We welcome you to join us in our study of man Christ and redemption. Please turn to that first page I gave you tonight and I'll begin to introduce our course. My goal was to get that done before our Break. By the way, my custom is to open class with sharing in terms of praising the Lord for what he's done for us as well as prayer requests. We can't pray for everybody's praying to ankle and so forth but we do consistently pray for burdens on people's hearts and the exciting thing is we see the Lord answer prayer. Every semester and that's a great blessing. So next time we'll begin with that. This time we have too much to do, including especially our bookstore break. Course description, everybody on the same page with me, is a study of the creation and nature of mankind, so doctrine of man, sin, doctrine of sin, the person and work of Christ. That's two doctrines, Christ's person and his saving work and the application of salvation. So five topics. Human beings, sin, person of Christ, his work and the way God actually causes his grace to hit our lives. We call it the application of salvation. Text books, our standard textbook is Lewis Birkhoff's systematic theology. Dr. Jones affectionately refers to it as the common coin of the realm for the reformed and Bible believing seminaries. It is somewhat dated now. It's over 50 years old, but it is solid. You will find it reads like the encyclopedia, but friends, we need encyclopedias. And this is a very fine book. Of course it needs to be updated. And that's why the other books, my goal is to have one other book, more recent one, for each topic that we cover. Two of those topics are served by this book, Anthony Hukuma's book, created in God's image. It is the best seminary level treatment from a believing writer. He also happened to be a reformed and believing writer, which fits with the doctrinal orientation of this school very perfectly. Tony Hukuma, Tony Calvin, seminary until he retired, then he produced three outstanding books, which we use regularly in our theology courses here at Covenant Seminary. In fact, you'll get two of them in this course, creating God's image deals with the doctrines of man, and sin, in ways that we will find stimulating. I will help stimulate you by assigning some quizzes on those readings. More about that in a little bit. But now our goal is still to strike fear in the students hearts. I mean to orient the students to the course by introducing the books. His book, saved by grace, replaces John Murray's fine work, redemption accomplished and applied. See, under recommended, the last book, John Murray's book, redemption accomplished and applied. The applied part of that book is replaced in my own courses by Hukuma's book, saved by grace, which deals with the application of salvation. What do I mean by that? Regeneration, calling, justification and sanctification adoption. All those different biblical pictures of God's actually touching us with his grace. Robert Newman wrote a little pamphlet, some perspectives on the image of God, which provides a biblical theological approach to the image, which will complement what we'll be doing in class. In a helpful way, my students have always enjoyed this little booklet. It has opened up some doors and windows for them in the Bible's teaching. Alistair McGrath of Oxford University in Great Britain has written a book that frankly is not at seminary level, perhaps it would be a college text. He is very capable of writing scholarly tomes, he does that, and also semi-popular books more than one a year of each. He's a real prodigy. McGrath is an evangelical, theologian in Great Britain, as I said. But his book, understanding Jesus, the first half of it, just the pages mentioned here, is the best treatment I can find at this point on the person of Christ that fits the purposes of this course. I have a better book. It's down there under-recommended. David Wells, the person of Christ, is the cat's meow, but it's just too difficult and consistent of too many pages for our purposes in this course, trying to cover all five doctrines. So I'd like to encourage you to read that probably after the course. Wells book, but in the meantime, McGrath's book is decent and will prove satisfactory for our purposes. I'm delighted with John Stott's The Cross of Christ. It's right on. Just right on an MA level textbook. He handles the Bible very capably, including its theological themes. And as always, he has his finger on the pulse of modern culture and makes wonderful applications. He'll be blessed. Perhaps it suffers from an omission or two. And as with any book beside Holy Rit, I hope you disagree with him at some point or other or something's wrong with you. You're not reading with both eyes open, but it's a wonderful book and I'm thankful for it. Some have said it's his finest book. Am I not aware of John Stott's movement on the doctrine of hell? I'm not only aware I've written against him on that, but that doesn't lessen my overall respect and appreciation for him and his ministry. And I wouldn't hesitate to continue using his good books. I do. The next item here is just absolutely sensational and off the charts. And yeah, thank you for your chuckle. You're all awake. My course syllabus years ago, I went to putting the notes in print because I remember being a student myself. And I have to agree with the definition of a lecture as that which passes from the paper of the professor to the paper of the student without passing through the mind of either the best courses I had in seminary. I wrote my hand off and I could hardly engage my mind. Now I give you pretty full notes, a pretty full set of notes. I've got some supplementary overheads and discussions and so forth, but I err. I risk erring on the side of your right in front of a camera there. Thank you for moving stage left. I err on the side of giving you the whole thing, so your temptation then is for you to sleep. All I can say is if I minister rest to your soul, so be it. I've taken all things into account and that's where we've come out. So you do need that starting in after our break at least tonight and bring it every time and please bring your Bible. I don't know where folks are used to studying theology but a covenant seminary we work with the Bible as our primary text. The Westminster standards are the official standards of the seminary. You won't find us heavy handed in our use of them. We don't simply teach them and proof text them with the Bible. We rather work with the scriptures, but I do find the Westminster confession. The fine is summary of the Christian faith that I know of and I use it in a summary fashion which I'll try to do when we conclude. The various doctrines of the course. Your own evaluation of it and any aspect of my teaching or any other teachers at this school is between you and the Lord and we'll respect you on that regard. I might as well tell you now my philosophy is where I think the Bible is clear. I teach to persuade. I just think God deserves that that we ought to teach with conviction. I teach to persuade based upon the authority of the Bible and if I can't persuade you on that basis then I don't want to because I'm going to answer to God even as you are as well. Recommended books. Cornelius planting his book not the way it's supposed to be a breviary a short treatment that is of sin was Christianity today's numero uno award winner this year. It is a wonderful book especially in terms of showing us our sins as individuals, churches, denominations and even as whole cultures. It is a powerful treatment by a professor at Calvin Seminary. I believe he just left to go to Calvin College and help in the area of ministering to students in terms of trying to spur them on in their spiritual lives. He's well qualified based upon this book. Again why don't I use it? I'm already up against my limit with page numbers but read it some other time. You will benefit from doing that. I mentioned David Wells book the best book on the person of Christ in terms of academics for my money is Bob Latham's book by that title. That title starts book is very very good. Latham would be a little more academic and detailed so I would pick it up and read it so you're going to break my budget. I can't afford all these books. I just put out umpteen dollars already. Well get it on your two acquire list. It's good to have that for Christ around Christmas time. Otherwise you're well intentioned unsafe friends and relatives will get you so much trust will commit some terrible things buying you go any pictures and books you never wanted and so forth. And I mentioned Murray's book comments or questions on the text then either it's crystal clear or as clear as might while this assume the former course plan. The topics are listed in the left the five topics and the classes remember each class is a week's work. So welcome the week one that's right three hours this course would meet three times a week three separate hours. There are both pluses and minuses to this system. It is our lot so let's work with it together there is the whole course laid out grading. As a student I appreciated being given credit for what the hope for the work I did so I give 10% merely for completing your readings on time. It's not a whole lot but it's better than nothing on the other hand so be a good boy or girl scout and you'll get 10% in the bank 100% of that 10. Paperettes and quizzes are worth 50% so I have any paperettes I don't even think so this time so I think you can scratch that. I do have quizzes however I've also given you my rating scale. It's about time I started doing that so there it is homework assignments obviously I couldn't have anything assigned tonight. If I could I would have that berk off reading that is listed as recommended okay so we're suffering a little bit here. Do next class read hukama there's some ambiguity here it's hukama having to do with this topic that is created in God's image. Read hukama created in God's image 11 to 11 and bring to class a completed take home quiz okay the quiz is a sealed quiz it's right here in the envelopes. Let me pass that out please do not open these up this will be due next class somebody help me over a million a break we'll do that on the break. Please do not open them before you're ready to take them you're not allowed to look at past quizzes or do one of these hold them up to the light jobs and so forth you're on your honor. If you have a weakness in that area get your spouse or a friend to monitor you I'm serious we all have different weaknesses but the quiz as every quiz is only on that particular reading. Quizzes are not cumulative they're only for so for example that quiz is not on class lecture it's not on any other readings in the world it's only on Anthony Hukama's book created in God's image pages 11 to 11 you're to take it before next. Oh Monday that's hard and bring it to class I'm sorry we're crunched at the beginning it's just a way the days fall out we need to get going we only have two weeks that means two class days on the doctrine of humanity. You also have another short reading in Hukama which will not be quized and Newman's pamphlet read that you won't understand what we'll be talking about next time so you need to read those things but obviously emphasize the part you're going to be quized on I'd encourage you to read it twice if you have the time but in any case on one reading even if it's only your first I would highlight and then go back over and study the high linings you need to put it away completely you can't use. Bible or any other helps and do your best on the quiz give me some help you say I haven't had you before what is the nature of the quiz the quiz says put away all books and notes when taking this quiz you may try to grade it after you are done. If you are like I am you want to do that but do not change answers true or false the instructions say true or false according to Hukama we try to attain objectivity by that prepositional phrase according to Hukama you might disagree with him I might that's not the point okay so based upon what he says we have true and false questions and I will give you a little hint you also need to know. I'll give you a page of our notes you also need to know the information on page 15 of the syllabus I'll give you the two there's two lists the quiz is all true and false with one exception I will ask you one of these two lists the lists are represented by page 15 letters C and D. of your notes as you read Hukama it will become clear page 15 C talks about redemptive historical stages okay and so I might ask you to give the four redemptive historical stages of the image you would say something like this a creation the image was intact original or whole after the fall the image was perverted in Christ it's restored in the new heavens in the world. Resurrection of the dead it's it's perfected something like that synonyms are acceptable of course the other thing is D the other possible list the image should include human beings in our three relationships to God the fellow human beings and to the creation of God so the quiz is totally true and false questions from Hukama with one exception you will be asked to list either the three relationships or the four redemptive historical stages is that clear I will tell you there's a total of 30 questions so you say I better read pretty carefully a hundred pages and 30 questions it's a question every few pages there yes I do intend for you to do that come answer questions okay we ought to start and at least make an introduction I will say this if you keep turning you'll find a final examination study sheet it is my goal to give out the matters that will be included on the final this study sheet the first day of class to really fight the student I mean to help you see the whole course and perspective and if you want to begin outlining now obviously as my syllabus has grown it's too big to test you on the whole thing I can tell you horror stories about when I was a seven I hate to hear that stuff as much as my kids hate to hear you know how that goes but so I basically test on summaries on concluding sections so there is a final examination study sheet to which I am bound it's included in those notes that were handed out today anybody find it yet okay right after the assignments and before JND Kelly early Christian doctrines calcidonian creed you do have a few pages of notes that so so don't discard the matters you just got handed out the introductory matters and say walk and just leave them home because when we summarize the doctrine of Christ I would like to look at that calcidonian creed and when we get to the application of salvation is a chart that I'd like us to think about let's turn to page one of the notes the doctrine of man my timing is less than wonderful here because we immediately launch into a controversial matter this is not good timing Peterson for years I taught this material after teaching the doctrine of God and that worked fine but now we have shuffled the contents of our three m a theology courses and it was largely my doing we had them out of whack in terms of where we put the different topics so we begin with man and I begin with controversy I don't like doing that it's unavoidable okay let me describe what I mean I should say this first as well we're going to be studying under doctrine of man three major topics let me give them to you our origin the image of God what does it mean when Genesis says God made us in his image after his likeness my man of course I mean humanity I'm not speaking of a male but doctrine of man or also called anthropology theological anthropology includes our origin the image of God and then our constitutional nature how many parts are we made up of modern philosophy says we are made up of one part modern philosophy is wrong the Bible says that we're made up of at least two parts but evangelical Christians can't agree after whether we're made up of two parts or three parts that is our soul and spirit different entities different constituents of our makeup or are they different aspects of the same immaterial part of our makeup are we two parts or three we will work with that Lord willing next class tonight our goals are to work with the origin of mankind and then the image of God so page one origin of man Millard Erickson a outstanding evangelical theologian he's a Baptist the theologian lists five views he has a wonderful wonderfully up-to-date book called Christian theology it's a fine book and you know I'm going to say you ought to buy it sometime but not this week he lists five views of man's origin on those pages of his book a brief summary of the five views will launch us into an examination of the beginnings of humanity under origin of man here's the sub here the subsets here views of man's origin we're doing now then page two the status of Adam and Eve can we read the account of Adam and Eve as a fable as some would tell us or are they intended to be understood as historical persons I'm going to argue strongly for the latter view top of three was man created from a previously existing creature there is disagreement here with an evangelical Christianity as well unfortunately my estimation I'm going to argue this view if you say yes that is not compatible with a read with with accurate understanding of Genesis so those are our three topics under the origin of man but first of all views of our origin in the first place page one let me just mention give names to the five naturalistic evolution fiat creationism theistic evolution theistic evolution and progressive creation as we say it all sounds like a jumble jumble to me good good I'll let you in on an inside secret that we rarely let go outside the guild of theologians we use this confusing terminology so you will need us we will keep ourselves employed now seriously you can see there are two basic positions and evolutionary one and a creation position okay at least the way Erickson sets it up I would agree with him and there are adjectives then that the sting that makes subsets to creationist positions and three evolutionist positions naturalistic evolution as the name implies is an attempt to account for all forms of life by means of the imminent processes of nature imminent means there's nothing outside there's no transcendent God super naturalism is expressly excluded according to naturalistic evolution so the meaning is anti super naturalistic evolution got it that's what naturalistic means obviously this is incompatible with theism with the belief in God let alone with the Bible or Christian theism but it is a view and as you know not an unpopular one naturalistic evolution fiat creationism is Erickson's term I have friends who would call it biblical creationism so it depends on what where one comes out Erickson comes out in favor of five progressive creationism and as I have thought about this I don't believe Miller Erickson has an unkind bone in his body so I don't think he was trying to stack the deck but in fact that's what happens low and behold his view is number five the right one you with me and here instead of now again the term biblical creationism is not really fair my friends to use either the implication is there are two views the biblical one and then non-biblical ones and guess which one you know so I said maybe you can't achieve absolute objectivity and fairness in terms but fiat sounds like God said it and it was done and that's exactly what the Erickson intends quoting Erickson this is the idea that God by a direct act brought into being virtually instantaneously everything that is both a direct end of quote both a direct action of God and the shortness of the time span of creation are stressed in this view John Whitcombs the early earth defends this position Whitcom and Morris the Genesis flood represents the same outlook advocates claim that they do the best job of interpreting the biblical data concerning creation I will give them credit for taking the Bible very seriously they believe the Bible is God's word it's an errant that's right I will also give them credit for interpreting Genesis in the simplest way possible taking it at very a very face value approach does that make it necessarily the best option no but I will give them credit for that I will fault them before I even begin to evaluate these things officially for not being tolerant of fellow believers who disagree with them that does not foster fellowship and even the investigation of truth I have friends who represent what's called here the progressive creationist view who have been blackballed from societies and even getting their materials advertised in Christian magazines because of what they regard is kind of a nice word for it the approach of these people to say there's the only possible viewpoint for Christians to hold well that's not true it simply isn't true because like it or not sincere Bible believe in Christians have held and do hold be D as a matter of fact and E will be back and evaluate in a bit theistic evolution this is the view notice naturalistic evolution now we take out the adjective naturalistic which I said is the equivalent of anti super naturalistic and now we have evolution with God involved in some way theistic you say aren't theistic and theistic pretty close yes but here they're used to technical terms just to talk of two different things theistic evolution theistic see is the view that God planned the creative process well is a certainly better than naturalistic evolution you have God and that kind at least fits the beginning of Genesis one one this is the view that God planned the creative process good and that he used evolution accomplishes ends not so good after God created the first form that's good he removed himself from the evolutionary process that's not good with tongue and in cheek Erickson refers to God as the creator emeritus you know like professor emeritus retired professor God is creator emeritus deistic looks like a good adjective as in deism the older viewpoint that God wound up the universe like a clock and left it to run on its own again built in principles this is not a live option for Christians so I can strike out one and three and the fact of the matter is sincere Christians have held B D and E I have real problems with D but nevertheless theistic evolution this view is similar to theistic evolution and yet there are important differences between the two according to theistic evolution God is involved not only with the very beginning of the creative process but also at key points there after better you say that's an improvement so when we move from naturalistic evolution to theistic evolution we move in a good direction and now moving to theistic it's getting better I agree God was directly and supernaturally responsible for man's creation great we're making definite progress here God used a previously existing creature when he made a human being God created a human soul and infused it into a higher primate wrong as my sons would say not that doesn't work but again there are sincere by believing Christians who have held it here's a book that didn't get the press it deserved evangelical affirmations a conference was held at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School oh in 1989 or 1990 they invited good people and addressed different topics oh what are evangelicals some challenges to the traditional doctrine of salvation biblical authority each has a presenter and then a person who responds at least one ethics social ethics black evangelical theology praise the Lord at something like that is treated often not treated I'm thankful for that capable work evangelicals evangelicals a humanism and the church the a Carson with a response from the president of Moody Bible Institute so good people when they got to evangelicals and modern science they chose Robert C Newman and Newman in his book correctly under evangelicals responses to modern science lists three views young earth creationists they're called fiat creationist on the notes in front of you old earth creationists they're called progressive creationists in our notes and then theistic evolutionists he includes those three because in fact there are living breathing human evangelical Christians who espouse all three of those today progressive creationism bottom of page one this quoting Ericsson sees the creative work of God as a combination of a series of de novo that is brand new creative acts and an imminent or processive operation so it combines immediate divine I don't like the word intervention but I think that will communicate to you immediate divine action of a supernatural variety with providence over long periods of time at various points in time God created new creatures without using previously existing life so this can it can hold to the biological chart but it can account for the big gaps between the species as seeing God creating with me you may not like that but that is an approach that Ericsson adopts between these special acts of creation evolutionary development took place they want to call it evolution well you could but I'll qualify in a moment progressive creationist hold that God in a special act created man from the dust of the earth you say okay that's the rub then of these five views okay the way I have laid them out what makes a person a creationist is exactly that last sentence I read if you hold that God made human beings by a special direct act and you're a creationist I would define it in that way okay as well as holding God create the heavens and the earth but that would be the distinction in my mind between being an evolutionist or creationist it would not be on how old the earth is the Bible doesn't tell us that okay it's not a fundamental of our faith in that way you may think well we can only stress those genealogy so far we can come to some conclusions there I would respect that although there are problems and I'll point you to an essay a classic essay in those regards but so that is how at least I'm defining it following Ericsson if you believe God made the cosmos and that he made human beings he made Adam from the dust of the ground and E from Adam's side you're a creationist okay there are other intramural debates and I'm all for those continuing I'll just prejudge my conclusions and tell you I'm making a plea today for tolerance before the in light of the two different creationist views okay I would finally if I had to cast my lot with progressive creationism rather than fiat creationism okay if I have to do it all right but I would make a plea for toleration from mutual respect lots of work needs to be done I'll give you bibliography in a moment let me finish progressive creationist our creationists in that they hold God in a special act created man from the dust of the earth he did not use a previously existing primate when he made the first human being this view rejects macro large scale evolution okay fishes didn't evolve into some totally different type of creature we didn't come from fish I needed it horses okay with me on the other hand this view says God didn't make every kind of fish that is in the world today or every kind of horse there can be within the Bible doesn't use the technical language but within what we would call species great ranges of development over millions of years frankly according to this viewpoint this view rejects macro evolution but accepts micro evolution it accepts development within species but rejects movement from one species development from one to a totally different species in order to keep you just waiting to come back to class I didn't plan it this way really friends I'll hold my evaluation till after our break