The argument of my thesis concerns the understanding of the doctrine of sin in systematic theology, and, as a corollary of this, the scope of the doctrine in terms of its content. My argument is that the doctrine of sin is particularly prone to being defined with a strictness or narrowness which causes it to lose much of its meaning; that such limiting treatment tends to be accompanied by distorted relationships with, or over-determination by, other key doctrines, particularly that of salvation; and that it is helpful to see this tendency as a failure to see sin as a symbol with a complex of meanings, this complex being essential to the doctrine. A brief introductory survey of the usual perspectives on sin and of recent monographs firstly indicates the major issues raised by sin. Then more detailed analysis of the work of Barth, Brunner, Rahner, Pannenberg and Ricoeur provides examples of different methods of dealing with sin and leads to the conclusion that the tension between freedom and inevitability is essential to the doctrine of sin: it is part of sin's meaning and attempts to suppress, explain or relocate it lead to unacceptable tensions elsewhere. The use of Ricoeur's analysis of the symbolism of evil as a critical tool demonstrates the significance of the Adamic narrative for Christian doctrine, and the way in which its neglect can lead to the acquisition of ideas characteristic of non-Christian mythologies. The positive suggestion of the thesis is that sin should be seen as a tensive symbol incorporating a wide complex of meanings and involving a specific mythology of "the beginning" and that its paradoxical nature should be maintained as indicating a conflict within humanity, and seen in relationship to the suffering of God in Christ.

Thesis (Th.M. (Ethics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

This thesis comprises a re-evaluation of the feminist theological critique, as given by Valerie Saiving, Judith Plaskow, Daphne Hampson and Susan Nelson Dunfee, of Reinhold Niebuhr's doctrine of sin. The re-evaluation proceeds from a contextual interpretation of Niebuhr's theology in general and a contextual reading of his doctrine of sin in particular. My argument is that Niebuhr is deliberately and consistently a contextual theologian. I locate his contextual methodology in the open-ended approach of Christian realism. / The feminist critique is based on the assumption that Niebuhr universally defines the primary sin as pride. It is argued that pride is in fact a distinctly male characteristic, and, while quite plausibly the primary sin for men, is clearly not the primary sin for women. Niebuhr is guilty, that is, of confusing male reality with human reality in the doctrine. Saiving and Plaskow then develop a definition of women's sin which they correspond with Niebuhr's sin of sensuality. This type of sin, rather than being self-aggrandizing, is characterized by inordinate and destructive self-effacement. Their subsidiary argument is that Niebuhr erroneously treats sensuality, which should be equal but opposite to pride, as a secondary form of sin. / My argument in this thesis is that the critique rests on a mistaken assumption about the universality of Niebuhr's claim. His concerns were with the powerful. The contextual claim that pride is the primary form of sin in those who are empowered is being mistaken for a claim that pride is the primary sin for all people, regardless of gender or context. My subsidiary argument is that the correlation of women's sin with Niebuhr's understanding of sensuality is mistaken. What the feminists refer to as women's sin is in fact not sin at all for Niebuhr but evidence of injustice. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

No description available.

1. The central theoretical argument of this study is that Dr. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones maintains a true and Biblical view of sin and that he sets off his view meaningfully and apologetically against unbiblical views regarding sin. The purpose of the study is to investigate Lloyd-Jones's view of sin and to indicate that it can at present be applied meaningfully and apologetically. 2. To develop and substantiate this argument, the following procedure has been followed: 2.1. Lloyd-Jones's theological background is established as reliable. 2.2. His position regarding apologetics and his points of departure concerning it are dealt with. He begins by examining man and his fall into sin. The gospel, as God's way of salvation, is set against unbiblical views regarding man and his redemption. His points of departure indicate how the fall of man has resulted in a humanistic anthropology and how this in turn has led to unscriptural standpoints regarding sin. The Biblical view of man, on the other hand, is based on man being made in the image of God. The fall of man damage this image of God in man. God restores this image by means of the redeeming sacrifice of his Son so that the restored man can once again become the image bearer through the working of the Holy Spirit. 2.3. Lloyd-Jones's apologetic points of departure are followed by an examination of his views regarding sin. His views are based on the Biblical doctrine of original sin and especially on the text of Romans 5:12-21. Lloyd-Jones's basic premise regarding original sin is: 'The world is as it is today because when Adam sinned all sinned". Effective apologetics should use the Biblical doctrine of original sin by referring to the positive antipole, namely redemption in Christ. 2.4. From original sin flows all acts of sin. That is why the characteristics of sin are investigated. The most important conclusions resulting from the characteristics of sin are: 2.4.1. That sin deliberately rejects and suppresses the truth and that the sinner is pleased about the sin which is committed (Romans 1:32; Philippians 3:19). 2.4.2. That the keyword for sin in the New Testament namely hamrtia, essentially means "missing your goal". However the exegesis of Lloyd-Jones indicates that the sinner does not only miss his goal, but does not even aim at the target; in fact, he aims at a different target from the one God sets for him, instead of the living God being worshipped, the creature and creation are worshipped (Romans 1:18-32). 2.4.3. That sin causes spiritual disintegration. This is why people are so susceptible to superficial and unscriptural trends. 2.4.4. That sin is directed primarily against God (Psalm 51:6). 2.4.5. That a true doctrine of sin calls forth a healthy realisation of sin and therefore also a realisation of one's dependence on God for eternal salvation (cf. Matthews 5:3). 2.4.6. That God's judgement of sin as a breach of his covenant is intensified in the church of the New Testament (d. Hebrews 10:19-31). 2.5. Lloyd-Jones uses his view of sin with the intention of awakening a realisation of sin in unbelievers and in this way encouraging the need for redemption. 2.6. The same doctrine of sin is used to foster the sanctification of believers. The process of sanctification consists of the mortification of sin. This process occurs through the direction of the Holy Spirit. 3. Sinful acts are manifested in false doctrines and false religions. This is why Lloyd-Jones's fields of application are examined. A feature of false doctrines and false religions used virtually throughout by Lloyd-Jones in the apologetic process, is the additions to or detractions from the Bible - or both: 3.1. The Roman Catholic Church adds to Scripture by accepting an open canon as it is embodied in Roman Catholic tradition. It is precisely as The Roman Catholic Church system places itself between man and Christ and in this way people's eternal salvation is compromised. 3.2. In contrast with humanism and the resulting uncertainty concerning eternal salvation in the Aminian theology, Lloyd-Jones focuses on the sovereignty of God and the consequential certainty of salvation in the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination. 3.3. If the Darwinian evolutionary doctrine were true, the Biblical doctrine of sin and salvation would be meaningless. Lloyd-Jones uses the story of creation and the fall of man as it is described in Genesis 1-3 as actual occurrences to show that evolutionism is simply a theory. 3.4. Against Christian Science's focus on temporary and earthly prosperity, Lloyd-Jones places man's eternal prosperity as a higher priority. Sin threatens man's eternal prosperity. The Christian Scientists add to the Bible by placing the Science of Mind above the Bible. They detract from the Bible by regarding sin simply as ignorance. 4. Outstanding and admirable features of Lloyd-Jones's apologetics are the way in which he pursues apologetics and the substantial quality of his discussion. He approaches apologetics in an atmosphere of love for the truth and love for the sinner. Lloyd-Jones's point of departure is essentially a prayerful development and true exposition and application of the Word. / Thesis (Th.M. (Ethics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

1. The central theoretical argument of this study is that Dr. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones maintains a true and Biblical view of sin and that he sets off his view meaningfully and apologetically against unbiblical views regarding sin. The purpose of the study is to investigate Lloyd-Jones's view of sin and to indicate that it can at present be applied meaningfully and apologetically. 2. To develop and substantiate this argument, the following procedure has been followed: 2.1. Lloyd-Jones's theological background is established as reliable. 2.2. His position regarding apologetics and his points of departure concerning it are dealt with. He begins by examining man and his fall into sin. The gospel, as God's way of salvation, is set against unbiblical views regarding man and his redemption. His points of departure indicate how the fall of man has resulted in a humanistic anthropology and how this in turn has led to unscriptural standpoints regarding sin. The Biblical view of man, on the other hand, is based on man being made in the image of God. The fall of man damage this image of God in man. God restores this image by means of the redeeming sacrifice of his Son so that the restored man can once again become the image bearer through the working of the Holy Spirit. 2.3. Lloyd-Jones's apologetic points of departure are followed by an examination of his views regarding sin. His views are based on the Biblical doctrine of original sin and especially on the text of Romans 5:12-21. Lloyd-Jones's basic premise regarding original sin is: 'The world is as it is today because when Adam sinned all sinned". Effective apologetics should use the Biblical doctrine of original sin by referring to the positive antipole, namely redemption in Christ. 2.4. From original sin flows all acts of sin. That is why the characteristics of sin are investigated. The most important conclusions resulting from the characteristics of sin are: 2.4.1. That sin deliberately rejects and suppresses the truth and that the sinner is pleased about the sin which is committed (Romans 1:32; Philippians 3:19). 2.4.2. That the keyword for sin in the New Testament namely hamrtia, essentially means "missing your goal". However the exegesis of Lloyd-Jones indicates that the sinner does not only miss his goal, but does not even aim at the target; in fact, he aims at a different target from the one God sets for him, instead of the living God being worshipped, the creature and creation are worshipped (Romans 1:18-32). 2.4.3. That sin causes spiritual disintegration. This is why people are so susceptible to superficial and unscriptural trends. 2.4.4. That sin is directed primarily against God (Psalm 51:6). 2.4.5. That a true doctrine of sin calls forth a healthy realisation of sin and therefore also a realisation of one's dependence on God for eternal salvation (cf. Matthews 5:3). 2.4.6. That God's judgement of sin as a breach of his covenant is intensified in the church of the New Testament (d. Hebrews 10:19-31). 2.5. Lloyd-Jones uses his view of sin with the intention of awakening a realisation of sin in unbelievers and in this way encouraging the need for redemption. 2.6. The same doctrine of sin is used to foster the sanctification of believers. The process of sanctification consists of the mortification of sin. This process occurs through the direction of the Holy Spirit. 3. Sinful acts are manifested in false doctrines and false religions. This is why Lloyd-Jones's fields of application are examined. A feature of false doctrines and false religions used virtually throughout by Lloyd-Jones in the apologetic process, is the additions to or detractions from the Bible - or both: 3.1. The Roman Catholic Church adds to Scripture by accepting an open canon as it is embodied in Roman Catholic tradition. It is precisely as The Roman Catholic Church system places itself between man and Christ and in this way people's eternal salvation is compromised. 3.2. In contrast with humanism and the resulting uncertainty concerning eternal salvation in the Aminian theology, Lloyd-Jones focuses on the sovereignty of God and the consequential certainty of salvation in the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination. 3.3. If the Darwinian evolutionary doctrine were true, the Biblical doctrine of sin and salvation would be meaningless. Lloyd-Jones uses the story of creation and the fall of man as it is described in Genesis 1-3 as actual occurrences to show that evolutionism is simply a theory. 3.4. Against Christian Science's focus on temporary and earthly prosperity, Lloyd-Jones places man's eternal prosperity as a higher priority. Sin threatens man's eternal prosperity. The Christian Scientists add to the Bible by placing the Science of Mind above the Bible. They detract from the Bible by regarding sin simply as ignorance. 4. Outstanding and admirable features of Lloyd-Jones's apologetics are the way in which he pursues apologetics and the substantial quality of his discussion. He approaches apologetics in an atmosphere of love for the truth and love for the sinner. Lloyd-Jones's point of departure is essentially a prayerful development and true exposition and application of the Word. / Thesis (Th.M. (Ethics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.