tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3295328575953992372.post5272222116372363742..comments2024-03-21T03:04:18.673-04:00Comments on Unapologetica: Prelapsarian Anthropology: Some ThoughtsRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07883500968749756873noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3295328575953992372.post-81621351591402794682012-03-31T14:23:21.801-04:002012-03-31T14:23:21.801-04:00Continuing...
Intellect or education do not equate...Continuing...<br />Intellect or education do not equate to holiness or sanctification. The root of depravity is spiritual rather than mental; therefore, the remedy must be spiritual rather than educational. In other words, sin cannot be educated out of a person. How many "great" scholars with great reasoning ability have turned out to be not very good Christians? And how many simple, uneducated saints, with a great heart for God, do you think have existed? <br /><br />As for "physicalism," the spirit and the body have parallel faculties. A disembodied spirit may move on its own, without physical feet. (Look at the unclean spirits who left the demon-possessed man and went into the swine. They had to see the swine, as well as be able to move to where they were at.) This is why Jesus spoke of men "having ears to hear," or having ears but not hearing (and the same with eyes). Rebellious sinners have physical eyes and ears, but they have purposely "closed" their spiritual eyes and ears, refusing to see or hear the truth. The spirit of a child is limited in its understanding by the body. A spirit without a body may go through a wall, but a spirit within one of these corruptible bodies must use a door. Also, though a disembodied spirit can see the door, the spirit of a (living) physically blind man cannot see. The physical body limits the spirit while the spirit is within it. In the same way, The spirit of a newly conceived child must wait until the body and mind have developed to a certain point before they can reach an accountable understanding. It is absurd to suggest that a zygote understands the law written on its heart and has any conflicting thoughts regarding it. Thoughts require synapses and brain cells, which the zygote does not yet have. And thoughts of understanding regarding the law of God written on the heart might require years of development and experience.<br /><br />Ken Hamrickbiblicalrealisthttp://biblicalrealist.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3295328575953992372.post-39881810029839125842012-03-30T14:25:10.068-04:002012-03-30T14:25:10.068-04:00"Man was created in the image of God (Genesis..."Man was created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27). All are still images of God (Acts 17:28), though the image has been marred such that one must be conformed to the image of Christ (Romans 8:29). Therefore, what man lost by virtue of the Fall cannot be an essential aspect of the imago Dei. If it were, men would no longer be the image of God."<br /><br />It seems to me your opening quote is where a lot of this 'problem' hinges. Two things need clarification:<br /><br />(1) What does it mean when you say the Imago Dei has "been marred"? <br /><br />(2) What relation does the Image of Christ have with the Imago Dei? Your wording might not have been intentional, but the way it comes off is that because the Imago Dei has been marred, conformity to the Image of Christ is necessary. The only options available are (a) the Image of Christ supplants the ID, (b) the Image of Christ *only* "unmarrs" the ID, (c) the Image of Christ 'builds upon and goes beyond' the ID. <br /><br />To say the Image of Christ supplants the ID is obviously problematic, for it would mean man is no longer made in the ID, as you also admit cannot be the case. To say the Image of Christ merely undoes the "marring" is to say it merely restores one to a prelapsarian state, but that suggests man's highest End is Eden. The only acceptable answer I can see is (c), where the Image of Christ is a 'building upon' the ID, which is the only category in which Indwelling of the Holy Spirit could fall into. <br /><br />Also, I've written an article titled "<a href="http://catholicnick.blogspot.com/2012/01/7-reasons-protestant-anthropology-is-to.html" rel="nofollow">7 Reasons Protestant Anthropology is to be Rejected</a>" which might be interesting to you.<br /><br />P.S. It seems Blogger's new "improvements" have discontinued "email me of follow up comments" and the only way to get that option back is to go to your blog Settings and enable "Embedded Comments"Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453168437883536663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3295328575953992372.post-76198860968183654192012-03-29T22:42:51.731-04:002012-03-29T22:42:51.731-04:00Ecclesiates 3:19 Surely the fate of human beings i...Ecclesiates 3:19 Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same spirit; humans have no advantage over animals. Everything is meaningless. 20 All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. 21 Who knows if the human spirit rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?<br /><br />What do you make of this, given your view?<br /><br />I think you beg the question regarding the ability of animals to reason as you are not an animal. If animals could reason, then why can't they be responsible for believing truth? See also: Psalm 32:9; Jude 10; 2 Peter 2:12.<br /><br />I don't see why it's problematic that to reason correctly implies one is further along in progressive sanctification. Further, I reject the sort of physicalism which your statement about "brain cells" would entail, and such "children" would still possess the faculty for reason.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07883500968749756873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3295328575953992372.post-27914961808469258672012-03-29T20:16:54.930-04:002012-03-29T20:16:54.930-04:00Ryan,
You've left out one common suggestion a...Ryan,<br /><br />You've left out one common suggestion as to what distinguishes man as in God’s image: that man, like God, is a spiritual being (unlike all the animals). The prospect of the image of God being the faculty of reason would make those who reason better to have more of that image than those whose faculty of reason is not as good. And what of those men whose faculty of reason is damaged to impaired? Not only this, but the image of God is not something developed in men but present from conception. But children at conception have no brains cells with which to reason about anything --- do they not yet have the image of God? Furthermore, some animals have a rudimentary ability to reason. Ravens can reason that if they pull downward on a fishing line that has been hung over pulley, then the line will pull a fish up and out of the water. <br /><br />Ken Hamrickbiblicalrealisthttp://biblicalrealist.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com