Theological Term of the Week

consequent absolute necessity
“The view that the atonement was not absolutely necessary, but as a ‘consequence’ of God’s decision to save some human beings, the atonement was absolutely necessary”1

• From scripture:

  Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, 4 who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father…. (Galatians 1:3-4 ESV)

  For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. …
  
  

  14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery. 16 For surely it is not angels that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham. 17 Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. (Hebrews 2:10, 14-17 ESV)

   [F]or all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:23-26 ESV)

• From The London Baptist Confession, Chapter 8

  1._____ It pleased God, in His eternal purpose, to choose and ordain the Lord Jesus, his only begotten Son, …to be the mediator between God and man; the prophet, priest, and king; head and saviour of the church, … unto whom he did from all eternity give a people to be his seed and to be by him in time redeemed, called, justified, sanctified, and glorified.
  
  10.____This number and order of offices is necessary … for in respect of our alienation from God, and imperfection of the best of our services, we need his priestly office to reconcile us and present us acceptable unto God….

• From Big Truths for Young Hearts by Bruce Ware:

  Did Jesus really have to die in order so save us from our sin? Could God have done the same thing some other way? Many Christians have asked these kinds of questions over the years, and if they are clear about Scripture’s teaching, they know the answers. Yes, Jesus did have to die; and no, there was no other way.

  …The problem of mercy is this: how can a holy, just, and righteous God show mercy and kindness to sinners who deserve the judgment that he, as God is obligated to execute? Remember, he cannot ignore sinners’ sin. He cannot pretend they’re no guilty. As God, he must exercise justice, and to fail to do so would be to fail to be God!

  So here is the genius of the cross. God made a plan by which our sins and its full guilt would be charged against God’s own Son. As his Son, the God man, bore our sin and its guilt in himself, the judgment that we deserved was directed at him, not at us. On the cross, then, Jesus bore our sin and paid the punishment for our guilt, and this did two things at once. Jesus’ payment for our sin 1) satisfied the full demands of God’s justice against our sin, while 2) it provided everything God’s mercy and love sought to accomplish in bringing forgiveness to sinners. In Christ on the cross, the fullness of God’s just wrath against our sin and the richness of God’s mercy and love toward sinners meet and are satisfied. As Paul says, God the Father gave his Son, Christ Jesus, “as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the cross” (Romans 3:25-26).

• From Redemption Accomplished and Applied by John Murray: 

  [W]e are constrained to conclude that the kind of necessity which the Scriptural considerations support is that which may be described as absolute or indispensable. The proponents of hypothetical necessity do not reckon sufficiently with the exigencies involved in salvation form sin unto eternal life: they do not take proper account of the Godward aspects of Christ’s accomplishment. If we keep in view the God which must be met in salvation from it, then the doctrine of indispensable necessity makes Calvary intelligible to us and enhances the incomprehensible marvel of both Calvary itself and the sovereign purpose of love which Calvary fulfilled. The more we emphasize the inflexible demands of justice and holiness the more marvellous become the love of God and it’s provisions.

Learn more:

1. Wayne Grudem and Jeff Purswell, Bible Doctrine: Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith: The Necessity of the Atonement
2. Kim of Hiraeth: Consequent Absolute Necessity (notes from John Murray’s Redemption Accomplished and Applied)
3. Jonathan Edwards: Necessity of Atonement
4. S. Lewis Johnson: The Necessity of Christ’s Death (Five mp3 sermons with transcripts)
   

1Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem

Related term:

• penal substitution

Filed under Christ’s Nature and His Work

Do you have a a theological term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it.

I’m also interested in any suggestions you have for tweaking my definitions or for additional (or better) articles or sermons/lectures for linking. I’ll give you credit and a link back to your blog if I use your suggestion.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms organized in alphabetical order or by topic.

Theological Term of the Week

Disclaimer: As those of you who read here regularly probably know, I’m a firm complementarian, not an egalitarian. In this post I’ve linked and quoted some things supporting egalitarianism even though I may disagree with the points made. The scripture quoted is scripture used by egalitarians to support egalitarianism. Of course, I don’t think it does or I’d wouldn’t be a complementarian, would I?

egalitarianism
The view that men and women are equal before God and “all the functions and roles in the church are open to men and women alike.”1

• From scripture:

  Then God said, “Let us make man  in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

  27 So God created man in his own image,
   in the image of God he created him;
  male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:26-27 ESV)

  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28 ESV)

• From Christians for Biblical Equality, “Men, Women and Biblical Equality”. (This is a site promoting egalitarianism):

  The Bible teaches that, in the New Testament economy, women as well as men exercise the prophetic, priestly and royal functions (Acts 2:17-18, 21:9; 1 Cor 11:5; 1 Peter 2:9-10; Rev 1:6, 5:10). Therefore, the few isolated texts that appear to restrict the full redemptive freedom of women must not be interpreted simplistically and in contradiction to the rest of Scripture, but their interpretation must take into account their relation to the broader teaching of Scripture and their total context (1 Cor 11:2-16, 14:33-36; 1 Tim 2:9-15).

• From The Bible and Gender Equality by Rebecca Merrill Groothuis (supporting egalitarianism): 

  Evangelical egalitarianism, or biblical equality, refers to the biblically-based belief that gender, in and of itself, neither privileges nor curtails a believer’s gifting or calling to any ministry in the church or home. In particular, the exercise of spiritual authority, as biblically defined, is deemed as much a female believer’s privilege and responsibility as it is a male believer’s.

  Biblical equality does not mean women and men are identical or undifferentiated. Biblical egalitarians recognize average differences (both learned and intrinsic) between women and men, and affirm that God designed men and women to complement and benefit one another.

  Although it shares with feminism the belief that unjust treatment of women should be remediated, biblical equality is not grounded in feminist ideology, which is derived from cultural factors and philosophies. Rather, biblical equality is grounded simply and solely in the properly consistent interpretation of God’s written word. On this basis, biblical egalitarians (a) affirm that the gifts and callings of the Spirit are distributed without regard to gender, and that all believers in Christ stand on equal ground before God, and (b) repudiate the notion that the Bible grants to men spiritual authority and other religious privileges that it denies to women.

Learn more:

1. Rebecca Merrill Groothuis: The Basics of Biblical Equality: Belief and Practice (supporting egalitariansim)
2. N. T Wright: Women’s Service in the Church: The Biblical Basis (supporting egalitarianism)
3. Daniel Wallace: Women in Leadership - Part 1, Part 2 (supporting complementarian, but examining the complementarian/egalitarian debate.)

Related term:

• complementarianism

1Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem

Filed under Ecclesiology.

Do you have a a theological term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it.

I’m also interested in any suggestions you have for tweaking my definitions or for additional (or better) articles or sermons/lectures for linking. I’ll give you credit and a link back to your blog if I use your suggestion.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms organized in alphabetical order or by topic.

Theological Term of the Week

complementarianism
The view that men and women are equal in value before God but that their God-given roles in the family and the church are distinct, with “some governing and teaching roles in the church are reserved for men.”1

• From scripture:

  Then God said, “Let us make man  in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

  27 So God created man in his own image,
   in the image of God he created him;
  male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:26-27 ESV)

  Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. (1 Timothy 2:11-14 ESV)

• From The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood:

  Based on our understanding of Biblical teachings, we affirm the following:

  • 1. Both Adam and Eve were created in God’s image, equal before God as persons and distinct in their manhood and womanhood (Gen 1:26-27, 2:18).
  • 2. Distinctions in masculine and feminine roles are ordained by God as part of the created order, and should find an echo in every human heart (Gen 2:18, 21-24; 1 Cor 11:7-9; 1 Tim 2:12-14).
  • 3. Adam’s headship in marriage was established by God before the Fall, and was not a result of sin (Gen 2:16-18, 21-24, 3:1-13; 1 Cor 11:7-9). …
  • 5. The Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, manifests the equally high value and dignity which God attached to the roles of both men and women (Gen 1:26-27, 2:18; Gal 3:28). Both Old and New Testaments also affirm the principle of male headship in the family and in the covenant community (Gen 2:18; Eph 5:21-33; Col 3:18-19; 1 Tim 2:11-15). …
  • 7. In all of life Christ is the supreme authority and guide for men and women, so that no earthly submission-domestic, religious, or civil-ever implies a mandate to follow a human authority into sin (Dan 3:10-18; Acts 4:19-20, 5:27-29; 1 Pet 3:1-2).
  • 8. In both men and women a heartfelt sense of call to ministry should never be used to set aside Biblical criteria for particular ministries (1 Tim 2:11-15, 3:1-13; Tit 1:5-9). Rather, Biblical teaching should remain the authority for testing our subjective discernment of God’s will. …

• From The Order of Creation by R. C. Sproul: 

  If anything transcends a cultural custom, it is a Creation ordinance. Thus, it is a dangerous business indeed to treat the matter of subordination in marriage and in the church as a mere local custom when it is clear that the New Testament mandates for these matters rest upon apostolic appeals to Creation. Such appeals make it crystal clear that these mandates were not intended to be regarded as local customs. That the church today often treats divine rules as mere customs reflects not so much the cultural conditioning of the Bible but the cultural conditioning of the modern church. Here is a case where the church capitulates to the local culture rather than being obedient to the transcendent law of God.
  
  … Creation ordinances may be modified, as the Mosaic Law did with regard to divorce, but the principle here is that Creation ordinances are normative unless or until they are explicitly modified by later biblical revelation.

Learn more:

1. Sam Storms: Complementarianism
2. Mary Kassian: Complementarianism for Dummies
3. John MacArthur: The Biblical Position on Women’s Roles
4. Andreas J. Köstenberger: The Crux of the Matter: Paul’s Pastoral Pronouncements Regarding Women’s Roles in 1 Timothy 2:9-15 (pdf)
   
5. Douglas Moo: What Does It Mean Not to Teach or Have Authority Over Men? (pdf)
6. D. A. Carson: Silent in the Churches: On the Role of Women in 1 Corinthians 14:33B-36 (pdf)
7. Bill Kynes: Complementarianism: Definition and Priorities (mp3)
8. Mark Dever: Gender Roles in the Church (mp3)

Related term:

• egalitarianism

1Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem

Do you have a a theological term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it.

I’m also interested in any suggestions you have for tweaking my definitions or for additional (or better) articles or sermons/lectures for linking. I’ll give you credit and a link back to your blog if I use your suggestion.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms organized in alphabetical order or by topic.