Some distinctions are pedantic, part of that “craving for controversy and for quarrels about words” that Paul warned against (1 Tim 6:5).
Yet where would we be without those crucial distinctions between
essence and persons in the doctrine of the Trinity, or between person
and natures in Christ? I’ve been struck by how frequently John Calvin
invoked the Chalcedonian maxim “distinction without separation” not only
for the doctrine of Christ but as a rule for a host of other
theological topics—including justification and sanctification, law and
gospel, and the earthly signs (water, bread, and wine) and the reality
(Christ with his benefits).
Our problem today is more often the erosion—or even ignorance—of
crucial distinctions and categories. As Robert Godfrey often says, “We
like to reinvent the wheel, and it’s never round.” Sometimes we treat
contemporary controversies as if we were the first to encounter them.
Unaware of the discussions and debates that forged Christian consensus
in the past, we often treat controversies as if we were the first to
encounter them. Starting from scratch, we often end up with our own
lopsided confusion of things that ought to be distinguished and
separation of things that ought to be held together.
In recent debates over the application of redemption, especially
union with Christ, justification and sanctification, there is a tendency
on the part of some to view classic Reformed distinctions with
suspicion. Are they a bit of Aristotelian logic-chopping, the product
of an over-active scholastic imagination? Or are they valuable—and more
importantly, grounded in Scripture?
Here are a few categories that are helpful in guiding our own reflection today on some of these important questions: Continue at Michael Horton
No comments:
Post a Comment