Ardel Caneday has compiled a directory to online conversations about Bethlehem Baptist's Church's move toward changing its requirements for baptism prior to church membership.
HT: Justin Taylor at Reformation 21 Blog
By the way, Caneday is the co-author with Tom Schreiner of the best book I've ever read that no one knows about—The Race Set Before Us: A Biblical Theology of Perseverance and Assurance. Schreiner and Caneday have given us a great gift in their thorough exegesis of biblical passages about the certainty and necessity of progressive sanctification. If you want to understand the warning passages in Hebrews and other texts, your study will be incomplete without reading this book. It's not an easy read, but it will be a worthwhile investment.
4 comments:
I agree- great book. It was in fact just referred to today in my Hermeneutics class, talking about how to interpret different types of Scripture.
Welcome, by the way, Jason. I never returned the hello on your earlier post. Will you still be in town next April? JW and I are planning to make it to TFTG.
Is there a specific comment of mine that you're referring to? I do believe that progressive sanctification is both necessary AND certain in the life of a believer. As I remember, Schreiner and Caneday hold both aspects in tension. I agree that the biblical text clearly presents both aspects.
I found their analysis of the warning passages to be carefully nuanced. For those who have not read it, S & C see the intent of warning passages as one of God's means in spurring believers to progressive sanctification, not as systematic soteriologies. In other words, we shouldn't be reading the warning passages trying to figure out if the subjects of the hypotheticals were genuine believers or not. The purpose of the passages was to motivate authentic believers to make progress in producing fruit. S & C's sensitivity to authorial intent in contrast to some of the more common views seemed plausible and worthy of further study and reflection. I'm not quite ready to say without reservation that I'm convinced they're right, but I think more people should read their case.
Those are the big (and helpful) ideas that stick in my mind 3 or 4 years after I read the book. Overall, it struck me as a more thoroughly exegeted and precisely articulated version of The Gospel According to the Apostles.
Are you probing because of problematic peculiarities you encountered? Please share if you did.
I was grateful for the nuancing. I do believe that lovers of systematic theology force too much systematization on the warning passages, especially by hypothesizing on the hypothetical subjects of the hypothetical scenario.
I remember that S & C pointedly criticized forcing systematization of certain texts. I don't remember them criticizing systematic theology as a whole. That could be because I forgot it or because my reading radar wasn't searching for it. If your reading was focused on the Hebrews passages, I can see how you might conclude that this was a theme throughout the book. I don't think it was, but I could be wrong.
I understand your love for systematic theology. Which comes first—biblical or systematic? Do you think systematic theology can be dangerous in the hands of those who have not first learned to practice biblical theology?
Post a Comment