
This morning our TheoForum class took an exam on section 3 from Grudem’s Systematic Theology, which dealt with The Doctrine of Man. When it was all over one of the guys said that he was surprised at how ‘ready’ he was for being tested on this material. I asked the other guys if they felt the same way, “Did you guys find that when looking at the test questions you felt encouraged that you’d retained more than you realized?” All heads were nodding yes. For any of you local Pivot guys who haven’t joined TheoForum there’s a good rubber-meets-the-road reason to link up with what’s happening. We really are learning, not just reading and waking up at stupid early hours every other Friday. So, on to the tests…
There were two teams. A few guys were no shows. I won’t mention their names here, now.
Team Tucker - Todd Tucker, Randy Albert, Sylvester Tumusiime, and Garrett Ryan
Team Missios - Nick Missios, Evan May, Chris Roberts, Steve Roberts (honorary student)
First, in review of chapter 21 (The Creation of Man), the teams had to work together to give descriptions for each of the four successive stages of a biblical theology of the image of God in man. Then they had to mention and briefly describe two particular ways in which our likeness to God is expressed. They talked about, respectively, moral judgment, authority, and creativity.
We then moved on to chapter 22 (Man as Male and Female) where the men had to list 3 categories in which the creation of man as male and female mirrors the intra-Trinitarian relationship. There both teams shared the concepts of harmony/oneness, equality in personhood, distinction in roles and authority. Following this, someone stepped forward from each team to briefly describe the egalitarian position. Both men represented this view clearly and concisely. Both team nailed the meaning of the Greek word kephale and that question closed out chapter 22.
Chapter 23 (The Essential Nature of Man) found a room full of guys flipping through their Bibles to identify whether a particular verse was most often cited by dichotomists or trichotomists. We then asked for for a dichotomist response to the classic trichotomist prooftext 1 Thess 5:23. Guys are encouraged on questions like this to pool knowledge and write bullet phrases to help them along as they orally respond to the essay question. Both men handled this question well. Next a quick True/False question about Paul’s use of the term “spirit” and then a review of Grudem’s list of ‘tendencies’ often associated with various strands of trichotomist teaching.
Hastening forward to chapter 24 (Sin), men were asked for a one sentence definition of sin. Both were very well written. Then with closed Bibles they had to write down two classic passages related to some aspect of the doctrine of sin. Portions from Romans 5, 6 and Psalm 51 were cited. Another Greek word memory question, followed by Grudem and Berkhof’s response (multiple choice) to the person fearing he/she has committed the unpardonable sin, listing the two categories of sin featured in Roman Catholic doctrine, and an oral essay response to the Christian who claims that he hasn’t sinned in a month. That wrapped up 24.
The last chapter covered was chapter 25 (The Covenants Between God and Man). There was a True/False question on the distinction between the Covenant of Grace and other covenants. Then they had to identify the name of the covenant that is not between God and man but among the members of the Trinity.
Finally for extra points they could list 2 proponents and 2 opponents of complementarianism. And lastly they could add two points for each member of their team that completed the reading assignment.
Team Tucker: 98 A
Team Missios: 104 A+
Good work fellas.
Two weeks from today we meet again to start our first biographical study.