Human Nature, Sin, and Grace

Human nature: Drawing from Gen. 1:26-27 to understand human nature, I have found

the argument of Origen (c.185–c.254) on the distinction between the image and likeness both

intriguing and enlightening , before this reading I had considered or assumed the use of the two

words “ image and likeness” as only a matter of expression. I agree with his position when he

said “but the fulfillment of the likeness is reserved for the final consummation.” I believe this is

a valid argument because it seems the part of becoming the “likeness” of God is a process. He

(God) intent to grow us up as son’s and daughters, teaching us His ways, nature , and character

so that over time we will be transformed into His Likeness. 2 Pet. 1:4. God sees us as work in

progress (process) through whom He is working out His plan. He is fashioning man to like Him

in the final outcome. 1 Jn.3:2. (p.328)

Sin: The position adopted by the Cappadocia fathers on their argument that, “Adam was

created in the image of God meant that he was free from all normal weaknesses and disabilities

which subsequently afflicted human nature.” But this happened because of the abuse of the

human free will. This position is strengthened by the scriptures in James 1:14-15. Sin therefore is

a resultant effect of man’s abuse of human free will beginning with the first man(Adam) and

“transmitted to his posterity” as argued by J.N.D Kelly (1909-97). In the same vein, Cyril of

Jerusalem (c.313–86) “emphasized that Since all of humanity traces its origins to Adam and Eve,

it follows that all humanity shares in this defacement of the image of God.” This line of

argument stood out for me because it aligns with scriptures; Rom. 3:23, 1Jn.2:16, Eph. 2:3b

(p.330) I agree with Augustine’s argument on the helplessness of man in the fight against sin,

when he stated, “sinners are to be considered as being seriously ill and are unable to diagnose
their own illness adequately, let alone cure it. It is through the grace of God alone that humanity's

illness is diagnosed (sin) and a cure made available (grace).” (p.331)as supported by Eph. 2:8

GRACE: Augustine’s argument here is very apt, he “held that human nature is frail, weak, and

lost and needs divine assistance and care if it is to be restored and renewed. Grace, according to

Augustine, is God's generous and quite unmerited attention to humanity, by which this process of

healing may begin” I am also agree with Augustine on his position on grace as being

participatory and continuous, when he said. “God assists fallen humanity by healing,

enlightening, strengthening, and continually working to restore and renew the human soul.” To

achieve this he argued further that, “humanity needed to be shown what to do and then gently

aided at every point” As opposed to Pelagius, who believes as he stated “humanity merely

needed to be shown what to do and could then be left to achieve it unaided. p.333

Impact of this doctrine.

I am created in the image of God. But to become the likes of God is a process to which I must
submit and grow progressively.

The sin nature is inherent in me, occasioned by Adam’s abuse of the human free will in turning
away from God.

The grace of God, through Jesus, has rescued me from eternal death.

Personal belief statement.Man was originally created sinless, he fell from the grace of God.
God in his act of kindness initiated a plan to restore man to himself.

A question you have from the readings

How can we bring agreement on this bible passages on man and woman both as the image of
God. Gen. 1:27 and 1 Cor. 11:7.
Soteriology

Reflection: “The doctrine of salvation deals with the restoration of the created order, and above

all humanity, to its proper relationship to God.” Irenaeus of Lyons (c.130–c.202). this statement

sits well in that, there would have been no need for the doctrine of salvation if there was no

abuse of the human free will which lead to the turning away from God and the eventual fall from

the grace of God. (p.246)

The argument by lyons (c130-c202) stood out for me very prominently in connecting humanity

to divinity for salvation or redemption to take place, he stated thus “bringing God down to

humanity through the Spirit while raising humanity to God through his incarnation, and in his

coming surely and truly giving us incorruption through the fellowship which we have with him.”

It also consistent with the position of scripture in John 1: 14and 16.(p.246)

I found the Genevan theologian François Turrettini (1623–87) exposition on the

threefold office of Christ was very rich and illuminating and fascinating. He stated thus; “The

prophet illuminates the mind by the spirit of enlightenment; the priest soothes the heart and

conscience by the spirit of consolation; the king subdues rebellious inclinations by the spirit of

sanctification.” This also is in agreement with scripture in Revelation. 1:5. This is why He is

called "the faithful witness" (as Prophet); "the firstborn of the dead" (as Priest); and "the ruler of

kings on earth" (as King) In the threefold office of Christ, we are granted our freedom from sin.

Impact of doctrine: Jesus is my savior, I will live my life to please Him.

Personal belief statement: I believe firmly that Jesus Christ is the only to salvation that God had

provided. This has guided will continue to guide how I live. My personal believe is anchored on

John. 14:6 and 1Tim.2:5 .

Question: how can the pluralist approach be married with scriptures.

Christology

Reflection: On the debate for the person of Christ, I found the contrasting argument form Arius

and Athanasuis interesting. Aruis argued that Jesus Christ is only supreme among created

being, though recognized as the first and foremost in terms of origination and rank; that the Son

and the father do not have the same essence. I disagree with Aruis line of argument because it is

substantiated by scriptures, in fact I believe it is at variance with what the bible teaches in the

following passages; John. 10:30, John. 14:11, Phi. 2:6, 1John. 5:7.

On the other hand, the position of Athanasuis, seem more accurate, as it agreed with both

scriptures and church traditions. Athanasuis argued against the Arian belief, that if Christ is a

created being He can not redeem humanity, because no human being can redeem another. This

position seats well with the bible passage in Acts. 4:12.

Impact of doctrine: I believe the position of Athanasuis has further strengthen my believe on

the deity of Jesus Christ.

Personal belief statement: Jesus is God incarnate, who came into the world for the purpose of

redemption. While He was on earth He was fully God and fully man. John. 1:1-14.

Question: what new thing did Jesus bring?

Pneumatology

Reflection: I found very fascinating Irenaeus of Lyons (c.130–c.202) early interest and

understanding of the person and working of the Holy Spirit at a period when the subject was the

focus of debate in both church community and theological community. Equally enlightening and

worthy of reflection was the argument of Athanasuis on the divinity of the Holy Spirit.

“Athanasius argued that the work of the Spirit pointed inescapably to the divine nature of the

Spirit. How could the Spirit deify humanity if the Spirit itself was a creature? After all, Paul

refers to the church as the “temple of God” within which the Spirit dwells. “If the Holy Spirit

were a creature, we should have no participation in God. “the following verses of scriptures

identifies the works of the Holy Spirit in believers. The Holy Spirit gives rise to faith (1

Corinthians 12: 3), pours love into human hearts (Romans 5: 5), and guides the prayers of

Christians (Romans 8: 26). It is also seen as a “pledge” or “guarantee” of the believer's salvation

– an initial phase in the transformation of human nature, which is completed in heaven. (p. 283)

Impact of doctrine: The is the third person of the trinity, not just a force or created being, so I

worship Him as God.

Personal belief statement: I believe in the trinity as co-equals in the God head.

Question: How can John. 14:28, be substantiated in light of equality of the God head?
Church and the Sacraments

Reflection: on church and the sacrament, Augustine of Hippo’s arguments stood out as

being most educative and in alignment with both church tradition and the teachings of the Bible,

firstly, Augustine emphasized that the church is not meant to be a “pure body,” a society of

saints, but a “mixed body” (corpus permixtum) of saints and sinners. This secondly referring to

the parable in (Matthew 13: 24–31). Augustine argued that both saints and sinners are to be

found in the church. “To attempt a separation in this world is premature and improper. That

separation will take place in God's own time, at the end of history. No human can make that

judgment or separation in God's place.” (p.359)

Augustine made a similar point in connection with the theology of the sacraments. holds

that the efficacy of a sacrament rests not upon the merits of the individual administering it but

upon the merits of the one who instituted them in the first place – Jesus Christ. The validity of

sacraments is thus independent of the merits of those who administer them. There may be a

pastoral advantage to the sacraments being administered by someone of unblemished reputation,

but there is no theological necessity for this. Christ is the ultimate guarantor of the efficacy of the

sacraments; the minister plays only a secondary and subordinate role. (p. 387) I consider this

argument to be true as supported by this bible passages. Rom. 11:29.

Impact of doctrine: The consist of both saints and sinners and Christ is the ultimate

guarantor of the efficacy of the sacraments.

Personal belief statement: The church is a community of believers in Christ undergoing

progressive transformation into the Christ likeness at different levels individually and

congregationally. The validity of sacraments is only guaranteed by Christ, not man.

 Question: If Christ is coming for a church without spot or wrinkle, should the church be

a mixed multitude?

Last Things.

Reflection: I have found this reading very enlightening, particularly the distinction it drew

between the terms eschatological and apocalyptic. And the exposition on the modern meaning

and usage of the words. Further more Paul’s eschatological argument that, “salvation remains

something which will be consummated in the future” and the general theme of the new testament

that “something which happened in the past has inaugurated something new, which will reach its

final consummation in the future.” Underscores an important point in the discuss on the doctrine

of eschatology.(p.427- 428).

Also very remarkable is Augustine of Hippo’s allusion to the eschatological doctrine that

“Believers are saved, purified, and perfected – yet in hope (in spe) but not in reality (in re).

Salvation is something that is inaugurated in the life of the believer but which will only find its

completion at the end of history.” (p.429). Both Paul and Augustine’s position can be

substantiated by scriptures. 1 John. 3:2, 2 Corinthians 1: 22, 1 Corinthians 15: 23; 2

Thessalonians 2: 1, 8–9

Impact of doctrine: salvation for a believer in Christ both “now” and the “not yet.” So keep the

faith.

Personal belief statement: Christ is coming again for a church without spot nor wrinkle,

therefore I should live in hope of His return.

Question: what if there is really no end?