Here is the fourth part in this mini series. Part one can be found here, part two here and part three here.
What does it mean to be sovereign?
We see that God alone is the moral prescriber and that even though sinful human beings deserve death, judgment and an eternity of separation from an altogether holy God we do have a God who is gracious. It is here that we often get in a muddle, confuse our theology with anthropology, try to create an anthropocentric and systematic castle rather than loosely hanging our ideas on theocentric and movable stakes and consequently end up making nonsense statements that, in light of eternity, will equate to asking what colour square is!
We know that “he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17:31), we know that “the LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love” (Numbers 14:18), we know that “it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy” (Romans 9:16), and we know that “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9)
In and amongst a myriad of true statements we must place a paradox between God’s sure, certain and absolute sovereignty and the moral, just and absolute culpability of humans for their actions. In doing this, however, we must maintain a theocentric mindset, one that has an eternal perspective and one that does not pander to the desire of the human heart to hear what its itching ears lust for (2 Timothy 4:3).
God bless.
Dear Freedom
What does it mean to be sovereign?
We see that God alone is the moral prescriber and that even though sinful human beings deserve death, judgment and an eternity of separation from an altogether holy God we do have a God who is gracious. It is here that we often get in a muddle, confuse our theology with anthropology, try to create an anthropocentric and systematic castle rather than loosely hanging our ideas on theocentric and movable stakes and consequently end up making nonsense statements that, in light of eternity, will equate to asking what colour square is!
We know that “he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17:31), we know that “the LORD is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love” (Numbers 14:18), we know that “it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy” (Romans 9:16), and we know that “if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (Romans 10:9)
In and amongst a myriad of true statements we must place a paradox between God’s sure, certain and absolute sovereignty and the moral, just and absolute culpability of humans for their actions. In doing this, however, we must maintain a theocentric mindset, one that has an eternal perspective and one that does not pander to the desire of the human heart to hear what its itching ears lust for (2 Timothy 4:3).
God bless.
Dear Freedom
0 comments:
Post a Comment