Think Wink.

Two weeks ago in my Doctrine class, the topic was the nature of the atonement. That was an interesting discussion that led to my last two-part sermon on the cross. I felt that my textbook had not put enough emphasis on expiation to bring forth the idea of propitiation. The reason why the author did this is to remind his audience that Christ suffered the penalty for our sins, not just removed them from us. Thus it is easy to see why he did that. But in that discussion, the extent of the atonement came up. Before we took our fifteen minute break, the teacher said we would cover this area of the atonement: sin of the world vs. sin of the elect; Universal/general vs. particular/definite. When the teacher said this, he and the rest of the class all focused on the outspoken calvinist: me. HEHEHE! I remember this one kid who just absolutely said God cannot send people to hell because it was his eternal predestined plan to do so. It was just impossible. That made me a little upset because that is boxing up God and limiting him to what he can and cannot do. So the whole class told him not to say that. But that was fun because he was putting out his views and we got to respond to him and him to us, to me. Oh the joy.

The next day before chapel, I was sitting outside the chapel reading through Leviticus, picturing in myt mind how I wanted to break down the text and seeing how my sermon would formulate. The prof. came up to me and started talking to me about part of that discussion: what does it mean to be “in Christ.” He was looking it up on the internet and found an interesting source from a hyper-calvinist who would think I am weak in my soteriology. He didn’t really approach any of the other people from the class that was there, just me.

Yesterday in class, we were speaking on the roles of Christ as prophet, priest, and king. At the end of the day, 2 Peter 3:9 came up in the discussion and guess what. Everyone looked to me to make some kind of argument against that text. Next time it comes up I might give my answer to it. But that is only if that is necessary to class discussion. It just wasn’t vital to understand Christ’s offices and my role as fulfilling them in Christ.

I say this to say that this is too much fun and way too flattering. I enjoy debating the five points. I enjoy going against my professor who is not a calvinist. I enjoy my class taking me on in this great debate. I enjoy it thoroughly. This is so because of the fact that I am talking about what Jesus did for me in eternity past, present, and what he will do in the future. I enjoy the discussions of the verses and taking on the class. But I only enjoy it when it is relevant to the issue. Dr. Alber Mohler said that a person is not a try calvinist if he will drive across the state to speak on the five points but will never go across the street to preach the gospel to his neighbor who is lost in sin. This is why I don’t have to preach explicitly about the five points. They will come out but I don’t make it a point. My main focus is the gospel the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. That gives me great joy, calvinism is only a small sliver of that joy.

The Missing Piece to the Corinthian Correspondence?

More From John Owen

Another look into euaggelion