Systematic Theology

Three Ways to Spoil the Gospel

October 22, 2008 by Andy Naselli

While addressing the question “Ought We to Pray to the Holy Spirit?”, Graham Cole notes that there are three “ways to spoil the gospel” (p. 64):

addition
subtraction
disproportion (“by a lack of due weight in theological emphasis, by giving an element in it either too much or too little accent”)

Here’s the context (from Graham Cole, Engaging with the Holy Spirit: Real Questions, Practical Answers [Wheaton: Crossway, 2007], 64):

To pray to the Spirit is not wrong theologically, but if that practice displaces prayer to the Father in the name of the Son in reliance upon the Spirit, then there may be another sort of problem that emerges. The problem is that of disproportion. There are many ways to spoil the gospel. [1] One such way is by addition: Christ plus Mosaic circumcision as the gospel for the Gentiles. Galatians addresses this error. [2] The gospel may be spoiled by subtraction. Christ is divine but not human. The recently publicized Gnostic Gospel of Judas appears to take this road. Jesus is depicted as saying to Judas: “You will be greater than all the others, Judas. You will sacrifice the man that clothes me.” This error subtracts human nature from Christ and turns him into only a seeming human. This docetic error was the problem facing the original readers of John’s first letter (1 John 4:1-3). [3] But the gospel may also be spoiled by a lack of due weight in theological emphasis, by giving an element in it either too much or too little accent. A biblical truth may be weighted in a way that skews our thinking about God and the gospel. Arguably, to make prayer to the Holy Spirit the principal practice in Christian praying would be such an error. The Holy Spirit may be prayed to. He is God. But the Holy Spirit is not to be prayed to in such a way as to mask the mediatorship of Christ and our location in Christ as members of his body. For to pray to the Father in the name of the Son in reliance upon the Spirit is to rehearse the very structure of the gospel . . . .

It would be wise to ask yourself (and others who know you!), “Am I spoiling the gospel by disproportion? Is there an area that I am failing to give due weight in theological emphasis by giving an element in it either too much or too little accent?”

Trinity Debate: Ware-Grudem vs. McCall-Yandell

October 9, 2008 by Andy Naselli

Tonight I live-blogged a Trinity Debate between Bruce Ware and Wayne Grudem vs. Tom McCall and Keith Yandell on this question: “Do relations of authority and submission exist eternally among the Persons of the Godhead?”

During the Q&A, I asked a question from Phil Gons, who was watching the debate via live streaming and emailed me the question. I was disappointed in Dr. Yandell’s answer. Basically, he made fun of the question, apparently because it did not compute with his metaphysical system. Frustrating. Phil shares and explains his penetrating question more here and here.

D. A. Carson: “Making Sense of Suffering”

October 5, 2008 by Andy Naselli

This weekend D. A. Carson spoke at a conference on “Making Sense of Suffering” to Omaha Bible Church:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4 (Gospel Reflections on Trials and Tribulations)

DAC also led a pastor’s session on “Preaching and Biblical Theology.”

HT: Erik Raymond

D. A. Carson MP3s
The Logical and Emotional Problems of Evil: This links to a handout that lists recommended resources on suffering, including this annotation:

* Carson, D. A. How Long, O Lord? Reflections on Suffering and Evil. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006. [1. Outstanding, clear, practical, pastoral. The entire book rewards thoughtful reading, especially chapters 11–13. Chapter 11 condenses and updates the major argument of his Ph.D. dissertation completed at Cambridge University in 1975 and reprinted as Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility: Biblical Perspectives in Tension (2d ed.; Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2002).]

How Could a Good God Allow Suffering and Evil?

October 2, 2008 by Andy Naselli

About a month ago, I posted on “The Logical and Emotional Problems of Evil,” linking to an MP3 and handout. Now that address is condensed as a simple four-page essay for my church’s Exploring Christianity outreach. (Cf. other pamphlets in this series on difficult issues.)

“If God displays his mercy in some and his justice in others, there is goodness in his justice and justice in his mercy”

September 25, 2008 by Andy Naselli

Stephen Westerholm movingly summarizes Augustine’s view on election and reprobation (Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The ‘Lutheran’ Paul and His Critics [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004], 19):

Augustine can offer no explanation why God chooses some and not others. Any explanation based on a difference in the human beings concerned would mean there was something in some human beings that God recognized and rewarded; their salvation would no longer depend on his grace alone. [n. 26: Note, however, Augustine’s earlier thinking in De div. quaest. 68.4.] If, on the other hand, the decision rests exclusively on God’s sovereign will, then it must remain impenetrable for human minds.

But Augustine does insist on the justice of what God does. Blame for human sin rests on humans alone—God has not compelled them to sin [n. 27: Texts that speak of God “hardening” sinners can only mean that God leaves them in their sinful ways; Augustine will not allow that God plays any active role in promoting sin (Ad Simpl. 1.2.15–16).]—and all merit condemnation. The condemned are justly condemned (Ench. 24.94); and since justice itself is a good thing, there is even goodness in their condemnation. Furthermore, that some are condemned reminds the forgiven of what their sins merit and of the magnitude of God’s mercy (De don. pers. 12.28). As one to whom many owe money can decide to cancel the debts of some and exact payment from others, and it would be presumptuous of the debtors either to think the decision should be theirs or to fault their creditor for exercising a creditor’s prerogative, so God is free to show mercy as he pleases without doing injustice to any (Ad Simpl. 1.2.16). If God displays his mercy in some and his justice in others, there is goodness in his justice and justice in his mercy (De don. pers. 12.28).

Mike Bullmore on Natural Disasters

September 13, 2008 by Andy Naselli

Here is a timely video by Mike Bullmore (one of the c. 130 videos mentioned in the last post). He answers the question, “How are we to interpret natural disasters? Are they necessarily a sign of God’s judgment?”