I have heard some people say that a Reformed view of Scripture and the Gospel promotes an elitist, heartless, intellectual determinism. Though that can happen, I do not think that it is exclusive to a Reformed understanding of Scripture. Nevertheless, Reformed thinking is what I was thinking about this morning.
As I was driving to church, I was listening to an introduction to the White Horse Inn Discussion Group. They were recounting the inception of the group and the general intent of the group. One particular sound byte that they were talking about was from a show a number of years ago. It was a recording that they took while interviewing a number of professed believers. In the interview, they basically asked the question: can you describe the Gospel? As one might assume the answers were widely varied and every single person interviewed missed the point completely. That of course made the point of those on the panel of the White Horse Discussion Group and they went on.
Some time later, the White Horse Inn members heard about how that particular set of interviews impacted Dr. R. C. Sproul who was, at the time of the original airing, driving in his car. As he listened to people’s understanding, or lack thereof, of the Gospel, he became overwhelmed with sorrow; it was said that he actually had to pull his car to the side of the road as he wept over the lack of understanding that has so permeated Christianity at large. There are few men in Christianity that have such an incredible burden for people to know the truth about the one true God and Savior of men.
I think of my own life and I am shamed by that. In thinking about my past, I can recount breaking down in that type of anguish only over losing a dear friend or relative. I have not yet come to such a point of love for the truth that I weep when people do not comprehend or even care to comprehend it. In many ways, Dr. Sproul’s response almost makes me look like the one who is heartless.
So then, I would ask: Does the example set by Dr. Sproul demonstrate a heartless, determinism? Have you ever been burdened for God’s truth to such a degree? Instead of criticizing the finer points of his theology, though they probably exist for most of us, let us (myself included) be challenged by his example; why don’t we cultivate the same kind of love for our God and Savior.
Here's my rebuttal to that and the main reason why I don't support Sproul's teaching on most issues:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPZYl9QLPEM
I think that in this video Sproul is being honest to the Reformed position and carrying it out to its ultimate end. From that perspective, I respect him for standing by his theology. However, the fact that he never answers the question brings up a lot of questions of my own.
What questions??
ReplyDeleteMy main question would be this: what kind of love does he believe God has in that He doesn't desire that all of those created in His image be reconciled to Himself?
ReplyDeleteGood post, Paul! I thoroughly enjoyed it. May we do what you wrote at the end and cultivate that kind of love for our Lord Jesus Christ.
ReplyDelete@Paul, Thanks man for the encouragement and exhortation. I'll be praying for you in this and as well that He'd make this true in my life.
ReplyDelete@Jeremy, maybe you should listen intently to that video you posted, because Sproul very well answers the question that Driscoll proposes to him.
Voltron- How does Sproul answer the question? Here's what it seemed like to me: the question, obviously needing elaboration, is simply answered with a yes or no. Sproul never said either one of those. The question was "Does God desire all men to be saved?" and the response would have better suited the question "Does God delight in punishing the wicked?"
ReplyDeleteR.C. Sproul was attempting to avoid the issue equivocation. He was defining his terms (specifically that of will/desire); because it is not a yes or no question. He needs to know what the question means by will/desire and he needs to state what he means by will/desire, and most importantly what the Biblical author(s) mean by will/desire. Voltron writes well in saying that Sproul does well in answering the questions posed to him; he is clear and goes the extra mile to avoid miscommunication because it is not as simply as yes or no.
ReplyDelete@Voltron & @Phil, I greatly appreciate that.
ReplyDelete@Jeremy, I do understand the differences that you have and, to some degree, we might be entering an argument that does not deal with the issues at hand. I would also like to resubmit the intent of the post: "Instead of criticizing the finer points of his theology, though they probably exist for most of us, let us (myself included) be challenged by his example." Considering that you used the term
"rebuttal," I am curious. Do you disagree with my sentiments? I never intended to defend Sproul's entire theological system because it is a system of man.
Regardless of whether we all agree with his every aspect of his theology, I think that we can probably agree learn something from his example. Obviously, you agree with that concept to some degree, otherwise you would not be taking Mr. Smith classes. =D
I would love to talk the theology of Sproul's comments out more but I think that it might be more edifying for both/all of us to do so in person. I would personally prefer to have a Bible open and cut past the impersonal means of my blog if you have the time.
My rebuttal was to this:
ReplyDelete"So then, I would ask: Does the example set by Dr. Sproul demonstrate a heartless, determinism?"
Rebuttal was a bad fit, I should have said "response."
Shoot me an e-mail about meeting up. jeremy.l.howard@calvary.edu