"For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight." - Ephesians 1:4 (NIV)
"So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me his prisoner. But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, who has saved us and called us to a holy life - not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Saviour, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." - 2 Timothy 1:8-10 (NIV)
"The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and will come up out of the Abyss and go to his destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because he once was, now is not, and yet will come." - Revelation 17:8 (NIV)
the way i see it, God chooses to create the best possible world in which all human actions (including faith) work for His maximum glory - this is the world in which we are living in right now. accordingly, God chooses not to create all other possible worlds in which all human actions (including faith) do not work for His maximum glory.
in this respect, all human actions (including faith) are entirely chosen by God. at the same time, all human actions (including faith) are entirely free. therefore, we are chosen but free.
in choosing to create the best possible world in which all human actions (including faith) work for His maximum glory, God indeed predestines the elect for salvation. however, God does not predetermine babies to damnation before they are born!
Saturday 30 August 2008
the sin of doctrinal pride
If your Calvinism or Arminianism or dispensationalism, or your view concerning the end times, or your disdain for all doctrinal beliefs causes you to feel doctrinally superior to those who hold other views, then you are probably guilty of the sin of doctrinal pride. I'm not suggesting that we should not seek to know the truths of Scripture and develop doctrinal convictions about what the Scriptures teach; I am saying that we should hold our convictions in humility, realising that many godly and theologically capable people hold other convictions.
I was once asked to comment about a book that taught a system of sanctification with which I strongly disagree. In my letter, I wrote the following: "Please note that I am saying 'things with which I disagree,' not things wherein he [the author] is wrong. I may find out when I get to heaven that I am the one who was wrong."
Now, having written that, does it mean my convictions are less strong than before? Not at all. If anything, after having read the book, my convictions were stronger. But it does mean that I want to hold my convictions with humility and treat the author of the book with the same respect I would treat people whose doctrine of sanctification is the same as mine. (I realise that in using myself as an example of the humility we should practice, I can appear to be "proud of my humility." I trust such is not the case, and I know there are other occasions when I have not been as generous and respectful toward those with whom I disagree.)
- Jerry Bridges, Respectable Sins
I was once asked to comment about a book that taught a system of sanctification with which I strongly disagree. In my letter, I wrote the following: "Please note that I am saying 'things with which I disagree,' not things wherein he [the author] is wrong. I may find out when I get to heaven that I am the one who was wrong."
Now, having written that, does it mean my convictions are less strong than before? Not at all. If anything, after having read the book, my convictions were stronger. But it does mean that I want to hold my convictions with humility and treat the author of the book with the same respect I would treat people whose doctrine of sanctification is the same as mine. (I realise that in using myself as an example of the humility we should practice, I can appear to be "proud of my humility." I trust such is not the case, and I know there are other occasions when I have not been as generous and respectful toward those with whom I disagree.)
- Jerry Bridges, Respectable Sins
Friday 29 August 2008
to God be the glory
for the purposes of this post, let us admit the following three statements (two premises and one conclusion).
1. God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him.
2. we are most satisfied in Him when we are saved, not damned.
3. therefore, God is most glorified in us when we are saved, not damned.
the calvinist position on saving grace is as follows:
4. God enables some to accept saving grace.
5. God does not enable some to accept saving grace.
6. God effects saving grace in those whom He enables to accept saving grace.
7. God does not effect saving grace in those whom He does not enable to accept saving grace.
my position is on saving grace as follows:
4. God enables all (ie. all who accept common grace) to accept saving grace.
5. some choose to accept saving grace.
6. some do not choose to accept saving grace.
7. God effects saving grace in those who choose to accept saving grace.
8. God does not effect saving grace in those who do not choose to accept saving grace.
either way, God is robbed of His glory when some are not saved. the difference is that according to the non-calvinist position, we rob God of His glory when we do not put our trust in Him. (we do not rob God of His glory when we put our trust in Him, because this is what God calls us to do - for His glory.)
according to the calvinist position, God robs Himself of His glory!
1. God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him.
2. we are most satisfied in Him when we are saved, not damned.
3. therefore, God is most glorified in us when we are saved, not damned.
the calvinist position on saving grace is as follows:
4. God enables some to accept saving grace.
5. God does not enable some to accept saving grace.
6. God effects saving grace in those whom He enables to accept saving grace.
7. God does not effect saving grace in those whom He does not enable to accept saving grace.
my position is on saving grace as follows:
4. God enables all (ie. all who accept common grace) to accept saving grace.
5. some choose to accept saving grace.
6. some do not choose to accept saving grace.
7. God effects saving grace in those who choose to accept saving grace.
8. God does not effect saving grace in those who do not choose to accept saving grace.
either way, God is robbed of His glory when some are not saved. the difference is that according to the non-calvinist position, we rob God of His glory when we do not put our trust in Him. (we do not rob God of His glory when we put our trust in Him, because this is what God calls us to do - for His glory.)
according to the calvinist position, God robs Himself of His glory!
Thursday 28 August 2008
unlocking the second prison
the yellow ribbon project seeks to engage the community in giving ex-offenders a second chance at life. it hopes to inspire a ripple effect of concerted community action to support ex-offenders and their families.
september is yellow ribbon month. more information about the yellow ribbon project and events in the month of september can be found here.
to me, the yellow ribbon project is about God restoring creation to reflect His glory. giving ex-offenders a second chance happens to fall under this category.
conviction without rehabilitation is like the cross without the resurrection. they must go hand in hand.
the cross marks the end of the Old Covenant - 'it is finished' (John 19:30, NIV). through the cross, God unlocks the first prison of sin and redeems creation.
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.
- Romans 8:1-4 (NIV)
the resurrection marks the beginning of the New Covenant - 'this cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you' (Luke 22:20, NIV). through the resurrection, God unlocks the second prison of death (ie. not sin, but the wages of sin) and renews creation.
I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed - in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."
"Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?"
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
- 1 Corinthians 15:50-57 (NIV)
to be released from the first prison of sin (through the cross) is to have life after death. to be released from the second prison of death (through the resurrection) is to have life after life after death, as n.t. wright likes to say.
september is yellow ribbon month. more information about the yellow ribbon project and events in the month of september can be found here.
to me, the yellow ribbon project is about God restoring creation to reflect His glory. giving ex-offenders a second chance happens to fall under this category.
conviction without rehabilitation is like the cross without the resurrection. they must go hand in hand.
the cross marks the end of the Old Covenant - 'it is finished' (John 19:30, NIV). through the cross, God unlocks the first prison of sin and redeems creation.
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.
- Romans 8:1-4 (NIV)
the resurrection marks the beginning of the New Covenant - 'this cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you' (Luke 22:20, NIV). through the resurrection, God unlocks the second prison of death (ie. not sin, but the wages of sin) and renews creation.
I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed - in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."
"Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?"
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
- 1 Corinthians 15:50-57 (NIV)
to be released from the first prison of sin (through the cross) is to have life after death. to be released from the second prison of death (through the resurrection) is to have life after life after death, as n.t. wright likes to say.
Wednesday 27 August 2008
common grace and saving grace
caleb has raised a number of very interesting points about common grace and will no doubt develop them even further over the next few days. his blog is here and his post on common grace is here.
common grace refers to 'God's invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature' (Romans 1:20, NIV), while saving grace refers to 'the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile' (Romans 1:16, NIV). saving grace is found in Christ - 'the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation' (Colossians 1:15, NIV) - through faith in Christ alone.
this post is an attempt to provide a philosophically and theologically sound alternative to the calvinist position on common grace and saving grace.
the calvinist position on common grace and saving grace is as follows:
1. common grace does not have the power to save.
2. saving grace has the irresistible power to save.
3. all are given common grace.
4. all reject common grace.
5. some are given saving grace.
6. some are not given saving grace.
7. those who are given saving grace are irresistibly saved.
8. those who are not given saving grace are not saved.
9. those who are not given saving grace are nevertheless responsible for not being saved, because all have rejected common grace in the first place.
however, if only saving grace has the irresistible power to save, then those who are not given saving grace are not responsible for not being saved. the fact that all have rejected common grace in the first place is besides the point.
my position on common grace and saving grace is as follows:
1. common grace does not have the power to save.
2. common grace has the resistible power to point towards saving grace.
3. saving grace has the resistible power to save.
4. all are given common grace.
5. some accept common grace.
6. some reject common grace.
7. those who accept common grace are enabled to accept or reject saving grace.
God ensures that those who accept common grace will hear the gospel within their lifetime.
8. those who reject common grace are not enabled to accept or reject saving grace.
God ensures that those who reject common grace will either not hear the gospel within their lifetime or be blinded to the gospel if they do hear the gospel within their lifetime.
9. those who accept common grace and accept saving grace are saved.
10. those who accept common grace and reject saving grace are not saved.
11. those who reject common grace are not saved.
links: more on common grace and saving grace (18 may 09), even more on common grace and saving grace (23 jun 09)
common grace refers to 'God's invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature' (Romans 1:20, NIV), while saving grace refers to 'the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile' (Romans 1:16, NIV). saving grace is found in Christ - 'the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation' (Colossians 1:15, NIV) - through faith in Christ alone.
this post is an attempt to provide a philosophically and theologically sound alternative to the calvinist position on common grace and saving grace.
the calvinist position on common grace and saving grace is as follows:
1. common grace does not have the power to save.
2. saving grace has the irresistible power to save.
3. all are given common grace.
4. all reject common grace.
5. some are given saving grace.
6. some are not given saving grace.
7. those who are given saving grace are irresistibly saved.
8. those who are not given saving grace are not saved.
9. those who are not given saving grace are nevertheless responsible for not being saved, because all have rejected common grace in the first place.
however, if only saving grace has the irresistible power to save, then those who are not given saving grace are not responsible for not being saved. the fact that all have rejected common grace in the first place is besides the point.
my position on common grace and saving grace is as follows:
1. common grace does not have the power to save.
2. common grace has the resistible power to point towards saving grace.
3. saving grace has the resistible power to save.
4. all are given common grace.
5. some accept common grace.
6. some reject common grace.
7. those who accept common grace are enabled to accept or reject saving grace.
God ensures that those who accept common grace will hear the gospel within their lifetime.
8. those who reject common grace are not enabled to accept or reject saving grace.
God ensures that those who reject common grace will either not hear the gospel within their lifetime or be blinded to the gospel if they do hear the gospel within their lifetime.
9. those who accept common grace and accept saving grace are saved.
10. those who accept common grace and reject saving grace are not saved.
11. those who reject common grace are not saved.
links: more on common grace and saving grace (18 may 09), even more on common grace and saving grace (23 jun 09)
Tuesday 26 August 2008
the potter and the clay
Romans 9-11 is not about the saved and the unsaved, but about the Jews and the Gentiles. to this end, Romans 9-11 is not about individual election for salvation, but about corporate election for service. in this post, i will focus on Romans 9:14-21.
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 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?
- Romans 9:14-21 (NIV)
a calvinist reading of Romans 9:14-21 would hold that some persons are chosen to glorify God by receiving His mercy whereas others are chosen to glorify Him by receiving His wrath. however, Romans 9:14-21 is really about how corporate election for service does not secure individual election for salvation.
When Paul asserts God's freedom to have mercy on whomever he wishes, Paul is not forging a doctrine of unconditional individual election but establishing God's freedom to pour out his mercy beyond the boundaries of Jewish ethnic identity. To those Jews who cherished a narrower version of God's mercy, Paul repeated God's word to Moses: "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." There is a wideness in God's mercy!
- Walls and Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist
in Romans 9:16, paul tells Jews who put their confidence in the flesh that 'it does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy'. in effect, paul is saying that salvation does not depend on works of the Old Covenant (keeping the law), but on works of the New Covenant (faith in Christ alone). this is consistent with the book of Romans as a whole.
"A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God." - Romans 2:28-39 (NIV)
in Romans 9:18, paul tells Jews - who think that God can only have mercy on Jews but not Gentiles, and that God can only harden Gentiles but not Jews - that 'God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden'.
just because Jews were corporately elected for service under the Old Covenant does not mean that they had to be individually elected for salvation under the New Covenant. at the same time, just because Gentiles were not corporately elected for service under the Old Covenant does not mean that they could not be individually elected for salvation under the New Covenant.
God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy (ie. both Jews and Gentiles who believe), and he hardens whom he wants to harden (ie. both Jews and Gentiles who do not believe).
"For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous." - Romans 5:19 (NIV)
"For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." - Romans 11:32 (NIV)
surely God has unlocked the prison of sin for all men!
at the potter's house
This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD: "Go down to the potter's house, and there I will give you my message." So I went down to the potter's house, and I saw him working at the wheel. But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him.
Then the word of the LORD came to me: "O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter does?" declares the LORD. "Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.
- Jeremiah 18:1-10 (NIV)
in Romans 9:19-21, paul reminds objectors that no one resists God's will. at this point, it is important to note that there is one will in two senses. just because no one resists God's decretive will does not mean that no one resists God's preceptive will.
paul is not saying that some persons are chosen to glorify God by receiving His mercy whereas others are chosen to glorify Him by receiving His wrath, and that we should just accept it. paul is saying that when the clay refuses to be moulded for noble purposes, it cannot later object that the potter does not want to use it for noble purposes.
likewise, when we resist God's preceptive (not decretive) will, we cannot later object that God does not want to use us according to His preceptive (not decretive) will.
a workman approved by God
"In a large house there are articles not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; some are for noble purposes and some for ignoble. If a man cleanses himself from the latter, he will be an instrument for noble purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work." - 2 Timothy 2:20-21 (NIV)
at the end of the day, the potter does 'have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use' (Romans 9:21, NIV). nonetheless, this is on the condition that 'a man cleanses himself from the latter' through faith in Christ alone.
and faith is indeed a work (of the New Covenant), just not a work (of the Old Covenant).
14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 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?
- Romans 9:14-21 (NIV)
a calvinist reading of Romans 9:14-21 would hold that some persons are chosen to glorify God by receiving His mercy whereas others are chosen to glorify Him by receiving His wrath. however, Romans 9:14-21 is really about how corporate election for service does not secure individual election for salvation.
When Paul asserts God's freedom to have mercy on whomever he wishes, Paul is not forging a doctrine of unconditional individual election but establishing God's freedom to pour out his mercy beyond the boundaries of Jewish ethnic identity. To those Jews who cherished a narrower version of God's mercy, Paul repeated God's word to Moses: "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." There is a wideness in God's mercy!
- Walls and Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist
in Romans 9:16, paul tells Jews who put their confidence in the flesh that 'it does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy'. in effect, paul is saying that salvation does not depend on works of the Old Covenant (keeping the law), but on works of the New Covenant (faith in Christ alone). this is consistent with the book of Romans as a whole.
"A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God." - Romans 2:28-39 (NIV)
in Romans 9:18, paul tells Jews - who think that God can only have mercy on Jews but not Gentiles, and that God can only harden Gentiles but not Jews - that 'God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden'.
just because Jews were corporately elected for service under the Old Covenant does not mean that they had to be individually elected for salvation under the New Covenant. at the same time, just because Gentiles were not corporately elected for service under the Old Covenant does not mean that they could not be individually elected for salvation under the New Covenant.
God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy (ie. both Jews and Gentiles who believe), and he hardens whom he wants to harden (ie. both Jews and Gentiles who do not believe).
"For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous." - Romans 5:19 (NIV)
"For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." - Romans 11:32 (NIV)
surely God has unlocked the prison of sin for all men!
at the potter's house
This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD: "Go down to the potter's house, and there I will give you my message." So I went down to the potter's house, and I saw him working at the wheel. But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him.
Then the word of the LORD came to me: "O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter does?" declares the LORD. "Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.
- Jeremiah 18:1-10 (NIV)
in Romans 9:19-21, paul reminds objectors that no one resists God's will. at this point, it is important to note that there is one will in two senses. just because no one resists God's decretive will does not mean that no one resists God's preceptive will.
paul is not saying that some persons are chosen to glorify God by receiving His mercy whereas others are chosen to glorify Him by receiving His wrath, and that we should just accept it. paul is saying that when the clay refuses to be moulded for noble purposes, it cannot later object that the potter does not want to use it for noble purposes.
likewise, when we resist God's preceptive (not decretive) will, we cannot later object that God does not want to use us according to His preceptive (not decretive) will.
a workman approved by God
"In a large house there are articles not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; some are for noble purposes and some for ignoble. If a man cleanses himself from the latter, he will be an instrument for noble purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work." - 2 Timothy 2:20-21 (NIV)
at the end of the day, the potter does 'have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use' (Romans 9:21, NIV). nonetheless, this is on the condition that 'a man cleanses himself from the latter' through faith in Christ alone.
and faith is indeed a work (of the New Covenant), just not a work (of the Old Covenant).
Monday 25 August 2008
Jacob and Esau
Romans 9-11 is not about the saved and the unsaved, but about the Jews and the Gentiles. to this end, Romans 9-11 is not about individual election for salvation, but about corporate election for service. in this post, i will focus on Romans 9:6-13.
6 It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." 8 In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring. 9 For this was how the promise was stated: "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son."
10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad - in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls - she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
- Romans 9:6-13 (NIV)
a calvinist reading of Romans 9:6-13 would hold that God predetermined Jacob for salvation and Esau for damnation. however, Romans 9:6-13 is really about how the corporate election of Jews for service would ultimately effect the individual election of both Jews and Gentiles for salvation.
in Romans 9:6-7, paul stresses that Jews were never corporately elected for salvation in the first place. (there is no such thing as being corporately elected for salvation.) therefore, God's word has not failed just because not all Jews are saved.
on the contrary, Jews were corporately elected for service, to bring the Messiah into the world and then to bring the good news of the Messiah to the world. all Jews are corporately elected for service, but only those who have faith in Christ alone are individually elected for salvation.
it is significant that Romans 9:7 refers to Genesis 21:12 - after the birth of Isaac, while Romans 9:9 refers to Genesis 18:10, 14 - before the birth of Isaac. paul uses this to show that Romans 9:7 (Genesis 21:12) was the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham in Romans 9:9 (Genesis 18:10, 14). God's word has not failed!
similarly, Romans 9:12 refers to Genesis 25:23 - before the birth of Jacob and Esau, while Romans 9:13 refers to Malachi 1:2-3 - after the birth (and death) of Jacob and Esau. paul uses this to show that God's descriptive (not prescriptive) certainty that 'the older will serve the younger' in Romans 9:12 (Genesis 25:23) was fulfilled in Romans 9:13 (Malachi 1:2-3). once again, God's word has not failed!
descriptive certainty refers to infallible foreknowledge while prescriptive certainty refers to predestination.
for example, i can be descriptively certain that someone will commit a crime today, but not prescriptively certain that someone will commit a crime today. this is because i will know for sure that someone will commit a crime today, but will not actually cause anyone to commit a crime today.
on the other hand - if i so freely choose - i can be both descriptively and prescriptively certain that i will commit a crime today. this is because - if i so freely choose - i will know for sure that i will commit a crime today, and will actually cause myself to commit a crime today.
to be sure, God is both descriptively certain and prescriptively certain about corporate election for service. however, God is only descriptively certain and not prescriptively certain about individual election for salvation.
God knew for sure that Adam would eat the fruit, but God did not actually cause Adam to eat the fruit (Adam caused himself to eat the fruit). God knew for sure that Pharaoh would not let Israelites go, but God did not actually cause Pharaoh to not let the Israelites go (Pharaoh caused himself to not let the Israelites go). God knew for sure that Judas would betray Jesus, but God did not actually cause Judas to betray Jesus (Judas caused himself to betray Jesus).
*****
that God "hated" Esau does not mean that God did not love Esau. in context, that God "hated" Esau means that God loved Esau less than Jacob.
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters - yes, even his own life - he cannot be my disciple." - Luke 14:26 (NIV)
Jesus is not saying that we should hate all of the above. in context, Jesus is saying that we should "hate" all of the above, that we should love all of the above less than Him.
furthermore, God only "hated" Esau in Romans 9:13 (Malachi 1:2-3) - after the birth (and death) of Esau, on account of Esau's godless life (which was freely lived). God did not "hate" Esau in Romans 9:12 (Genesis 25:23) - before the birth of Esau. God only told Rebekah that 'the older will serve the younger'.
God does not predetermine babies to damnation before they are born!
otherwise, if you are a calvinist, then you would not want to have children. what if your children are predetermined to damnation? or what if your mother was told that her child (ie. you) would be predetermined to damnation?
6 It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children. On the contrary, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." 8 In other words, it is not the natural children who are God's children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham's offspring. 9 For this was how the promise was stated: "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son."
10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad - in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls - she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
- Romans 9:6-13 (NIV)
a calvinist reading of Romans 9:6-13 would hold that God predetermined Jacob for salvation and Esau for damnation. however, Romans 9:6-13 is really about how the corporate election of Jews for service would ultimately effect the individual election of both Jews and Gentiles for salvation.
in Romans 9:6-7, paul stresses that Jews were never corporately elected for salvation in the first place. (there is no such thing as being corporately elected for salvation.) therefore, God's word has not failed just because not all Jews are saved.
on the contrary, Jews were corporately elected for service, to bring the Messiah into the world and then to bring the good news of the Messiah to the world. all Jews are corporately elected for service, but only those who have faith in Christ alone are individually elected for salvation.
it is significant that Romans 9:7 refers to Genesis 21:12 - after the birth of Isaac, while Romans 9:9 refers to Genesis 18:10, 14 - before the birth of Isaac. paul uses this to show that Romans 9:7 (Genesis 21:12) was the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham in Romans 9:9 (Genesis 18:10, 14). God's word has not failed!
similarly, Romans 9:12 refers to Genesis 25:23 - before the birth of Jacob and Esau, while Romans 9:13 refers to Malachi 1:2-3 - after the birth (and death) of Jacob and Esau. paul uses this to show that God's descriptive (not prescriptive) certainty that 'the older will serve the younger' in Romans 9:12 (Genesis 25:23) was fulfilled in Romans 9:13 (Malachi 1:2-3). once again, God's word has not failed!
descriptive certainty refers to infallible foreknowledge while prescriptive certainty refers to predestination.
for example, i can be descriptively certain that someone will commit a crime today, but not prescriptively certain that someone will commit a crime today. this is because i will know for sure that someone will commit a crime today, but will not actually cause anyone to commit a crime today.
on the other hand - if i so freely choose - i can be both descriptively and prescriptively certain that i will commit a crime today. this is because - if i so freely choose - i will know for sure that i will commit a crime today, and will actually cause myself to commit a crime today.
to be sure, God is both descriptively certain and prescriptively certain about corporate election for service. however, God is only descriptively certain and not prescriptively certain about individual election for salvation.
God knew for sure that Adam would eat the fruit, but God did not actually cause Adam to eat the fruit (Adam caused himself to eat the fruit). God knew for sure that Pharaoh would not let Israelites go, but God did not actually cause Pharaoh to not let the Israelites go (Pharaoh caused himself to not let the Israelites go). God knew for sure that Judas would betray Jesus, but God did not actually cause Judas to betray Jesus (Judas caused himself to betray Jesus).
*****
that God "hated" Esau does not mean that God did not love Esau. in context, that God "hated" Esau means that God loved Esau less than Jacob.
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters - yes, even his own life - he cannot be my disciple." - Luke 14:26 (NIV)
Jesus is not saying that we should hate all of the above. in context, Jesus is saying that we should "hate" all of the above, that we should love all of the above less than Him.
furthermore, God only "hated" Esau in Romans 9:13 (Malachi 1:2-3) - after the birth (and death) of Esau, on account of Esau's godless life (which was freely lived). God did not "hate" Esau in Romans 9:12 (Genesis 25:23) - before the birth of Esau. God only told Rebekah that 'the older will serve the younger'.
God does not predetermine babies to damnation before they are born!
otherwise, if you are a calvinist, then you would not want to have children. what if your children are predetermined to damnation? or what if your mother was told that her child (ie. you) would be predetermined to damnation?
is faith a work?
as an ex-classical calvinist, i used to struggle with the nature of faith. is faith a work? or is it not?
if faith is something we must do, then we are robbing God of His glory. if faith is not something we must do, then there is nothing we can do anyway. after all, some persons are chosen to glorify God by receiving His mercy whereas others are chosen to glorify Him by receiving His wrath. this is the underlying premise of classical calvinism.
however, this is nowhere to be found in Scripture. instead of holding the logically inconsistent classical calvinist position that faith is not a work yet is something we must do, i would simply say that there are two kinds of works. to this end, faith is a work in one sense and not a work in another sense. in particular, faith is a work of the New Covenant (Christ) and not a work of the Old Covenant (law).
from this new perspective, it is clear that whenever paul rails against justification by works, he is not opposing justification by works per se. he is only opposing justification by works of the Old Covenant (eg. animal sacrifices, circumcision, penance etc).
*****
yes, faith is something we must do. just because God has unlocked the prison of sin does not mean that we have left it. we have to follow Him as He leads us out of the darkness and into the light.
no, we are not robbing God of His glory. just because we are able to leave the prison of sin (because God has unlocked it from the outside) does not mean that we are able to unlock it from the inside.
if faith is something we must do, then we are robbing God of His glory. if faith is not something we must do, then there is nothing we can do anyway. after all, some persons are chosen to glorify God by receiving His mercy whereas others are chosen to glorify Him by receiving His wrath. this is the underlying premise of classical calvinism.
however, this is nowhere to be found in Scripture. instead of holding the logically inconsistent classical calvinist position that faith is not a work yet is something we must do, i would simply say that there are two kinds of works. to this end, faith is a work in one sense and not a work in another sense. in particular, faith is a work of the New Covenant (Christ) and not a work of the Old Covenant (law).
from this new perspective, it is clear that whenever paul rails against justification by works, he is not opposing justification by works per se. he is only opposing justification by works of the Old Covenant (eg. animal sacrifices, circumcision, penance etc).
*****
yes, faith is something we must do. just because God has unlocked the prison of sin does not mean that we have left it. we have to follow Him as He leads us out of the darkness and into the light.
no, we are not robbing God of His glory. just because we are able to leave the prison of sin (because God has unlocked it from the outside) does not mean that we are able to unlock it from the inside.
Sunday 24 August 2008
the sovereignty of God
The fact that God is sovereign over His creation means that He is glorified both in salvation and damnation, although in very different ways. This is not to say, however, that some persons are chosen to glorify God by receiving His mercy whereas others are chosen to glorify Him by receiving His wrath. Rather, God loves all persons with perfect love. And given the fact that He has created us in His image, a relationship of perfect love with Him is the only possible source of ultimate satisfaction and fulfillment for us.
Those who accept His love experience joy and flourish under His care, and God is glorified in their flourishing. By sharp contrast, those who reject His love will inevitably be unhappy and fail to flourish in the long run. Their very unhappiness is an eloquent, although ironic, testimony to God's greatness and glory.
- Walls and Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist
In the fallen and partially redeemed universe we may distinguish (1) the simple good descending from God, (2) the simple evil produced by rebellious creatures, and (3) the exploitation of that evil by God for His redemptive purpose, which produces (4) the complex good to which accepted suffering and repented sin contribute.
Now the fact that God can make complex good out of simple evil does not excuse - though by mercy it may save - those who do the simple evil. And this distinction is central. Offences must come, but woe to those by whom they come; sins do cause grace to abound, but we must not make that an excuse for continuing to sin. The crucifixion itself is the best, as well as the worst, of all historical events, but the role of Judas remains simply evil.
We may apply this first to the problem of other people's suffering. A merciful man aims at his neighbour's good and so does 'God's will', consciously co-operating with 'the simple good'. A cruel man oppresses his neighbour, and so does simple evil. But in doing such evil, he is used by God, without his own knowledge or consent, to produce the complex good - so that the first man serves God as a son, and the second as a tool.
For you will certainly carry out God's purpose, however you act, but it makes a difference to you whether you serve like Judas or like John.
- C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain
Those who accept His love experience joy and flourish under His care, and God is glorified in their flourishing. By sharp contrast, those who reject His love will inevitably be unhappy and fail to flourish in the long run. Their very unhappiness is an eloquent, although ironic, testimony to God's greatness and glory.
- Walls and Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist
In the fallen and partially redeemed universe we may distinguish (1) the simple good descending from God, (2) the simple evil produced by rebellious creatures, and (3) the exploitation of that evil by God for His redemptive purpose, which produces (4) the complex good to which accepted suffering and repented sin contribute.
Now the fact that God can make complex good out of simple evil does not excuse - though by mercy it may save - those who do the simple evil. And this distinction is central. Offences must come, but woe to those by whom they come; sins do cause grace to abound, but we must not make that an excuse for continuing to sin. The crucifixion itself is the best, as well as the worst, of all historical events, but the role of Judas remains simply evil.
We may apply this first to the problem of other people's suffering. A merciful man aims at his neighbour's good and so does 'God's will', consciously co-operating with 'the simple good'. A cruel man oppresses his neighbour, and so does simple evil. But in doing such evil, he is used by God, without his own knowledge or consent, to produce the complex good - so that the first man serves God as a son, and the second as a tool.
For you will certainly carry out God's purpose, however you act, but it makes a difference to you whether you serve like Judas or like John.
- C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain
Wednesday 20 August 2008
why i am not a (classical) calvinist
it is past one in the morning, but i simply have to blog about this.
just over a month ago, i blogged about the greatest prison break in history. just a few minutes ago, i came across a strikingly similar illustration as i was about to stop reading and go to bed. mere coincidence? i think not.
contemporary arminianism, calvinism and classical arminianism
The contemporary Arminian addresses the sinner as a convicted criminal standing at the gate of the penitentiary. Standing under a legal obligation to enter into eternal imprisonment, the prisoner will be escorted into inescapable confinement and punishment upon death. There at the front gate, an evangelist offers release from the coming horror and urges the convict to accept the gift of total pardon.
In contrast, Calvinists and classical Arminians see the sinner as already imprisoned in the deepest corner of a terrorist camp. Bound, gagged, blindfolded and drugged, the prisoner is weak and delusional. Calvinists and classical Arminians know that the preacher at the gate cannot reach the prisoner through the layers of confinement and sensory distortion. The prisoner can't even begin to plead for help or plan an escape. In fact, the prisoner feels at home in the dank squalor of the cell; she has come to identify with her captors and will try to fight off any attempted rescue. Only a divine invasion will succeed.
The Calvinist view of divine invasion is simple. God invades the camp, carries the prisoner out, strips the prisoner of her shackles and blinders, and injects "faith" into the prisoner's veins. The former prisoner, having already been rescued from prison and positioned outside its walls, now trusts the Deliverer because of the potency of the administered faith serum. God has been the lone actor throughout, in the sense that the human response of faith is directly and irresistibly caused by God. Whether this saving action of God takes place over a longer or shorter period of time, faith is the inevitable result of divine illumination.
The classical Arminian believes that God steals into the prison and makes it to the bedside of the victim. God injects a serum that begins to clear the prisoner's mind of delusions and quell her hostile reactions. God removes the gag from the prisoner's mouth and shines a flashlight around the pitch-black room. The prisoner remains mute as the Rescuer's voice whispers, "Do you know where you are? Let me tell you! Do you know who you are? Let me show you!"
And as the wooing begins, divine truth begins to dawn on the prisoner's heart and mind; the Saviour holds up a small mirror to show the prisoner her sunken eyes and frail body. "Do you see what they've done to you, and do you see how you've given yourself to them?" Even in the dim light, the prisoner's weakened eyes are beginning to focus. The Rescuer continues, "Do you know who I am, and that I want you for myself?"
Perhaps the prisoner makes no obvious advance but does not turn away. The questions keep coming: "Can I show you pictures of who you once were and the wondrous plans I have for you in the years to come?" The prisoner's heartbeat quickens as the Saviour presses on: "I know that part of you suspects that I have come to harm you. But let me show you something - my hands, they're a bit bloody. I crawled through an awful tangle of barbed wire to get to you."
Now here in this newly created sacred space, in this moment of new possibility, the Saviour whispers, "I want to carry you out of here right now! Give me your heart! Trust me!"
- Walls and Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist
moderate calvinism. classical arminianism. middle knowledge. call it whatever you want. at the end of the day, this is where i stand.
links: prison break (12 jul 08), ord loh! (3 mar 09)
just over a month ago, i blogged about the greatest prison break in history. just a few minutes ago, i came across a strikingly similar illustration as i was about to stop reading and go to bed. mere coincidence? i think not.
contemporary arminianism, calvinism and classical arminianism
The contemporary Arminian addresses the sinner as a convicted criminal standing at the gate of the penitentiary. Standing under a legal obligation to enter into eternal imprisonment, the prisoner will be escorted into inescapable confinement and punishment upon death. There at the front gate, an evangelist offers release from the coming horror and urges the convict to accept the gift of total pardon.
In contrast, Calvinists and classical Arminians see the sinner as already imprisoned in the deepest corner of a terrorist camp. Bound, gagged, blindfolded and drugged, the prisoner is weak and delusional. Calvinists and classical Arminians know that the preacher at the gate cannot reach the prisoner through the layers of confinement and sensory distortion. The prisoner can't even begin to plead for help or plan an escape. In fact, the prisoner feels at home in the dank squalor of the cell; she has come to identify with her captors and will try to fight off any attempted rescue. Only a divine invasion will succeed.
The Calvinist view of divine invasion is simple. God invades the camp, carries the prisoner out, strips the prisoner of her shackles and blinders, and injects "faith" into the prisoner's veins. The former prisoner, having already been rescued from prison and positioned outside its walls, now trusts the Deliverer because of the potency of the administered faith serum. God has been the lone actor throughout, in the sense that the human response of faith is directly and irresistibly caused by God. Whether this saving action of God takes place over a longer or shorter period of time, faith is the inevitable result of divine illumination.
The classical Arminian believes that God steals into the prison and makes it to the bedside of the victim. God injects a serum that begins to clear the prisoner's mind of delusions and quell her hostile reactions. God removes the gag from the prisoner's mouth and shines a flashlight around the pitch-black room. The prisoner remains mute as the Rescuer's voice whispers, "Do you know where you are? Let me tell you! Do you know who you are? Let me show you!"
And as the wooing begins, divine truth begins to dawn on the prisoner's heart and mind; the Saviour holds up a small mirror to show the prisoner her sunken eyes and frail body. "Do you see what they've done to you, and do you see how you've given yourself to them?" Even in the dim light, the prisoner's weakened eyes are beginning to focus. The Rescuer continues, "Do you know who I am, and that I want you for myself?"
Perhaps the prisoner makes no obvious advance but does not turn away. The questions keep coming: "Can I show you pictures of who you once were and the wondrous plans I have for you in the years to come?" The prisoner's heartbeat quickens as the Saviour presses on: "I know that part of you suspects that I have come to harm you. But let me show you something - my hands, they're a bit bloody. I crawled through an awful tangle of barbed wire to get to you."
Now here in this newly created sacred space, in this moment of new possibility, the Saviour whispers, "I want to carry you out of here right now! Give me your heart! Trust me!"
- Walls and Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist
moderate calvinism. classical arminianism. middle knowledge. call it whatever you want. at the end of the day, this is where i stand.
links: prison break (12 jul 08), ord loh! (3 mar 09)
Monday 18 August 2008
more new perspectives on prisons
"Come, follow me," Jesus said, "and I will make you fishers of men." - Matthew 4:19 (NIV)
"Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"" - John 21:19 (NIV)
as dr joseph stowell expounded at the rbc ministries conference in july, Jesus started His public ministry by calling His first disciples (peter and andrew) to follow Him. three and a half years later, Jesus ended His public ministry by recalling peter to follow Him. indeed, true discipleship is about following Jesus.
"And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." - Luke 14:27 (NIV)
in the footsteps of faith
the "follow me" framework is not the only way to make sense of Jesus' public ministry.
The "bookends" of Jesus' ministry - the first statement of His public ministry, 'to proclaim freedom for the prisoners' (Luke 4:18, NIV), and the last act on the cross where He forgave the prisoner (Luke 23:43) - distinctly highlight a special place in God's heart for the downtrodden.
- Henry Khoo, Shoes Too Big
O perfect redemption, the purchase of blood
To every believer the promise of God
The vilest offender who truly believes
That moment from Jesus a pardon receives
Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord!
Let the earth hear His voice!
Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord!
Let the people rejoice!
O come to the Father, through Jesus the Son
And give Him the glory, great things He hath done
"Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God. Then he said to him, "Follow me!"" - John 21:19 (NIV)
as dr joseph stowell expounded at the rbc ministries conference in july, Jesus started His public ministry by calling His first disciples (peter and andrew) to follow Him. three and a half years later, Jesus ended His public ministry by recalling peter to follow Him. indeed, true discipleship is about following Jesus.
"And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." - Luke 14:27 (NIV)
in the footsteps of faith
the "follow me" framework is not the only way to make sense of Jesus' public ministry.
The "bookends" of Jesus' ministry - the first statement of His public ministry, 'to proclaim freedom for the prisoners' (Luke 4:18, NIV), and the last act on the cross where He forgave the prisoner (Luke 23:43) - distinctly highlight a special place in God's heart for the downtrodden.
- Henry Khoo, Shoes Too Big
O perfect redemption, the purchase of blood
To every believer the promise of God
The vilest offender who truly believes
That moment from Jesus a pardon receives
Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord!
Let the earth hear His voice!
Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord!
Let the people rejoice!
O come to the Father, through Jesus the Son
And give Him the glory, great things He hath done
Sunday 17 August 2008
wheat and weeds
Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.
"The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'
"'An enemy did this,' he replied.
"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'
"'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.'"
- Matthew 13:24-30 (NIV)
are the days getting better? or are the days getting worse? as don carson pointed out at the living word seminar in july, the answer is both.
the weeds
to be sure, we live in a fallen world in which death, decay and destruction abound.
"We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies." - Romans 8:22-23 (NIV)
the wheat
at the same time, God affords us glimpses of His glory in nature, relationships and life itself.
"Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal." - 2 Corinthians 4:16-18 (NIV)
this is why justification by faith is not about participating in the new creation only when we find ourselves in heaven, but about participating in the new creation on earth as it is in heaven. indeed, if we are not participating in the new creation on earth as it is in heaven, it is doubtful if we will even find ourselves in heaven. besides, christianity is not about getting to heaven, but about being in [a relationship with] Christ.
are the days getting better? or are the days getting worse? it really depends on who you ask, and it really depends on who you are.
"The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'
"'An enemy did this,' he replied.
"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'
"'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.'"
- Matthew 13:24-30 (NIV)
are the days getting better? or are the days getting worse? as don carson pointed out at the living word seminar in july, the answer is both.
the weeds
to be sure, we live in a fallen world in which death, decay and destruction abound.
"We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies." - Romans 8:22-23 (NIV)
the wheat
at the same time, God affords us glimpses of His glory in nature, relationships and life itself.
"Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal." - 2 Corinthians 4:16-18 (NIV)
this is why justification by faith is not about participating in the new creation only when we find ourselves in heaven, but about participating in the new creation on earth as it is in heaven. indeed, if we are not participating in the new creation on earth as it is in heaven, it is doubtful if we will even find ourselves in heaven. besides, christianity is not about getting to heaven, but about being in [a relationship with] Christ.
are the days getting better? or are the days getting worse? it really depends on who you ask, and it really depends on who you are.
Monday 11 August 2008
slave but free
chosen but free. busy but free. slave but free.
as rousseau observed almost two and a half centuries ago, 'man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains'. this much is true.
the question is not whether man is in chains. the question is whether man is in chains in spite of the gospel or in chains because of the gospel, a prisoner of sin or a prisoner of the Lord, a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness.
"Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey - whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness." - Romans 7:16-18 (NIV)
slaves do not have a choice. slaves to sin are bad and cannot do good, while slaves to righteousness are good and cannot do bad.
however, this does not mean that we do not have a choice as to whether we are slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness. we do have a choice as to whether we are slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness.
it is just that once we choose to be slaves to sin, we can no longer choose to be slaves to righteousness. (it is logically impossible for slaves to sin to choose to be slaves to righteousness, because slaves to sin are bad and cannot do good.) if we later turn around and choose to be slaves to righteousness, then it shows that we never really chose to be slaves to sin in the first place.
likewise, once we choose to be slaves to righteousness, we can no longer choose to be slaves to sin. (it is logically impossible for slaves to righteousness to choose to be slaves to sin, because slaves to righteousness are good and cannot do bad.) if we later turn around and choose to be slaves to sin, then it shows that we never really chose to be slaves to righteousness in the first place.
death through Adam, life through Christ
"But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous." - Romans 5:15-19 (NIV)
"For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." - 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 (NIV)
just as in adam we are all slaves to sin, so in Christ we are all slaves to righteousness. of course, we do not have a choice as to whether we are in adam. but we do have a choice as to whether we are in Christ.
"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!" - 2 Corinthians 5:17 (NIV)
the more i read n.t. wright and think about it, the more i realise that the gospel is not about the cross and the resurrection per se. the gospel is about the cross and the resurrection fulfilling the Old Testament/Covenant/creation in establishing the New Testament/Covenant/creation.
as rousseau observed almost two and a half centuries ago, 'man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains'. this much is true.
the question is not whether man is in chains. the question is whether man is in chains in spite of the gospel or in chains because of the gospel, a prisoner of sin or a prisoner of the Lord, a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness.
"Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey - whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness." - Romans 7:16-18 (NIV)
slaves do not have a choice. slaves to sin are bad and cannot do good, while slaves to righteousness are good and cannot do bad.
however, this does not mean that we do not have a choice as to whether we are slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness. we do have a choice as to whether we are slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness.
it is just that once we choose to be slaves to sin, we can no longer choose to be slaves to righteousness. (it is logically impossible for slaves to sin to choose to be slaves to righteousness, because slaves to sin are bad and cannot do good.) if we later turn around and choose to be slaves to righteousness, then it shows that we never really chose to be slaves to sin in the first place.
likewise, once we choose to be slaves to righteousness, we can no longer choose to be slaves to sin. (it is logically impossible for slaves to righteousness to choose to be slaves to sin, because slaves to righteousness are good and cannot do bad.) if we later turn around and choose to be slaves to sin, then it shows that we never really chose to be slaves to righteousness in the first place.
death through Adam, life through Christ
"But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous." - Romans 5:15-19 (NIV)
"For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive." - 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 (NIV)
just as in adam we are all slaves to sin, so in Christ we are all slaves to righteousness. of course, we do not have a choice as to whether we are in adam. but we do have a choice as to whether we are in Christ.
"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!" - 2 Corinthians 5:17 (NIV)
the more i read n.t. wright and think about it, the more i realise that the gospel is not about the cross and the resurrection per se. the gospel is about the cross and the resurrection fulfilling the Old Testament/Covenant/creation in establishing the New Testament/Covenant/creation.
Saturday 9 August 2008
new perspectives on prisons (revised)
rehabilitation is not something new to the singapore prison service. it has always been part of the department, albeit somewhat sidelined in earlier years. as a matter of fact, rehabilitation is one of the three core values on the department crest - security, humanity and rehabilitation.
as the director of prisons, mr ng joo hee, recently told the straits times, 'it's really the smart and practical thing to do. we don't just do it because we've bleeding hearts... we do it because we want to reduce harm in society'.
having said that, i have been thinking about the new perspective on paul. it has transformed the way i look at the gospel and the way i look at rehabilitation. after all, the gospel is about prisoners - prisoners to sin.
new perspectives on prisons (revised)
rehabilitation is not about getting out of prison, just as justification by faith is not about getting to heaven. rehabilitation is about the rehab, renew and restart of prisoners - inside of prison as it is outside of prison, just as justification by faith is about the regeneration of prisoners to sin - on earth as it is in heaven.
the Old Covenant
"Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed." - Galatians 3:21-23 (NIV)
the Old Covenant is a remand prison which detains us until the day of our trial. we are guilty and unable to break out of our pitch black cells of sin. we can only wait for the just judge to declare us guilty and sentence us to death.
the New Covenant
"So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law." - Galatians 3:24-25 (NIV)
the master key which unlocks our pitch black cells of sin is the death of Christ on the cross. the law crucifies Christ for our sins, not His. God does it to 'demonstrate His justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus' (Romans 3:26, NIV).
cross and resurrection, conviction and rehabilitation
conviction does not take us out of prison, just as the cross does not take us out of the world. what conviction does is transfer us from a remand prison (where there is no rehabilitation) to a mainstream prison (where there is rehabilitation), just as the cross transfers us from the Old Covenant (where we look forward to Christ finishing His work on the cross) to the New Covenant (where we look back on Christ's finished work on the cross). however, this is not the end of the story.
"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men." - 1 Corinthians 15:12-19 (NIV)
conviction must be followed by rehabilitation, just as the cross must be followed by the resurrection. conviction without rehabilitation is like the cross without the resurrection. it is unlocking the stairway to heaven, locking it back, and throwing the key away. if this is truly the case, then there is really no hope left.
"But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." - 1 Corinthians 15:20-28 (NIV)
the day of release
even as inmates remain in prison until the day of their release, they are being rehabilitated to be law-abiding citizens of society. even as we remain in the world until the day of our release, we are being regenerated to be Christ-abiding citizens of heaven, 'conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers' (Romans, 8:29, NIV).
"But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Saviour from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body." - Philippians 3:20-21 (NIV)
*****
saying that we are justified by faith alone is like saying that inmates are rehabilitated by their desire to change alone. this is actually unbiblical. rather, we are justified by faith being made complete by evidence of faith (ie. works of faith), just as inmates are rehabilitated by their desire to change being made complete by evidence of change.
the world is not an end in itself but points and prepares us towards heaven, just as the inside of prison is not an end in itself but points and prepares inmates towards the outside of prison. if inmates should not love the inside of prison more than the outside of prison, how much more should we not love the world more than we love heaven!
as the director of prisons, mr ng joo hee, recently told the straits times, 'it's really the smart and practical thing to do. we don't just do it because we've bleeding hearts... we do it because we want to reduce harm in society'.
having said that, i have been thinking about the new perspective on paul. it has transformed the way i look at the gospel and the way i look at rehabilitation. after all, the gospel is about prisoners - prisoners to sin.
new perspectives on prisons (revised)
rehabilitation is not about getting out of prison, just as justification by faith is not about getting to heaven. rehabilitation is about the rehab, renew and restart of prisoners - inside of prison as it is outside of prison, just as justification by faith is about the regeneration of prisoners to sin - on earth as it is in heaven.
the Old Covenant
"Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe. Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed." - Galatians 3:21-23 (NIV)
the Old Covenant is a remand prison which detains us until the day of our trial. we are guilty and unable to break out of our pitch black cells of sin. we can only wait for the just judge to declare us guilty and sentence us to death.
the New Covenant
"So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law." - Galatians 3:24-25 (NIV)
the master key which unlocks our pitch black cells of sin is the death of Christ on the cross. the law crucifies Christ for our sins, not His. God does it to 'demonstrate His justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus' (Romans 3:26, NIV).
cross and resurrection, conviction and rehabilitation
conviction does not take us out of prison, just as the cross does not take us out of the world. what conviction does is transfer us from a remand prison (where there is no rehabilitation) to a mainstream prison (where there is rehabilitation), just as the cross transfers us from the Old Covenant (where we look forward to Christ finishing His work on the cross) to the New Covenant (where we look back on Christ's finished work on the cross). however, this is not the end of the story.
"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men." - 1 Corinthians 15:12-19 (NIV)
conviction must be followed by rehabilitation, just as the cross must be followed by the resurrection. conviction without rehabilitation is like the cross without the resurrection. it is unlocking the stairway to heaven, locking it back, and throwing the key away. if this is truly the case, then there is really no hope left.
"But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." - 1 Corinthians 15:20-28 (NIV)
the day of release
even as inmates remain in prison until the day of their release, they are being rehabilitated to be law-abiding citizens of society. even as we remain in the world until the day of our release, we are being regenerated to be Christ-abiding citizens of heaven, 'conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers' (Romans, 8:29, NIV).
"But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Saviour from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body." - Philippians 3:20-21 (NIV)
*****
saying that we are justified by faith alone is like saying that inmates are rehabilitated by their desire to change alone. this is actually unbiblical. rather, we are justified by faith being made complete by evidence of faith (ie. works of faith), just as inmates are rehabilitated by their desire to change being made complete by evidence of change.
the world is not an end in itself but points and prepares us towards heaven, just as the inside of prison is not an end in itself but points and prepares inmates towards the outside of prison. if inmates should not love the inside of prison more than the outside of prison, how much more should we not love the world more than we love heaven!
Monday 4 August 2008
clarifying the new perspective
as caleb points out, we have already been justified by Christ's finished work on the cross. indeed, 'we have now been justified by His blood' (Romans 5:9, NIV) and 'have now received reconciliation' (Romans 5:11, NIV).
it was only under the Old Covenant that 'justification by faith' took place before 'justification'. in other words, it was only before Christ died for our sins (ie. under the Old Covenant), that believing that Christ would die for our sins (ie. 'justification by faith') took place before Christ died for our sins (ie. 'justification').
under the New Covenant, 'justification by faith' takes place after 'justification'. this means that we no longer look forward to Christ finishing His work on the cross, but look back on Christ's finished work on the cross.
of course, we only know that we have already been justified by Christ's finished work on the cross insofar as we live by faith, insofar as we live according to the will of God.
*****
all things considered, it is admittedly misleading to say that 'justification' is the verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future, while 'justification by faith' is the anticipation in the present of the verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future ('faith' being the anticipation in the present).
this implies that 'justification' is a future verdict, when it is clear from Scripture that we have already been justified by Christ's finished work on the cross. this - that 'justification' is a future verdict - is not what i believe, and it is not what i believe n.t. wright believes either. at least, i hope not.
to eliminate any ambiguity, i would say that 'justification' is the [past] verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future [by the future verdict of 'glorification']. 'justification by faith', then, is the anticipation in the present of the future verdict of 'glorification', knowing that we have already been justified by Christ's finished work on the cross, and that 'those He justified, He also glorified' (Romans 8:30, NIV).
it was only under the Old Covenant that 'justification by faith' took place before 'justification'. in other words, it was only before Christ died for our sins (ie. under the Old Covenant), that believing that Christ would die for our sins (ie. 'justification by faith') took place before Christ died for our sins (ie. 'justification').
under the New Covenant, 'justification by faith' takes place after 'justification'. this means that we no longer look forward to Christ finishing His work on the cross, but look back on Christ's finished work on the cross.
of course, we only know that we have already been justified by Christ's finished work on the cross insofar as we live by faith, insofar as we live according to the will of God.
*****
all things considered, it is admittedly misleading to say that 'justification' is the verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future, while 'justification by faith' is the anticipation in the present of the verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future ('faith' being the anticipation in the present).
this implies that 'justification' is a future verdict, when it is clear from Scripture that we have already been justified by Christ's finished work on the cross. this - that 'justification' is a future verdict - is not what i believe, and it is not what i believe n.t. wright believes either. at least, i hope not.
to eliminate any ambiguity, i would say that 'justification' is the [past] verdict which will be reaffirmed in the future [by the future verdict of 'glorification']. 'justification by faith', then, is the anticipation in the present of the future verdict of 'glorification', knowing that we have already been justified by Christ's finished work on the cross, and that 'those He justified, He also glorified' (Romans 8:30, NIV).
two kinds of works
Scripture is clear that justification is by faith, not by works.
"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." - Romans 3:28 (KJV)
"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." - Galatians 2:16 (KJV)
Scripture is also clear that justification is by faith and works, not by faith alone.
"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." - James 2:24 (KJV)
the law of noncontradiction states that 'one cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time' (aristotle). to this end, 'to suppose God to have contrary wills towards the same object, is a contradiction; but it is not so, to suppose Him to have contrary wills about different objects' (edwards).
it is a contradiction to say that justification is not by works yet by works in the same respect and at the same time. however, it is not a contradiction to say that justification is not by works in one sense yet by works in another sense. this is the position i wish to take.
justification is not by works in one sense
justification is not by works of the law.
under the Old Covenant, justification was bottom up and external. the only way to approach God was by abiding in Jewish law, with the Jewish high priest as mediator.
under the New Covenant, justification is top down and internal. the only way to approach God is by abiding in Christ (who did not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them), with Jesus the Great High Priest as mediator.
therefore, justification in this day and age is by faith in Christ alone, not by works of the law.
justification is by works in another sense
justification is by works of faith.
"By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames." - 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 (NIV)
By the grace God has given me... (v10)
firstly, works of faith should be in accordance with the grace God has given to each one of us (and God gives grace to each one of us, not just some of us).
for example, God gives some of us the grace to be married and some of us the grace to be single. those of us who have the grace to be married should work out our salvation in accordance with being married, while those of us who have the grace to be single should work out our salvation in accordance with being single.
For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. (v11)
secondly, works of faith flow from faith in Christ alone. by definition, works which do not flow from faith in Christ alone are not works of faith, whatever else they may be.
If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames. (v14-15)
finally, works of faith have eternal value. to be sure, God does not judge us on what we do not do with what we do not have. however, God does judge us on what we do with what we have.
"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." - Romans 3:28 (KJV)
"Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." - Galatians 2:16 (KJV)
Scripture is also clear that justification is by faith and works, not by faith alone.
"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." - James 2:24 (KJV)
the law of noncontradiction states that 'one cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time' (aristotle). to this end, 'to suppose God to have contrary wills towards the same object, is a contradiction; but it is not so, to suppose Him to have contrary wills about different objects' (edwards).
it is a contradiction to say that justification is not by works yet by works in the same respect and at the same time. however, it is not a contradiction to say that justification is not by works in one sense yet by works in another sense. this is the position i wish to take.
justification is not by works in one sense
justification is not by works of the law.
under the Old Covenant, justification was bottom up and external. the only way to approach God was by abiding in Jewish law, with the Jewish high priest as mediator.
under the New Covenant, justification is top down and internal. the only way to approach God is by abiding in Christ (who did not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfill them), with Jesus the Great High Priest as mediator.
therefore, justification in this day and age is by faith in Christ alone, not by works of the law.
justification is by works in another sense
justification is by works of faith.
"By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames." - 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 (NIV)
By the grace God has given me... (v10)
firstly, works of faith should be in accordance with the grace God has given to each one of us (and God gives grace to each one of us, not just some of us).
for example, God gives some of us the grace to be married and some of us the grace to be single. those of us who have the grace to be married should work out our salvation in accordance with being married, while those of us who have the grace to be single should work out our salvation in accordance with being single.
For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. (v11)
secondly, works of faith flow from faith in Christ alone. by definition, works which do not flow from faith in Christ alone are not works of faith, whatever else they may be.
If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames. (v14-15)
finally, works of faith have eternal value. to be sure, God does not judge us on what we do not do with what we do not have. however, God does judge us on what we do with what we have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)