Final Exam Flashcards
Systematic Theology
“The application of God’s Word by persons to all areas of life.”
Biblical Theology
Answers: “What does the whole Bible teach us about any given topic” (meta-narrative)
Intratextural reading of Scripture
“within the text” (“extra” = outside the text)
Rationality/reason
ministerial function
Rationalism
magisterial function (“over”)
Mystery
acceptable & necessary // convictions, yet humility; mystery, but not contradictions (postmodernism/pluarlism)
Progressive Revelation
continuing nature — over time
Word-act revelation
a) God’s redemptive acts are revelatory
b) God’s revelatory word interpret God’s redemptive acts
c) God’s revelatory word is itself a redemptive act
3 horizons in reading Scripture
1) Textural Context (where we start with any text)
2) Epochal Context (where are we in the unfolding story)
3) Canonical Context (where the text fits in light of the whole canon)
Typology
*promise-fulfillment // involves an organic or essential relation between events, person, and institutions in one epoch and their counterparts in later epochs.
Miracle
“God’s mighty ‘signs’; ‘wonders’; and ‘works’.” // NOT “breaking of natural law” which would assume implicit deism.
Opera ad intra
works that terminate within God’s own being
Opera ad extra
works that terminate outside of God’s own being
Efficient causation
divine action (Process Theism denies this and points to partial cause of all events)
Extraordinary vs. Ordinary Providence
“extra” = demonstrations of God’s covenant Lordship
“ordinary” = works within nature
*both under God’s providential control
Panentheism (=process theism)
“God is an event. God is in everything. In other words, God and the world are inseparable, but not identical.”
“God does not direct the world, but rather ‘lures’ and ‘shapes’ it.” = rejects divine action // only partial cause
Libertarian or Indeterministic (human freedom)
Traditional Arminianism (synergism) = God and humans work together
“a person is free if they can always do otherwise”
Compatibilistic (human freedom)
Traditional Calvinism (monergism) = freedom that is compatible with God’s ordination of things.
“God wills and plans all things, not in dependency or conditioned on mankind.”
Divine Decree
“His eternal purpose according to the counsel of His will, whereby, for His own glory, He hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.”
Foreordination
God’s plan with respect to his overall plan/decree.
Predestination
God’s plan related to the eternal condition of moral agents.
Reprobation
God’s choice of some to suffer eternal lostness.
Election
God’s positive choice of individuals to salvation.
Open theist (divine providence)
God’s will is not the ultimate explanation for everything that happen; human decisions and actions make an important contribution.
Arminian (divine providence)
God’s plan encompasses all things, but to make room for libertarian freedom, they argue that God’s eternal plan is based on his foreseeing what we will do if created.
Calvinism (divine providence)
God’s plan encompasses everything. From eternity past, God has chosen according to his purposes, many known only to him, all things that come to pass.
Supralapsarian
Election of some to eternal life and others to death
Creation of humans
Fall of humans into sin
Atonement of Christ (=particular/limited)
Gift fo the HS to convict
Regeneration of elect
Sanctification of elect
Infralapsarian
Creation of humans
Fall of humans into sin
Election of some to eternal life and others to death
Atonement of Christ (=particular/limited)
Gift fo the HS to convict
Regeneration of elect
Sanctification of elect
Sublapsarian (
Creation of humans
Fall of humans into sin
Atonement of Christ to make salvation possible (=universal/unlimited)
Election of some to eternal life and salvation (those he foresaw would cooperate with prevenient grace)
Foreseeing that others would reject grace, he decided to leave them in their condemnation
Aspects of Divine Providence (3)
1) Preservation = God’s continuous activity
2) Concurrence = relation between divine and human activity by which God cooperates with created things (=secondary causes) in every action, directing them
3) Government = God has a purpose in all that he does in the world and he providentially governs or directs all things
Immediate vs Mediate Agency
Immediate = direct (Creation) Mediate = through means (created means, physics, mankind, etc.)
Remote vs. Proximate Agency
Remote = distant relation Proximate = close relation
Asymmetrical relation of God’s planning of good & evil
God stand behind good and evil
“Every good and perfect gift is from God.”
(Joseph - Gen. 50:19-20; Jonah 1:14-15; Isaiah 10:5-17)
Middle knowledge vs. Timeless knowledge vs. Simple Foreknowledge
Middle = God possesses not only the knowledge of what will in fact happen in the actual
world (i.e. simple foreknowledge), but also what could in fact happen in all worlds and what would in fact happen in every possible situation, including what every possible free creature would do in every situation in which that creature could find itself.
Timeless = Since God is outside of time, he sees all of time at once, and he sees it as present. As such, God knows all things without knowing the future since nothing is future to him.
Simple = knowledge at any given time of what will in fact happen in the actual world at any given time
Theodicy
the vindication of of divine goodness & providence in view of the existence of evil
Problem of Evil: logical vs. religious vs. evidential
logical = there is a logical incoherence within the Christian doctrine of God (i.e. "If God exists, then there is no evil. There is evil. So, God does not exist.") religious = asks why a particular evil is happening to me evidential = argue that evil makes theism implausible or improbably. (i.e. given the existence of evil, it is unlikely that God exists)
Dualism
the view that there are two distinct, co-eternal substances, or self-existent principles from which all else are derived.
Gnosticism
1) believe the God of the OT & NT are different
2) hold that creation was mediated by lower beings arranged in a hierarchy of being.
3) there is an absolute dualism between creation/salvation
4) Creation was not created good, but evil since it contains matter
Naturalism
the view that the material universe is eternal and independent of any act of supreme will or intelligence
Pantheism
the view that there is no ultimate distinctions between the Creator and the creation
Creatio ex nihilo
God created ‘out of nothing’
Heb 11:3; Rom 4:17; Gen 1:1 *bara
Neo-Orthodoxy vs. Liberal view of Gen. 1-3
Neo = theological truth but not historical (Karl Barth/Emil Brunner) Liberal = simply legendary & mythical
Historical Nature of Gen. 1-11
a) biblical genealogies (1 Chron 1:1; Luke 3:3)
b) Jesus assumes (Mt 19:4-6; Mk 10:6-8)
c) Paul assumes (1 Tim 2:13-14; Rom 5:12-21)
d) Christian position destroyed if not historical
Gap Theory
views Gen. 1:2 as documentation of the recovery of the world from the chaos into which it had lapsed between Gen. 1:1-2
Theistic Evolution
God began the process of evolution, implanting within creation the laws that its development has followed.
Progressive Creationism
argues that God intervened at certain points in the process of creation and acted directly, but then at other times allowed things that God had previously created to evolve within certain limits
Literary Framework Theory
The whole sequence of seven days of creation is not a chronological account of the sequence of historical events when God created the universe, rather it is a literary device used to tell a story that conveys a theological truth.
Macro vs. Microevolution
macro = larger evolutionary theory (*deny) micro = evolutionary changes within a species or small group of organisms (*see this)
Irreducible complexity
The incredibly complex structures of living systems not only rule out gradual evolution by mutation and natural selection, they also require absolute creation; that is, being made ‘full grown’ or fully functional. (Intelligent Designer)
Day-age Theory
After each creative act, God used natural processes working over long periods of time to develop various life-forms.
Cultural-creation mandate
1) Dominion over creation
2) Fruitful & multiply
3) God’s image = responsible for creation
Image vs. Likeness
They are synonyms of each other (Hebrew)
Gen. 1:27; 9:6; 1 Cor 11:7; Gen. 5:1; James 3:9
Views of the Image of God
1) Substantive/Structural View (Ontological) = a particular quality found in us and it is due to this ‘quality’ that we continue to have the ‘image’ of God in us, even after the Fall.
2) Functional View = human beings image God by what we do, particularly in relation to having ‘dominion’ over the earth.
3) Relational View = found in our ability to have a relation with God and others.
Roman Catholic View of image/likeness
Rationality remained intact (=image), but the
likeness was lost (=holiness).
Structure vs. Function
Hoekema = distinguish between 'structure' and 'function' Resemblance = "structure" i.e. human nature, moral excellence, moral agency, speech Representation = "function"
Psychosomatic Unity
Summary of the Biblical Data (Modified Dichotomy)
Human beings now exist in a state of psychosomatic unity but this unity can and will be temporarily disrupted at the time of death. 2 Cor 5:8 clearly teaches that human beings can exist apart from their present bodies (cf. 1 Thess 3:13; 4:14).
Greek Dualism
Man is composed of two distinct substances — matter/body or mind/soul (spark of divinity). However, they also argued that matter (body) was inferior (morally evil) to the mind or soul.
Cartesian Dualism
René Descartes = argued for a distinction between mind and body. Mind or soul is made up of consciousness and cognition (immaterial). The body is made up of extension and boundary (material).
Physicalism — reductive vs. non-reductive
Naturalism – reductive physicalism or non-reductive physicalism (contemporary discussion of human nature — minds or brains)
Theological Anthropology
Christian theology argues that human beings enjoy neither metaphysical nor methodological pride of place: humanity comes second both in the order of being and in the order of knowing. Theological anthropology is a derivative doctrine; it is not a foundational doctrine. We only reach the stage of theological anthropology when we affirm that man is a
being who has to do with God, or better, when we affirm that God is the one who has to do with human beings
Complementarianism vs. Egalitarianism
Egalitarianism – equal, but no authoritative role differences
- Creation: no role/authority difference
- Fall: authority/role difference starts in the Fall
- Redemption: no authority difference
- New Creation: no authority difference
Complementarianism – equal, and authoritative role differences
- Creation: role/authority difference
- Fall: distortion of creation
- Redemption: recovery of creation
- New Creation:
Dichotomy
This view posits two parts to man – body and soul.
Support = OT & NT texts & word studies* // soul & spirit used interchangeably (i.e. “heart”)
Trichotomy
This view posits three component parts (substances) to man’s nature — body, soul and spirit.
Support = separate words for soul & spirit in OT & NT; (1 Thess. 5:23 & Heb. 4:12)
Traducianism
The view that the immaterial as well as the material part of man is propagated by human reproduction. The soul is “mediately” created by God. (consensus position of the church since 3rd century)
Creationism
Each individual immaterial part of man is to be regarded as a direct creation or immediate creation of God, owing its origin to a direct creative act. The time of the soul’s creation is either at conception, birth, or sometime between. The soul is supposed to be created pure and then united with a depraved body.
Pre-existence Theory
This theory holds that the soul existed prior to its actual embodiment. God then brings the soul to earth to be joined with the baby’s body as he or she grows in the womb. This view has not been held by Protestant or RC theologians.
Intermediate State
Jehovah’s Witnesses and 7th Day Adventists believe that man ceases to exist between death and resurrection.
“Soul sleep”, i.e. man’s soul exists in an unconscious state between death and the resurrection, must also be rejected.
The NT does indicate that the state of believers between death and resurrection is one of provisional happiness, one that is “better” than the present earthly state ((Phil 1:22-23; 2 Cor 5:6-8)
Original Sin
The sinful state and condition in which every human being is born by virtue of their relationship with Adam.
It does not refer to Adam’s first sin, rather to the sin that is ours as a result of Adam’s fall — inherited sin.
1) Guilt = judicial or legal concept
2) Pollution = moral concept
a) Total Depravity
b) Spiritual Inability
Total Depravity
1) Corruption of original sin extends to every aspect of human nature.
2) On our own we can do no spiritual good or be good in terms of a relationship with God.
3) There is not present human beings, by nature, love to God as the motivating principle of his life.
(Gen. 6:5-6; 8:21; Psalm 51:5; Mk 7:21-22; Rom. 8:7a; Eph. 2:1-3)
Spiritual Inability
The inability of the sinner to turn himself to God or for anything that is pleasing or good in God’s sight.
1) Non-believer cannot and does not want to do, say, or think that which totally meets with God’s approval, and therefore fulfill God’s law.
2) The non-believer is unable to apart from the special working of the HS to change ourselves and respond to the gospel.
(Mt. 7:18; Jn 3:3, 5; Rom. 8:7-8; Eph. 2_1-5)
Imputation of Sin
Guilt & Pollution — “to think of as belonging to someone, and therefore to cause it to belong to that person.”
Prevenient Grace (Arminian Theology)
universal to all people, but can be rejected
Habitus; Actus; Status
Habitus = sin is a state to which man is subject / inclination toward evil Actus = sin involves personal, concrete acts of wrongdoing Status = sin is a violation of a legal standard for which man is held accountable
Pelagianism; Semi-Pelagianism; Realism; Federalism
Pelagianism = deny all aspects of original sin (guilt, pollution, total depravity & spiritual inability)
Semi-Pelagianism = deny guilt, agree with pollution, but a partial depravity & we have our own ability to choose God
Realism (Augustine) = agree with guilt but no imputation, and agree with guilt & pollution w/ total depravity & spiritual inability
Federalism = agree with all (guilt, pollution, imputation, total depravity & spiritual inability)
Synergism vs. Monergism
Synergism = God and humans work together Monergism = one work, God Himself wills and plans all things, not in dependency or conditioned on mankind
Christology
a) The person and work of Christ cannot be separated
b) In proclaiming Christ, you are proclaiming a whole theology
FALSE = “Jesus is the first and greatest created being.”
Jesus of History vs. Christ of Faith
Liberal theology - “the quest for the Historical Jesus”; wanted to get behind the texts (interpretation = faith) to the reality (history).
“Christology from below” (liberal) vs. Christology from above” (orthodox)
“Myth of God Incarnate” (John Hick) & ‘Jesus Seminar’
Myth of God Incarnate = argued the idea that the idea of God becoming man is mythological
Jesus Seminar = their goal was to determine which of the attributed 500 says in the NT by Jesus actually go back to Jesus himself and which were later “put into his mouth” by the church.
Methodological Naturalism
Methodology: “Christology from below” vs. “Christology from above.”
Christologies: inclusivist, exclusivist, pluralist
inclusivist (mediating position) = the cross work of Christ is the basis for salvation, but that one does not necessarily have to have faith in Jesus to experience salvation
exclusivist (traditional affirmation of the church) = Jesus is the God-man, the eternal Word made flesh…only hope for salvation
pluralist = Jesus is only one possible mediator of salvation; Jesus is a moral example, not substitute
Inaugurated Eschatology
The theme of ‘fulfillment’ — the NT proclaims that what was predicted in the old has now arrived in the new, even though there is still more to come. (already, not yet tension)
How the Bible’s storyline gives us a high Christology
In Jesus and his work…
a) the desperate plight begun in Eden now finds solution
b) the promise that God himself must be the Savior of his people is fulfilled
c) God’s righteousness has come — both in justice and justification
d) The prophetic anticipation of God’s coming or David’s coming to redeem the people is fulfilled
e) The promise that through Abraham’s seed all the nations will be blessed is fulfilled
Ontological vs. Functional Christology (Kenosis Theory)
Ontological = he set aside the use of his attributes Functional = doesn't do justice to scripture
Implicit vs. Explicit Christology
Self-identity vs. Self-consciousness
7 texts which explicitly state that the Son is ‘God’ (these) and why is this important?
John 1:1-2, 18; 20:28 Romans 9:5 Titus 2:13 2 Peter 1:1 Hebrews 1:8a
**deity of Christ seen in 4 different writers, consistent affirmation, geographically diverse ascription, placing in John’s Gospel
Texts that show the Son eternally pre-exists contra Arian theology…
John 12:41 (cf. Isa. 6:1-3; 1 Cor. 10:4)
John 1:1; 17:5 (imply)
Hebrews 1:2 (imply)
John 1:18; 8:58 (cf. Ex. 3:14; Phil 2:6; Col. 1:17; Heb. 13:8)
Texts that show the Son received worship…
Matthew 14:33; 21:15-16; 28:9, 17 John 20:28; cf. 5:22-23 Eph. 5:19 Phil. 2:9-11 Rev. 5:8-9, 12-14
Texts that show the Son is the Creator & Sustainer…
Creator (John 1:3; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:3)
Sustainer (Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:2-3)
Texts that refer to the Virgin Birth…
Matthew 1:18-25
Luke 1:26-38
John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18
Philippians 2:6-7
Theological Importance of the Virgin Birth
1) It demonstrates that salvation must ultimately come from the Lord
2) Allows us to assert the uniqueness of Jesus
3) Made possible the uniting of full deity/humanity in one person.
The Virgin Birth and the Sinlessness of Christ
Understanding of Original Sin…
1) Jesus comes into humanity a different way (not tow parents)
2) Jesus is not under the covenant headship of Adam
3) Jesus was unfallen
John 1:1-2 and the use of Colwell’s Rule. What is the Jehovah Witnesses argument at this point and how would you respond?
The Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that the correct translation is “a god.” In so doing, they violate a canon of Greek Grammar. This rule has come to be known as “The Colwell Rule” (1933). It says that: “A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb.” In the case of John 1:1, the clause in question says και θεος ην (and was God). The verb “was” (ην) follows the noun “God” (θεος). In short, in Greek usage, we wouldn’t expect a definite article (the) because it’s not necessary. According to rule, we would expect the definite article to occur with a noun following the verb. The reason the definite article is absent is not because John is denying the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father but because the grammar doesn’t need the definite article.
What is the Kenosis Theory? How do you respond from Phil. 2:5
This theory argues that Christ gave up some of his divine attributes while he was on earth as a man. (i.e. “emptied himself”)
Phil 2 = the incarnation is an act of addition, not subtraction
Docetism
Denied the reality of Jesus’ body as well as his sufferings and death. In other words, Jesus only seemed to be human.
Arianism
God cannot share his being with anyone else.
Apollinarianism
Taught that while in all other being are body, soul, and spirit coexisting in union, in Christ were only the human body and soul, the divine Logos having displaced the human spirit (nous).
Neostorianism
The view that there were tow separate persons in Christ, a human person and a divine person.
Monophysitism
The view that Christ had one nature only.
Adoptionism
The view that Christ was adopted by the Father
Chalcedonian Christology
“one person, two natures united in Jesus Christ!”
homoousios vs homoiousios
homoousios = same substance homoiousios = similar substance
Immaculate Conception
Was made dogma on Dec. 8, 1854 (Pius X) by the Roman Catholic Church. No scriptural warrant for this position!
Texts that show the sinlessness of Christ…
John 8:46 Hebrews 4:15; 7:26; 9:14 1 Peter 1:19; 2:22; 3:18 1 John 2:1; 3:5 2 Cor. 5:21 John 15:10; 18:38 Acts 2:27; 3:14; 4:30
Council of Nicaea & Council of Chalcedon (Christology)
Nicaea = affirmed that Jesus Christ was truly God, of the same substance, and truly man. Chalcedon = affirmed that Jesus Christ was one united person, two natures — fully God and man
Chalcedonian understanding of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ as applied to Christ
Argued that Christ is ‘one person w/ 2 natures’
Christ is true God, but he is not the whole Godhead.
Christ is true man, but he is not the whole of humanity.
Hypostatic union (=anhypostasia, enhypostasia)
The Son took into union with himself a full complex of human attributes without its own person (‘anhypostasia’, literally ‘no person’). The enhypostatic union means that Christ’s humanity is that of everyman, but it does not mean that he is “everyman.” He is the man, Christ Jesus; and the only humanity united to him hypo statically is his own.
Extra-Calvinisticum
“outside” = the teaching that Christ’s divine nature cannot be enclosed or imprisoned within a human nature, but remains infinite despite being in union with a finite body.
Communicatio idiomatum
Lutherns argued for a ‘communication of attributes’ whereby our Lord’s divine nature at his virgin conception ‘divinized’ his human nature by ‘communicating’ omnipresence to the human nature.
Christ as Prophet, Priest & King
Prophet = spoke God’s words to the people, Jesus is the final prophet & revelation of God, but not merely a prophet, explicit testimony to His prophetic work (Acts 3:22-24; Luke 24:24-27; Jn 5:45-47; 1 Peter 1:10-12)
Priest = humanity’s representation before God, Jesus laid claim to a special relationship to the temple, intercession is prominent in His ministry, regarded His death as the shedding of new covenant blood, sinlessness (Hebrews ch. 5-10; esp. 5:1; 7:11-12; 8:8-12; Mt 12:6; Mk 14:57-58; Jn 2:19, 21)
King = Adam (type) > Christ (antitype), resurrection & ascension (Jn 1:1-2; Phil 2:6; Heb. 1:1-3; Ephemeres 1:18-23)
Theories of Atonement
Ransom = a ransom was paid to Satan for our release from bondage.
Recapitulation = Christ’s identification with humanity through the incarnation; emphasizes the taking upon himself of our natures to live our life and die our death.
Satisfaction = only a God-man can make satisfaction
Governmental = God is the governor and ruler who stand above the law.
Moral Influence = God did not require the payment of a penalty for sin, but that Christ’s death was simply a way in which God showed how much he loved human beings by identifying with their sufferings, even to the point of death.
Christus Victor = The cross work of Christ is also presented in Scripture as a conquest by which he conquers the rebellious principalities and powers, the demonic world headed by Satan.
Penal Substitution = Penal (from the Latin, poena) speaks of the fact that in order to save us, Christ had to endure our penalty, take our punishment that we rightly deserve. Substitution speaks of the fact that Christ paid this penalty in our place.
8 ways/words of the Atonement
Obedience = Christ’s perspective of the cross #servant (Rom 5:19; Phil 2:8; Heb 5:8-9) *active representation & passive substitution
Sacrifice = sinless, lamb of God, OT sacrificial system background (Hebrews 9-10)
Propitiation (=expiation) = sacrifice that turned aside God’s wrath, made amends (Rom 3:24-26; Heb 2:17; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:10)
Redemption = to buy back as a purchase or ransom; deliverance from bondage (Mk 10:45; Eph 1:7; Col 1:13-14; 1 Peter 1:18-19)
Reconciliation = familial; “to restore to friendship” (Rom 5:10-11; Col 1:19-20; Eph 2:11-22; 2 Cor 5:18-21)
Justification = denotes, primarily, that action in the law court whereby a judge upholds the case of one part in dispute before him (Rom 3:23-24; 5:1-2; 8:1; Gal 2:16; 3:13; John 3:18, 36; Phil 3:9; 2 Tim 4:7-8)
Conquest = protevangelion (Gen. 3:15); conquers the rebellious principalities and powers; victory (Col 2:13-15; Hebrews 2:14-15)
Moral Example = the cross as the supreme moral example for believers of love, obedience, suffering, etc. (1 Peter 2:18-25; Phil 2:5; Jn 13:12-17; 1 Jn 4:7-12)
Active & Passive Obedience
Active = representation Passive = substitution
God as both the subject & object of the cross
a) Propitiation is necessary because sin arouses the wrath of God. The cross has a God-ward focus. God is the object of propitiation.
b) God takes the initiative in propitiation (Lv 17:11; Rom 3:25; 1 Jn 4:10). God’s love is the source of the atonement. God takes the initiative to appease his own righteous anger. God is the subject of propitiation.
Consequent absolute necessity of the cross vs. hypothetical necessity
Consequent absolute necessity = the necessity of Christ taking upon humanity and going to the cross (Heb 2:10, 17; 7:26; 9:23-24) #sin=punishment
Hypothetical necessity = contends that there were other ways possible to God that He could have chosen beside the cross of Christ
Extent of the Atonement (Arminian, Modified Calvinist & Calvinist Views)
2 main views: 1) universal in divine design but limited in its accomplishment and efficacy 2) particular in its design and as such particular, definite, or limited in its extent.
Agree that: sufficient for all, universalism is unbiblical, nature of Christ’s work, bona fide offer of salvation to all that hear the gospel, on the condition of repentance & faith
Arminian = universal atonement & limited efficacy // faith precedes regeneration **universal divine love & universal gospel offer
Modified Calvinist (sublapsarian) = sufficient for all & efficient for elect **limited scope intent, limitless scope intent, bona fide offer intent, just condemnation intent
Calvinist or Definite/Particular Atonement = limited in extent/intention // saving intent for elect & saving effect for elect **intent or purpose of atonement was actually and certainly to secure the salvation of God’s elect, and the elect only (Jn 10:11, 15; Acts 20:28; Eph 5:25)
