When it comes to the origin of the world, all Christians are creationists. After all, nothing in Scripture is more basic than the teaching that God created the entire universe (“the heavens and the earth”). But what if I told you there is another sense in which not all Christians are creationists? Well, it’s true. When it comes to the particular question of the origin of human souls after Adam, creationism refers to a distinct view that is opposed to another view called traducianism. Proponents of both views are creationists with respect to the broader question of the origin of the world, but they disagree about the origin of individual human souls. If people are composed (at least) of a body and a soul, where do their souls come from?

You may be starting to think this all sounds very confusing. Indeed, the question of the origin of souls is a difficult one that requires precise definitions and carefully delineated categories of thought. It is also a question that Scripture does not address directly, which leaves some to wonder why the issue really matters at all. It’s a fair point, but we are wise to remember that Scripture can pressure us to ask questions it doesn’t clearly raise by speaking to issues that are closely related to those questions. That is, even if an issue is not addressed directly in Scripture, it may be addressed indirectly so that people seeking to understand sound doctrine according to Scripture will need to wrestle with it. Such is the case with the question of the origin of human souls after Adam. It is good for us to be attentive to Scripture, and it is Scripture that is pressuring us to give an account of the origin of souls.

The goal of this essay is to define creationism and traducianism, give a bit of a historical overview of the proponents of the respective positions, and then help readers sort through the biblical and theological issues that impact or are impacted by one’s view to this question. The final section of the essay will consider the most pressing doctrinal issue related to the origin of human souls: the doctrine of original sin.

Definitions and Historical Considerations

Concerning the origin of the soul, there are two opposing views held by Christian theologians throughout church history—traducianism and creationism.^[1]

Traducianism is the view that a soul is made from the soul(s) of one or both parents simultaneous with the material body’s formation at conception, such that the entire composite human nature of each person (i.e., both the body and the soul) since Adam and Eve is propagated (Latin, traducem) by the parents.

Creationism is the view that each soul is immediately created by God ex nihilo (out of nothing) at the moment of conception^[2] and combined with the material body to form the composite human nature of each individual person.

From the outset, it is important to note that both views affirm that God created Adam’s soul ex nihilo in the beginning.^[3] The debate is only about the souls of Adam’s descendants. It should also be observed that both views affirm that God is the Creator of all souls. The question is whether God creates post-Adamic souls immediately and ex nihilo or mediately and the from the substance of parental souls.

Historically, the creationist view is the majority position across various Christian theological traditions, including the Reformed tradition. It has not, however, risen to the level of confessional consensus in the ecumenical creeds nor in the Reformed confessions. The majority of the church fathers who addressed the question argued for creationism, but many had nothing to say on the matter. Most cite Tertullian as the first Christian theologian to argue explicitly for traducianism in his Treatise on the Soul.^[4] Early in his career, Augustine seems to have seen the question of the origin of the soul as bearing only minimal theological significance.[5] Once the Pelagian controversy heated up, however, he was inclined to the traducian view as the one that best accounted for the transmission of original sin. In the end, however, Augustine remained undecided on the issue.^[6] The vast majority of medieval theologians held to the creationist view (see, e.g., Thomas Aquinas^[7]). After the Reformation, the Lutheran tradition tended to favor the traducian position (see, e.g., Johann Gerhard^[8]) while the majority of Reformed thinkers were convinced creationists (e.g., Turretin,^[9] C. Hodge,^[10] Bavinck,^[11] and Berkhof^[12]). Traducianism, however, is not without its advocates in the Reformed tradition (e.g., A. H. Strong,^[13] William G. T. Shedd,^[14] and Gordon Clark^[15]).

Theological Methodology for a Philosophical Question

The question of the origin of souls is a philosophical one for which no clear answer is given in Scripture. This accounts for the lack of definitive consensus among Christian thinkers through the ages and should give us a sense of humility and charity as we approach the issue. But if this is so, why has such focused attention been given to this issue historically and why would we trouble ourselves with it today? Several observations are in order.

First, Christians should not despise explicitly philosophical questions. Rather, we should be willing and eager to gain understanding of the world God has made insofar as reason and available data permit. The Scriptures tell us that the one true God made the world and everything in it (Gen 1:1), and they further tell us that God has made mankind in his image and commanded him to take dominion over creation (Gen. 1:28). Philosophy is the disciplined use of reason to gain understanding of the world God has made, and it is one of the principal ways that rational creatures take dominion over creation.

Second, we should note that Scripture itself pressures us to elevate some philosophical considerations over others. The degree to which philosophical questions should be elevated in importance for the Christian is determined by the proximity the question has to the clear teaching of Scripture. At the highest level, the disciplined use of our reason and the appropriation of terms from precise philosophical schools of thought is a matter of articulating the very teaching of the words of Scripture itself. False teachers or merely confused readers may ascribe a meaning to the biblical language that is contrary to the meaning actually conveyed by the words. In such cases, extra-biblical terminology is useful for the safeguarding of biblical truth. Often, it is terms whose precision has been finely honed in philosophical discourse that prove adequate for the task. As an example, look no further than the consistent and confessional use of philosophically precise and readily available terms like nature, being, substance, and subsistence in the doctrine of the Trinity. At a secondary level, there are cases in which Scripture does not address a philosophical question directly in its own terms, but it does directly address matters that are closely related to the question. In such cases, clearly revealed biblical truth regulates our philosophical reasoning by setting fixed boundaries and commending the plausibility of a possible solution according to its coherence with the truth of Scripture.

The question of the origin of souls belongs to this secondary level of philosophical reasoning. Whether one is a creationist or traducianist is not itself a test for orthodoxy. How one construes a creationist or traducianist account, however, is still important because how one answers this question will have implications for other clearly revealed doctrines. In the next section, I will address several key biblical and theological points that must be navigated in thinking through the origin of souls, suggesting ways that advocates of either position might articulate their view so as not to transgress clear doctrinal boundaries set down by Scripture. In the final section, I will give more sustained attention to how this debate relates to the most significant doctrine adjacent to it—the doctrine of original sin.

Theological Significance of the Origin of Souls

Significance of the Completion of Creation and God’s Rest

The opening line of the creation week narrative is among the most widely recognized sentences in all of Scripture: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). Creation week concludes with the words,

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God finished his work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done. So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation (Gen. 2:1–3).

The correspondence of key words and phrases in these opening and closing sections form an inclusio indicating the unity of the account. In Gen. 1:1, we have the phrase, “God created” (bārāʾ ʾᵉlōhim). At the end of 2:3, we see the exact same Hebrew expression (bārāʾ ʾᵉlōhim) though the translation into English masks the exact repetition. Also repeated is the phrase “the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1, 2:1). In addition to the repetition of these phrases, there is an important contrast to be observed. Genesis 1:1 uses the phrase “in the beginning” to signal the start of God’s creative work, while Genesis 2:1–3 uses the word “finished” twice to describe the end of God’s creative activity. Thus, God’s rest is not to be understood as a period of divine recuperation from hard labor—he does not grow tired or weary after all—but as the cessation (rest) from his work of special creation. This text is the principal basis for the theological distinction between God’s acts of providence (his ongoing work in the world he has made) and creation (his work to bring into being the world and all that it contains).

Traducianists allege that the creationist view of the origin of souls undermines the significance of the completion of God’s act of creation and his entering into his rest. If God continually creates a new soul at every moment of conception, then has he really ceased from his work of special creation? Both sides agree that creating new individuals of already existing kinds belongs to the category of providence, rather than creation, properly speaking. Nevertheless, the creationist contends that every single human soul since Adam was brought into being out of nothing, just as the souls of Adam and Eve were during the week of creation. Thus, to the traducianist, the clear biblical teaching that God’s special work of creation is completed at the end of creation week is undermined by the creationist position.^[16]

Creationists reply that the completion of special creation and God’s entering his rest means that he no longer brings into existence the kind of thing that had no previous existence. Thus, while each soul is created ex nihilo, each soul does not represent a new kind of substance, only a new individual instance of the already-created kind. Thus, the creationist maintains that, in their position, the biblically demanded distinction between creation and providence is preserved.^[17]

Read More