03.01.2015 Views

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Brock University

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Brock University

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Brock University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

BAUE: THE CURRENT DEBATE ON PREDESTINATION 21<br />

In embracing “grace unlimited” to avoid double predestination, Pinnock falls<br />

off the other side of the horse into a quasi-universalism, failing to see that<br />

election is a doctrine of the Gospel, centred in Christ, and tied to the means<br />

of grace. He discusses predestination but does not see its connection to<br />

Christ. Hence Arminians and Calvinists share the same error—both focus on<br />

the inscrutable decree of God and ignore the cross. Pinnock errs further<br />

when he takes up predestination to salvation:<br />

When the term predestination is used in relation to salvation, it concerns the<br />

believer’s future destiny which is to be conformed to Jesus Christ, not to his<br />

becoming a Christian. We are “predestined” to be conformed to “the image<br />

of his Son” (Rom. 8:29). There is no predestination to salvation or damnation<br />

in the bible. There is only a predestination for those who are already children<br />

of God with respect to certain privileges out ahead of them. 11<br />

Here he fails to note the comfort of this doctrine for the believer now in that<br />

it is a promise that God will help him persevere through all trials and<br />

temptations. If Pinnock is right, there is no practical use of the doctrine. It<br />

merely holds out the vague promise of pie in the sky when you die.<br />

The Calvinists were not about to take this lying down, and fired back<br />

with two volumes of their own in 1995 under the title, The Grace of God, the<br />

Bondage of the Will, edited by Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware. 12<br />

Here they specifically take issue with Pinnock and his 1989 defence of<br />

Arminianism:<br />

The understanding of grace in these works is that grace is distributed equally<br />

to all people, and that is why it is unlimited. The “will of man” chooses<br />

whether to submit to grace given. In this scheme the human will plays the<br />

ultimate and decisive role in personal salvation. Our understanding of God’s<br />

saving grace is very different. We contend that Scripture does not teach that<br />

all people receive grace in equal measure …. God’s saving grace is set only<br />

upon some, namely those whom, in his great love, he elected long ago to<br />

save, and that this grace is necessarily effective in turning them to belief. 13<br />

Here is a clear expression of Calvinist thought. But we must ask, where is<br />

Christ Jesus Where is the cross There is only the attempt to peer into the<br />

mind of God and fathom his eternal decree. The authors must at least be<br />

given credit for adhering to standard Calvinistic double predestination when<br />

they say, “The grace of God is given effectively and savingly only to some.<br />

This is what theologians have meant when they spoke of irresistible grace. 14<br />

But in so doing they repristinate Augustine’s error. They argue from<br />

11 Pinnock, 18.<br />

12 Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware, eds, The Grace of God, the Bondage of the Will<br />

2 vols (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995).<br />

13 Schreiner, 12.<br />

14 Schreiner, 13.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!