Grace (PhD Edit)

This article features the very limited key mentions of the theological term 'grace', from my Doctorate. 

The biblical concept of 'grace' was alluded to more so in the work than the actual word. This entry is based on uses of the word 'grace' and its meanings.

Please see Ephesians 1-2, as persons in Christ are saved by grace through faith for good works, and not by good works.

The Holy Spirit 

The Holy Spirit plays a key part in the transformation of persons into Christian believers. It is in fact an aspect of God’s participating in his creation and human salvation. Franke (2005: 53). 

The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, Whale (1958: 124). Packer (1973: 59).

The Holy Spirit is the supreme agent of grace. Whale (1958: 124). 

Free will

Luther dogmatically assumes that there is no middle way between God’s grace and human free will, and postulates that human free will should be theologically denied and everything should be ascribed to God. Luther (1525)(1972: 133).

Luther’s sovereignty perspective (Luther (1525)(1972: 123)) may place less emphasis on the human will than the later writings of Calvin and Feinberg. Luther is far more forceful in presentation that is Calvin and especially Feinberg. He is very forceful in his debate with Erasmus. 

Essentially, Luther at least denies any type of human libertarian free will. He in today’s modern language, would be a compatibilist. 

As a modern compatibilist, I do not deny significant human free will, but hold to limited free will. Human beings are secondary causes of what God wills as the primary cause. There can also be other secondary causes, such as human beings, demonic beings and angelic beings. 

Human beings are not forced to commit thoughts, acts and actions that they would be hold morally accountable for by God. Moral accountability requires human beings to at least with limited free will, embrace these thoughts, acts and actions. 

These are done semi-autonomously, but not fully autonomously. 

If human beings are forced to commit thoughts, acts and actions, they are not morally accountable. 

In contrast 

There are incompatibilist, evangelical counters to the Reformed view. 

Ephesians scholar Francis Foulkes (1989) explains that predestination is not in opposition to human free will. Foulkes (1989: 55). The gospel of grace was offered to all persons, and those persons that accepted the message were elected. Foulkes (1989: 55).

Foulkes insists that the human faith required rests totally on God and not in self. Foulkes (1989: 55). Frankly, Foulkes does not explain how this works within his incompatibilistic system. 

Problems of evil and suffering 

G.C. Berkouwer explains that ‘Man is-even when alienated from God-not alone.’ Berkouwer (1962: 183).

God has still gifted fallen humanity and there is a possible limitation to human corruption, that being the grace of Christ, and his words and work. Berkouwer (1962: 186-192). 

Millard J. Erickson explains that God demonstrates his love through benevolence, grace, mercy, and persistence. Erickson (1994: 292).The love of God and Christ needs to be demonstrated within a Calvinistic sovereignty theodicy in order to serve as an effective form of practical theology for those suffering. 

BERKOUWER, G.C. (1962) Man: The Image of God, Grand Rapids, W.M.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It? Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

FRANKE, JOHN R. (2005) The Character of Theology, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

PACKER, J.I. (1973) Knowing God, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

LUTHER, MARTIN. (1516)(1968) Commentary On The Epistle To The Romans, Translated by J.Theodore Mueller, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

LUTHER, MARTIN. (1518)(1989) ‘Heidelberg Disputation’, in Timothy F. Lull (ed.), Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, Minneapolis, Fortress Press. 

LUTHER, MARTIN. (1525)(1972) ‘The Bondage of the Will’, in F.W. Strothmann and Frederick W. Locke (eds.), Erasmus-Luther: Discourse on Free Will, New York, Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., INC. 

PACKER, J.I. (1996) ‘Regeneration’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books.

Short on Church government, too

Last evening at Northview Community Church membership class, the lead pastor mentioned (paraphrased) that in the New Testament Scripture, the terms elder and pastor were basically synonymous, or often used synonymously.

However, because of inherited corporate type Northview church language, women at Northview can be titled as pastor, but are not overseers or elders.

I reason, that based on a biblical, contextual approach the Northview approach is correct. But, I do acknowledge that the modern workings of this doctrine, can at least be hypothetically difficult, when a woman in a smaller congregation, especially, has the most religious studies and theological education and opines and teaches without significant error. If in some cases the most superior intellect present in regards to Bible, is an educated woman. This is a legit possibly in today's western world where often more women are seeking advanced degrees than men. Even so, I reason that Scripture should be submitted to in context.

I have written on this subject previously. January 2011

I apolozgize that the scans are not perfectly straight. The text is very large and my copier screen, small. For this article. I used software to straighten the images, which cuts off text slightly.

Strong page 40: Overseer

Strong page 80: Elder

There are considerations such as I Timothy 3 pointing out that an overseer should be the husband of one wife.

So a man, a male.

Also in Ephesians 5 there is the concept of the husband as head of the wife and as Christ is the head of the Church, a reasonable resulting view being a woman, therefore should not be the spiritual head of a local church, if she is not the spiritual head of the home.

I do not conclude from this that a woman should not be a head of a corporation, country, etcetera.

I do not conclude that a woman should not be awarded a PhD or Doctorate in Religious Studies, degrees.

Browning states that when the overseers met they were considered the elders (presbuteroi) Browning (1997: 112).

Wallace notes it in English as (presbytereroi). Wallace (1996: 347).

Thiessen expresses his opinion that the terms pastor, elder and bishop all were one and the same office in the New Testament quoting Acts 20. Thiessen (1956: 418). He quotes Saint Jerome that stated the elder was identical to the bishop in the text the 'Early Years of Christianity' from E. De Pressense. Thiessen (1956: 418).

Wallace states that the term episkopos/overseer is used interchangeably with versions for the word for elder in Acts 20 and in Titus. Wallace (1996: 347). Wallace reasons overseers are always elders but he is not sure that elders are always overseers. Some elders may have not been overseers. Wallace (1996: 347).

If in the New Testament when the overseers met they were the elders then there could be an argument made that the only legitimate elders today in a church are overseers/pastors/reverends. However, with my findings it is not crystal clear that only overseers were elders Biblically.

Northview has, it appears, elders that are not specifically trained Christian religious teachers. Definitely, these are not overseers. But some overseers do serve as elders.

Browning states women could be regarded as deacons. Browning (1997: 93). Deacons were agents of the overseers. Browning (1997: 93).

If the views suggested by Wallace is the Biblical case, then women can become Biblical deacons only.

The terms and meaning for elder and overseer are not identical. But it seems that an overseer, biblically could always be an elder; an elder may or may not be an overseer.

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Perrysburgh, Ohip, Welch. 

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Perrysburgh, Ohio, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

WALLACE, R.S. (1996) ‘Elder' in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

The Tin Man/Ethical Superiority

Wikipedia: Original novel

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

Ethical Superiority

Pirie:

"It is not a fallacy to be ethically superior to your opponent. It is fallacy to assume you are without supporting evidence. And the evidence must be more compelling than the fact that your opponent disagrees with you.' (92).

With apologies to the fundamentalists; with my first employment post-Secondary school, a mentor in the insurance field, taught me to never assume, because:

ass/u/me

I have taken this life lesson and applied it to my academic work.

This is similar to my concept of not guessing in academia, as much as possible. 

Back to Pirie:

One party assumes to be ethical with a position and therefore the other party with a contrary position is assumed unethical. (92). This is also transferred to related morality.

But a different worldview or different opinion on a subject, does not necessarily make either position ethical or unethical.

Pire reasons this has also been called the 'Tin Man' fallacy as in the Tin Man, from the Wizard of Oz (1939) has no heart. (93). This is opposed to the 'Straw Man' fallacy. (93). The Straw Man fallacy will be discussed in a future entry, but it misrepresents an opponent's position, and then knocks that misrepresented position down. (193).

Straw Man attacks can be connected to personal (ad hominem) attacks, as in producing fictional intellectual attacks and as well, personal attacks versus an opponent.

The fallacious implementation of Tin Man/Ethical Superiority approach is easy to imagine.

The Christian accuses someone of a contrary worldview and that same worldview of being unethical and immoral. The person of a non-Christian worldview condemns the Christian and biblical and gospel views as being unethical and immoral.

However, reasonable ethical standards need to be established and then a breaking of these ethics, reasonably established for a rational critique to occur.

Not assumed. 

LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York. (Philosophy). 

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.

The System

Burnaby Mountain: Burrard Inlet

LANGER, SUSANNE K (1953)(1967) An Introduction to Symbolic Logic, Dover Publications, New York.

Quote:

'If a propositional form of one variable is said to hold or to fail for all values in the range of significance of that variable, this is a statement about the form. Such a statement is either true or false; that is, either it is true that

'(a) : ~ (a fm a)' or it is false.

~=false 

If certain values are assigned to (a), it will be false that (a) is the fellowman of (a). (97).

It is therefore true in this particular system (97) that (a) is not the fellowman of (a), and therefore (b) is not the fellowman of (b) etcetera down the alphabet. (98).

These are general terms (97-98) that are consistent within the system. There are consistent forms.

As a general condition (a) is 'not his own fellowman' is true. (98). 

It is true in the symbolic logic system presented. But it depends on how terms are defined within each specific system. 

Symbols must be understood in context.

∃=sometimes or somebody (98--99).

rb=robbed (98-99).

∃ rb A=Somebody robbed A; Somebody robbed Smith. (98-99).

∃ fm A=Somebody is the fellowman of A (Smith).

Structure, forms, context and system need to be reasonably explained and understood within philosophical, theological and biblical writing; within academic writing. This needs to be understandable for the reader.

Again, this is not the most clear technical textbook, but I am doing my best to work through it and explain. The uses of the terms true and false here require considerable concentration. Ironically, a text promoting intellectual clarity through the use of symbolic logic is not as clear as possible, although I find working through it very educational and useful.

Symbolic logic is an alternative to written language because written language is prone to ambiguous language, but at the same time there can be ambiguity with the use of the symbols.

Keep calm