Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Daniel Akin on "Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility"

This is an edifying article on Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility from the president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. In it he addresses how should Southern Baptists respond to the issue of Calvinism as the subtitle indicates. Read it here...

A few thoughts...

1. As is well known, Calvin did not codify the five points of Calvinism. Akin is absolutely right in pointing this out. They were codified by his closest associates, students, and colleagues who lived in that historical setting - as a response to the disciples of Arminius at the Synod of Dort.

2. In reading some of Calvin's commentary on key passages where the systematized version of Calvinism is at stake, I would argue that Calvin was in fact a Calvinist. Regardless, Calvin was not the first Calvinist, nor is he the first to identify in fetal form the "doctrines of grace". Calvin was fond doctrinally of Augustine.

3. Calvin had no historical reason for codifying or expounding exhaustively the doctrines of grace and, hence, he did not attend to them extensively in his writing. He dealt more with buffeting the Church against the heresies of the papacy, than writing treatises on definite atonement, for example. This, in part, may explain the lack of written evidence concerning Calvin's Calvinism.

4. But we would also be wise to give attention to the codifying of his thought by those who were closest to him, so long as it is in accord with the doctrine of Christ and, thus, biblically balanced as Akin ably states.

5. Beyond these points, I find Akin's assessment of the "five points" well and good, and his pastoral and practical considerations concerning "biblical balance" necessary, edifying, and encouraging. In particular, I wholeheartedly agree with and admire his admonition towards a Godwardness (Point 1), Christ-centeredness, Biblicist position (Point 7), and, as somewhat of an overflow of these things, a fiery evangelical heart and prowess for sinners in this world.

6. I also "Amen!" his call to address these issues with discernment in teaching our congregations. I long to implement a Christian learning/ training center in the mainstream ministry of any church that God would providentially lead me towards. He gets a "Hallelujah!" for making mention of it in the context of youth ministry in order to prepare them for the secular bombardment that awaits most of them. My agreement in these areas is most especially an agreement with God's Word and the injunction to equip the saints for the work of ministry.

7. Lastly, to quote Akin, "Is there a place for differing positions on the issues of election, the extent of the atonement and calling, as well as how we do missions, evangelism, and give the invitation? I am convinced that the answer is yes. Further, I believe we will be the better for it theologically and practically as we engage each other in respectful and serious conversation." I concure with great expectation of further discussion.

8. And in keeping with my nature, I'll add something else after I've written, "Lastly...": Read Spurgeon's quote! In the words of Lloyd off of "Dumb and Dumber" - "It's a good one!" And may God be glorified in Jesus Christ - the J. C.!

3 comments:

John Lofton, Recovering Republican said...

A Calvin-admiring site ernestly contending for the faith. Please visit TheAmericanView.com; comment?

JLof@aol.com

Our "Mission Statement"

“For the nation and kingdom that shall not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.” — Isaiah 60:12.

As Christians, we are commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ to teach all nations — including ours — to observe all things He has commanded (Matthew 28:18-20). This means bringing into captivity to Christ all areas of life and thought. This means destroying arguments that are against the knowledge of God (II Corinthians 10:5). In obedience to these commands of our Lord, this Web site is established. We covet your prayers for our success in obeying Him.

We are seriously concerned about, deeply grieved by and lament the fact that far too many of today’s so-called “Christian leaders” are a sinful embarrassment and are responsible for the cause of Christ being mocked and ridiculed. By being, first, cheerleaders for the Republican Party, they have dishonored their Lord and sold their Christian birthright for a mess of partisan political pottage. These individuals and organizations are Christian in name only, “Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.” From such, it is added, we must turn away.

Secular, Christless conservatism — even when it is supposedly “compassionate” — will not defeat secular, Christless liberalism because to God they are two atheistic peas-in-a-pod and, thus, predestined to failure.

More than 100 years ago, speaking of the secular, Christless conservatism of his time, the great Southern Presbyterian theologian, Robert L. Dabney, observed:

“[Its] history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward to perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It tends to risk nothing serious for the sake of truth.”

Amen! And what Dabney says has been proven with a vengeance in modern times, under recent Republican Administrations and Congresses who were supported enthusiastically by individuals and organizations who called themselves “Christian” but who, alas, when judged by their fruits, were not.

To those who will accuse of us of desiring and trying to bring about “a Christian America,” we unashamedly plead guilty though the accusation is far too modest and somewhat muddled. To be sure, we desire a Christian America, and a Christian world, a Christian galaxy and a Christian universe. And, over time, by His grace, we hope to demonstrate that all these things already belong to the Lord Jesus Christ because He created them all and they are His property. This is why all knees must bow to the Lord and all tongues confess that He is the Lord — because He is!

Jude 1:3 3

“Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” (KJV)

Bryan Barley said...

Brian -

Thanks for posting this. I always love seeing whatever Dr. Akin says on this issue. I think his best point is, like you pointed out, that the pastor must be text-driven and not system-driven, whatever that system may be. He made this point in one of his chapel messages this last semester saying something along the lines of, "this may cause more tension in your theological system, but it will insure that you are faithful to God's word." Thank goodness the leaders of the SBC like Patterson, Mohler, and Akin take such responsible positions on an issue that needs not hurt the great work that the SBC is doing right now to touch the nations. Like Dr. Akin says, now that the conservative resurgence is over, we need a Great Commission resurgence.

By the way, I was curious what you thought of Timothy George's definition of irresistible grace in the article that, "God created human beings with free moral agency, and He does not violate this even in the supernatural work of regeneration. Christ does not rudely bludgeon His way into the human heart. He does not abrogate our creaturely freedom. No, he beckons and woos, He pleads and pursues, He waits and wins"

Brian R. Mahon said...

Mr. Barley...

as to George's definition -

"God created human beings with free moral agency, and He does not violate this even in the supernatural work of regeneration. Christ does not rudely bludgeon His way into the human heart. He does not abrogate our creaturely freedom. No, he beckons and woos, He pleads and pursues, He waits and wins."

mmmm...It's fine to me I suppose, for starts. I would say that God originally created human beings with a free moral agency also. But I would say that we lost that freedom concering "morality" in the Fall. Our moral compass stopped working - it was smashed beyond human repair.

We maintained a natural freedom of the will - we can do this or that, although, I would contend that God knows these before we do them as well, that He is the God of known contingencies.

But as sinners, the freedom that remains is an insufficient freedom to know or understand spiritual things, much less agree with God unto salvation in and of ourselves. In other words, we have a type of freedom of the will - with which we make free choices, but the sinner cannot make those proper decisions between righteousness and evil, but only with respect to lesser and greater evils, for a sinner's will, although free, is bound by his condition to love sin, and hate God, and to reject His Gospel with that freedom; this is supremely displayed in the cross where we all crucified "the Lord of glory." It is not that I couldn't believe so much as that I wouldn't - in my fallen unspiritual freedom, I didn't want God or His salvation.

In regeneration, God the Holy Spirit quickened my dead soul, and by grace enabled me to see with the eyes of my heart the comfort, love, and beauty of Christ, whereupon seeing it, I believed, so that it might be properly said that "I believed", but that God overcame my deadness and the bondage of my fallen will to do precisely that.

Can people resist the Holy Spirit? Yes. But nowhere in Scripture does it say that God can't decide to do "more" and overcome our resistance - this I believe he does in every case of authentic salvation; and thus, all is properly attributed to the grace of God.

So I have a different understanding perhaps than George as to the latter part of his phrase. With that in mind, I do agree that Jesus doesn't bludgeon his way into the human heart - but I do believe that he omnipotently overcomes the resistance of the sinner's heart, giving spiritual awakeing to the will, so that in a regenerated or restored spiritual or moral freedom, we will gladly choose Christ and Him crucified as the sole boast and basis of our salvation. We will not resist this grace because by it we are awakened to so great a reality that it will be our greatest desire to receive Him, and all that He is for us.

These are mere musings, but I'd love to continue such an incredibly edifying doctrinal conversation - that Christ may be more clearly and intimately known and preached to the nations. Hope this edifies!

See also: http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/1985/1487_What_We_Believe_About_the_Five_Points_of_Calvinism/#Grace