Skip to main content

A response to a comment by G. R. Osborne on Berkouwer’s understanding of the doctrine of final perseverance

In his contribution to Clark Pinnock (editor), Grace Unlimited (1975), G. R. Osborne states that Berkouwer, in Faith and Perseverance, pp. 9-10, “speaks of the timelessness of the doctrine of final perseverance, founded on ‘the richness and abidingness of salvation” (p. 188, emphasis mine).
This single-sentence comment on Berkouwer’s view hardly gives a fair indication of the type of thinking found in Chapter 1 of Berkouwer’s Faith and Perseverance - “Timeliness and Relevance” (pp. 9-14, emphasis mine).
Berkouwer insists that “the living preaching of the Scriptures, which offer no metaphysical and theoretical views about … ‘permanency’ as an independent theme in itself, does nothing to encourage ‘a continuity which is … opposed in any way to the living nature of faith” (p. 13).
Berkouwer stresses that “The perseverance of the saints is not primarily a theoretical problem but a confession of faith” (p. 14) and that “The perseverance of the saints is unbreakably connected with the assurance of faith” (p. 11).
The use of the expression “timelessness” in respect of Berkouwer’s perspective seems particularly misleading in view of Berkouwer’s favourable citation of Barth’s words: “It has to be a relation whose being must be renewed every moment to remain true, as much through the speech of the good God who is new every morning as in the knowledge and act, the faith and obedience of man” (p. 13, citing K. Barth, Prolegomena, (1927), p. 296).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Berkouwer’s “Holy Scripture” and E J Young’s “Thy Word is Truth”

E J Young argues that one’s doctrine of Scripture is derived from either experience or Scripture, either natural man or supernatural God. Young does speak of the human character of Scripture. It does, however, seem that the supernatural-natural dichotomy underlies his doctrine of Scripture. He turns to the Bible “to discover what it has to say of itself” (p. 40). It is questionable, however, whether his view is not grounded in a notion which tends to set divine and human activity over against each other. Young rejects a mechanical theory (p. 65). It does, however, appear that his own view is really no more than a modification of this view. His interpretation of the working of the Spirit in the inspiration of Scripture is not directly identifiable with mechanical dictation (pp. 79-80). It does seem, however, that there is a tendency to move in that direction.  * Here are some statements from Young.  - “Without Him (God) there could have been no Bible. Without man th...

Grace found Noah!

Genesis 6:1-22 As we read the story of Noah, we learn of the place of Noah within the divine revelation of the Gospel of grace. "Noah found grace" (8) might be turned around to read, "Grace found Noah." "Amazing grace ... I once was lost but now am found." The significance of Noah, highlighted in 5:29, is expressed in the words, "Not the labour of my hands can fulfil Thy law's demands ... All for sin could not atone, Thou must save, and Thou alone. Nothing in my hand I bring, simply to Thy Cross I cling." To think of the flood exclusively in terms of judgment is to see only one side of what God was doing. As well as judging, He was also saving - "In this ship a few people - eight in all - were saved by water" ( 1 Peter 3:20 ). The ark points forward to Christ, "who came back from death to life", Christ who "saves" us ( 1 Peter 3:21 ).

Doctrine And Devotion

For some Christians, 'doctrine' is a taboo word. They only need to hear the word and their hackles are up! In their view, doctrine is dry. It is head-knowledge. It is not practical. There are others whose preoccupation with doctrine gives precisely the same impression. One recalls the story of the man who was asked his opinion of a certain preacher. The question was put to him, "Was he sound?" The reply came back immediately, "Oh yes. he was sound all right, but the rest of us were sound asleep." Doctrine can be 'on fire.' Doctrine need not be dull. Doctrine does not need to be above the heads of the ordinary people. It does not belong to the private domain of the academic's 'ivory tower.' When you hear the word, 'doctrine', do not imagine an academic 'holy of holies' which is protected by the words, "Trespassers Forbidden." For both the academic theologian and the ordinary believer, the way forward in doctrin...