The doctrine of election has been one of the key subjects discussed by various influential theologians throughout the two thousand years. Many have attempted to understand and embrace the enigma of election presented in the bible. It is important to realize that there are many views pertaining to the doctrine of election ranging from prominent theologians such as Augustine and Pelagius, Calvin and Arminius, Barth and Brunner and various other theologians and their respective counterparts. Karl Barth and Emil Brunner are the giants on the subject of modern theology. Their theological insights are such that even now people are mesmerized by their incredible aptitude for theological understanding and presentation of that framework in a fluid and concise frame. Each of these two theologians presents a theology on the doctrine of election from a biblical perspective. The doctrine of election is one of the main points in the Bible because throughout it we are presented with passages proclaiming that God is sovereign in whatever or whomever He elects. God is the one who elects man and that He is for humanity. God reveals His love and grace through His divine freedom in love, grace and a special attention He provides for man. Karl Barth was criticised by Emil Brunner for Barth’s concept of Jesus Christ as the electing God and the elected man, from which arose the understanding of “universalism” and questionable faith of Barth according to Brunner.
Karl Barth’s theology is such that it revolves around the person of Jesus Christ who he presents is the everlasting event of the hypostatic union between God and mankind. Karl Barth refuted the historical understanding of predestination as the infinite, definite and beyond purist edict of God...
... middle of paper ...
...Scriptures. Brunner therefore accuses Barth of going beyond the premise of Bible which cannot be allowed as the evidences presented can be used any number of ways. The main criticism coming from Brunner towards Barth is that use only the Scripture for the evidences to support the hypothesis presented and not to go outside the parameters of Biblical evidences. Both Barth and Brunner devote to present and affirm the Bible as their foundation for the hypothesis. Barth and Brunner present a doctrine of election and both are very much alike except a few themes in each of these doctrines of election. Like Barth, Brunner presents election as God’s grace alone which is poured towards humanity. Brunner refuses the double predestination as being un-Biblical “…God has chosen one from eternity for eternal life and has denied the other from eternity to eternal damnation.”
There are several aspects to consider when exploring the Christian worldview. There are many facets or denominations and they each have their own distinct beliefs and practices, but they all share the same fundamental beliefs. In this Paper we will explore the character of God, His creation, humanity and its nature, Jesus’ significance to the world, and the restoration of humanity, as well as my beliefs and the way that I interact with Christianity and my personal worldview.
The key purpose of predestination was satisfied in both salvation and condemnation that the glory of God might be shown. According to Calvin, God’s predestination was exclusively to his will, independent of external reasons, and so was eventually mysterious to humanity. For this reason, Calvin backed the inquiry by saying the predestination confined to scripture. Calvin disagreed to the claims that predestination made God unjust, so he argued that all of sinful humanity deserved punishment—and so none were fated unjustly—and that since God’s mysterious will was righteous, we affirmed that predestination was
Within mainstream society it seems as if there is not a great deal of emphasis on the contributions made by theologians in society, as well as contributions by theologians to religious thought. Particularly in Christendom, ecclesiastical assemblies are so consumed with vain ideas of worship, and content on hearing biblical messages that capitulate to their personal desires, that theological studies are often neglected. Yet the contributions theologians have made in society, and the impact these contributions have had on religious assemblies have been pivotal in guiding religious discourse on subjects such as ethics, morality, and social transformation. It is for this reason, that in this essay an attempt will be made to analyze three essays from three world-renowned theologians of the 20th century. The theologians are Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and Walter Wink, all of which have produced the essays used for this analysis, and have written works that have completely challenged status quo religion, and changed the landscape of Christendom forever.
The Bible is read and interpreted by many people all over the world. Regardless, no one knows the absolute truth behind scripture. Walter Brueggemann, professor of Old Testament, wrote “Biblical Authority” to help people understand what he describes as six different parts that make up the foundation to ones understanding of scripture. He defines these six features as being: inherency, interpretation, imagination, ideology, inspiration, and importance. As Brueggemann explains each individual part, it is easy to see that they are all interconnected because no one can practice one facet without involuntarily practicing at least one other part.
Theologian Vern S. Poythress wrote, “Theological systems, whether dispensationalist, covenantal, Calvinist, Arminian, or even modernist, have a profound influence on the way we approach a given [biblical] text.” There is no portion of scripture that is more influenced by the theological system of dispensationalist than that of biblical prophecy, particularly in the area of God’s redemptive plan from for humanity. The purpose of this essay is to establish that an appropriate understanding of biblical eschatology can best be achieved through a dispensational theological perspective.
Barth’s opening thesis is a view that everything that can be known with confidence about God or divine things is known only or primarily by faith, as opposed to a coherent or cognitive. In addition, existential, in the sense that Barth affirms that scripture has an objective significance, even before considering it through faith and reason. According to Barth, “This circumstance is the simple fact that in the congregation of Jesus Christ, the Bible has specific authority and significance” (p. 56) and without the congregation it becomes only historical. It becomes important to uphold and defend the Bible’s authority and the power does not come from any simple measure employed by us individually. It is up to the congregation to openly confess the analytical propositions without fear and become actively engaged in the faith and obedience of which it asks (p. 56).
Logos plays a relatively minute role in this paper due to logos being about rational or logical appeal and because this essay is about Thomas’s religious beliefs and the belief in God is not based rational or logical facts, it is based on faith and faith does not fall under logos. Also logos is hard to have in this case because everyone has different religious beliefs causing a religious statement to be true fact for some and ghastly lie to other. This makes religion views seen as that of opinion which ...
The stories which humans tell about their origins are always cherished and held in high regard. In fact, no culture has existed which has not created or attempted to create some story of origins. Every culture has had some means in which to say this is where we came from. Especially in cultures where religion found itself prevalent, the mythology of origins became not only a status or anthropology but also a theology. In which case, we find that Christianity is not alone in this struggle, though our struggle may be unique in kind. For our case, we find that the foundation of theology, specifically practical theology, finds its basis in our story of creation and origination. “One of the central affirmations of the Christian faith is the claim that human beings are created in the image of God.” Because the creation story, as cited above, claims that humanity was made in the image or likeness of God, and we affirm that the Bible is the witness to Christ, who being in human form was also made in the image of God, then it is logical to conclude that the theology of human nature rests on this imago dei and therefore the discussion of Karl Barth’s relational view of imago is critical to dissect in order for a reasonable theology to be constructed.
Peterson, Michael - Hasker, Reichenbach and Basinger. Philosophy of Religion - Selected Readings, Fourth Edition. 2010. Oxford University Press, NY.
The divine command theory is an ethical theory relating to God and how his commandments should guide the morality of humankind. Objections to this theory include objections to the nature or existence of God or to the nature of his character or commands. For the purposes of this paper, I will present the divine command theory, introduce a serious objection evident in Genesis 22, propose and explain an alternative to the divine command theory that is the divine will theory, explain why this theory avoids the objection, and critique and respond from the perspective of a divine will theorist.
The four fundamental claims of the Catholic Intellectual Tradition, Human beings exist in a relation to a triune God, God’s presence in the world is mediated through nature and reality, faith and reason are compatible, the dignity of the human being is inviolable and therefore the commitment to justice for the common good is necessary. However, the great books in the Catholic Intellectual tradition show that they represent these fundamental claims in a broad distinctive way. This essay will show that these readings better represent one of the fundamental claims, human beings exist in a relation with a triune God, from the view point of three great books from the bible, Genesis, Exodus and the Gospel of Matthew. The Bible clearly supports the
God’s written law is something that is and should be continuously turned, to not only when Christians find themselves in need, but also throughout in one’s daily life. The four gospels tell to story of Jesus’ life and his teachings he gave while on the earth making it possible for there to be a true example of Christ-like faith. The proposition that there are differences in the story of Jesus and in his teachings seems to question the basis upon which the Christian faith is found upon. Rather than proclaiming the gospels as falsehoods because on the differences they possess, by analyzing the differences in the context of the particular gospel it can be understood that the differences are not made by mistake, rather as a literary device. While the four gospels have differences and similarities, they cannot be regarded as an argument against the faith because their differences are what point to the many aspects of Christ.
It seems that from all of John Calvin’s teachings, it’s quite possible that this debate over his doctrine of predestination has been argued more than any other in history. In this essay I will explore Calvin’s view of predestination, giving special attention to the justice of predestination. Secondly, I will explain the purpose of election as understood by Calvin. Third, I will discuss the purpose of reprobation.
Hugo Meynell's book is a clear example of the growing interest in apologetics. Meynell considers four common objections to Christian doctrine, the belief in God is morally irrelevant; that there is no reason to believe in the special claims of Christianity over those of non-Christian religions. Meynell, also says no sense can be made of the doctrines of Incarnation, Atonement, and the Trinity and that Christian doctrine about life after death is based upon an indefensible view of the nature of human persons-and shows to his own views that these remarks can be met. It should be noted that Meynell on the prior assumption that God exists. This is not because Meynell takes that assumption to be indefensible or incapable of demonstration; it is rather that the existence of God is not his topic in this book.
Catholicism teaches that assurance of salvation is not possible. Noted Professor Karl Barth at one point in his theology was very outspoken on this topic. Barth completely denounced the possibility of assurance of salvation. David Martyn Lloyd-Jones writes, “Barth dislikes experience altogether and his whole view is that you really can be certain of none of these things, and, moreover, that all our attempts at expression of our faith are, of necessity, wrong and fallacious.” Although Barth eventually drifted away from this view the Catholic Church holds it to this