Reply To: Anthropology 2024/2025 Discussion Board 1

[VictorKachi]

Thank you for your work; I found your perspective on the viewpoints presented quite compelling.It seems that traducianism and creationism are gaining more attention. I want to clarify that my response is not a full endorsement of either view, but rather to illustrate how both can be seen as coherent. The issue at hand cannot be neatly settled with biblical references, even though we must make numerous inferences. For instance, creationism appears to have stronger biblical backing in verses like Psalm 139, where God is depicted as the direct creator of each individual soul. However, the true purpose of that scripture is not to settle this debate; it leaves us with questions that another Psalm, like Psalm 151:5, would compel us to consider.
God breathed life into Adam, forming the inner essence of humanity, and bestowed blessings upon him (Gen 1:28), a command was given, and even after humanity’s fall, creation continued through mankind.

This raises the question of how the sinful nature is transmitted from Adam to each individual, leading to curiosity about how this relates to the human nature of Jesus Christ.

Think of it this way; If God had sent a baby Savior or a fully grown Savior thrown down from heaven to save humanity, it would have strongly supported the idea of traducianism. However, God chose to honor and work with His previously declared word in Genesis 1:28, where He issued a blessing and a command for fruitfulness as part of His creative mandate. This illustrates the collaboration between God, the Creator, and parents in the origin of the soul.