Quote
Regeneration is a poor argument against Traducianism. Traducians affirm that God is the creator of soul and body. They deny that God creates the soul apart from propagation. Lutheran dogmatician Franz Pieper: "We received our soul and body with all their members from our parents as causae secundae, and at the same time we know that God is our creator and Father." So monergistic regeneration is completely consistent with Traducianism. God creates willing men from unwilling men.
Yes, Lutherans normally embrace Traducianism, however their philosophy does not stand up to scrutiny. It is interesting to note that in his dogmatics Pieper merely remarks in the Prolegomena that the matter should be regarded as an open question?

But if we think this through I believe the answer is very clear. If Adam's soul and ours had a different origin:

  • (1) Adam by God breathing into him the breath of life, and
  • (2) us having our souls imparted by our parents (Traducianism)
they could not be said to be of the same species because:

  • (1) Adam's was from nothing and inbreathed directly by God, and
  • (2) ours would be from "something" and propagated by our parents
Thus, Jesus could not be the “last man Adam,” since He would have been born of a different species in Mary. Or, if it is accepted that Jesus is "the last man Adam," (because Mary was found with child of the Holy Spirit ...) He could ONLY redeem Adam and not his posterity, whom would be propagated of different parents in Traducianism. Thus, either way Jesus could not be the redeemer of God’s elect who, in Traducianism, would each be made from some preexisting material and wholly dissimilar. Thus, the doctrines of Lutheranism (as put forth by Franz Pieper and others) are a poor argument for the regeneration of God’s elect! [Linked Image]

Quote
Eccl 12:7 and the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it. .

Zech 12:1 … Thus saith Jehovah, who stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him:
Again, these verses do not say HOW the spirit was formed within man, however it directly says God gave it and formed it. Lutherans of course translate this that God used secondary means of the parents, however the Scripture is clear in Adam’s case that the soul was breathed into him directly from God (Gen 2:7). I think it is very telling as well in the creation of Eve… Would not Adam have said not only that Eve was "bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh" but "soul of my soul" (Gen 2:23)? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/giggle.gif" alt="" /> Of course there are related texts:

Quote
Num 16:22 And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation?

Isa 57:16 For I will not contend for ever, neither will I be always wroth; for the spirit would faint before me, and the souls that I have made.

Heb 12:9 Furthermore, we had the fathers of our flesh to chasten us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
Though God is God of all, I believe it was Turrentin who asked, Why should God be called "the Father of spirits" as opposed to "the fathers of the flesh” unless the origin of each was different? However, if the souls are propagated (Traducianism), the parents of the body and the soul would be the same. [Linked Image]Traducianism and Scripture do not seem to coincide. [Linked Image]

Speartus, can you defend Traducianism from Scripture? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" />

Reformed and Always Reforming,