Lecture Series: Dr David Gooding, "The Glorious Gospel of the Blessed God"

Dr David Gooding's 5-part series on the Gospel--which includes very strong rebuttal of the Calvinist system--has been made available for free download from Myrtlefield House.  These lectures were originally presented at the 1995 "Rise Up and Build" conference.  The links to each part are below.

Dr Gooding is professor emeritus of Old Testament Greek at Queen’s University Belfast. A number of his books, including some which were co-authored with Dr John Lennox, are available for free online at Key Bible Concepts.

About this series

In the first lecture, Dr Gooding states that the major aim and motivation of this series is:

that we may, as we study that glorious gospel, come into deeper understanding of the character of God: His love and His justice; His goodness as well as His holiness and severity [...] so that in the first instance our hearts may well up, and our spirits likewise, in the more fervent and genuine adoration of the wonder that God is in Himself. And that our worship may be deepened, and with it there shall come that same divine compassion and attitude that God has shown to those that are around and as yet are lost. And we ourselves may be the more motivated to carry the gospel to them.   

Our motivation therefore is that as we ourselves, through the study of God's gospel, come into deeper understanding of His character we shall ourselves be saved from holding any views and preaching any ideas that would derogate from the glory of God and misrepresent His character. That, I know, is a very high aim, and not necessarily easily accomplished.

My prayer is that all of us would approach these lectures, and the Calvinism-Arminian debate in general, with that same motivation.

Dr Gooding also cautions, right at the outset, regarding his own presentation, stating:

I am encouraged by the fact that you are to be allowed questions, because not only will your questions contribute to my deeper understanding of these things and a more balanced view than perhaps I shall myself present, but they will allow me in the course of these seminars, myself to be a trifle more dogmatic at places than perhaps I ought to be, because you will have the opportunity to come back at me and to restrain my wilder enthusiasms, and together we shall work towards a better understanding of the truth.

One aspect I especially appreciate about this series is Dr Goodings emphasis on the Lord Jesus. For instance, in the second lecture, before opening to the gospel of John, he states:

We are to think of Christ as the revealer of God [...] We are to study the wonderful wisdom seen in the way our Lord went about approaching men and women. How and by what methods He sought to fulfil His divine commission, being the Word of God, now incarnate, come to make God known to men.   

As He went about His task, what were His presuppositions about the people that He talked to?  For His presuppositions were God's presuppositions, of course. In this, too, He makes manifest the Father.

One criticism I have is that, for the most part, Dr Gooding does not name the doctrines, theories or theological systems for which he advocates or has criticism. He almost never mentions Calvinism by name, usually only referring to it as "That other theory", or variations of this, and though defending Arminian doctrines like prevenient grace he never uses either label. In fairness, this was by design; he says at the beginning of the Q&A:

I didn’t pretend to offer you, in these seminars, a complete and fully worked out system of theology.  What I was simply doing was to call attention to certain Scriptures that seem to me to have very important bearings of this general topic. And important because they pertain to the honour and character of God. It’s our wisdom therefore that whatever system we may hold is constantly to come back to Holy Scripture as written.  And test--and if need be modify--our system according to Scripture.

And later:

Somebody asked me early on in these seminars why I didn't come out and say that it was Calvinism I didn't agree with. Well, one, because there are many grades of Calvinism, and tons of Christians hold views that are common with Calvinists who wouldn't like to be called "Calvinists" because they don't share everything.  

And some Calvinists think me an Arminian, you know.  And they think by putting a label on me that defines exactly what I believe, when I find the label they put on me doesn't describe me fairly at all. In the end we're better without labels aren't we? We mustn't say "I am of Paul", must you? Or, "I am of Apollos"? And you certainly mustn't say "I am of Calvin" or "I am of Arminius". They're all believers. Christians, we must love each other, mustn't we?  God blessed Whitefield; God blessed Wesley. Mighty men of God, that God used for the conversion of thousands.

These comments notwithstanding, I consider him to be consistent with 4-point Arminianism (like my own view; this is also consistent with those in the SBC who prefer the label "Traditionalist" but are 4-point Arminians in substance). On Calvinism, Dr Gooding has said elsewhere (link, at note 16):

For myself, I would have to confess that the strong Calvinist system of theology seems to me to be shot-through with logical fallacies... As far as I am aware, my own attitude to Calvinist doctrine does not come from any particular source, but is my own personal response: first of all to the study of Scripture, and then to the writings of teachers from both sides of the debate.

Here is the series (external links):

Part 1: The Justice of God’s Judgments: AUDIO or VIDEO;

Part 2: Christ, the Revealer of God, the Light of the World, the Creator of Faith, the Giver of Sight: AUDIO or VIDEO;

Part 3: Vessels of Wrath and Vessels of Mercy: AUDIO or VIDEO;

Part 4: The Father’s Gift to the Son, the Father’s Drawing, the Illumination of the Holy Spirit: AUDIO or VIDEO; and

Part 5. Q & A: AUDIO.

Related Posts:

• Prevenient Grace in the Hebrews Warning Passages and a Link to a Free eBook (excerpts from Dr Gooding’s primer on the book of Hebrews); 
• Dr David Gooding and Dr John Lennox, "God's Program for the Restoration of Creation".

Sermon Series: Todd Petkau, "Does Prayer Still Work?"

I was really encouraged and challenged in my prayer life by a recent sermon series from Riverwood Church.

I had meant to post it earlier, but I didn't find the time; then just this morning, two items came up which each reminded me of this series. First, today's Daily Text from Seedbed highlighted a portion of EM Bounds work, Power Through Prayer; Pastor Todd also highlights EM Bounds throughout the series (see the clip below, for example). Second, I received a notice that The Circle Maker: Praying Circles Around Your Biggest Dreams and Greatest Fears, the book after which the third message is named, is on sale through Kindle today and tomorrow.

Here is a clip describing EM Bounds:

Sermons:

You can watch or listen online here (you'll have to scroll down to October 12, 2015 for the first message in the series), or via iTunes. The links below will download the message from the church website:

1. "Not What We've Made It": download Video, or Audio;
2. "Go for the Gold": download Video, or Audio;
3. "Circle Making": download Video, or Audio;
4. "Symphonic Harmony": download Video, or Audio.

Sermon Series: Dr Brian Abasciano, "Ephesians 1"

Dr Brian Abasciano, author of the three-part study through Romans 9, is preaching through Ephesians chapter one. Here are the links:

1. Ephesians 1:1-3 ("Praise God for Blessing Us with Every Spiritual Blessing in Christ!");
2. Ephesians 1:4-6 ("Praise God for Choosing and Predestining Us in Christ!");
3. Ephesians 1:7-10 ("Praise God for Redemption, Revelation, and Righting All Things in Christ!");
4. Ephesians 1:11-12 ("Praise God Almighty Who Chose Us and Predestined Us in Christ for His Glory!");
5. Ephesians 1:13-14 ("Praise God for Sealing us with the Holy Spirit in Christ!").

A note to regular readers: as I mentioned at the end of my last post, I will likely not be posting regularly for the next few months, and if you comment it may take a few days before I see it or I'm able to respond.

The "not quite forgotten" Jesus: My challenge to Calvinists one year later

In "The Waning Authority of Christ in the Churches", AW Tozer wrote, "The Lordship of Jesus is not quite forgotten among Christians, but it has been relegated to the hymnal where all responsibility toward it may be comfortably discharged in a glow of pleasant religious emotion."

And later:

We evangelicals also know how to avoid the sharp point of obedience by means of fine and intricate explanations. These are tailor-made for the flesh. They excuse disobedience, comfort carnality and make the words of Christ of none effect. And the essence of it all is that Christ simply could not have meant what He said. His teachings are accepted even theoretically only after they have been weakened by interpretation.

While every Christian needs to be cautious of this danger—and Tozer was addressing the evangelical church at large—possibly the worst result that I see in the life of Calvinists is the tendency to pay little attention to our Lord Jesus' words and life, and when we do venture into the Gospel accounts, to refuse to take Him at His word.  

My challenge to you

We will examine what I think are the causes below, but first, here is my challenge: Spend some time in the Gospels, and focus on the Lord Jesus.

Pastor Bruxy Cavey said about his own journey away from Calvinism (MP3 link, at 46:26):

For me, actually just staring into Jesus made the shift; studying his life. I went through a season in my life... I just started reading commentaries; first century background studies; so that I could understand Jesus better. And the more I started to understand Jesus, the more I realized that this system of thinking was not sufficient to help me say, “This is what Jesus was expressing”. Jesus then, I would say, got me to rethink everything.

It has been just over a year now since I left Calvinism, and looking back, I can’t help but believe this was part of my story too.  It was meditating on the Lord Jesus, and His words like:

But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.  For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?  And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?  You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:44-48 ESVUK)

and:

But love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return, and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind to the ungrateful and the evil.  Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful. (Luke 6:35-36 ESVUK)

which the Holy Spirit continually placed on my conscience, that forced me to rethink everything.

I am convinced that focusing on the Lord Jesus is the best response to Calvinism: spend some time—real time—focusing on the Lord Jesus and meditating on His life and words.

Now, what causes Calvinists to treat the Lord’s words this way?

I think one of the causes of this is the Calvinist understanding of Election which places the Lord Jesus at the peripheral, rather than the centre; He is seen as a means to an end rather than the All in All.

Arminius thought, “the Calvinistic idea of election to faith rather than in view of faith or in view of one’s union with Christ [...] involves God settling his elective love on people without regard to Christ’s work or one’s participation in it.” (Pinson on Arminius, link).  In his “Declaration of Sentiments”, Arminius wrote:

This doctrine is highly dishonorable to Jesus Christ our Savior. For,  

1. It entirely excludes him from that decree of Predestination which predestinates the end: and it affirms, that men were predestinated to be saved, before Christ was predestinated to save them; and thus it argues, that he is not the foundation of election. 

2. It denies, that Christ is the meritorious cause, that again obtained for us the salvation which we had lost, by placing him as only a subordinate cause of that salvation which had been already foreordained, and thus only a minister and instrument to apply that salvation unto us. This indeed is in evident congruity with the opinion which states "that God has absolutely willed the salvation of certain men, by the first and supreme decree which he passed, and on which all his other decrees depend and are consequent." If this be true, it was therefore impossible for the salvation of such men to have been lost, and therefore unnecessary for it to be repaired and in some sort regained afresh, and discovered, by the merit of Christ, who was fore-ordained a Savior for them alone.

Contrast this with the Articles of Remonstrance.  As Martin Glynn explained regarding Article I:

Something else that needs to be pointed out here is how Christocentric (Christ centered) this is. God’s purpose in this decree is Jesus and that those who are saved are saved “in Christ, for Christ’s sake, and through Christ”. We are saved within the body of Christ, we are saved because Christ loves us and wants us saved, and we are saved only through the power of Christ, not our own. Christ, as opposed to eternal decrees, is the center of salvation–the crux, if you will, upon which salvation rests.

Ephesians 1

Take Ephesians 1, for example.  It seems to me that most Calvinists would be just as happy (or maybe happier?) if the words, “in Him”, “in Christ”, and “through Christ”, were not in the text at all (after all, the Calvinist may reason, these words only confuse Arminians into believing election is Corporate and Christocentric!).  But Paul ties each line to the Lord Jesus, and makes it absolutely clear that we are only blessed (v3&6), only chosen (v4), only predestined and adopted (v 5), only redeemed (v7), only know the mystery of His will (v 8), only obtain an inheritance, and were only sealed with the Holy Spirit (v 13) “in Him”, “in Christ” and “through Christ”.

Pastor Keith Coward, writing about his journey out of Calvinism, said:

I decided to shore up my confidence [in Calvinism] by reading some Reformed writers. But my plan backfired: I began with a small booklet about election; the author opened by stating his case from Eph 1:4 – a verse that I had studied when teaching through Ephesians the previous year. I had been struck by the parallels between Deut 4:37; 7:6-11 and this text: In the former, God says that he chose the Israelites to be his holy people because he loved them for the sake of their fathers; in the latter, Paul says that God chose “us” to be holy in Christ, which may easily mean “for the sake of Christ”. Election was a corporate, vocational, conditional concept for Israel; perhaps it was the same thing for Christians (see 1 Pet 2:9-10). Whatever the case, I knew that there was a lot of room to interpret Eph 1:4 differently than this author did. He was building his case for election on a verse that I knew could not bear that weight, and I began to wonder what would happen to other classic proof texts if examined more carefully, without Calvinistic presuppositions.

The Calvinist understanding of election has God choosing individuals without regard to Christ; the Lord Jesus, in this scheme, is no more than an afterthought.  Is it any wonder, then, that Calvinists so rarely meditate on Jesus and His words?  The Apostle Paul, on the other hand, places Jesus our Saviour at the centre, and Arminius and Arminians follow his lead.

Can this be seen in Calvinist Leaders?  James White, a case study

Admittedly I use James White as the example because he is an easy target; there have been two instances in the last year which have already made their rounds on social media.  Although James White is just one individual, he is a prominent Calvinist, and—especially given that, in the first instance below, he led the crowd to laugh at the words of our Lord—perhaps his, and his audience’s, example of lack of knowledge of Jesus' own words can serve as a picture of New Calvinism generally.

Example 1: the Flowers-White debate.

At one point in the debate between Leighton Flowers and James White, Flowers made the remark that we should humble ourselves like a child (summarizing the Lord Jesus' statement in Matthew 18:4). Not realizing (I assume) that this was the Lord’s own words, James White responded sarcastically, “I think I just heard Professor Flowers say that a child is humble?” leading the audience to laugh, not at Flowers, but at the words of our Lord Jesus!

Again, I don’t believe it was deliberate; I believe James White, like most Calvinists I have known (and was a part of), does not sufficiently study and meditate on the words of the Lord Jesus.  Still, it is surprising that any Christian leader of Dr White’s prominence could hear our Lord Jesus’ own words and mock them, not knowing their true source. (Given this incident, Dr White and his audience might also want to consider the Lord’s words in Mark 8:38/Luke 9:26; if your theology makes you ashamed of the words of our Lord Jesus, to the point that you can unwittingly mock them for not fitting into your theological framework, it is time to rethink your theology!).

See Professor Flowers comments on the debate here.

Example 2: James White responds to a sermon by James McCarthy.

Another example comes from back in January. James McCarthy, author of John Calvin Goes to Berkley, stated in a sermon, “God doesn’t love you strictly because of yourself; He loves you because of His Son. Didn’t the Lord Jesus teach that...what did He say? The Father loves you why? Because you have loved Me.”

On his radio program, James White responded, “I’m trying to figure out where that reference was. The Father has loved you because you have loved Me? …I couldn’t find that one. I would like to know what text is being paraphrased at that point, because that would make the Father’s love of us, dependent upon something we’re doing, and I think something was misstated there. I’m not sure.”

Notice that James White’s own words are nearly a direct quote of the passage he does not think exists!  Jesus said, “In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I will request of the Father on your behalf; for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me and have believed that I came forth from the Father.” (John 16:26-27 ESVUK).

It is clear that James White is unfamiliar with the words of the Lord Jesus.  Yet our Lord said, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:31-32 ESVUK), and:

If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me. (John 14:23-24 ESVUK).

See more on this incident here.

NT Wright, "Look at Jesus":

Dr NT Wright, when asked what he would say to his children on his death bed, offered a similar challenge to the one I have presented above.  Here is his response:

AW Tozer asked once, “Does God get only the tattered bits of your time, yet you say you are a follower of the Lamb? Do not fool yourself.” (The Crucified Life). We could even more seriously ask, “In your life and theology, are the words of the Lamb no more than 'not quite forgotten', yet you say you submit to the Lordship of Jesus? Do not fool yourself!”

*A note to regular readers: I will likely not be posting regularly again for a few months as I have a very heavy semester.  I also apologize if you comment and it takes a few days before it gets through moderation or before I respond.