In
Psalm 4, there is a great message of the Gospel. By ourselves, we are
sinners, turning God’s glory to shame, loving delusions and seeking
false gods (Psalm 4:2). By grace, God has done something about this -
‘the Lord has set apart the godly for Himself’ (Psalm 4:3). When we
pray, ‘Answer me’ (Psalm 4:1), we have this confidence: ‘the Lord will
hear when I call to Him’ (Psalm 4:3). The Lord hears the sinner’s
prayer, ‘Give me relief from my distress; be merciful to me and hear my
prayer’ (Psalm 4:1). Jesus Christ is God’s Answer to this prayer. Christ
brings relief (salvation). This salvation arises from the mercy of God.
In Christ, we have a ‘joy’ and ‘peace’ which the world can neither give
nor take away (Psalm 4:7-8). When the seeking sinner comes with
question, ‘Who can show us any good?’ (Psalm 4:6), the Gospel Answer is
always the same - Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
The question of universalism in Barth’s theology has been raised directly by J D Bettis in his article, “Is Karl Barth a Universalist?” (Scottish Journal of Theology, Vol. 20, No. 4, December 1967, pp. 423-436). This article requires to be carefully discussed not only for its significance as an interpretation of Barth’s thought but also because it presents a serious misrepresentation of Berkouwer’s criticism of Barth. Bettis writes, “Modern protestant theology has defined three basic answers to the question of the particularity of election: double predestination, Arminianism and universalism” (p. 423). By attempting to fit Berkouwer into “this structure of alternatives” (p. 423), he misrepresents completely Berkouwer’s criticism of Barth. According to Bettis, Brunner and Berkouwrer hold that “because Barth fails to accept either Brunner’s Arminianism or Berkouwer's double decree, he must be a universalist” (p. 426). There are two misrepresentations of Berkouwer here. (...
Comments
Post a Comment