Schreiner at Oak Hill
13 comments | Permalink
In May Tom Schreiner delivered the 2008 Oak Hill School of Theology lectures on "Run to Win the Prize: The Nature of Warnings in New Testament Theology." (Oak Hill Theological College is in North London.)
Here are the online MP3s:
- How to understand the warnings in Scripture.
- Persevering in faith is not perfection
- Persevering in faith is not works-righteousness
- Faith and Assurance
He also spoke on believers baptism and did a Q&A on it:
Ardel Caneday also mentions that "Tom is working on a manuscript for a trade book for a popular readership under the title, Run to Win the Prize."Caneday is apparently working on a similar project.
To read Schreiner's work on these issues, see The Race Set Before Us: A Biblical Theology of Perseverance & Assurance and the edited volume, Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ. For a summary of Schreiner's views on the former, see this article: Perseverance and Assurance: A Survey and a Proposal.
HT: A.B. Caneday / Dan Green
To read Schreiner's work on these issues, see The Race Set Before Us: A Biblical Theology of Perseverance & Assurance and the edited volume, Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ. For a summary of Schreiner's views on the former, see this article: Perseverance and Assurance: A Survey and a Proposal.
HT: A.B. Caneday / Dan Green
posted by JT at Wednesday, June 25, 2008
13 Comments:
Thank you for these resources.
Chris
http://chris-kratzer.blogspot.com
I audited Hebrews at RTS/Charlotte last week taught by D.A. Carson, who interpreted Schreiner's and Caneday's position in this way: "If it were possible to find anyone in ____ (can't read my writing here!) to apostasize, the threat is empty and intrinsically indefensible. The more you see that there is no final apostasy, the threats become empty." Far be it from me to disagree with Carson, but I thought he misrepresented their position.
I am downloading those mp3s as I write. Thanks for linking them.
(In the title to this post it should be "Oak Hill", not "Oak Hills". )
Michael,
What is Carson's position?
I am making my way thru "The Race Set Before Us" right now. I have not whole-heartedly accepted one of Schreiner and Caneday's major theses as I am still processing it (i.e. that NT warning passages are directed exclusively to believers). I do agree with their assesment of the oft neglected prospective orientation of salvation (i.e. the "not yet"). But I am having trouble putting this together with the warning passages. In particular, I was unable to follow their argument that Heb. 6:4-6 is directed to believers. Their treatment of that passage seemed hasty to me and unclear. I'd love to see a fuller treatment of that passage by them. Although they heavily criticize Grudem's treatment of the passage, at this point I am more inclined to agree with Grudem that the subjects of the passage are false professors.
Michael Johnson,
Glad to meet you, virtually!
You indicate that D. A. Carson represented our position as follows: "If it were possible to find anyone in ____ (can't read my writing here!) to apostasize, the threat is empty and intrinsically indefensible. The more you see that there is no final apostasy, the threats become empty." You then state, Far be it from me to disagree with Carson, but I thought he misrepresented their position.
If you heard him correctly, which I assume you did because I have heard the same from other sources, then Carson has not understood our argument rightly and has unintentionally misrepresented our view.
Others have also misrepresented our view in ways far worse. Take a look here and here to see a collection of links for various reviews of The Race Set Before Us, including reviews that badly misrepresent what the book actually says and means.
I could respond to Carson's argument at length, but I will forego that here. I can address it on my own blog, dedicated to the subject. Briefly, Carson confuses our view with the "hypothetical view," a view that we critique and reject.
However, I would appreciate a note from you (via e-mail; use the link on my own blog), if you are willing, that reproduces your notes from Carson's lecture on the matter. Then I could offer some fuller response on my own blog.
Thanks.
Schreiner's study on perseverance is solid and should be given a lot more attention by Christians than it is - especially by those of Reformed persuasions (among whom I am one).
On another note, Justin, it seems as if Kostenberger's blog, Biblical Foundations, is no longer available. You may as well remove the link to it from your blog.
Best regards,
Rixon
Calgary
Dr. Caneday,
I have one question for you on Heb. 6:4-6. Do you and Dr. Schreiner understand vs. 6 as a conditional statement? IOW, should we read it something like, "IF they have fallen away THEN it is impossible" to be renewed? It seems to me that the connecting kai and the aorist participle (i.e. "fallen away") describe a situation that has already taken place.
Has any one read A.W. Pinks comments on Hebrews 6? What's your opinion on his interpretation?
MSC,
You asked, I have one question for you on Heb. 6:4-6. Do you and Dr. Schreiner understand vs. 6 as a conditional statement? IOW, should we read it something like, "IF they have fallen away THEN it is impossible" to be renewed? It seems to me that the connecting kai and the aorist participle (i.e. "fallen away") describe a situation that has already taken place.
Yes, we do take the participle ("fall away") as expressing a conditional (if . . . then), just as we find the participle functioning in the warning in chapter 10. Keep in mind that just because the participle is an aorist does not mean that it is describing an event that has already taken place. The aorist in non-indicatives is "timeless" (even within the indicative it is not necessarily time marked). It derives its time reference from finite verbs within the context.
I could develop our argument concerning Hebrews 6:4-6 much more fully, but I may do that on my own blog rather than take up JT's space.
Dr. Caneday,
That is very helpful. The more I read the book and am now listening to Dr. Schreiner's lectures your position is taking on greater clarity. I have many questions yet, but that is because I have been so entrenched in the "tests-of-genuineness" view that it is taking a while to gain a more objective perspective on the matter. Thanks.
yep - thanks for pointing to these resources.
MSC and All,
If you would like to raise questions about The Race Set Before Us, please come by my blog, The Race Set Before Us, and pose your questions. That is the purpose of my blog.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home