Fall 2007 Online Certificate Students:
View all sessions below. Then log all your comments, questions, discussion question answers, criticisms, or thoughts below.
NOTE: This is not the place for general discussion and questions. Go to the foyer for general discussion and refer to the FAQ on the right for question.
Time spent in the comments section will apply toward your one hour of community time per week. To download audio sessions, visit the course homepage on the TTP site. The next session will be posted each Wed.
______________________________
What did God create when He created man? Is man a material being only? Does man have both a soul and spirit? If so, what is the difference in their constitutional make up? What are the implications for understanding the constitution of man? This session covers the much disputed and seemingly inconsequential doctrine of the basic ontological structure of man along with the priorities, if any, of each part. The student will wrestle with the basic arguments of monists who believe that man is purely physical, not having an immaterial part.
What is Man's Essential Nature [18:32m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download What is Monism? [27:53m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download What is Trichotomy [8:36m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Powered by FireStats
September 8th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
1. The heart includes our intellect, will, emotions and spirit. It is the core of who we are and everything stems from it. The heart doesn’t have a separate cognitive function, but there may be a conflict in one aspect of the heart. In Matthew 15:10-20, I think Jesus was saying that our conduct should flow from a pure heart, rather than as the Pharisee’s, who had good conduct on the surface, but hearts that were not pure.
2. In Matthew 26:41, I believe flesh refers to our human weaknesses, weak will, proclivity to sin and things of that nature. For example, we are to be one flesh in marriage. This clearly doesn’t mean we become one body, but that we treat each other as we would ourselves and remain connected to each other, which refers to our nature. So, I don’t think the word flesh used on Scripture is synonymous with the body.
3. Our bodies are not inherently sinful; it is the nature within us that is sinful. So even though Christ had a body, he was not sinful because his nature is sinless. When our bodies are raised from the dead, we will have a different nature, so even though we will be physical, we won’t be sinful.
4. Tough question! I wish I were able to attend the table talk discussion to hear how others responded. First of all, I don’t think anger is sinful in and of itself. If anger is used to resolve a problem and is expressed in a healthy manner, then it can be fruitful. But anger due to irritability can be sinful because you’re hurting someone else and it’s not serving any useful purpose. If the irritability were due to a chemical imbalance, then taking medications would reduce sin. But if it’s not entirely due to a chemical imbalance and there is unresolved anger, then the medication may reduce the outward signs of anger but the sin could still remain and be expressed in another equally sinful manner. In the instance of skepticism, it is not an illness, but a character issue. Taking medication to believe in God, doesn’t seem moral as that would be taking away the person’s choice and God wants us to freely choose Him. The medication would almost be like a false god. I don’t think I would encourage a family member to take a pill to believe (though it would be tempting). I’d be more inclined to pray for God to open their heart.
5. God reveals His plan slowly throughout Scripture, gradually revealing His plan. God may not have fully informed people in the OT about the intermediate state because it would be difficult to understand without additional revelation. And, I don’t think the intermediate state without the full revelation would have been very comforting. Their comfort was in the resurrection.
6. The biblical writers had correct doctrine relative to what they knew at the time. But it was not complete doctrine, as God continued to reveal truths.
7. The NT teaches that the OT laws were a means to reveal our sin and need of salvation, but that the laws are not the means to salvation. It also reveals the plan of salvation through Christ.
8. ???
9. Monism and Dualism are challenging for me. I’m looking forward to more information on dualism this week.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Discussion Questions Session 2
Discussion Question #1
Jesus is saying what we truly believe and desire comes from within, deep within.
Discussion Question #2
The flesh is referring to our shortcomings and weaknesses toward sinful tendencies.
Discussion Question #3
The flesh is not our bodies, but our sinful nature. Christ had a body but he was God and without sin. We will have bodies, but will not have a sinful nature as there will be no sin in heaven.
Discussion Question #4
A) Maybe to some degree; but wasn’t Christ irritated by the money changers in the temple? I think that it can become sinful depending on how you handle it.
B) Not really. The anger is not the sin; it is the way the anger is handled that can become the sin.
C) No, belief in God is a choice of free-will. I don’t believe there is true atheism as everyone has set a god up for himself, yet there is only one true God.
D) No. Just believing in God does not save you. The devil and his demons believe in God. It is the understanding of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and accepting that gift that brings salvation.
Discussion Question #5
I am not sure. Maybe because they could not understand it because the birth, crucifixion and the resurrection was yet to come.
Discussion Question #6
God gives truth in revelation as He desires to meet the purposes that He requires to be met at the time He chooses.
Discussion Question #7
That gentiles will be grafted into the family of God’s chosen.
Discussion Question #8
I am not sure.
Discussion Question #9
Dichotomy versus Trichotomy. I have always been under the belief that we are a triune being. Now I am just rolling that over in my head.