|
|
Archive for the ‘kantzer lectures’ Category
Thursday, May 20th, 2010
The Henry Center is pleased to announce that Dr. Ravi Zacharias’s recent Trinity International University chapel message and his conversation with friends on the subject “Apologetics Beyond the Pew” are now posted free of charge for the viewing of the general public.
April 12, 2010 | Apologetics Beyond the Pew: A Conversation for the Church with Ravi Zacharias and Friends
The Henry Center sponsored this special event with global evangelist Ravi Zacharias in ATO Chapel on the TEDS campus. Entitled “Apologetics Beyond the Pew: A Conversation for the Church with Ravi Zacharias and Friends”, the event covered how Christians can carry out faithful apologetics beyond the walls of the church building.
After opening remarks by TIU President Craig Williford, Dr. Zacharias was joined by Scott Chapman of The Chapel (Grayslake) and John Njoroge of RZIM. Following the conversation, questions were fielded from those in attendance.
The event was free and open to the public. It was also webcasted live for an international audience. The Henry Center was pleased to sponsor this event, which came on the heels of a special service on the same day announcing the formation of a special partnership between TIU and RZIM. Dr. Zacharias’s chapel message is also posted below.
Conversation | Audio | Video
Chapel Message | Audio | Video
Posted in Uncategorized, kantzer lectures |
Friday, February 26th, 2010
The Henry Center is pleased to announce that audio and video from its most recent Trinity Debate are now posted free of charge for the viewing of the general public.
February 3, 2010 | How and When Will All Israel Be Saved? A Theological/Missiological Conversation on Scripture, the End-Times, and Jewish Evangelism
Location | ATO Chapel (TEDS)
Participants | Dr. Mitch Glaser (Chosen People Ministries); Dr. Douglas Moo (Wheaton College); Dr. Willem VanGemeren (TEDS); Dr. John Feinberg (TEDS)
Moderator | Dr. Richard Averbeck (TEDS)
On February 3, 2010 from 7pm-9:30 in ATO Chapel at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, the Henry Center, in conjunction with Chosen People Ministries, hosted a conversation entitled “‘All Israel’ and the Church: A Conversation on Scripture, Eschatology, and Evangelism”. Conversational partners included Dr. Mitch Glaser of CPM, Dr. Douglas Moo of Wheaton College, Dr. Willem VanGemeren of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Dr. John Feinberg of TEDS, and the moderator, Dr. Richard Averbeck of TEDS. The event was free and open to the public.
The following provided avenues for discussion:
In Romans 11 Paul makes the case that God has not cast off his people Israel, despite their rejection as a nation of Jesus, their Messiah. His final argument that God isn’t finished with Israel is that “all Israel will be saved” (Rom 11:25-27). What did Paul mean and how will this come to pass? Who constitutes “Israel,” the biological seed of Abraham or his spiritual seed? Is the salvation in view spiritual, national, socio-economical, or all of these? Has this promise been fulfilled during the NT era by individual Jews and Gentiles turning to Christ and hence “filling up” the “all Israel?” Or is the promise to be fulfilled in the end-times at the return of Christ? If the latter, will only those biologically Jewish be saved, or will there also be a massive turning to Christ among the Gentiles? Whatever the answers to such questions, what are the implications for how Christians should understand the modern state of Israel? And, of most practical importance, how should one’s understanding of Rom 11:25-27 impact one’s attitudes toward and efforts in evangelizing Jews?
The event was webcasted and live-blogged by the Center.
Part One | Video | Audio
Part Two | Video | Audio
Posted in Uncategorized, kantzer lectures |
Tuesday, September 15th, 2009
A report live-blogged by Andy Naselli
The 2009 Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology by Dr. Stephen Williams
Williams is professor of systematic theology at Union Theological College in Belfast, Ireland. The title of the six-part series is “The Election of Grace: A Riddle without Resolution?” The sixth lecture in the series was advertised to be “an exposition of Romans 9-11 offering a positive proposal on election, prepared for in lectures 1-5.”
This is also available via live stream.
*******
- Lest he be misunderstood, Williams clarified that he is not against systematic or conceptual thinking. The issue is the limits and nature of the systematic enterprise (the “where” and the “when” rather than the “that”).
Assurance of Salvation
- Discussion of election usually intersects with how certain people can be of their salvation.
- There are different ways of asking the question: Am I sure (1) that I am a Christian, (2) that Christ died for me, (3) that I will be kept to the end?
- If the questions people ask have many forms, then the Puritan answers were equally nuanced.
- Calvin thought that assurance was part of the essence of faith.
- Grounding assurance in one’s fruit is problematic because it may result in a justification-by-works mindset that loses sight of Christ’s centrality.
- We previously assigned people in one of two categories with reference to election: responsibility for rejection and non-congratulation for acceptance. But it’s a bit different with the paradox of assurance.
- Perseverance is a subordinate ground of assurance.
Tension
[Simeon] Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions. Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?
[Wesley] Yes, I do indeed.
[S] And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?
[W] Yes, solely through Christ.
[S] But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?[W] No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.
[S] Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?[W] No.
[S] What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother’s arms?[W] Yes, altogether.
[S] And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?[W] Yes, I have no hope but in Him.
[S] Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election, my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things wherein we agree.
- Luther: It is only when you are under the cross and suffering that you will rightly learn about predestination. Suffering for the sake of the gospel creates alignments; it strengthens identity.
Posted in kantzer lectures, stephen williams |
Monday, September 14th, 2009
A report live-blogged by Andy Naselli
The 2009 Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology by Dr. Stephen Williams
Williams is professor of systematic theology at Union Theological College in Belfast, Ireland. The title of the six-part series is “The Election of Grace: A Riddle without Resolution?” The fifth lecture in the series was advertised to address “election, regeneration and faith.”
*******
- Some have challenged the moderate single-predestination view that Williams presented in the previous lecture.
- Charles Simeon: “There is not a decided Calvinist or Arminian in the world who equally approves of the whole of Scripture . . . who, if he had been in the company of St. Paul whilst he was writing his Epistles, would not have recommended him to alter one or other of his expressions.”
- Paradox becomes sharper and not eased upon reflection.
- Simeon exaggerates his point.
- Immanuel Kant puzzled over moral agency.
- Deut 29:29 = the theologian’s motto
- Why do I need to know the nature and limits of human freedom? I can be held account for resisting grace yet cannot congratulate myself for accepting anything.
- Williams is not persuaded by Calvin on justice.
Posted in kantzer lectures, stephen williams |
Monday, September 14th, 2009
A report live-blogged by Andy Naselli
The 2009 Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology by Dr. Stephen Williams
Williams is professor of systematic theology at Union Theological College in Belfast, Ireland. The title of the six-part series is “The Election of Grace: A Riddle without Resolution?” The fourth lecture in the series was advertised to address “the question of election and particular atonement, working from the John Owen/McLeod Campbell debate,” but it actually deals with election in the NT.
This is also available via live stream.
*******
- C. H. Dodd somewhere alludes to the two-beat history of Israel: election and grace.
- Gospels = acts of the earthly Jesus; Acts = acts of the exalted Jesus
- What Paul teaches about the future of Israel (esp. in Romans 11) is variously interpreted, including what he means by “Israel.”
- Predestination often has a wider range of meaning in English than election: (1) it may refer to events, not just people, and (2) it may refer to those destined for perdition and not just life.
- Those who are not elect may still rejoice in election even though they are merely observers (cf. the audio/video of the previous lecture).
- (1) Election for service is important in the NT. The question of postmortem destiny doesn’t have to be to the fore when the vocabulary is used. (2) In any comprehensive account we should look carefully at the addressees of letters or addresses.
- Re Arminianism: Election based on God’s foreseeing a person’s faith is implausible. (1) It makes predestination a ratifying and reactive decree. Election is not only temporally prior to human action; it seems to bring about the historical situation. (2) On the Arminian view the person who is the object of divine foreknowledge is merely an idealized mode of their concrete form—a bloodless abstracted persona.
- Re Open Theism: (1) God’s dealings with individuals, especially in matters of faith and salvation, are too particular, personal, and intimate to permit this view. (2) One reason that open theists interpret texts along these lines is apparently the supposed lack of compatibility between predestination and human freedom.
- We should read election texts along broadly Augustinian lines.
- Augustine embraced a form of what is now called “double predestination.” The decree of reprobation is formulated in alternative ways, e.g., emphasizing God’s passing over people or God’s active decreeing. There are three typical arguments in this regard: (1) It is explicit in Scripture. (2) It is entailed by single predestination. (3) It is implicit in the doctrine of providence, namely, that God ordains everything. These arguments are not compelling. Narrative must have a heavy hand on our hermeneutical tiller (cf. 1 Pet 2:8 and Romans 9).
- We should be willing to be quite unclear re God’s passing over in light of the clarity of human responsibility for rejecting God.
Posted in kantzer lectures, stephen williams |
Thursday, September 10th, 2009
A report live-blogged by Andy Naselli
The 2009 Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology by Dr. Stephen Williams
Williams is professor of systematic theology at Union Theological College in Belfast, Ireland. The title of the six-part series is “The Election of Grace: A Riddle without Resolution?” The third lecture in the series was advertised to address “the question of election as a determination of destiny, specifically, the problem of perseverance” but will actually be addressing election in the OT.
This is also available via live stream.
*******
- Bultmann observed that the history of Israel was a history of failure. We may not be persuaded by Bultmann’s reasoning, but his conclusion is right.
- The nations were destined to be beneficiaries of the Abrahamic covenant.
- The threefold division elect, anti-elect, and non-elect is useful as long as the categories aren’t viewed as static.
- The elect were both a blessing and a judgment to the nations.
- Israel and the nations are distinguished yet bound together, so this raises the question why all the people of the earth are not elect.
- Do Lesslie Newbigin’s arguments re election in The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission make election a matter of necessity? Surely they do not. Newbigin repeatedly states that election is not privilege but responsibility. The phrase “responsibility not privilege” surely rings strange in our ears.
- The peculiar privilege of election is communion with the living God.
- We need to be careful not to interpret the end of Ezekiel literally (i.e., its fulfillment in the literal form given).
- It is right that election is responsibility and that election for service should be emphasized, but it is not responsible to drain out of it communion with the living God.
Posted in kantzer lectures, stephen williams |
Wednesday, September 9th, 2009
A report live-blogged by Andy Naselli
The 2009 Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology by Dr. Stephen Williams
Williams is professor of systematic theology at Union Theological College in Belfast, Ireland. The title of the six-part series is “The Election of Grace: A Riddle without Resolution?” The second lecture in the series addresses “Barth on election integrated with Barth’s views on Mozart, Beethoven and Brahms.” (Update: Williams decided not to focus on Mozart, Beethoven, and Brahms, though he will mention Mozart at the end.)
This is also available via live stream.
*******
Introduction
Evaluating Barth’s View of Election
- Theologians have often disregarded warnings about speculation in dogmatics.
- However worthy Barth’s motivation for believing that God has elected all, his belief is not scripturally warranted.
- Barth treats election as part of the doctrine of God. He treats creation after election.
- Does any other theologian have the capacity for exasperating and enthralling his readers at the same time?
- The observation that some make of America also applies to Barth: no generalization about his work is correct, but anything you say about it is true about it somewhere.
- Barth’s view of election is problematic for at least two reasons: (1) it seems to depart from the way Scripture uses the term election, and (2) it is essentially universalism. It is true that Jesus Christ is called “the elect” in the NT, but the NT does not say that all people are elect in Christ. The NT restricts the elect to a subset of the whole.
- Barth is not a dogmatic universalist, but his scheme pushes him toward that. He entirely fails to protect himself properly against the accusation. He seems untroubled by dissonance between his own language and biblical language. Why? Barth’s firm rejection of natural theology gives us a clue.
- Barth loved Mozart, who for Barth is the musician of joy. Mozart let creation sing in contrast Beethoven and Brahms, who are somber at best.
Posted in kantzer lectures, stephen williams |
Tuesday, September 8th, 2009
A report live-blogged by Andy Naselli
Tonight begins the 2009 Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology by Dr. Stephen Williams. Williams is professor of systematic theology at Union Theological College in Belfast, Ireland. The title of the six-part series is “The Election of Grace: A Riddle without Resolution?” The first lecture in the series addresses “the different ways of understanding God that surface in debates about election.”
This is also available via live stream.
*******
Introduction
- Psalm 130 instructs the heart. Psalm 131 instructs the mind.
The Intractable Nature of the Dispute
- Is election a riddle without resolution? Only he is a theologian who can turn a solution into a riddle!
- Election continues to divine the evangelical community in particular, especially via the Calvinist-Arminian debate. See for example a recent perspectives book debating five views on election.
- How far should anyone expect to get with contributing their perspective on election? We are faced with divergent ways of reading Scripture by evangelicals with different views of election (all of whom think Scripture “clearly” teaches their view).
- The cauldron has been no hotter than it has been for centuries. Strong language on soteriology is not new. And there is no evidence of global theological warming in the twentieth century.
Divergent Views of God
- It would be helpful to examine hermeneutical differences, but it would be even more interesting to examine different ways in which God portrays himself.
- Universalism (which Williams rejects) achieves a more coherent of the coexistence of the divine attributes than the alternative positions of Calvinism, Arminianism, and open theism.
- With reference to providence, God relates to good and evil in very different ways. Humans have unleashed evil upon the world and God has produced the good.
How Shall We Proceed?
- Scripture is the authority and exegesis the guide, but we won’t be able to deal with any texts in depth.
- Lectures 3 and 4 will focus on the Old and New Testaments. The OT lecture will argue that election is responsibility rather than privilege. The NT lecture will argue that election is contrasted not with reprobation but with a call that is refused.
- Someone who will be perched on Williams’s shoulder throughout these lectures and will be featured in lecture 5 is Charles Simeon. The three aims of preaching for Simeon were to humble the sinner, exalt the Savior, and exalt holiness. “Beware of systematizers.” In other words, be Bible-Christians and not just system-Christians. According to Simeon, the preacher has no responsibility to reconcile truths that Scripture does not. His responsibility is to rightly apply both sets of biblical truth. Further, existential reconciliation is possible. “Without agreeing with [everything by] Simeon, I’m taking some of my cues from him.”
- Lecture 6 will ask where this all takes us today.
- Methodologically, the place to learn about God’s love and power is Jesus himself. Karl Barth was massively christocentric, so lecture 2 is devoted to him.
Posted in kantzer lectures, stephen williams |
Tuesday, September 1st, 2009
The Henry Center is pleased to announce that it will be webcasting the Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology featuring Stephen Williams (Union Theological College, Belfast, Ireland). These lectures will be available on the Kantzer Lectures page from September 8-15, 2009. See the series page for the times.
The Center is pleased to be able to bring its constituency these lectures thanks to cutting-edge technology. Past webcasts have proven highly successful for the Center, with thousands watching the Ware-Grudem debate roughly one year ago.
Tags: henry center, kantzer lectures, stephen williams
Posted in hctu events, kantzer lectures |
Tuesday, August 18th, 2009
 In three weeks, the Center will host Dr. Stephen Williams of Union Theological College (Belfast, Ireland) for its prestigious Kantzer Lectures in Revealed Theology. The Center is pleased to announce event times and locations for the lectures, all of which are free and open to the public.
The series will be of special interest to those who enjoy rich, deep theology. It is moderated by Dr. Kevin Vanhoozer and will be published by Eerdmans.
September 8-15, 2009 | Dr. Stephen Williams (Union Theological College, Belfast, Ireland)
Series Title: The Election of Grace: a Riddle without Resolution?
Lectures on election with special reference to Karl Barth, the Bible, and the pastoral function of the doctrine. Please note that all lectures and free and open to the public.
Series Outline
Lecture One, Tuesday, September 8 | The different ways of understanding God that surface in debates about election. 7pm in ATO Chapel, dessert reception to follow in Hinkson Hall (Rodine Building on the campus of TEDS)
Lecture Two, Wednesday, September 9 | A lecture on Barth on election integrated with Barth’s views on Mozart, Beethoven and Brahms. 4pm in Hinkson
Lecture Three, Thursday, September 10 | The question of election as a determination of destiny, specifically, the problem of perseverance. 4pm in Hinkson
Lecture Four, Monday, September 14 | The question of election and particular atonement, working from the John Owen/McLeod Campbell debate. 10am in Hinkson
Lecture Five, Monday, September 14 | Election, regeneration and faith. 4pm in Hinkson
Lecture Six Tuesday, September 15 | An exposition of Romans 9-11 offering a positive proposal on election, prepared for in lectures 1-5. 4pm in Hinkson
Tags: kantzer lectures, stephen williams
Posted in hctu events, kantzer lectures |
|
