Five Apophatic Articles on Soteriology
- No person may legitimately claim a role in the initial move of their hearts towards God.
- No one has a greater desire and passion to see every human being saved than God.
- No Christian has objective, rational grounds to take pride in their salvation.
- God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.
- No human should expect to be able to exhaustively sum up the mysteries of God’s providence along strictly positive lines.
Jim, I don’t think limited redemptionists could agree to point 2 could they?
Dr. Paul Henebury
I am Founder of Telos Ministries, and Senior Pastor at Agape Bible Church in N. Ca.
[Paul Henebury] Jim, I don’t think limited redemptionists could agree to point 2 could they?I wouldn’t think so
I would be more comfortable saying: “No one has a greater desire and passion to see sinners saved than God.
I think #4 is a bit of a problem as well. In some passages we’re told He takes no pleasure in the death of him who dies, but in many others we read of His wrath… and He does not appear at all reluctant. I think wrath is, among other things, pleasure in the destruction/punishment of wickedness.
We have a similar situation with “God so loved the world” and passages that describe God hating the wicked (e.g., Psalm 11.5)
In some way, both love and hate are accurate. And both “no pleasure” and “wrath” are accurate.
But the statement is a problem because it requires qualifications. I’m not sure it has much to do with Calv. vs. Armin. though. … except that if one can accept God’s pleasure in punishing the wicked, he has somewhat less reason to object to the Calv. view of predestination.
We have a similar situation with “God so loved the world” and passages that describe God hating the wicked (e.g., Psalm 11.5)
In some way, both love and hate are accurate. And both “no pleasure” and “wrath” are accurate.
But the statement is a problem because it requires qualifications. I’m not sure it has much to do with Calv. vs. Armin. though. … except that if one can accept God’s pleasure in punishing the wicked, he has somewhat less reason to object to the Calv. view of predestination.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
God has given us His Word, His final Word - Jesus Christ. All of Ben’s points (one smart guy) are summed up in the glorious Lord Jesus Christ. Read them once more with Him and His 1st coming resonating to them. Its pretty sweet!
[Aaron Blumer] We have a similar situation with “God so loved the world” and passages that describe God hating the wicked (e.g., Psalm 11.5)D.A. Carson, in his book “Love in Hard Places” does a great job delineating the senses in which the Scriptures refer to God’s Love. It makes a great deal of sense of this seeming contradiction.
In some way, both love and hate are accurate. And both “no pleasure” and “wrath” are accurate.
Appreciate that, Mike. Can you summarize it for us or is it just too complex?
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[Aaron Blumer] I think #4 is a bit of a problem as well. In some passages we’re told He takes no pleasure in the death of him who dies, but in many others we read of His wrath… and He does not appear at all reluctant. I think wrath is, among other things, pleasure in the destruction/punishment of wickedness.Why do you think God’s wrath necessitates His taking pleasure in it?
God said He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. What scripture contradicts that?
Despair does not lie in being weary of suffering, but in being weary of joy. G.K. Chesterton
The themes of judgment on the wicked and salvation of the righteous are inextricably intertwined in Scripture. There is plenty of reflection on this in the Psalms, Prophets, 1&2 Thessalonians, and Revelation. In short, if God is pleased with his saving work, he must be pleased in the way he does it, which is executing judgment on the wicked.
But here is a specific passage:
But here is a specific passage:
Psalm 135:6-12 Whatever the LORD pleases, he does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps.Ok, so God does all that he pleases. What pleases God?
7 He it is who makes the clouds rise at the end of the earth, who makes lightnings for the rain and brings forth the wind from his storehouses. 8 He it was who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, both of man and of beast; 9 who in your midst, O Egypt, sent signs and wonders against Pharaoh and all his servants; 10 who struck down many nations and killed mighty kings, 11 Sihon, king of the Amorites, and Og, king of Bashan, and all the kingdoms of Canaan, 12 and gave their land as a heritage, a heritage to his people Israel.There’s plenty of “death of the wicked” in there. So, we are back to nuancing in what sense God does and does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
You have a logical fallacy in there, in addition to confounding different uses of “please.”
It is not the same thing at all l to say “He does what He pleases” and “everything He does brings Him pleasure.”
It is not the same thing at all l to say “He does what He pleases” and “everything He does brings Him pleasure.”
Despair does not lie in being weary of suffering, but in being weary of joy. G.K. Chesterton
I agree with you that “All that God delights in he does” is not logically convertible with “All that God does he takes delight in.” However, that’s not an issue here, since we have a list of certain things God did, delighting in them.
It is the English here that is unclear. The verb from which חָפֵ֥ץ is conjugated means “to take delight in.” In fact, the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament distinguishes this word from its near synonyms in that it communicates a greater emotional involvement, real delight, in the activity.
Here’s another excerpt:
It is the English here that is unclear. The verb from which חָפֵ֥ץ is conjugated means “to take delight in.” In fact, the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament distinguishes this word from its near synonyms in that it communicates a greater emotional involvement, real delight, in the activity.
Here’s another excerpt:
[TWOT] The word is used of God having delight in certain people. In David’s song of deliverance, he says that God provided for him because he “delighted” in him (2Sam 22:20). The Queen of Sheba expressed a blessing to God because he “delighted” in Solomon (1Kings 10:9). God is said to experience this delight toward good works of men. For instance, he “delights” in his sabbath being kept and his law observed (Isa 56:4), in “mercy” and “knowledge of God” (Hos 6:6), and in “truth” (Psa 51:8). In respect to himself, God engages in activities in which he takes “delight” (Psa 115:3; Psa 135:6). Samson’s father, Man oah, feared death for himself and wife because the Angel of the Lord had appeared to them, but his wife replied that had God “delighted” to do this, he would not have received their sacrifices.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
First, “to take delight in” is not the only possible translation of the word.
Second, the issue is not really the meaning of the word by itself, but the meaning of the expression, “whatsoever ___ pleased.” Multiple commentaries take it the same way I do, which is an expression denoting that God does whatever He chooses to do.
Third, it is not necessarily so that the list in vv. 7-12 are to be taken as a list of things that God did because they gave Him pleasure, but only additional examples of His power.
It is certainly not at all clear that Psalm 135:6-12 necessarily establishes that God enjoys destroying the wicked. Ezekiel 33:11, on the other hand, is quite clear.
[updated to fix typo]
Second, the issue is not really the meaning of the word by itself, but the meaning of the expression, “whatsoever ___ pleased.” Multiple commentaries take it the same way I do, which is an expression denoting that God does whatever He chooses to do.
Third, it is not necessarily so that the list in vv. 7-12 are to be taken as a list of things that God did because they gave Him pleasure, but only additional examples of His power.
It is certainly not at all clear that Psalm 135:6-12 necessarily establishes that God enjoys destroying the wicked. Ezekiel 33:11, on the other hand, is quite clear.
[updated to fix typo]
Despair does not lie in being weary of suffering, but in being weary of joy. G.K. Chesterton
Dan, the word used in Ps. 135 is the very same one used in Ezekiel 33. According to TWOT and other lexicons, this word is conspicuous for its emphasis on the emotional attachment or delight in the verb. So, it’s not merely choosing or being willing to do something, but actively desiring it.
As to your reading of Ps. 135, I must say I find it awkward. Verse 6 says, “The LORD does whatever pleases him.” Then, it lists things God does/did. The most natural interpretation is that the psalmist is reciting examples of what it pleased God to do.
But Ps. 135 was really just one example of a broader point. All throughout Scripture, God is praised for saving his people, and the most common way (or at least a very common way) of describing that salvation is the destruction of wicked oppressors. This is the salvation that believers look for and praise God for. For example, Isaiah 13 tells of God’s terrible wrath against Babylon, even including dashing infants into pieces. In Isaiah 14, the people of God and even the earth itself breaks into a song praising God for that very act of deliverance.
Nor is that perspective confined to the Old Testament. In 2 Thessalonians, the deliverance of God’s people and the destruction of the wicked are molded into a single act. In Revelation 18, the terrors of the fall of Babylon are recounted in horrific detail. How are believers supposed to respond to this announcement? “20 Rejoice over her, O heaven, and you saints and apostles and prophets, for God has given judgment for you against her!”
If there’s any text that needs harmonization, it’s the Ezekiel passage. After all, the message is for the house of Israel specifically (see v.7 and v. 10). It is addressed to those who were reared in the covenant, then broke it. It’s not a generic statement of God’s feelings for all mankind.
As to your reading of Ps. 135, I must say I find it awkward. Verse 6 says, “The LORD does whatever pleases him.” Then, it lists things God does/did. The most natural interpretation is that the psalmist is reciting examples of what it pleased God to do.
But Ps. 135 was really just one example of a broader point. All throughout Scripture, God is praised for saving his people, and the most common way (or at least a very common way) of describing that salvation is the destruction of wicked oppressors. This is the salvation that believers look for and praise God for. For example, Isaiah 13 tells of God’s terrible wrath against Babylon, even including dashing infants into pieces. In Isaiah 14, the people of God and even the earth itself breaks into a song praising God for that very act of deliverance.
Nor is that perspective confined to the Old Testament. In 2 Thessalonians, the deliverance of God’s people and the destruction of the wicked are molded into a single act. In Revelation 18, the terrors of the fall of Babylon are recounted in horrific detail. How are believers supposed to respond to this announcement? “20 Rejoice over her, O heaven, and you saints and apostles and prophets, for God has given judgment for you against her!”
If there’s any text that needs harmonization, it’s the Ezekiel passage. After all, the message is for the house of Israel specifically (see v.7 and v. 10). It is addressed to those who were reared in the covenant, then broke it. It’s not a generic statement of God’s feelings for all mankind.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
[Aaron Blumer] Appreciate that, Mike. Can you summarize it for us or is it just too complex?
Five ways the Bible speaks of God’s love, according to D. A. Carson:
[D. A. Carson]
- God’s intra-Trinitarian love,
- God’s love displayed in his providential care,
- God’s yearning warning and invitation to all human beings as he invites and commands them to repent and believe,
- God’s special love towards the elect, and
- God’s conditional love toward his covenant people as he speaks in the language of discipline.
I indicated that if you absolutize any one of these ways in which the Bible speaks of the love of God, you will generate a false system that squeezes out other important things the Bible says, thus finally distorting your vision of God.
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/carsonatonement.h…
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
Very late doing this, but wanted to respond to dan’s question above regarding what God’s wrath against sin has to do with His pleasure.
Several factors link the two in my mind, though I’m certainly open to other explanations.
1. The nature of “wrath.” What is it? It seems to me that wrath is desire to destroy and punish what deserves to be destroyed or punished. Since it’s part of God’s perfection that He feels this desire, it’s a good desire—even a beautiful desire. No desire of God can possibly be less.
2. The nature of desire. If wrath is indeed a kind of desire, then the accomplishing of the desire is pleasure. This is just my understanding of what these words mean. The desire accomplished is sweet to the soul.
(I thought I had a third but it slips my mind just now)
I can think of two possible ways to understand “no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies” etc.
a. Context. He is talking specifically about Israel.
b. Complexity/seeming paradox.
There’s certainly a lot of “b” in Scripture… the whole idea of the Trinity for starters. The hypostatic union. Regeneration and faith. I don’t find it difficult personally to believe that God delights in punishing what/who ought to be punished and grieves over it at the same time.
Several factors link the two in my mind, though I’m certainly open to other explanations.
1. The nature of “wrath.” What is it? It seems to me that wrath is desire to destroy and punish what deserves to be destroyed or punished. Since it’s part of God’s perfection that He feels this desire, it’s a good desire—even a beautiful desire. No desire of God can possibly be less.
2. The nature of desire. If wrath is indeed a kind of desire, then the accomplishing of the desire is pleasure. This is just my understanding of what these words mean. The desire accomplished is sweet to the soul.
(I thought I had a third but it slips my mind just now)
I can think of two possible ways to understand “no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies” etc.
a. Context. He is talking specifically about Israel.
b. Complexity/seeming paradox.
There’s certainly a lot of “b” in Scripture… the whole idea of the Trinity for starters. The hypostatic union. Regeneration and faith. I don’t find it difficult personally to believe that God delights in punishing what/who ought to be punished and grieves over it at the same time.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Discussion