The Prophet and His Day: Isaiah 1-39 - Free Bible Commentary

SPECIAL TOPIC: BOB’S EVANGELICAL BIASESI must admit to you the reader that I am biased at this point. My systematic theology is notCalvinism or Dispensationalism, but it is Great Commission evangelism (i.e., Matt. 28:18-20; Luke24:46-47; Acts 1:8). I believe God had an eternal plan for the redemption of all mankind (e.g., Gen.3:15; 12:3; Exod. 19:5-6; Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 18; 36:22-39; Acts 2:23; 3:18; 4:28; 13:29; Rom. 3:9-18,19-20,21-31), all those created in His image and likeness (cf. Gen. 1:26-27). All OT covenants areunited in Christ (cf. Gal. 3:28-29; Col. 3:11). Jesus is the mystery of God, hidden but now revealed (cf.Eph. 2:11-3:13)! The NT gospel, not Israel, is key to Scripture.This pre-understanding colors all my interpretations of Scripture. I read all texts through it! It issurely a bias (all interpreters have them!), but it is a Scripturally-informed presupposition.SPECIAL TOPIC: ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCEElection is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel,a tool, or means of others’ redemption! In the Old Testament the term was used primarily for service; inthe New Testament it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconcilesthe seeming contradiction between God’s sovereignty and mankind’s free will, but affirms them both!A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God’s sovereign choice and Romans 10on mankind’s necessary response (cf. 10:11,13).The key to this theological tension may be found in Ephesians 1:4. Jesus is God’s elect man andall are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God’s “yes” to fallen mankind’s need (Karl Barth).Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, butholiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore theresponsibilities! God’s call (election) is for time as well as eternity!Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths. A good analogy would bea constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must notremove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths:1. Predestination vs. human free will2. Security of the believers vs. the need for perseverance3. Original sin vs. volitional sin4. Sinlessness (perfectionism) vs. sinning less5. Initial instantaneous justification and sanctification vs. progressive sanctification6. Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility7. God’s transcendence vs. God’s immanence8. God as ultimately unknowable vs. God as knowable in Scripture9. The Kingdom of God as present vs. future consummation10. Repentance as a gift of God vs. repentance as a necessary human covenantal response11. Jesus as divine vs. Jesus as human12. Jesus is equal to the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the FatherThe theological concept of “covenant” unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes theinitiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant, faith response fromhumans. Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful ofasserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology!17