Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Religion
Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3)
Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Baptists -- Doctrines; Theology, Doctrinal
(_c_) The concreated opposition between sense and reason which this theory
supposes is inconsistent with the Scripture declaration that the work of
God’s hands “was very good” (Gen. 1:31), and transfers the blame of
temptation and sin from man to God. To hold to a merely negative
innocence, in which evil desire was only slumbering, is to make God author
of sin by making him author of the constitution which rendered sin
inevitable.
(_d_) This theory directly contradicts Scripture by making the effect of
the first sin to have been a weakening but not a perversion of human
nature, and the work of regeneration to be not a renewal of the affections
but merely a strengthening of the natural powers. The theory regards that
first sin as simply despoiling man of a special gift of grace and as
putting him where he was when first created—still able to obey God and to
coöperate with God for his own salvation,—whereas the Scripture represents
man since the fall as “dead through ... trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1),
as incapable of true obedience (Rom. 8:7—“not subject to the law of God,
neither indeed can it be”), and as needing to be “created in Christ Jesus
for good works” (Eph. 2:10).
At few points in Christian doctrine do we see more clearly than
here the large results of error which may ultimately spring from
what might at first sight seem to be only a slight divergence from
the truth. Augustine had rightly taught that in Adam the _posse
non peccare_ was accompanied by a _posse peccare_, and that for
this reason man’s holy disposition needed the help of divine grace
to preserve its integrity. But the scholastics wrongly added that
this original disposition to righteousness was not the outflow of
man’s nature as originally created, but was the gift of grace. As
this later teaching, however, was by some disputed, the Council of
Trent (sess. 5, cap. 1) left the matter more indefinite, simply
declaring man: “Sanctitatem et justitiam in qua _constitutus
fuerat_, amisisse.” The Roman Catechism, however (1:2:19),
explained the phrase “constitutus fuerat” by the words: “Tum
originalis justitiæ admirabile donum _addidit_.” And Bellarmine
(De Gratia, 2) says plainly: “Imago, quæ est ipsa natura mentis et
voluntatis, a solo Deo fieri potuit; similitudo autem, quæ in
virtute et probitate consistit, _a nobis quoque_ Deo adjuvante
perficitur.”... (5) “Integritas illa ... non fuit naturalis ejus
conditio, sed supernaturalis evectio.... Addidisse homini donum
quoddam insigne, justitiam videlicet originalem, qua veluti aureo
quodam fræno pars inferior parti superiori subjecta contineretur.”
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