We are not better theologians than God - 22 June 2010 |
|
We’ve reached the final session of the Guided Reading Course for this academic year. This week’s reading is John Barach, “Covenant and Election,” in The Federal Vision, ed. S. Wilkins and D. Garner (Monroe: Athanasius Press, 2004).
Here’s a clip to give you a flavour:
We are not better theologians than God. We must learn from Scripture … how to address God’s people … and call our congregations ‘God’s chosen people’ and assure them, as Peter and Paul and all the rest do, that Jesus died for them, that they are God’s temple, the temple of the Holy Spirit.” (John Barach, “Covenant and Election,” p. 34)
1. What echoes of Calvin’s approach to the doctrine of election do you find in Barach’s introduction to the subject (pp. 15-17; cf. also pp. 25, 37)?
2. What does Barach believe about the doctrine of predestination? On what bases does he argue his case? (pp. 17-19)
3. Why, according to Barach, do “perhaps twenty out of seven hundred” people receive the Lord’s Supper in some Reformed churches (p. 19)? What erroneous logic leads to this practice?
4. What, according to Barach, is the Arminian position on election (pp. 19-20)? Would you be inclined to nuance this claim in any way (cf. Turretin, Institutes, IV.xi.7; 1:356-357)?
5. What is the “[other] view more popular in our circles” (p. 20)? What pastoral problems does this view tend to produce (pp. 20-21)?
6. What point does Barach seek to make from Hebrews 10 and John 15? Why is this important to his argument (p. 22-23)?
7. What historic pedigree does Barach claim for his view (p. 23; cf. pp. 39-41)? What does this tell us about “Reformed theology”?
8. In what ways is the language of God’s “chosen ones” and “elect ones” used in Scripture (pp. 24-25)? What texts does Barach mention in this context?
9. How would Barach respond to the claim that NT talks about an entirely different kind of election from the OT (p. 27)? Are you persuaded? What other texts might helpfully be cited in this context?
10. What “three things” must be held “together as we think about the relationship between covenant and election” (p. 31; cf. pp. 31-32)? How do the texts discussed in the preceding pages (pp. 27-31) support these conclusions?
11. What happens if we ignore or marginalise the significance of God’s covenant in our reading and application of Scripture (pp. 32-33)?
12. How does Barach flesh out the relationship between salvation-history and God’s decree (p. 36)?
13. Are you uncomfortable with any of the terminology Barach discusses on p. 37?
14. “If apostasy is a real danger, can we ever have assurance?” (p. 39; cf. 35-36)?
| Tweet | Post comment via Facebook |
Posted by Steve Jeffery · Topics: Guided Reading Course, Minister's Blog