Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

God, and thus ignores the fact that God now works through secondary causes and
ceased from His creative work. This is not a very serious objection for those who do not
have a deistic conception of the world. It is a gratuitous assumption that God has ceased
from all creative activity in the world.
5. CONCLUDING REMARKS.
a Caution required in speaking on the subject. It must be admitted that the arguments
on both sides are rather well balanced. In view of this fact it is not surprising that
Augustine found it rather hard to choose between the two. The Bible makes no direct
statement respecting the origin of the soul of man, except in the case of Adam. The few
Scriptural passages that are adduced as favoring the one theory or the other, can hardly
be called conclusive on either side. And because we have no clear teaching of Scripture
on the point in question, it is necessary to speak with caution on the subject. We ought
not to be wise above that which is written. Several theologians are of the opinion that
there is an element of truth in both of these theories, which must be recognized. 13
Dorner even suggests the idea that each one of the three theories discussed represents
one aspect of the whole truth: “Traducianism, generic consciousness; Preexistentianism,
self-consciousness or the interest of the personality as a separate eternal
divine thought; Creationism, God-consciousness.” 14
b. Some form of Creationism deserves preference. It seems to us that Creationism
deserves the preference, because (1) it does not encounter the insuperable philosophical
difficulty with which Traducianism is burdened; (2) it avoids the Christological errors
which Traducianism involves; and (3) it is most in harmony with our covenant idea. At
the same time we are convinced that the creative activity of God in originating human
souls must be conceived as being most closely connected with the natural process in the
generation of new individuals. Creationism does not claim to be able to clear up all
difficulties, but at the same time it serves as a warning against the following errors: (1)
that the soul is divisible; (2) that all men are numerically of the same substance; and (3)
that Christ assumed the same numerical nature which fell in Adam. 15
13 Cf. Smith, Chr. Theol., p. 169; Dabney, Syst. and Polemic Theol., pp. 320 f.; Martensen, Chr. Dogm., p. 141;
Bavinck, Geref. Dogm. II, p. 630; Raymond, Syst. Theol. II, pp. 35 f.
14 Syst. of Chr. Doct. II, p. 94.
15 For further study of this subject confer especially the study of Dr. Honig on Creatianisme en
Traducianisme.
217