Is God Sovereign?

The gut reaction of many Christians to such a question is a resounding yes. This is demonstrated through internet articles[1] that proclaim God’s while ignoring other issues. To fully address the question we will determine what it means for God to be sovereign, keeping in mind biblical and theological issues like free will as we do so.

Beyond Christian cliché, one perspective sees God’s sovereignty in regards to two distinct wills. R.C. Sproul’s explains this perspective by separating out God’s will into the “decretive will of God”[2] and the “Preceptive will of God.”[3] The decretive will is a declaration of something that will happen according to God’s supreme power. When decreed “nothing can thwart its coming to pass.”[4] Many only think of God’s sovereignty in terms of this will only.[5] This understanding leaves gaps that lead to unsolvable issues and heresy. These difficulties come in two forms: biblical passages and flawed theology. When we take the perspective of God as all powerful and sovereign many passages in the Bible become difficult if not impossible to understand. God at times appears to repent in Genesis 6:6, have a change of mind in Genesis 18:16-33, and wrestle with humans Genesis 32:22-32. A. W. Pink addresses these issues by explaining how Genesis 20:6 shows that God has control over our will “Here is a case where God did exert His power, restrict man's freedom, and prevent him from doing that which he otherwise would have done.”[6] Pink goes on to demonstrate a perspective adhering to solely the decretive will by invoking Calvin to explain that we just do not understand things seemingly contradictive to God’s will.[7] This explanation gets close to fatalism.

Sproul explains that God has a second will that allows for humanity’s freedom, the perceptive will, which centers on the law. “They express and reveal to us what is right and proper for us to do.”[8] This will can be broken and is every day. While the two wills theory explains the issue of human free will, showing where God gives us grace to the kingdom, it fails to address the scriptural issues where God’s power seems to come into question.

Karl Barth takes a different approach that helps revision the answer. He is quick to point out that many wish to address freedom through human history and how God relates. Instead Barth, like Bonhoeffer,[9] sees that we can “speak about man only by speaking about God.[10] The starting point then is God’s freedom, which is self determined, sovereign, and done in unity as Father, Son and Spirit. “In God’s own freedom there is encounter and communion; there is order and, consequently, dominion and subordination; there is majesty and humility, absolute authority and absolute obedience; there is offer and response.”[11] Where others had perceived God’s sovereignty to be freedom from, we now see as communal and freedom to and for.[12] This understanding changes the whole view of Biblical issues and humanity’s free will.

God, as our measuring stick of freedom, then changes what it means for us to be free. We now see this freedom as a gift from God, our freedom is a result of God’s.[13] It is thus that our freedom is also for and not from. To be free for God, and without this we become slaves to other ends such as sin.

In this light we see God’s freedom and sovereignty for in the difficult scriptural passages. God is not separated from in these passages, which would affront sovereignty, but instead is for. While we may not understand how God works, we then can see that our gift of freedom plays into God being for us and God’s free choice to be our humanity’s Lord.

---

[1] Stan Evers. “What is God’s sovereignty?” Grace Magazine. http://www.gracemagazine.org.uk/articles/geoffthomas/sovereignty.htm (accessed October 15, 2010).

[2] Sproul, R.C. Following Christ. (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1996), Logos 4.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Multiple sources tout God’s sovereignty such as:1) Evers, Stan. “What is God’s sovereignty?” Grace Magazine. http://www.gracemagazine.org.uk/articles/geoffthomas/sovereignty.htm (accessed October 15, 2010). 2) MacArthur, John, Jr. Bible Questions and Answers Part 22. Cassette GC 1301-T. Word of Grace, 1982.

[6] A.W Pink. “The Sovereignty of God.” Christian Classics Ethereal Library. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/pink/sovereignty.txt (accessed October 15, 2010).

[7] Ibid.

[8] R.C Sproul. Following Christ. (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1996), Logos 4.

[9] Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Life Together: A Discussion of Christian Fellowship. (San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1954), 36.

[10] Karl Barth. The Humanity of God. (London: Westminister John Knox Press, 1960), 70.

[11] Karl Barth. The Humanity of God. (London: Westminister John Knox Press, 1960), 71

[12] Ibid., 72

[13] Ibid., 75

Is it the leadership or is it the followers?

Today I received an email from a member of church asking to no longer help out with Sunday School. Serves me right for checking my email on a day off. That said it got me thinking.

The church I am at now has a mostly older congregation. Without their support the ministry can not happen. Since I arrived we have lost at least 10 Sunday school leaders (I think closer to 15) which would be roughly 1/3 of our volunteer base. As a result I am now behind the bullet. With the loss of each volunteer it means more work for others to pick up (or more likely me and I can't be in two places at once). The parents recently have requested more classes (splitting age groups) so to be more content appropriate. This is quickly becoming not possible. Thus leaving me, and the children in a bind.

The part that gets me is that this church has constantly talked about wanting to grow. Well we have two-three new families coming now. I guarantee they will be leaving shortly if we have to start canceling Sunday School. It makes me want to scream! If you (church members) want the church to grow then support the growth that is happening! Stop abandoning the youth and children and step up to the plate!! Your actions and words do not match so figure out what is important or let it die and do not complain about it.

The other thing to think about is maybe my leadership or the pastors is failing. I have not been able to gather in many new volunteers. It is quite possible that that is my failure to bring up the issue, ask for help, or recognize gifts.

I am at my wits end with this and ready to let sunday school (and thus the children's ministry) die if no one finds this important enough to support. I pray other churches are able to cultivate the faith of their children and youth with multigenerations unlike we are. Please pray for us to have a solution and embrace what God is doing.

How do we deal with Multiple Canons in Christianity??

This is by no means exhaustive on this subject as for the assignment I was limited to 750 words. Also I poorly explained the canonical approaches understanding of multiple canons. I still believe that the best approach to interpreting scripture (at this point) is a mastery of as many as possible and then starting with questions when encountering scripture. I think this leaves the most room for the holy spirit and allows us to be more imaginative and theologically minded when reading scripture. Any comments or critiques would be appreciated (I know my professor will have a few!)

Nathan Goldbloom

Seattle Pacific University

Theo 6010

October 5, 2010

How do we theologically understand the different Christian canons when interpreting the Bible?

Without scriptural canon, heresy and theological disagreements become commonplace. As a result it is important to address this question as interpreting scripture. To theologically engage with this question we must examine what scripture is and criterion for canonization, and then determine a method of scripture interpretation will address this issue.

What is scripture? Barth discusses scripture as “The Bible is God’s Word to the extent that God causes it to be His Word, to the extent that He speaks through it.” [1] This means that Scripture is a witness to God. God takes the human words and uses them to reveal God’s self to us in a dynamic event.[2] Others take the perspective of scripture as God in written from, or claim that the Bible is more the “word of Israel”.[3] For the sake of space we will proceed with this basic understand as Barth explained, recognizing that there are valid criticisms and issues here that could be further explored.

In the discernment process to establish a standard canon various ideas for criteria and lists of texts were proposed. There became six main criteria that have been used to establish Christian Canons: Apostolic authority, orthodoxy, catholicity, traditional use, antiquity and inspiration.[4] Canons of Christian scripture use these criteria in varied degrees. For example Origen’s view was that inspiration mattered more than apostolicity.[5]

Within the canonical approach the canon takes center stage. The oneness of scripture and the point of canonization[6] become crucial. Unfortunately, this approach places an extreme importance on the fourth century church, since it establishes the canon, and its discernment.[7] Then the question becomes if we are trading one historical context, original author, for another, canonical church? Finally, by focusing on the point of canonization God becomes inadvertently limited prior to this point. Did not God have to sanctify the texts beforehand so that we could formally recognize them through canonization?

Proponents of the canonical approach may use the gifts of the Holy Spirit to explain multiple canons. The Gifts of the Spirit vary in the bible and when given to people.[8] This answer indirectly addresses the issue with an analogy and leaves us at “it’s a mystery.” Contrary, I believe clarity can be achieved.

The solution I would propose is an eclectic approach that utilizes the synchronic, diachronic, and existential approaches to interpretation. Sandara M. Schneiders develops this approach and gives us a starting point- the question.

“A research project does not begin by classifying the methodological approaches, choosing one, and attempting to operate according to its canons. Rather, the interpretive project begins with the proper formulation of the questions one wishes to ask of the text and the selection, from the repertoire of methods, of those that are useful for eliciting from the text the material for answering those questions.”[9]

One concern is choosing which method suits us in order to get a desired meaning out of scripture. This however can be avoided by a series of criteria that Schneiders details[10] and by interpreting within community so there is accountability to interpretation.

The Gospel of Matthew quotes a non canonical form of Isaiah, which he would have known, the evidence begins to point that a singular canonical form is not necessary for God’s revelation.[11]As a result, the proposed approach would not have canonization as its crux, but discernment lead by the Holy Spirit. The multiple canons are then other texts that can use for revelation. Flexibility allows us to hear or understand the revelation that God has for us as Barth explained.[12] In this adaptable approach the Spirit is given a flexible person to engage relationally through the human words within the Bible.

Words: 744

Bibliography:

1. Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of the Word of God. London, New York. T&T Clark International. 1932.

2. Bruce, F.F.. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1988.

3. Gorman, Michael J. Elements of Biblical Exegesis: A Basic Guide for Students and Ministers. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2009.

4. Islamic Awareness. “Canon of the Bible,” Islamic-awareness.org. http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/

5. McDonald, Lee Martin. The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1988.

6. Schneiders, Sandra M.. The Revelatory Text: Interpreting the New Testament as Sacred Scripture. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1999.

7. Vanhoozer, Kevin J., ed. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic. 2005.

8. Wall, Robert. “Canonical Approach.” Seattle Pacific University. Demaray Hall. October 4, 2010.

---

[1] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics: The Doctrine of the Word of God. (London, New York. T&T Clark International. 1932), 109.

[2] Vanhoozer, Kevin J., ed.”Word of God.” Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic. 2005), 850-851.

[3] Ibid., 850-851.

[4] Bruce, F.F.. The Canon of Scripture. (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1988), 256-265.

[5] Ibid., 264.

[6] Bruce, F.F.. The Canon of Scripture. (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1988), 291.

[7] Mcdonald., 33.

[8] Robert Wall. “Canonical Approach.” (Seattle Pacific University. Demaray Hall. October 4^th, 2010.)

[9] Schneiders, Sandra M.. The Revelatory Text: Interpreting the New Testament as Sacred Scripture. (Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1999), 152

[10] Ibid., 164-167.

[11] Bruce, F.F.. The Canon of Scripture. (Downers Grove, Illinois: Intervarsity Press, 1988), 285.

[12] Vanhoozer, Kevin J., ed.”Word of God.” Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic. 2005), 850-851.