Berkouwer maintained that, when Romans 9-11 is understood as referring
to "God's revelation of mercy ... and not to a 'naked sovereignty'", the
illegitimacy of man's protest against God and the "mystical delight" of
Paul's doxology are seen quite differenty from their deterministic
interpretation (A Half Century of Theology, pp. 90, 93; Divine Election,
pp. 65, 147-149). Man's protest is recognized as entirely inappropriate
because "the doctrine of election is an 'inexpressible comfort' for
both the believer and the nonbeliever since it proclaims that there is
hope for the 'most miserable of men'" (A Half Century of Theology, p.
103). Paul's doxology is recognized as entirely appropriate because it
is faith's response to the divine mercy in which "there is nothing of
'the inexplicable arbitrariness of power that moves one to put his
fingers to his lips" (A Half Century of Theology, p. 93).
In this post, I will draw comparisons between Arminius and Berkouwer. * Bangs points out that the historical situation in Holland was not a simple one - Calvinism coming in, Arminius nearly ruining it and the Synod of Dort restoring it: “The earliest Dutch Reformed leaders don’t seem to be Calvinists at all. They rise out of the soil, here and there, nurtured by the old Dutch biblical piety, not seized by dogmatic insights, but steadily pressing toward a purified life of faith according to Scripture” (p. 21). This emphasis is similar to Berkouwer’s insistence that election is not a special gnosis for the theological elite. Rather, it is a confession of faith, arising from the hearts of those who have come to know the grace of God ( Divine Election (DE), p. 216). * Bangs observes that Arminius’ theological method is “practical and through faith”: “For the Theology which belongs to this world, is practical and through faith: Theoretical Theology belongs to the o...
Comments
Post a Comment