in three parts”, i.e. body, soul, and spirit) becomes an
interesting study filled with arguments and Scriptures on both sides. Yet
when we take a close look at the Scriptures, we find that both views lack the
full biblical picture. 2. Though Plato’s teaching differentiated
between the material and immaterial parts of man, it differed from Biblical
Dichotomy in that the body is the prison of the soul, which was an uncreated
and immortal form in heaven. 3. Aristotle developed Plato’s twofold
division into a threefold division consisting of body, soul (animal soul or
breathing aspect), and rational soul (intellectual aspect), differing from
Biblical Trichotomy. 4. Biblical
Dichotomy a) Definition:
Man is made up essentially of two elements, which are the body and soul
(synonymous with the spirit). b) Arguments (1) The terms
“soul” and “spirit” are interchangeable in the Scriptures (Jn 12:27 cp. Jn
13:21; Mt 11:29 cp. 2Co 2:13). (2) The body and the soul/spirit make up the
unity of the “living soul” (nephesh - life or soul) in life and in
death (Ge 2:7; Mt 10:28). c) Problems (1) There are
passages which separate the soul and spirit (He 4:12). (2) Death is defined by a separation of man’s
body from his spirit (Ja 2:26). 5. Biblical
Trichotomy a) Definition:
Man is made up essentially of three elements, which are the body, soul, and
spirit (spirit is separate from the soul). b) Arguments (1) The
Trichotomy View suggests that the body relates to self, the soul relates to
the world, and the spirit relates to God (1Co 2:14). (2) The spirit is where the spiritual aspect of
man resides (1Co 5:5; Ro 1:9). c) Problems (1) To
suggest that man’s spirit is the only aspect that is awakended to God is
incorrect. (a) The soul
is sanctified (1Th 5:23). (b) The soul worships (Lk 1:46). (c) The soul loves the Lord (Mk 12:30). (d) The believer’s soul resides in heaven (Re
6:9; 20:4). (2) Even God
uses the term soul in reference to Himself (Mt 12:18). 6. Explanation
of Soul and Spirit a) At times,
soul is interchangeable with spirit, but quite often it is used in reference
to man’s whole person. In other words, when speaking of the fact that man is
material and immaterial, the term soul is used. b) When man’s immaterial aspect is in view,
the term spirit is often used. Since Paul deals primarily with the “inner
man,” the term spirit is used predominantly in Paul’s writings. However,
ultimately man is not described as a spirit (immaterial aspect), but as a
living soul (whole person). c) Furthermore, man is multi-faceted and is
described with other aspects such as, heart, conscience, mind, and will. C. Transmission of Man’s
Being 1. We
understand that the material aspect of man is passed on by natural
generation. But how is the immaterial aspect passed on? 2. There are several traditional views:
Preexistence, Creationism, and Traducianism. 3. Preexistence
Theory a) This view
suggests that in the beginning, God created all human souls, which were
confined to human bodies in punishment. b) Souls go through various incarnations
(i.e. Reincarnation or Karma) as an attempt to rid themselves of the sin they
incurred in their lives (plural). c) Proponents of this view are Greek
philosophy, Hindu traditions, and other theological systems, including
Kabballa and a number of minority Christian groups (e.g. Cathars). d) This view gives no account of Adam’s sin,
Orthodox Christianity has never held to this view, and it is not consistent
with biblical teaching. 4. Creationism
Theory a) This view
teaches that the parents create the body by natural generation but only God
could create the immaterial soul at the moment of conception (Nu 16:22; He 12:9). b) God did not create the soul with sin, but
it came in contact with inherited guilt through the body. Christ could only
be sinless if God created His soul. c) Charles Hodge defends this view, as do
many other Reformers along with Roman Catholics. 5. Traducianism
Theory a) This view
promotes that the soul is transmitted along with the body through the process
of natural generation. b) William G. T. Shedd argues that: (1) He 7:10
describes a rational act on the part of unborn Levi. (2) Ge 2:1-3 argues that God rested on the
seventh day from all fresh acts of creating. (3) Under the Creationism Theory, each sinless
soul created by God would have to fall. (4) Man is always seen as a union between body
and soul. c) J. O.
Buswell also agrees with this view because it provides a more natural
explanation, though he adds that it cannot be firmly established on any
explicit scriptural teaching. III. THE FALL OF MAN A. The Views on the Fall of
Man 1. Not
everyone holds to the view that Adam was a historical figure who sinned and
plunged the entire human race into sin and judgment. 2. The Liberal View believes that the fall
was a legend and there was no truth or factual basis for the account of Gen
3. 3. The Neo-Orthodox View believes that the
fall was an allegory, not factual, but a lesson on sin from Gen 3. 4. The Orthodox View has always held to a
literal and historical account of Gen 3. a) Jesus
held to the literal and historical account of Genesis (Mt 19:4-5). b) The Scriptures affirm the account of the
fall of man as a fact (1Co 15:21-22). c) If Adam’s fall was a myth then Christ’s
death could also be a myth (Ro 5:12-21). B. The Test of the Fall of
Man 1. Why was
there a need for a test for Adam and Eve? The reason God gave Adam a moral
test was that obedience could only be true obedience with the possibility of
disobedience. 2. Though Adam and Eve were given several
responsibilities (exercise dominion - Ge 1:26; be fruitful and multiply - Ge
1:28; cultivate the ground - Ge 2:5, 15), they failed by disobeying God’s one
prohibition, which was not to eat from the “tree of knowledge of good and
evil” (Ge 2:9, 16-17). 3. The nature of sin was revealed because
Adam and Eve ate from the one prohibited tree in the midst of a paradise
permissible trees. 4. Adam and Eve were created innocent an
upright in a perfect environment. Therefore, their sin stemmed from a simple
choice to disobey (Ecc 7:29). C. The Tempter of the Fall of
Man 1. The
originator of sin was Satan, who rebelled against God and was cast out of
heaven (Is 14:12-14; Eze 28:16-19). 2. Satan took upon himself the disguise of a
serpent because a serpent would have been familiar to Eve and would not have
caused suspicion (Ge 3:1). Eve was not surprised that the serpent spoke to
her. 3. It was a real serpent because both Satan
and the serpent were cursed (Ge 3:14; Ge 3:15). D. The Temptation of the Fall
of Man 1. Satan
begins his deceptive plan to cause man to sin by addressing Eve. Perhaps he
went to Eve first since the commandment was not given to her specifically. On
the other hand, perhaps she was more susceptible to deception than Adam was
(1Ti 2:14). Or, it is quite possible that Eve was the best avenue in order to
bring about Adam’s fall (Ge 3:6). 2. Satan’s first approach to deceive Eve was
to question God’s Word, “has God said” (Ge 3:1). This remains Satan’s proven
method even to this day. 3. Satan’s second approach to deceive Eve
was to question God’s character. Satan implied that God was not truthful (“You
surely will not die!”, Ge 3:4) and that He was withholding good (“For
God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you
will be like God, knowing good and evil”, Ge 3:5). 4. Satan tempted Eve from three aspects (Cp.
1Jn 2:16): a) Lust of
the Flesh (“good for
food” - Gen 3:6a) b) Lust of the Eyes (“delight to the eyes” - Gen 3:6b) c) Pride of Life (“make one wise” - Gen 3:6c) 5. Eve was
the first human to sin, but Adam, as mankind’s representative, sinned and
brought sin and death upon all mankind (Ro 5:12). E. The Penalty of the Fall of
Man 1. On
Mankind (Ge 3:7-19) a) Just as
God had warned, man experienced death because he sinned (Ge 2:17; 3:3). b) Man began to experience gradual physical
death (Ge 5:5). c) Man immediately experienced spiritual
death in which, he died spiritually (Ep 2:1), lost fellowship with God (Ge
3:7-8), and incurred God’s penalty for sin (Ge 3:15-19). d) Man also experienced the guilt of sin and
self-justification (Ge 3:8-13). 2. On the
Serpent (Ge 3:14) a) The
serpent was cursed with the degradation of becoming the lowest species (Ge
3:14a). Snakes now carry a bad and evil connotation. b) As a consequence of having the lowest status,
the serpent would crawl on its belly (Ge 3:14b, evidently originally its
posture was erect) and he would eat the dust from which man was created. 3. On Satan
(Ge 3:15) a) Speaking
to Satan, God pronounced an enmity that would always exist between Satan and
the woman’s seed (Christ). Satan’s battle plan has always been “Anti-God” and
“Anti-Christ.” Satan also hates all those who belong to Christ (Jn 8:44; Jn
15:18-19 cp. Ep 2:2). b) In this enmity, Satan will bruise Christ’s
“heel” by way of crucifixion. However, Christ will crush Satan’s “head” by
ultimately defeating and destroying him (Heb 2:14; 1Jn 3:8). 4. One Eve
(Ge 3:16) a) The
woman, who was instrumental in influencing man’s spiritual death, would
experience pain when bringing forth physical life. b) At the same time, the Scriptures say that
her “desire will be for her husband.” This phrase has several
interpretations. (1) The first
is that “desire” (teshuqah) refers to “sexual desire” (cp. Sol 7:10)
for her husband even though she has pain during childbirth. (2) The second is that “desire” refers to a
longing for her husband’s headship and rule. (a) The same
word is used in Ge 4:7 and lends support to this interpretation. (b) New Testament exhortations imply that women
will struggle with submission to their husbands (Ep 5:22-24, 28; Co 3:18; 1Pe
3:1). (c) New Testament exhortations also imply that
men will struggle with being domineering over their wives (“he will rule (mashal
- have dominion, Ge 4:7 - “master”) over you”). 5. On Adam
(Ge 3:17-19) a) Included
in Adam’s punishment, the very ground man was to cultivate, was cursed (Ro
8:20-22). b) Man would have to endure “toil” and
“sweat” in order to bring an increase upon the ground, now filled with
“thorns and thistles.” c) Man’s life would be filled with hard
labor until he dies and returns to the dust from which he came. d) In addition, man was expelled from the
Garden, which was both a geographic and spiritual symbol of broken fellowship
with God. F. The Ramifications of the
Fall of Man 1. Sin
breaks fellowship with God (1Jn 1:9). 2. Contrary to Satan’s lie, sin always
includes a penalty (Ro 6:23). 3. Sin always has far-reaching consequences. 4. Christ is the only solution to fallen
man, both in atonement (He 2:17) and temptation (He
2:18). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
