11. Systematic Anthropology
Faith and belief in Scripture mean hearing and obeying the word of God; they mean, not mere Faith and belief in Scripture mean hearing and obeying the word of God; they mean, not mere intellectual assent, but the submission, the reliance on and the development and reshaping of our intellectual assent, but the submission, the reliance on and the development and reshaping of our whole being in terms of God
whole being in terms of God’’s law-word.s law-word.
Paul makes clear that unbelief is not a lack of the knowledge of God but a refusal to submit to Paul makes clear that unbelief is not a lack of the knowledge of God but a refusal to submit to God
God’’s lordship and authority our of unrighteousness (Rom. s lordship and authority our of unrighteousness (Rom. 1:17-20). Man rejects God1:17-20). Man rejects God’’ss authority and lordship in favor of his own
authority and lordship in favor of his own (Gen. 3:5); this is unbelief in the Biblical sense. The(Gen. 3:5); this is unbelief in the Biblical sense. The consequence of this revolt against God
consequence of this revolt against God is the perversion of man. Homosexuality is presented bis the perversion of man. Homosexuality is presented b yy Paul as the burning out of apostate man (Rom. 1:27, burned
Paul as the burning out of apostate man (Rom. 1:27, burned out out )).. The life of the reprobate man isThe life of the reprobate man is a life of hatred against all authority (Rom. 1:29-32
a life of hatred against all authority (Rom. 1:29-32). The reprobate hate God, ). The reprobate hate God, they hate parents,they hate parents, they boast of themselves, and the
they boast of themselves, and they are implacably hostile to all authority.y are implacably hostile to all authority. Then Paul makes clear why there can be no word and no salvation from man.
Then Paul makes clear why there can be no word and no salvation from man. First First ,, both God both God and fallen man have a word, a system, and a plan of judgment. In Romans 2, Paul contrasts the and fallen man have a word, a system, and a plan of judgment. In Romans 2, Paul contrasts the judgments of the ungodly, and their inherent plan and system, with the judgments of God. Man judgments of the ungodly, and their inherent plan and system, with the judgments of God. Man
the sinner presents himself as the judge, but Paul
the sinner presents himself as the judge, but Paul says,says, ““Therefore thou are inexcusable, O man,Therefore thou are inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest
whosoever thou art that judgest”” (Rom. 2:1). Man apart from God, whether in or out of the (Rom. 2:1). Man apart from God, whether in or out of the church, is under judgment. Man u
church, is under judgment. Man under God is man living in terms of Godnder God is man living in terms of God’’s word and ins word and in faithfulness to God
faithfulness to God’’s law:s law: ““For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou beif thou be a breaker of the law, th
a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcisiony circumcision is made uncircumcision”” (Rom. 2:25). Status before God (Rom. 2:25). Status before God is on God
is on God’’s terms only: it begins with sovereign grace, and s terms only: it begins with sovereign grace, and reveals itself by keeping Godreveals itself by keeping God’’s law.s law. Second
Second ,, manman’’s system and word are products of ds system and word are products of depravity, not wisdomepravity, not wisdom. “. “There is none righteous,There is none righteous, no, not one,
no, not one,”” and, and, ““There is none that doeth good, no, not oneThere is none that doeth good, no, not one”” (Rom. 3:10,12). Their words (Rom. 3:10,12). Their words spring from a poisoned well.
spring from a poisoned well. ““Their throat is an open sepulchre: with their tongues they haveTheir throat is an open sepulchre: with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is u
used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lipsnder their lips”” (Rom. 3:13). Paul cites verse after verse from (Rom. 3:13). Paul cites verse after verse from the Old Testament to sum up God
the Old Testament to sum up God’’s judgment on man. Every system of thought devised by mans judgment on man. Every system of thought devised by man is thus from a poisoned well and und
is thus from a poisoned well and under judgment. This is especially true of Phariseeism, whicher judgment. This is especially true of Phariseeism, which uses the law, interpreted to mean h
uses the law, interpreted to mean humanistic goals, as a means of justification. But no man umanistic goals, as a means of justification. But no man isis justified by works; no man earns an independence from God by his own actions (Rom. 3:20-30). justified by works; no man earns an independence from God by his own actions (Rom. 3:20-30). Salvation brings freedom, not from God, but from judgment and reprobation. The redeemed are Salvation brings freedom, not from God, but from judgment and reprobation. The redeemed are now free from sin and death,
now free from sin and death, the consequence of their own the consequence of their own system (Gen. 3:1-5), and are totallysystem (Gen. 3:1-5), and are totally under God
under God’’s dominion and law. Hence, faith does not make void the law:s dominion and law. Hence, faith does not make void the law: ““God forbid: yea, weGod forbid: yea, we establish the law
establish the law”” (Rom. 3:31). The law is n (Rom. 3:31). The law is now established over and in us aow established over and in us as Gods God’’s way and ans way and an aspect of His system and eternal decree.
aspect of His system and eternal decree. What Paul makes clear is that, because
What Paul makes clear is that, because of his depravity, there is no tenable of his depravity, there is no tenable system from fallensystem from fallen man. Fallen man simply works out the
man. Fallen man simply works out the implications of his depravity in his life (Rom. 1:24) and implications of his depravity in his life (Rom. 1:24) and inin his thought (Rom. 1:21-23).
his thought (Rom. 1:21-23). Man
Man’’s system is in essence the tempter s system is in essence the tempter ’’s thesis in Genesis 3:1-5.s thesis in Genesis 3:1-5. First First ,, there is no sure word ofthere is no sure word of God (
God (““Yea, hath God said?Yea, hath God said?””), and no assured decree o), and no assured decree of predestination (Gen. 3:1, 4). Man f predestination (Gen. 3:1, 4). Man lives inlives in an
an ““openopen”” universe, and the p universe, and the potentiality of man is the essence of that opennotentiality of man is the essence of that openness. The limitlessess. The limitless potentiality and actuality of God make the universe, totally open to God, a closed realm to potentiality and actuality of God make the universe, totally open to God, a closed realm to
rebellious man. For the universe to be
rebellious man. For the universe to be open must mean, fallen man open must mean, fallen man holds, that the limitlessholds, that the limitless potentiality must be transferred to man. The system replacing God
potentiality must be transferred to man. The system replacing God’’s eternal and foreordaineds eternal and foreordained decree is man
decree is man’’s potential and existential decree.s potential and existential decree. Second
Second ,, logically, this means that man, not the Lord, is god. Hence the culminating point of thelogically, this means that man, not the Lord, is god. Hence the culminating point of the temptation is that man
temptation is that man ““shall be as godshall be as god”” (Gen. 3:5). A new government, god, and law shall (Gen. 3:5). A new government, god, and law shall prevail. This requires a systematics of man, a systematic anthropology. Instead of sy
prevail. This requires a systematics of man, a systematic anthropology. Instead of systematicstematic theology, we are given a
theology, we are given a systematic anthropology. As a result, the mind of man systematic anthropology. As a result, the mind of man becomes a matterbecomes a matter of great concern. The psychology of man gains great attention from humanism, because the
of great concern. The psychology of man gains great attention from humanism, because the ultimate point of reference, potentiality, and coherence is the
ultimate point of reference, potentiality, and coherence is the supposedly autonomous mind ofsupposedly autonomous mind of man. Primitive tribes, perverts, mental defectives, criminals, children, and adults
man. Primitive tribes, perverts, mental defectives, criminals, children, and adults — — all varieties all varieties of men
of men — — are painstakingly studied in order to are painstakingly studied in order to give man the raw materials for the newgive man the raw materials for the new
systematics. Not surprisingly, modern anthropology began with Charles Darwin. As Dampier systematics. Not surprisingly, modern anthropology began with Charles Darwin. As Dampier stated it,
stated it, ““It is hardly too much to say that modern It is hardly too much to say that modern anthropology arose from theanthropology arose from the Origin ofOrigin of Species.
Species.””2525
Politics becomes the practical sphere of action of
Politics becomes the practical sphere of action of every systematic anthropology, because it isevery systematic anthropology, because it is through politics that man seeks to appl
through politics that man seeks to appl y the humanistic decree of predestination to man and y the humanistic decree of predestination to man and thethe world. Basic to the idea of systematics is the fact th
world. Basic to the idea of systematics is the fact th at is has inherent in it the element ofat is has inherent in it the element of
necessity. For the orthodox Christian, things are ordered by God and have in and behind them the necessity. For the orthodox Christian, things are ordered by God and have in and behind them the necessity of God
necessity of God’’s decree.s decree. ““For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformedFor whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren
to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren”” (Rom. 8:29). This (Rom. 8:29). This necessity is not only in their own lives, but in all things, for,
necessity is not only in their own lives, but in all things, for, ““Known unto God are all Known unto God are all his workshis works from the beginning of the world
from the beginning of the world”” (Acts 15:18). (Acts 15:18). The goal of systematic anthropology, modern po
The goal of systematic anthropology, modern politics, is to substitute the decree of man litics, is to substitute the decree of man for thefor the decree of God. More than one humanistic group and society have looked to the ant hill and the decree of God. More than one humanistic group and society have looked to the ant hill and the beehive as the model state: all things exist by order and plan. So, it is held, should man, but the beehive as the model state: all things exist by order and plan. So, it is held, should man, but the
source of the plan must be
source of the plan must be man himself. Man must remake himself and his world in terms man himself. Man must remake himself and his world in terms of hisof his own autonomous will.
own autonomous will.
Theological writings in the modern world are thus
Theological writings in the modern world are thus political writings, and the most influentialpolitical writings, and the most influential preaching in the modern era is political speaking. In the 1970s, the United States has seen an preaching in the modern era is political speaking. In the 1970s, the United States has seen an
American President, Carter, disavow any Christian influence on his decisions, while professing American President, Carter, disavow any Christian influence on his decisions, while professing to be a
to be a ““ born-again Christian, born-again Christian,”” and at the same and at the same time affirm a humanistic doctrine of human rightstime affirm a humanistic doctrine of human rights with religious zeal. The systematic anthropology of Carter, and
with religious zeal. The systematic anthropology of Carter, and of other selfprofessed Christiansof other selfprofessed Christians politicians, is a very clear one.
politicians, is a very clear one.
It is thus a serious error on the part of ch
It is thus a serious error on the part of churchmen to look for modern urchmen to look for modern challenges to the systematicchallenges to the systematic theology of Biblical faith from church sources only. Such challenges, however real and
theology of Biblical faith from church sources only. Such challenges, however real and important, do not represent the main challen
important, do not represent the main challenge. Systematics has on the whole ge. Systematics has on the whole left the church forleft the church for politics. The political thought of Soviet theoreticians is rig
politics. The political thought of Soviet theoreticians is rigorous in its attempts to be systematic,orous in its attempts to be systematic, and Western political theorists are no less dedicated.
and Western political theorists are no less dedicated.
25 25
Sir William Cecil Dampier:
It is, moreover, a requirement for systematic theology to place
It is, moreover, a requirement for systematic theology to place every area of life and every area of life and thoughtthought under the jurisdiction of God the Sov
under the jurisdiction of God the Sovereign and His law-word. Polytheism openly posits manereign and His law-word. Polytheism openly posits man yy gods and hence man
gods and hence man y jurisdictions. As a result, a particular god could be y jurisdictions. As a result, a particular god could be escaped by leaving hisescaped by leaving his jurisdiction. Hence, the Syrians of old held of Israel,
jurisdiction. Hence, the Syrians of old held of Israel, ““Their gods are gods of the Their gods are gods of the hills; thereforehills; therefore they were stronger than we; but let us
they were stronger than we; but let us fight against them in the plain, anfight against them in the plain, and surely we shall bed surely we shall be stronger than they
stronger than they”” (I Kings 20:23). (I Kings 20:23).
We find, however, similar opinions in many churc
We find, however, similar opinions in many church circles. Christianity and the state must beh circles. Christianity and the state must be kept strictly separate (a very different idea than the
kept strictly separate (a very different idea than the separation ofseparation of churchchurch and state; the one positsand state; the one posits a religious and theological division, the
a religious and theological division, the other an institutional one): Other churches insist onother an institutional one): Other churches insist on seeing the state as exclusively secular and hence under reason, not Scripture. Thus, we are told seeing the state as exclusively secular and hence under reason, not Scripture. Thus, we are told by a Lutheran, in a review of a work by F. A. Schaeffer,
by a Lutheran, in a review of a work by F. A. Schaeffer,
Similarly, one finds in the author a typically Reformed
Similarly, one finds in the author a typically Reformed desire to structuredesire to structure
government according to Biblical and even Christian principles. He would like to government according to Biblical and even Christian principles. He would like to see the Bible made the lawbook
see the Bible made the lawbook of the land, if not of the land, if not literally, at least indirectly. Heliterally, at least indirectly. He describes with approval Paul Robert
describes with approval Paul Robert’’s murals mural Justice Lifts the Nations Justice Lifts the Nations,, with Justicewith Justice unblindfolded and pointing her sword downward toward a book which is written unblindfolded and pointing her sword downward toward a book which is written ““The Law of God,The Law of God,”” and adds: and adds: ““To whatever degree a society allows the teachingTo whatever degree a society allows the teaching of the Bible to bring forth its natural conclusions, it is able
of the Bible to bring forth its natural conclusions, it is able to have form andto have form and freedom in society and government.
freedom in society and government.”” While we indeed recognize the Scriptural While we indeed recognize the Scriptural truth that
truth that ““righteousness exalteth a nationrighteousness exalteth a nation”” (Proverbs 14:34), we must affirm that (Proverbs 14:34), we must affirm that human reason, the natural knowledge of God
human reason, the natural knowledge of God’’s law, and the power of the swords law, and the power of the sword —
— not the revealed word of God not the revealed word of God — — are basic principles for secular government. are basic principles for secular government.2626 To hold that there is one kind of faith and obedience in the church, and another in the state, is To hold that there is one kind of faith and obedience in the church, and another in the state, is hardly in agreement with Scripture!
hardly in agreement with Scripture!
The systematic anthropology which manifests itself in politics links to itself modern science, i.e., The systematic anthropology which manifests itself in politics links to itself modern science, i.e., post-Darwinian evolutionary science, as the basics of the new faith. Scientific politics is t
post-Darwinian evolutionary science, as the basics of the new faith. Scientific politics is too
provide the new decree of predestination, the new source of authority and power, the new decree provide the new decree of predestination, the new source of authority and power, the new decree
of election and probation. Failure to se
of election and probation. Failure to see this fact means irrelevance to the e this fact means irrelevance to the triune God and Histriune God and His word. It means that we have a neoplatonic church theology which holds its doctrines in
word. It means that we have a neoplatonic church theology which holds its doctrines in abstraction from the real world, from that unity which constitutes the
abstraction from the real world, from that unity which constitutes the God-given creation. TheGod-given creation. The more that neoplatonic faith abstracts itself from the context of the
more that neoplatonic faith abstracts itself from the context of the material world, the clearer andmaterial world, the clearer and the higher its ostensible spirituality. Neoplatonic religion will thus produce an abstract theolog the higher its ostensible spirituality. Neoplatonic religion will thus produce an abstract theolog yy in which irrelevance is a mark of pu
in which irrelevance is a mark of purity. Its doctrines will become neoplatonic ideas, and rity. Its doctrines will become neoplatonic ideas, and thethe