Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Religion
Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)
Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Baptists -- Doctrines; Theology, Doctrinal
While certain forms of the preëxistence theory are exposed to the
last objection indicated in the text, Julius Müller claims that
his own view escapes it; see Doctrine of Sin, 2:393. His theory,
he says, “would contradict holy Scripture if it derived inborn
sinfulness _solely_ from this extra-temporal act of the
individual, without recognizing in this sinfulness the element of
hereditary depravity in the sphere of the natural life, and its
connection with the sin of our first parents.” Müller, whose
trichotomy here determines his whole subsequent scheme, holds only
the πνεῦμα to have thus fallen in a preëxistent state. The ψυχή
comes, with the body, from Adam. The tempter only brought man’s
latent perversity of will into open transgression. Sinfulness, as
hereditary, does not involve guilt, but the hereditary principle
is the “medium through which the transcendent self-perversion of
the spiritual nature of man is transmitted to his whole temporal
mode of being.” While man is born guilty as to his πνεῦμα, for the
reason that this πνεῦμα sinned in a preëxistent state, he is also
born guilty as to his ψυχή, because this was one with the first
man in his transgression.
Even upon the most favorable statement of Müller’s view, we fail
to see how it can consist with the organic unity of the race; for
in that which chiefly constitutes us men—the πνεῦμα—we are as
distinct and separate creations as are the angels. We also fail to
see how, upon this view, Christ can be said to take our nature;
or, if he takes it, how it can be without sin. See Ernesti,
Ursprung der Sünde, 2:1-247; Frohschammer, Ursprung der Seele,
11-17: Philippi, Glaubenslehre, 3:92-122; Bruch, Lehre der
Präexistenz, translated in Bib. Sac., 20:681-733. Also Bib. Sac.,
11:186-191; 12:156; 17:419-427; 20:447; Kahnis, Dogmatik,
3:250—“This doctrine is inconsistent with the indisputable fact
that the souls of children are like those of the parents; and it
ignores the connection of the individual with the race.”
2. The Creatian Theory.
This view was held by Aristotle, Jerome, and Pelagius, and in modern times
has been advocated by most of the Roman Catholic and Reformed theologians.
It regards the soul of each human being as immediately created by God and
joined to the body either at conception, at birth, or at some time between
these two. The advocates of the theory urge in its favor certain texts of
Scripture, referring to God as the Creator of the human spirit, together
with the fact that there is a marked individuality in the child, which
cannot be explained as a mere reproduction of the qualities existing in
the parents.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account