The last two sessions of Bible Study have provoked a good deal of discussion and questions which is, in my opinion, a good thing. There is nothing worse than teaching the Bible and having no response, so I always welcome debate.

However, I have given a great deal of thought to the direction of the discussions over the past two weeks and I genuinely believe that we are starting to move in the wrong direction.

My personal Biblical background and teaching is (Anglican*) Reformed, Evangelical which has as its base the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion (1562) and the Westminster Confession of Faith (1682). When I was ordained, I had to confirm in writing that these were my spiritual foundations. These foundations are shared by a number of other Reformed Evangelical denominations which allow me to pastor an interdenominational church such as MCC.

The broad category of ‘Evangelical’ can of course be also further sub-divided. Two such sub-divisions are Calvinism and Arminianism and many evangelicals hold the latter position. According to Wayne Grudem, who wrote a contemporary substantive book on Systematic Theology (one of my major sources of theological reference) the basic differences between these two groups are not merely differences in terminology, but in substance. One of these differences relates to the issue of ‘free choice’. Arising from their view of free choice is the Arminian position that “God’s will cannot include evil”.

This brings us back to the Bible Study discussions we have been having.

My job is to teach from the foundational truths that I have been schooled in. Whilst I’m happy to have alternative positions aired and wide-ranging discussions, I believe, after listening to Peter’s input, that there is no value in nor can we make progress by debating the differences between Calvinism and Arminianism – we must focus on our core understanding.

Peter is totally sincere about what he believes in, but I theologically disagree with his views. He is more than welcome to be part of our Bible Study and tell us his views when these differ from the theological base that I am teaching from, but I am going to restrict debate about those views, as they do not help any of us in our spiritual growth.

 

God’s Blessings, Neil

 

*Essentially I am an Anglican but from the standpoint of the Church of England in South Africa (CESA) (currently being renamed REACH – The Reformed Evangelical Anglican Church of South Africa) which is both different from and not part of the Anglican Church of South Africa.