New Blog

Dear All,

Please note this blog is now closed. I am now jointly working on a blog with a good friend of mine, Stephen Barton. Due to this and other commitments i cannot give this one the time it needs.

Please come visit us: www.gospeltogether.com

Dan

Election and Free Will

After writing an essay on free will and attending various lectures on the divine will of God, I thought I would write up some thoughts. It is a difficult subject, of which i am no master of it, and one which causes many Christian's problems. Yet what I offer here is some gleanings of my learning.

The Calvinistic position affirms the doctrine of foreordination. God foreordains all that shall come to pass; this includes electing those whom he freely chooses to salvation. Let me show this by a few verses:

 ²⁹ For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.³⁰ And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. (Rom 8:29-30 ESV)

 ⁷ It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, ⁸ but it is because the LORD loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Deu 7:7-8 ESV)

AND FINALLY:

He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, (Eph 1:5 ESV)

I believe these verses are sufficient proof to show the doctrine of election is a biblical argument. However, we also affirm the will of man is free. Yet how do we put these together? I wish to offer a few thoughts on this:

Some have argued: The Doctrine of Election is inconsistent with human responsibility.

We have two doctrines; freedom of the will in our nature and that God has foreordained all things. Some say this is incompatible; "how can I be free in my will, if what i choose to do has already been foreordained by God to happen?  As such, it is argued, the two doctrines are contradictory, and as such, we must give up on one or the other. We cannot have both as they contradict themselves.

However, we must see that these questions are philosophical questions not theological. In trying to reconcile these two views we are going to the question of logic and philosophy. The two doctrines stand by themselves and are theology taken straight from the Scriptures. Yet when we try to merge them together to form a unified thesis, we are asking how they relate in the mind and actions of the human. It is at this point we leave theology behind and go to philosophy. 

However, we must remember, because the two may appear incompatible, this does not diminish them as equally true! By themselves, the two doctrines stand on their own standards and truth. They are self-sufficient in this aspect. However, we must see that, the incompatibility of merging them together does not reflect the falsehood of them, but simply, our inability to reconcile them. 

Professor D. McLeod, notes the similarity of this same dilemma as seen in science. We are told by scientists, a wave and a particle are two different things.  They are two concepts, two matters, two different things which cannot be merged and are allowed to stand on their own as they are sufficient in themselves. Yet we are told that light is both a wave and a particle. The two are incompatible but are at the same time affirmed.

So we can see, if we want to place two things together, which stand by themselves, and cannot, we cannot say, "well one must be false." We do not put the night against the day and try merge them and say one must go because it cannot be night and day at one point. Accordingly, I am told my will is free, and I am told I am accountable for the actions I take in my life. Additionally, I know God foreordains all that shall come to pass. I cannot answer the compatibility of them together from any text because God does not answer this.

We must remember in this area we are in the high councils of God, of which, we have little sight. All we can gleam from Scripture is given in Romans:

 ¹⁸ Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. ¹⁹ One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" ²⁰ But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' " ²¹ Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? (Rom 9:18-21 NIV)

Therefore, the doctrine of God's will as foreordaining all things and electing those whom he chooses to salvation must stand by themselves and we must not become caught up with a philosophical debate trying to relate the two. 

Additionally, let us beware of the hyper-Calvininst view: Because God elects those who will receive the Gospel I have no need to preach to all humanity.

This again is a serious objection but is a reconciliation issue. How can we ask everyone to repent and believe when God has foreordained some not to believe? From where we stand in the Free Church of Scotland, the obligation to preach to all is categorical. God has sent me to say to everyone, "I have good news for you." I do this, not because I can reconcile the two, but all I know is that God has told me to preach to all. God has said categorically, go and preach to all mankind. I have no right to say to God, "I will only speak to those who will be saved", or, "once you tell me how to reconcile this commission to election, then i will go." Let us abandon this position with great haste.

We know not how many are saved, it need not be a small number, as some think, but may be a huge percentage. We do not know, but what we do know let us affirm with confidence. God knows all and foreordains all. He elects those whom he chooses and by His foreordination our free will is established and upheld.

Good Book

I have been reading  God, Marriage, and Family: Rebuilding the Biblical Foundation by Andreas Kostenberger and  David W. Jones recently. I would recommend this to all theology students, pastors, minsters, elders, etc. It is a fantastic book and thoroughly researched. They look at key Christian areas of family life and tackle each topic with thorough biblical research. 


I would not necessarily recommend it to newly weds or as a marriage preparation handbook, it is more suited as a teachers handbook. 


One of the best things about the book is the bibliography. You might think i am joking but the bibliography shows just how much research has gone into the book. It is also a great place to find book son each various topic.


I was put not it when listening to a sermon by Mark Driscoll and he talked it up so much i decide to get it. I am not disappointed. 


Will try post a bit more in future, its been hectic.

Marrow of Modern Divinity

After looking at the Marrow of Modern Divinity for the past few weeks I have to conclude; I am barely scratching the surface! There is so much to the debate:
Extent of the Atonement, the Law, Holiness, Assurance, Election and the Gospel offer etc. It is no wonder the debate scanned over a hundred years!

Cunnigham assessed the controversy and said, "they divided the truth between themselves in the points controverted." At first he appears to be bang on the mark, but the more I read, the more I have to disagree. The nature of the gospel seems to be at stake.

However, one point it raised which struck me.
If we are to follow the Great Commission and preach the Gospel to all mankind; How can we offer the non-elect the benefits of salvation if they are not elected to receive them?

I am fully convinced that we must preach the message to all without exception, but in offering the gospel call to salvation are we not also implying the right to receive it? If so, how can we offer a right of the elect to the non-elect?

Unfortunately, the Assembly condemned the Marrow and failed to see the significance of the theology  Hog, Boston, and others were advancing. Pastorally it raised questions still relevant to the present day.

A New Term

Well, the new term begins today. After a long summer break spent on placement, revising for exams and work the time has come to pick up the books again. I will be honest and say I am not looking forward to this year, I am not sure if I will enjoy it as much as last year. Yet what I must say is motivation is not lacking.

A summer placement does more than teach you about the life of a minister. It reminds you of the need to be 'on the ball' with your studies. It reminds you of the essential nature of a solid foundation of study and learning. How can we begin a ministry of shepherding if we do not know how to lead the sheep; moreover how can we lead the sheep if we have not been led by Christ?

So a healthy dose of Church History, Hebrew, NT and Systematic Theology is scheduled for the next year.  Lets see how it goes.

Mission

Another key theme i had been thinking about whilst on placement was a missional objective. Yet i do not mean simply a missional objective in the preaching and the preacher but a missional objective which streams from the pews (or chairs)!

The great commission is a reminder to us all that mission is not simply for missionaries, ministers and evangelists but to every Christian. We are all called to spread the gospel in church, work, home and social settings. This is crucial to the building of God's kingdom as it is how He intends us to work.

When we take this missional objective into our lives and live it - as God wants us to - we can begin to help build the Church for God by His power. When we come to Church and feed of the word and worship God we can then go out into our communities and bring others in. When everyone is pulling their weight growth is not a surprise but a pleasure to give God praise for.

Feedback Time!

I was trying to think about the most beneficial aspect of a summer placement. What part or parts are most valuable for a student and why? Surely this is the best way to take stock of such an experience and to grow from it?

Without a shadow of a doubt there is one clear winner for me. Honest, critical, effective feedback. I am indebted to Angus for the time he spent with me going over my sermons, the delivery, content, use of power point etc. The time taken to show me my errors as well as my achievements was hugely beneficial.

I do not know how other Church's operate but in the Free Church usually a student is asked to preach because their is a vacancy or the minister is away and needs pulpit supply. This is very common in my opinion however, this also produces a problem. The responsibility for honest feedback is placed upon the people, which if we are brutally truthful very seldom tell us when we stuff it up because they do not want to embarrass us! It is a sad truth at least in my opinion.

There are very few people who are bold enough to simply tell us if we have made a mistake, maybe it is a fear of appearing arrogant, or impolite, I am not sure. However, I would simply state my agreement with Hebrews 12:1;

No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it.

How many if us could benefit from honest feedback or front of house aid etc. I am grateful for the time Angus has taken with me to correct my many errors and be so encouraging at the same time. Not all correction is painful when we remember that we are corrected for our benefit so that our light for God burns all the brighter!