I frequently intuit that this debate is grounded in a failure--by both sides--to grasp that God created all things. Culture, religion, etc., like the Sabbath, are made for man. Let us cease using the creator/creature distinction to drive a wedge in the heart of God's actitivity, whether to elevate or denigrate the creation. Sometimes, less is more, and I think that this doctrine benefits from Augustine's modesty in De Trinitate, wherein he professes to be convicted only by the strictures of the creed and to treat all else as little more than an erudite prayer and meditation on what may be seen in the dim mirror.
I'm less concerned about how bad things got or are, and am far more interested in what we are, by union with Christ and the indwelling Spirit, destined to be and, by grace, are now becoming as new creations.
Perhaps this is the way out of the brothers' quarrel? After all, prayer and work don't require precise knowledge of God's higher judgement of their merit or the demerit of that of other men: only that we obey His command with humble hearts, filled with joy at having being saved from sin, death, and the Accuser.
1. Can you elaborate how CGT creates Faithful Presence, and how a rich theology of nature counters Faithful Presence thought? I'm not sure where the tension is.
2. Is the WCF chapter on "good works" something that frustrates you? (XVI.VII) "Works done by unregenerate men, although... of good use both to themselves and others., yet, because they proceed not from an heart purified by faith... are therefore sinful, and cannot please God." I don't necessarily disagree with this theological statement abstractly, but the overly precise definition of "good works" that makes them only available to regenerate people feels unhelpful.
I frequently intuit that this debate is grounded in a failure--by both sides--to grasp that God created all things. Culture, religion, etc., like the Sabbath, are made for man. Let us cease using the creator/creature distinction to drive a wedge in the heart of God's actitivity, whether to elevate or denigrate the creation. Sometimes, less is more, and I think that this doctrine benefits from Augustine's modesty in De Trinitate, wherein he professes to be convicted only by the strictures of the creed and to treat all else as little more than an erudite prayer and meditation on what may be seen in the dim mirror.
I'm less concerned about how bad things got or are, and am far more interested in what we are, by union with Christ and the indwelling Spirit, destined to be and, by grace, are now becoming as new creations.
Perhaps this is the way out of the brothers' quarrel? After all, prayer and work don't require precise knowledge of God's higher judgement of their merit or the demerit of that of other men: only that we obey His command with humble hearts, filled with joy at having being saved from sin, death, and the Accuser.
1. Can you elaborate how CGT creates Faithful Presence, and how a rich theology of nature counters Faithful Presence thought? I'm not sure where the tension is.
2. Is the WCF chapter on "good works" something that frustrates you? (XVI.VII) "Works done by unregenerate men, although... of good use both to themselves and others., yet, because they proceed not from an heart purified by faith... are therefore sinful, and cannot please God." I don't necessarily disagree with this theological statement abstractly, but the overly precise definition of "good works" that makes them only available to regenerate people feels unhelpful.