http://www.witheringfig.com/reviews/the-purpose-that-accords-with-election-romans-96-13/ In principio erat Verbum... Sun, 28 Feb 2010 15:01:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://www.witheringfig.com/reviews/the-purpose-that-accords-with-election-romans-96-13/comment-page-1/#comment-29617 Stephen Hebert Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:37:43 +0000 http://www.witheringfig.com/?p=1085#comment-29617 Interesting thoughts, Brandon. I've always had difficulty balancing "election" and "free will." I came to the conclusion several years ago that both were "true" and that I'd somehow have to come to terms with that. Interesting thoughts, Brandon. I’ve always had difficulty balancing “election” and “free will.” I came to the conclusion several years ago that both were “true” and that I’d somehow have to come to terms with that.

]]> http://www.witheringfig.com/reviews/the-purpose-that-accords-with-election-romans-96-13/comment-page-1/#comment-29611 Brandon Lackey Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:41:56 +0000 http://www.witheringfig.com/?p=1085#comment-29611 It's interesting to me that Paul never attempts to reconcile God's sovereign election with our freedom. He somehow assumes both are true, argues intensely for each at various points, but never attempts to synthesize them. I'm wondering if a symptom of our post-enlightenment western mindset is that everything must fit into a rational system - even the work of God. We can't seem to affirm God's sovereign design without raising the implications for our freedom. Piper will tend to explain the freedom passages through the sovereignty passages in order to complete the Piper/Jonathan Edwards system. Others subjugate sovereignty passages under their freedom theology. I'm wanting to affirm at this stage in my life that God is free to elect anyone to salvation for his own purposes. Somehow, not because of anything I have done, thought or chosen, he has extended his grace to me. Meanwhile, I was free to reject it, but by his grace I did not. I'm fully aware that this is not a very clean system and has all kinds of rational inconsistencies...but it's biblical. It’s interesting to me that Paul never attempts to reconcile God’s sovereign election with our freedom. He somehow assumes both are true, argues intensely for each at various points, but never attempts to synthesize them. I’m wondering if a symptom of our post-enlightenment western mindset is that everything must fit into a rational system – even the work of God. We can’t seem to affirm God’s sovereign design without raising the implications for our freedom. Piper will tend to explain the freedom passages through the sovereignty passages in order to complete the Piper/Jonathan Edwards system. Others subjugate sovereignty passages under their freedom theology. I’m wanting to affirm at this stage in my life that God is free to elect anyone to salvation for his own purposes. Somehow, not because of anything I have done, thought or chosen, he has extended his grace to me. Meanwhile, I was free to reject it, but by his grace I did not. I’m fully aware that this is not a very clean system and has all kinds of rational inconsistencies…but it’s biblical.

]]>