seeing in a mirror dimly

Have you ever wondered why God wants all men to be saved, and yet not all are?  Or why God’s will is that you abstain from sin, and yet we continue to sin?  Or why we pray for God’s will to be done, and it oftentimes seems that it isn’t?  Without wanting to try and give overly exhaustive answers to these enormous questions, I want to posit a really helpful distinction in thinking about God’s will towards these and other things.

Scripture

In the narrative of God’s restoration project of the cosmos, we see two sets of things: what God wants and what happens.  God commands Abraham to sacrifice his son, yet he does not let it happen (Gen. 22).   He wants Pharaoh to let his people Israel go, yet hardens his heart so that he does not do it (Ex. 4:21).  He has Isaiah tell Hezekiah that he will die, yet adds fifteen years to his life (Isaiah 38:1,5).   He prohibits us from condemning the innocent, yet Jesus is delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God (Acts 2:23, 3:18, 4:28).   God does not will sin; he is far from iniquity, yet it exists and is subject to his rule (Ex. 4:21, Acts 2:23, Rom. 1:24, 26, 2 Thes. 2:11). He wills the salvation of all (1 Tim. 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9) but has mercy on whom he wills and hardens whom he wills (Rom. 9:18).   God commands, prohibits, warns and admonishes us for our disobedience to Him, yet He is meticulously sovereign over all things (Ps. 33:11, 115:3, Dan. 4:25, Is. 46:10, Matt. 11:26, Rom. 9:18, Eph. 1:11, Rev. 4:11)!  How do we begin to understand this?!

Church History

Well, early Church theologians like Tertullian, Augustine, through to John of Damascus and Peter Lombard made distinctions between a ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ will (also “antecedent” and “consequent” among other distinctions) .   This further was developed in the Reformation and Post-Reformation (and by Roman Catholics in the Counter Reformation) such as Calvin, Luther, Zanchius, Walaeus, Voetius to be known as the distinction between God’s “Decretive” and “Preceptive” or “Secret” and “Revealed” aspects of God’s will (Cf., Deut 29:29, esp. Psalm 139).   Modern theologians such as Frame and Carson (and even Barth!) utilise such a distinction also.   Basically, the decretive will of God (God’s eternal decree) orders all events of history (God’s providence) and His preceptive will (God’s precepts) gives an indication of what God wills for us to do.

Objections

Now, some may object that this is an overly scholastic and speculative distinction (why not add Aristotelian, abstract and “not-Trinitarian-enough” to that list!?).   This doesn’t make sense, firstly on the grounds that it was a pre-scholastic definition and secondly, that there are good and bad speculations!  Biblical speculation (as per Sola Scriptura) is surely not bad speculation.   That is, good systematic theology derives from exegesis within a biblical theological framework using historical theology as a guide.  But another may object that if Christ is the full revelation of God – how do we deduce such a distinction simply from His person and work?  Fair question, but it’s changing the goalposts.   This objection presupposes that Christ is the only revelation of God.  To which we would reply that this distinction is grounded on the revelation of the Word of God; that is, the Word of God written!  We are the people of Christ and the people of the Book!

Problems in denying it

If we collapse these two aspects of God’s will into each other, then we are faced with a massive problem: God is robbed of His omnipotence, wisdom, goodness, and immutability.   A significant dualism is introduced between God’s intent and the actual result of world history.   God risks, and God fails. God is disappointed as Satan rejoices. Moreover, core conflicts can be introduced in to the Trinity: for instance, if Christ wills for all men to be saved, then the Holy Spirit must not!

If the decretive will of God is denied, then we will have a very attenuated view of God’s omnipotence, wisdom and sovereignty!  On the other hand, if the preceptive will of God is denied, then we’ll fail to do justice to God’s holiness, the moral demands placed on us in Scripture and with the seriousness of sin.

What’s the payoff?

Thus, this distinction between aspects of God’s will give us great pastoral help with understanding guidance: God sovereignly orders our steps in secret, but reveals the blueprint of human moral conduct (Prov. 16:9).  In regards sin (though this is complex and beyond the scope of this little article!), God permits its intrusion into creation and commands that we flee from it.   In regards salvation, God predestines His elect for salvation, yet since we are creatures who listen humbly to His revealed will in Scripture, we must work out our salvation in fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12) and seek to save the lost!   God providentially orders even the minutest elements of the universe, but cares about our most minute thoughts, words and deeds.   He is not a distant and removed Father, but comes close to us in His Son, and speaks to us by His Word.

Update:
For more info, check out Carson (How Long, O Lord?), Frame (The Doctrine of God).

Well, after a short hiatus of being snowed in by doctrine essays (I think I might even split the essay up into a few short blog spots – God, risk and middle knowledge being the topic), we’re back on the bandwagon for the Pilgrim’s Podcast! (and there’s plenty of interesting interviews coming up!)

This podcast is a cracker!  We sat down with Richard Glover (no, not from ABC’s drive program!) who is a wonderful and keen Christian fella from Sydney University’s Evangelical Union.  He’s a passionate guy about Christianity and politics, and in fact – Christianity and all of life! Moreover, he puts his love for Jesus into practise in different ways at St. Stephen’s Anglican Church in Newtown.  Richard’s a ‘kingdom-minded’ dude who is hoping and praying about the prospect of serving Jesus in Cambodia and we hear lots of really inspiring and encouraging stories about what God is doing there.

So, enjoy! Of course, there’s plenty of rambling too. *we know you’ve missed it*

Listen:
 

Download this episode of the Pilgrim's Podcast!

This is cool.  Flippin’ awesome actually.  I love hearing of people – doesn’t matter who – coming to Christ!

This guy, MC Jin, is an american emcee (read: hiphop-rapper) who rose up quickly a few years ago as a battle rapper.  Since then, he’s been signed, released an album and recorded tracks with Kanye and other dudes. He’s a Chinese guy who absolutely rips it on the mic.  You can probably check out some of his old battles – I remember listening to them years ago and they are simply amazing (warning: language).  Anyway, I’ve just come across this Youtube clip of his explaining his conversion, testimony and where he’s  at now.  The first video is a track of his, the second is a clip of his testimony.  Enjoy!

Well folks, this is the second installment of Steve and my fantastic interview with Dr. Ashley Null.  If you haven’t listened to the first part yet, then DO IT.  You know you want to.

In this interview we have the privilege of hearing Ashley’s wisdom on Christian humility.  What was an excellent section though, was hearing him speak about the importance of Church History for those who might be keen, young Christians (read: Young, Restless and Reformed!).  It was a really great second half of the interview, and Steve and I greatly benefitted from sitting under this short time of teaching by Ashley.  Much glory to our Lord!

Listen:
 

Download this episode of the Pilgrim's Podcast!

This is an excellent article.  Well balanced and very thoughtful… (a breath of fresh air rather than simply caricaturing individuals!)  Here’s a great paragraph:

“Finally, I worry that a movement built on megachurches, megaconferences, and megaleaders, does the church a disservice in one very important way that is often missed amid all the pizzazz and excitement: it creates the idea that church life is always going to be big, loud, and exhilarating and thus gives church members and ministerial candidates unrealistic expectations of the normal Christian life.  In the real world, many, perhaps most,  of us worship and work in churches of 100 people or less; life is not loud and exciting; big things do not happen every Sunday;  budgets are incredibly tight and barely provide enough for a pastor’s modest salary; each Lord’s Day we go through the same routines of worship services, of hearing the gospel proclaimed, of taking the Lord’s Supper, of teaching Sunday School; perhaps several times a year we do leaflet drops in the neighbourhood with very few results; at Christmas time we carol sing in the high street and hand out invitations to church and maybe two or three people actually come along as a result; but no matter — we keep going, giving, and praying as we can; we try to be faithful in the little entrusted to us.  It’s boring, it’s routine, and it’s the same, year in, year out.   Therefore, in a world where excitement, celebrity, and cultural power are the ideal, it is tempting amidst the circumstances of ordinary church life to forget that this, the routine of the ordinary, the boring, the plodding, is actually the norm for church life and has been so throughout most places for most of the history of the church; that mega-whatevers are the exception, not the rule; and that the church has survived throughout the ages not just – or even primarily – because of the high profile firework displays of the great and the good, but because of the day to day faithfulness of the mundane, anonymous, non-descript  people who constitute most of the church, and who do the grunt work and the tedious jobs that need to be done.   History does not generally record their names; but the likelihood is that you worship in a church which owes everything, humanly speaking, to such people.”

Ten bucks to the person who can spot the sentence which made me laugh out loud! (Clue: it’s not in the above paragraph)

Mark Baddeley has posted up a great article on the Sola Panel about how our own Self-Knowledge can aid us in the Christian life (particularly here, ministry).  Go and check it out – the next installments look promising too!

Also, he’s posted up some more extended thoughts on his blog here.  Interestingly I think is the discussion on the use of the “law of non-contradiction” in theology.  Good stuff!

Just a quick heads up for anyone who’s keen to come along:

The Prebyterian Theological College is hosting an Open Lecture by Paul Helm on the 15th September.
Moore Theological College is hosting a Calvin500 Conference on the 16th-17th September.

Paul Helm is Professor in History and Philosophy at Kings College, University of London, and holds the J.I. Packer Chair in Theology and Philosophy, Regent College, Canada.

Amongst numerous other interests, Dr Helm has special expertise in the links between Calvin’s thought and its development among Calvinists of the 17th century and is the author of Calvin and the Calvinists, 1982.  He’s written a whole lot of God, Time and Foreknowledge, and is coming to Australia at the perfect time for my doctrine essay!

If anyone’s keen to come along and grab dinner at the RSL before the lecture at PTC, let me know!

Greek Exam in a few hours.  Thought I’d find the time to post this up.  Love it!

Michael Jensen and David Hohne interview Andrew Cameron (Ethics @MTC) about his work: The Trials of Theology

Here!

Mark Thompson has just posted up a bunch of short summaries of the papers given at the Edinburgh Dogmatics Conference.  Very interesting bunch of speakers: Henri Blocher, Mike Horton, Bruce McCormack, John Franke and Mark Thompson himself.  Here’s s little snippet from Mark’s summary of his paper:

“Perhaps the most controversial part of my paper was the suggestion that the relationship between preaching and the sacraments can help us to clarify what preaching is about. In other words, preaching can be displaced by sacramental maximalism and it can also be distorted by sacramental minimalism. The sacraments remind us that the Christ of preaching is ‘Christ crucified’ not some abstract theological principle; they insist on the proper posture of the Christian as one who receivessalvation rather than effecting it; and they will not allow us to reduce preaching and the Christian life in general to the purely rationalist apprehension of eternal truths.

Some rather insistent voices suggest that the problem with some of our preaching at least is that it contains too much theology, making the sermon too complicated or too remote from the concrete realities of Christian living. I suggest what we need is more theology, not less and, in particular, careful thinking about the place preaching has in our doctrine of the church.”

Go, and check out the rest! Here.