Clarifying Our Theological Vision, part 1

31 thoughts on “Clarifying Our Theological Vision, part 1”

1. Thanks for this article! Beautiful clarification of some complex topics. I think this helps with the over-simplified and airtight distinction between the “saved” and “unsaved.” The threshold is more porous and messy than that, and Christ is at work trying to draw all sorts to himself. Glory!

2. Fantastic clarification, in my opinion, and matching up with what Jesus has been teaching me! Since learning a fantastic theological word coined by Thomas Torrance, “onto-relations” (which means that we have our “being in relationship”), we must indeed hold Union and Communion (or participation) together as 2 sides of the same coin.

   I thought it was greatly stated when you wrote about the weakness if “Turning what is dynamic and relational into something non-relational, generic, impersonal, causal and a fixed fact or data point that does not necessitate (in a vital way) the continuing ministry of the Holy Spirit in the life of the members of the church, the body of Christ.”

   As the true human, as well as being very God of God, Jesus reveals this in His life, words and work! And what he did, he didn’t do for himself (he is already that way!), He did for US, that we might participate! Ha!

   Thanks for explaining the Word (Jesus!) and word of God more accurately and may we, like Apollos, be greatly benefited by it as we live and share the Good News in this 500th year and celebration of the last Great Reformation! ??

3. Got it! It’s all good!

4. I posted this on our local churches’ FB wall. I also emailed local church leaders and recommended it for their study. I say Amen and Hallelujah!

   Thank you Dr. Deddo.

5. Thank you for your work and service to the church.
   I do have a question. I know that Christ divested Himself of His godly powers when He being a human being. Now many times Christ would answer His critics by stating that whatever He said and did was not of His doing but rather He was always doing the will of the Father and always felt the Father’s presents in in life having an intimate relationship with Him until He came to the cross and took on the sins of mankind. He then at that time cried out Father why has thou forsaken me. Christ was totally alone in his suffering and death. Do you agree if not please explain it to me.
   Thanks again,
   For all you do.

6. Bob, your question is one often asked: Did God (the Father) forsake Jesus when our Lord took the sins of the world upon himself on the cross. Tom McCall addresses this question in his book, Forsaken. You’ll find a summary of the main points in the book in a series of posts on The Surprising God blog beginning at http://thesurprisinggodblog.gci.org/2012/04/my-god-my-god-why-have-your-forsaken-me.html. Also see the GCI.org article at https://www.gci.org/jesus/forsake. What these articles note is that there never was a time when the Eternal Son of God and God the Father were separated. Indeed, the oneness of God, the Trinity, can never be broken. Why then did Jesus cry out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” These articles will answer that question.

7. This clarification is both meaningful and vital. A slight trip or stumble, if not corrected, can result in a fall. Thanks! Joyfully, the journey continues.

8. Outstanding!!!!! The distinctions that you pointed out are vital to us being better witnesses to the God revealed in Jesus. I was blown away with what you said about the two unions ( Hypostatic and Spiritual) and how they can’t be separated. We absolutely need the Hypostatic Union of the Son of God, so that by the Spirit we can be brought to participate in the Spiritual Union. As you say, Jesus worked it out for us (Hypostatic Union) and the Holy Spirit works it out in us (Spiritual Union). Thanks so much!!

9. This is excellent, Dr. Gary. The clarification on union and communion was needed, as well as the two types of union you mentioned. Thanks.

   Another point of clarification might be that when we in GCI refer to “universal reconciliation,” we are not saying the same thing as Christian Universalists.

   When Christian Universalists use the term, they mean that “all human beings will ultimately be restored to a right relationship with God in Heaven and the New Jerusalem.” (Wikipedia article, “Christian Univeralism.” Wikipedia is obviously not a scholarly source, but it does at least tell us what is commonly believed about the term and its association with Universalism.)

   While we are “hopeful” for all, unlike Univeralists, we cannot categorically affirm the final salvation of all.

   Thanks again.

10. Such a good clarification of our denominational theology! I have always appreciated that the GCI has explained our beliefs to the lay member! I feel we are understanding in New and exciting ways! Thank you for including us in these understandings!

11. Thanks, Dr. Deddo.

    I think we have to be careful not to make participation a work. Participation is an act of grace. I think all people are participating, to some extent, in the life and work of the Triune God – even if they are participating unknowingly, and without confessing Christ.

    As far as union goes, I find it hard to separate those who knowingly respond by grace, from those who unknowingly participate without knowing who they are in Christ. I think it’s easier for me to understand that some knowingly participate, and others do not, but all participate by the grace of God. Otherwise, we need to clarify the goodness, and the good deeds of non believers, and atheists.

    (See the “much more” of Romans 5; the “all” of Eph. 4:6; the “all” of Col. 3:11; the “all” of John 1:16; the Light that enlightens “every man,” John 1:9; etc.).

12. So why use the term “inclusion” why not just use the word “reconciled”—it would create less confusion when explaining the hypostatic and spiritual unions. Does all humanity share in the life of the Trinity due to the fact that the hypostatic union was accomplished in the Incarnation?

13. This essay was very helpful to me. It is packed full of thought-provoking statements that clarify GCI’s understanding of the Gospel. Each time I read it, 6 times so far, I get more clarity. Let me say this, if anyone reads this and perceives that we are walking back the goodness of the Gospel, I believe this clarification actually “walks forward” our understanding of the Gospel. Without personhood and distinction we are more lost than ever. If the life, death, resurrection, and ascension ever negates the “us” that is really us then we are in great jeopardy and in need of additional salvation beyond the finished work of Christ. We are included… and set aside for an “arranged marriage” but it is not a forced marriage. Indeed, the Gospel of Jesus is so good that we may say he has included all of humanity but will not ever usurp our freedom and distinction, as Imago Dei, to give our total and very real “yes” to his yes!

14. So our view of salvation is an Arminian view. Non believers become believers through the help of the Holy spirit. One person’s response to his calling.

15. From Gary Deddo, in reply to Joe Radosti:

    Thanks Joe for your comment. Yes, of course you are right—participation must not be construed as work—that is something some do to try to condition God to be for us, to incline or especially obligate God to treat us with love and grace/favor—even if we (mistakenly) think God had set up the obligations for us to fulfill that would obligate God to “fulfill his side of the contract” in order to appease him. There is no going back on that. And there are many ways to affirm and proclaim that, which we do and encourage and even direct our members and pastors to do.

    However, there are improper ways to guard against a “works righteousness” or contract view. There is more than one error to guard against. So the question becomes what all do we need to proclaim to assist our members and pastors to guard against multiple errors? It is not sufficient simply to guard against a “works” view when ministering over time to a congregation. But however done, it must, of course, not do so in a way that contradicts what has been affirmed about God’s freely-given grace. And that is what the article and the series will attempt to do. Partly because it is difficult to do, we tend to veer towards one curb or the other, when we need to avoid jumping over either. So we cannot avoid the problem of a works approach at any cost, especially the cost of fostering another error or by writing off sections of Scripture or its patterned ways of speaking about the truth of our life in Christ.

    Part of the clarification offered so far is to indicate how certain words are consistently used in the biblical revelation and what implications there are for a faithful theological rendering of these words so as to avoid creating confusion or hesitation and while promoting consistency. And the truth of the matter is that the word that translates koinonia, “participation,” is simply not used to speak of all persons. As we know, the biblical revelation does make a distinction between those who are believing and those who are not (or are not yet) believing.

    As we know, even in the Gospel of John where we hear about the light coming into the world and enlightening every person, John immediately follows up with at least an equally astounding fact, “He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:10-13). John is here distinguishing between humanity’s relationship to God via creation and its response to the same one who brings us redemption and reconciliation. Creation or existence is the gift of God, one that is largely external, fixed, relatively impersonal, mechanical and causal. Creation is in that sense a universal principle. Biblical teaching acknowledges this fact in a number of ways, for instance when Paul indicates, quoting a pagan philosopher, that all “live and move and have their being in God.” But the relationship of creation cannot be equated with the relationship of redemption or salvation. The fact that there are those who are created by God but who astonishingly reject his redemption and salvation indicates this is so. But there are those who have received the power to become the children of God, John goes on to indicate. The truth of creation is not identical to the truth of salvation. But the truth of creation does indeed provide, as Karl Barth puts it, an external basis for his covenant of grace.

    Of course Jesus calls for and even provokes a particular response to him throughout his entire ministry, including on the cross. Even there the man on one side responds to him in one way and the other man, on the other side, in an opposite way. Salvation is a personal relationship by the Holy Spirit on the basis of the objective work of Christ.

    As noted, there are other distinctions that are clearly and consistently made such as those who are “in Christ” or who are united to Christ, or those who are born from above and those who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit in the way prophesied by Joel, for example. That’s what the article pointed out. That is because participation (koinonia) denotes a personal, relational, dynamic, active and responsive reality. Participation (and other English translations of the Greek word: sharing, fellowship) does not denote a general, universal principle (or law!), or an impersonal, fixed, static, mechanical, causal, or non-relational reality. That is why participation does not apply to all since not all are responding in the same way, not all are receptive to the freely given gift and some, apparently, can actively resist and reject it.

    Furthermore, if we do not follow the biblical pattern and make a distinction between those who are participating and those who are not, then much of the Gospels, most of Acts and nearly all of the epistles must be dismissed or entirely neglected. They specify the nature of the responses to God’s freely given grace brought about by the ministry of the Holy Spirit, namely the nature of our participation with its benefits and non-participation with its dangers. Our theology ought to make room for and make sense of what constitutes so much of the New Testament, new covenant, teaching, especially when in them we also find plenty of guarding against a “works righteousness” or contract view. We ought to be able to do the same in our preaching and teaching and in our theology that helps us prepare for our testimony, preaching, teaching and counseling.

    Of course, like any theological statement, the idea of participation can be misused. Even Jesus’ own teaching was misused, not to mention Paul’s. So that has to be guarded against too. And what guards best against its misuse is to always place it in the context of God’s prior, freely given, and unconditioned-by-us grace in the incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension and promised return of Christ, and the sending of and ongoing ministry of the Holy Spirit. These are what JB Torrance calls the “indicatives of grace.” No imperatives of grace should ever be proclaimed apart from these indicatives of grace. But on that basis, following the absolutely pervasive pattern of biblical example, including Jesus’ own, and the biblical teaching othewise, we can and should, like good shepherds, guide people in making their responses to that grace, including the comprehensive category of response called participation. This is what Paul calls the “obedience of faith”—–faith in the unconditional indicatives of grace. But the unconditional indicatives of grace, because they involve real relationship, call for our response. Those responses can be described as the “unconditional obligations of grace” as James Torrance as put it. It is by the gracious ministry of the Holy Spirit that we are set free to share in Christ’s own regenerated human nature and in his perfect responses that he is making for us, in our place and on our behalf, as our living, great High Priest. Thus we are admonished to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18).

    An analogy might be that no one, at least in the Christian church, is obligated to offer or receive the offer of marriage. But when two are married they take on the obligations of marriage, mainly fidelity and being “one.” Why? Because marriage is a relationship of a certain sort. No one says after they are declared to be married, “Well, since we are married there’s no point in living together. Let’s go our separate ways. And anyway, since we’re now married, infidelity won’t make any difference.” The point of being married is fidelity and living together as one. We could say that while God has betrothed to himself all persons in Jesus Christ, the marriage has not been consummated by all by making a response enabled by the ministry of the Holy Spirit. (Note that all analogies eventually fail, including this one.)

    Further, it is a misuse of the idea of participation to try and use it as an absolute criterion to enable us to identify exactly who is and who is not participating or who is participating too exactly what degree. That would be to approach participation in legal, mechanical, causal, impersonal ways! That is not its purpose and doing so would amount to a disregard for the larger relational reality of the indicatives of grace. As we’ll explore further in the series as it unfolds, we make those distinctions for exactly the same reasons the biblical revelation does: to hold out hope to those who are not yet participating, to warn those who seem to be obviously and persistently resisting participation, to encourage those who have been participating to keep on, and to highlight all the benefits of participating as fully as the grace of God enables—–not only for one’s own benefit, but the benefit of others, both believers and not-yet believers. And more than that, to give God the glory for his grace of enabling us, through the Son and by the Spirit, to enter into a personal, dynamic, responsive and loving fellowship and communion with him in a relationship of worship.

16. From Gary Deddo in reply to Steven Sell:

    Steven, you raise a good question. We do not require our pastors or members to use the idea of “inclusion.” It has never served as a formal doctrinal term. It can be found in our Statement of Beliefs, but it is not used there as a key doctrinal term. It is primarily adjectival. So, it could be set aside. Or it can be used in a clearer and careful way and probably indicating, at least once in a while if not often, what it does not mean.

    All theological terms have a certain ambiguity to them, so they all have to be defined and used in a proper context. They all require some clarification and noting the biblical roots of these theological summaries or syntheses. There’s no such thing a doctrine that cannot be misunderstood! This is even more the case when using words informally that have little or no normative use in the history of the theology of the church.

    Inclusion needed to be addressed since it is an informal term that in GCI circles has been widely used for a good number of years. But without careful definition and qualification (what it does and doesn’t mean) we found that inconsistency and hesitation if not confusion was beginning to develop. It’s easy to make logical inferences (that are never necessarily true) from a word or phrase that is used, especially, when used informally. And that had begun happening. So inclusion itself requires at least clarification—–by referring to the Scriptural roots and making use of other more carefully defined and formalized terms in biblical studies and historically orthodox Christian theology. That’s what we’re attempting to do. It can be properly used, but, it can also be put aside if the term creates more problems than it solves. At this point, we leave it up to our pastors and leaders to discern what would be most helpful. But since it’s in our literature and history, it’s best if our GCI leadership can explain both what it does and doesn’t mean.

    The second part of your question about nonbelievers “sharing in the life of the Trinity” relates to the question of participation. Sharing is a translation of the NT word for “participation” (koinonia) along with communion and fellowship. It is also described in the NT without using that particular word. But given that “sharing” means being personal, relational, dynamic, interactive and responsive by the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the answer would have to be no, not all are yet sharing in the life of the Trinity, sharing in Jesus’ relationship with the Father by the Holy Spirit. But we can and should say that all that God has done for us, is doing and will do is with the aim to provide for and enable all to share by grace in the Son’s fellowship with the Father by the Holy Spirit, so that “all who call upon the Lord will be saved.”

17. From Gary Deddo in reply to Steven Sell’s commment concerning the Arminian view of salvation:

    Steven, GCI is not beholden to have a theology that is, for instance, Calvinist or Arminian, or anti-Calvinist or anti-Arminian. While our theology may be descriptively closer, at various points, to one or another of these more or less traditional systems of Protestant theology (there are others, e.g. Anabaptist), they prescribe nothing for us. We may learn and benefit from both or neither, or from some parts of one and other parts of the other or from a third or fourth (Eastern Orthodoxy, Anabaptist, etc). The GCI Statement of Belief does not align neatly with either of these two systems although it does overlap with both at significant points. Ours indeed does align with the Protestant Reformation tradition of which both Calvinist and Arminian theologies have their roots. It would take a very long essay, even books, to explain how exactly our theology both overlaps but departs from these theologies, especially since they themselves are not monolithic, but have variations within them!

    Your necessarily simple summary could actually be adopted by both Calvinists and Arminians, each requiring further but differing qualifications. All biblical and historically orthodox Christian theologies call for some kind of participation or responsiveness enabled by the Holy Spirit. It’s at the point of the why’s and how’s of that participation that the theologies differ.

    GCI’s incarnational Trinitarian theology tries to account for the biblical centrality of the person and work of Christ and for the united ministry of all three persons of the Trinity, which allows for the dynamic, personal, interactive and relational elements depicted and derived from the biblical revelation. It especially attempts to make use of a comprehensive grasp of who Christ is and how his ministry is linked with a biblically comprehensive understanding of the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

    Part of how we would differ both from most Calvinists and Arminians would be on the nature and scope of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. In short, the Holy Spirit has the same scope or breadth as does the ministry of Christ, namely on behalf of all. But also the Holy Spirit is the one who enables us to share in what Christ has accomplished for all in his human nature: our justification, sanctification and glorification. Additionally, the Holy Spirit does not work causally, mechanically or impersonally, but relationally, dynamically and personally, but none-the-less effectively.

    Finally, in contrast to most Arminians, we do not teach that the Holy Spirit gives us a neutral (and in that sense “free”) will to choose or to reject God. There is nothing neutral about the ministry of the Holy Spirit any more than was/is the ministry of Jesus Christ. The two Persons are perfectly one—in character, mind and will, for us and our salvation. Their ministries are perfectly coordinated. Another difference from Arminian theology is that we do not teach that God elects individuals on the basis of God’s foreknowledge of our choosing.

    There is a great mystery as to exactly how the Holy Spirit works that cannot simply be understood by analogy with human agency or natural law. Thus the personal and personalizing ministry of the Holy Spirit, after Christ’s ascension, is essential to our participation, our fellowship and communion, which is a gift of grace to share in the dual mediation of Christ to us and in his responses in our place and on our behalf as one of us. By the Spirit we grow up into Christ, we call out Abba Father. What Christ has done for us, the Holy Spirit works out in us.

    I hope this brief description helps, although it certainly cannot answer all the questions involved in sorting this out. I suppose that’s why we also offer theology courses through GCS!

18. Thanks very much, Dr. Deddo. The article is very helpful in clarifying many of the terms we use in our systematic theology and offers a more faithful explanation to the nuances of salvation in the Bible or biblical theology.

19. Gary how can I, a member of GCI, participate in GCI seminary? Are there any scholarships that would help with cost. I have a very small pocket book. I would like to be a part of this but not sure I have the financial means.

20. Hi Steven.

    The best way to get your questions answered concerning Grace Communion Seminary, is to phone the GCS office at 1-800-851-2611. They can acquaint you with the various related programs and policies.

21. Thank you so much for this clarification. I am looking forward to the next article.

22. Thank you all for your questions and kind comments. I’m glad you have found the article helpful. It is a challenging topic!

23. Dr. Gary –
    You recommended a linked article “The Christian Life and Our Participation in Christ’s Continuing Ministry.” I don’t know how I missed it, or perhaps I wasn’t ready to fully receive it until now, but I have to say it was one of the most amazing and logical and wonderful things I have EVER read. You made so clear, how we as preachers can and should preach grace (belief/response) in such a comprehensive way, that I don’t know why it isn’t included on the masthead of every publication and source we communicate on our website, and provided as must reading in the Equipper for anyone who preaches or teaches this gospel.

    I want to shout from the top of my lungs to those who have posted hear…PLEASE…click the link and take the time.

    If I had learned only that in all of my GCS classes and training (condensed to one article, without having to work it all out) it would have been well worth the time and expense of my eight year journey in our denomination’s seminary.

    I intend to use it as the key note article this Thursday Bible Study as we kick off an in-depth look and interactive dialogue into the Basics of Trinitarian Theology at New Hope.

    GOD BLESS YOU, man, for giving us such a jewel in that article, that was ironically only referenced as kind of a BTW to this article!!!

    Warmest,
    Craig

24. If one were to oversimplify ( clarify ) I Timothy 4:10, this all is , in my opinion, what Paul means by saying “…the Living God is the Saviour of all men, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO BELIEVE.” I appreciate the further clarifications and explanations. I also appreciate Hebrews 12`:2, that it is Jesus who is the ‘author, finisher and perfecter of our faith and Salvation.” I trust Him to take my hand and walk me into the Heavenly Realm and seat me at the right hand of the Father. Thank you Jesus! PK

25. Dr. Deddo,

    I have a question in regards to participation. It appears from the article and especially from some of the answers to the follow up questions that GCI is now making the definitive statement that only believers are participating. I realize that the statement was made that we are not trying to legalistically determine who is or is not participating. However, it seems that the gist is that some are completely not participating, and it appears to make the tie in that those are nonbelievers. First of all, if this is incorrect please let me know.

    However, if this is correct and the distinction is made that only believers are participating, how does this reconcile with the realities of others living out what I would can only consider to be participation in everyday life. In fact, a good example that comes to mind would be the one from the scripture actually referenced in the article – Acts 17. Although the actual koinonia word is not used there, it would seem participation is at the very core of the persuasive statements that Paul is trying to make there. He calls out people who are worshiping an “unknown god” and essentially brags on it to a certain extent, declaring that they are worshiping in ignorance but then ties their worship into the fact that they are worshiping an unknown god, and in fact there is an unknown God that is the one true God. This seems to be very close to declaring that they are already participating to some extent, even though they do not know it and then openly declaring that he wants them to know it and therefore participate even more fully, a call that I certainly rejoice in proclaiming to believer and unbeliever alike.

    Any points of clarification on this would be appreciated. Thanks!

26. Here is Dr. Deddo’s reply to Dennis’ comment:

    Dear Dennis,

    Thanks for your inquiry.

    Hopefully parts 2 and 3 of this series will fill out what we understand concerning our participation and thus provide a more full response to your questions. But here are a few things to consider.

    The aim of these clarifications is to fill out partial understanding or to correct possible misunderstandings of what we have been teaching over the last number of years. Unfortunately, there are a number of logical inferences that can be made from what we have taught about the completed and objective work of God through Christ, that are not logically nor theologically necessarily true. (No simple matter of logical inference regarding matters of fact are ever *necessarily* true.) And we want to clarify what we do and don’t mean on the basis of a comprehensive grasp of the biblical revelation of the reality to which it points. That means we want our theological formulations and understandings to cohere with that revelation and therefore result in a greater consistency and less confusion that fits with a comprehensive grasp of biblical teaching.

    As you will see in the following installments to the series, participation (koinonia), is a key term but not the only word that describes what participation involves. This word is also translated communion, sharing, fellowship. In biblical revelation this and related words or descriptions have a particular meaning that points to a particular aspect of a dynamic reality of relationship. It points to a personal, relational, interactive aspect of relationship with God through Christ, and (very important) by the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

    Participation points to a personal, conscious, interaction and fellowship taking place. It points to a personal face to face relationship. It does not refer to what is impersonal, automatic, mechanical, causal, or to an abstract universal principle—even those that might be true. It and the kind of relationship it points to is not a broad and generic term to which a whole wide range of meanings can be given.

    This dynamic is described in terms of persons partaking (also a translation of koinonia) of the Lord’s Supper. “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing in the body of Christ? (1Cor. 10:16).

    It is also reflected in this passage from the letter of John, “If we say that we have fellowship with him while we are walking in darkness, we lie and do not do what is true; but if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. (1John 1:6-7 NRSV)

    Another well known passage that shows the kind of fellowship being talked about is from Romans 10: 9-12 “If you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one confesses with the mouth and so is saved. The scripture says, “No one who believes in him will be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and is generous to all who call on him.” Confessing and believing is how Christ’s the free gift of salvation is received or appropriated in response to its revelation and proclamation..

    Participation is used to speak of a quality of relationship of people with God through Christ and by the Holy Spirit. It indicates a personal, positive responsiveness, receptivity, interaction. And that quality of relationship is of course different from those who are not (yet) receptive or personally and positively responding.

    The word indicates an important aspect of the reality of our relationship with God. This is what we are made for, this is the ultimate purpose of the completed work of Christ brought about or fulfilled in us by the Holy Spirit. But it is not impersonally imposed or caused. Without this word, concept, and accompanying descriptions, we would not know what we were ultimately created for nor what we have been rescued from so that we no longer have to stay entrapped and out of personal communion with God. So Paul can warn of the problem of having fellowship (koinonia) with demons (1 Cor. 10:20) or being united with prostitutes (I Cor 6: 14-18). These are not ways to participate with Christ.

    All the exhortations, commands and directives to the church in the letters of the New Testament aim for promoting participation by those who are believing. Believing being one of the most fundamental, ways of participating, that is a trusting relationship.

    So to answer your question, yes, participation applies to believers as used in the biblical revelation. But it is held out to all. But there are certain aspects of relationship that do apply to those only who are receiving, receptive, responsive to the Word of God in personal relational ways. So these cannot be ignored. Our theology cannot simply run roughshod over them. There a difference between those who are participating and those who are not. The difference is a matter of participation and the consequences of either participating or not.

    But does that mean God has nothing to do with those who are not believing? No, not at all. If God had nothing whatsoever to do with them they would not exist! And they could never come to have repentance and faith for they are gifts to be received and are empowered and set free to receive by the Holy Spirit so that they can participate in Christ and share in his responses he has and is making for them as the high priest of all humanity.

    Perhaps we can think of this dynamic relationship with the living God as a continuum on a slope. One the low side we have complete repudiation and non-participation. AT the other high end of the slop, we have full participation by the Spirit in Christ’s responses for us. All persons are located somewhere on that slope. But what is important is not locating exactly where individuals are located, but that there is a slope and there are two directions to go on the slope: down towards the bottom or upwards towards the top. The biblical revelation seems to address more the direction individuals are facing and so headed than where exactly each one stands. Of course we can’t know exactly for sure where persons stand nor with absolute certainty what direction they are headed. But we don’t have to. Our ministry is to announce the Gospel and direct all persons in the direction to the “upward calling of Christ” no matter where they stand or which way they face. And there are times and places to warn persons in particular or in general of facing the wrong direction or heading in the wrong direction—simply because there are two directions—whether or not we can know exactly where a particular persons stands. And we can give descriptions, following biblical teaching on what going in each direction looks like and the consequences of going in one direction or another. And we will do so out of compassion for those we love and for whom Christ died. So while we do not do anything for our salvation, that does not mean there is nothing for us to do. It calls for a particular direction of response.

    But no, not all are participating. And some have not yet begun responding and others are resisting or rejecting. Thus the descriptions of proper responses and all the warnings given in the New Testament to those who might be resisting, rejecting the good news or presuming upon it. So Paul will speak of God’s kindness and patience this way: “Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not realize that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?” (Rom. 2:4)

    Again, we simply cannot dismiss those warnings as if they are not there. It is somehow possible for human beings to resist and deny the objective reality of who God is and what he has done and is doing for us. That doesn’t change the reality, but it does change radically the quality of relationship. And the warnings are given so as to avoid such a situation of non-participation, of rejecting grace, of repudiating the grace of God in Christ and the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

    There are many ways to speak of God’s positive relationship to all humanity that matches the biblical testimony. All are created through Christ. All have the purpose of being created to image God through being joined to The Image of God, Jesus Christ, by the Spirit. All are upheld in their created existence by God through the eternal Son. And all do benefit in many of the less personal blessings of God that are externally available: the rain falls on the just and the unjust. We remain human even in sin, even as we reject God’s grace. So we have many created good human things—that are all still limited, perishable and corruptible too. But they are created goods. And we can certainly proclaim that. God remains “for” all and is against none. But he remains against all that is against us and against his ultimate purposes for us. And he is in a way against what is in us that is against us. God would not be loving if he were not against these things that are against us. That too, must eventually be brought out if we are to be faithful witnesses who desire, as God does, that others enter into a personal relationship and receive from God his blessings and do not simply presume upon his grace without receiving it.

    Now even good created things that all enjoy, whether or not they are participating in that personal relational and responsive way, can become barriers to personal participation with God through Christ Jesus. Any good created thing can become an idol. And when it does we must die to it. We must repent. We can even become idols to ourselves and to our capacities and abilities and even to our good deeds. We can presume upon God’s grace and live off our own resources, that may indeed be some the relatively impersonal gifts of God. You can see this in Jesus’ call to follow him. Often his disciples give up relatively good things, including fishing or comfortable relationships with family members to follow and be with him and learn from him. Seeking first the kingdom of God is essential to participation in a personal relationship. But this means that repentance is always a part of a personal response to God’s gift of grace in Christ delivered to us, to our very spirits, by the Holy Spirit.

    So God is indeed drawing all persons for whom Christ died–that they might participate. That is the purpose of our being the church and preaching and proclaiming the Gospel. But that ministry will call for the response of repentance and faith and a life of the obedience of faith in personal relationship with God according to his Word and Spirit. And all of Scripture is arranged this way. The reality of who God is and what he has done in relationship to us calls for very particular, personal responses, not no response or impersonal affirmation of an abstract universal principle. So Jesus: The kingdom of God is at hand (in my very presence and speaking to you personally here and now), so repent and believe in this good news.

    The proclamation of the indicatives of grace (what is true about God) always itself calls for a particular and personal response since it is meant to establish or set in motion a real personal and dynamic, interactive relationship. That’s what worship is and a life of the obedience of faith in who God is and what he has done for us. Reality calls for a response to correspond to it. And that response is called participation in our union with Christ by the Holy Spirit.

    Another way to put this is that conversion of mind and heart is a reality throughout the New Testament. This can be seen in those who respond to Jesus during his earthly ministry. It is clear throughout the book of Acts. Most notably this is clear in Paul’s own radical conversion. And in the letters it is clear in the range of reactions to the church and its leadership. Conversion is a dynamic of response to the Holy Spirit upon the proclamation of the Word of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit specifically open eyes and opens hearts and transforms our minds and lives. Conversion in the NT is a real thing. It is a change of direction and a matter of repentance and faith. It is also called being born from above. (This does not necessarily mean there is a particular moment of conversion that everyone can point to. But often there is a noted change of direction of one’s life and a new dimension of relationship that opens up, that is characterized by responsiveness, by receptiveness, by openness and so trust in God because of Christ.)

    So our preaching, teaching, counseling, testimony needs to follow the same pattern. That is the ministry of the church of Jesus Christ. God has reconciled all to himself so we who personally acknowledge that, by the gift of the Holy Spirit, are now his ambassadors, announcing that truth and then saying: so be reconciled (1 Cor 5).

    Now to the question on the passage in Acts 17. It must be read in the context of the whole of the book of Acts. And then in its more limited context. Yes, Paul is happy to indicate that these particular folks worship an unknown god. He does establish some provisional common ground with them. But these he regards as idols (v. 16) and he radically contrasts these idols including the one with the inscription “to an unknown god” and indicates their foolishness in worshipping them. He proclaims a living God not made by hands. He points out that God created people to seek God in that hope that they might “feel after him and find him.” (v. 27). He indicates that the “times of ignorance” which God has “overlooked” has passed, and now “he commands all men everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed and of this he has given assurance to all men by raising him from the dead. (vv. 30-31). The passage ends: “some mocked” and “some men joined him and believed” (and the woman Damaris and “others with them” (v. 34).
    Here are the two divergent responses. These two responses are clearly not both participation, fellowship, communion. And clearly Paul preached what he did to bring about the second response, not to have them continue on worshipping an idol, even one dedicated to the unknown god.

    Given all of what we read in Acts, those who did repent and receive Paul’s message on that occasion and who entered into a personal relationship with God indicated by following Paul, would not only move from a position of not knowing to knowing the name of the God. Rather, every aspect of their lives would be changed by that change, by ceasing to be idolaters and living in a personal relationship with the real God. Such “knowledge” is, as we say, life changing. That’s because it results in a real personal relationship—with the living God, no longer “relating” to a thing created by human hands that cannot speak, interact, give life, especially eternal life. The shift in direction of life is far greater than simply a cognitive identity of the proper name of God. Participation is much more than a cognitive change, more than a simple intellectual assent to an idea.

    Clearly, Paul did establish with his listeners a provisional common ground to get his them to make a particular response to the reality he proclaimed. But he directly called into question question their idolatry. His listeners were specifically called to repentance and to belief—that is to personal participation, as Paul counted on the working of the Holy Spirit even as he preached. And as he says elsewhere, this Gospel will always fulfill and offend, especially offend pride and self-sufficiency or self-righteousness. There is no Gospel that will only fulfill and not offend at least our pride. So Paul says:

    “But thanks be to God, who in Christ always leads us in triumphal procession, and through us spreads in every place the fragrance that comes from knowing him. For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; to the one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life.” (2 Cor 2:14-16 NRSV)

    Paul clearly outlines to different kinds of response and two directions in response to the proclamation of the Gospel. We can expect the same. There is no way to avoid this dynamic if we are to be faithful to Christ’s gospel. But our aim, of course to see others receive the good news and begin to personally participate in living, trusting relationship with God. But some will be offended along the way. It’s not our job to make sure this never happens. But of course it should happen for the “right” reason. If and when it happens it should be a reaction to the Gospel itself.

    We should not identify the good of creation (including our own being) with the good of redemption and our participation in that redemption. While they are both good and both demonstrate God’s being for us, we are not to stay reposed in the good (or goods!) of creation, but to respond personally to the good of redemption in Jesus and to repent especially of idolizing the good(s) of creation which cannot save us from sin and the power of sin or give us eternal life. We were meant for far more than enjoying or even making use of God’s good creation while remaining out of personal, participatory relationship with God. God came in Christ and accomplished for all what he did that we might enter into a worship relationship with the living God in Spirit and in truth and receive from him, personally, all he freely gives us by his Word and Spirit. And such a life is signaled by repentance, belief and a life of the obedience of faith according to God’s word. That is, those headed in that direction are those who are participating in the life of Christ.

27. Here is a comment from an anonymous reader:

    Hi Gary
    Many thanks for all the good stuff you are sending out! So much is being clarified for me. It is exciting!

    But there is something I am finding difficult to wrap my little brain around:
    In your article “Clarifying Two Key Terms: All Are Included and Union with Christ” you write that “not all have received that union or have entered into it. In that sense not all are united to Christ, not all are one with Christ…not all have the Spirit of Christ.”

    We have often spoken in the past of the objective and subjective. ie all are in union and all have the Spirit objectively but not everyone knows that (subjectively). Or I have heard it put another way: God sees everyone being in union with Christ but not everyone is aware of that.

    But what we are now saying seems to be different?

    Is it still correct to say that in one sense everyone is in union with Christ but because they are not participating in the work of the Holy Spirit they are blind to the reality and do not understand that which is already true of them?

    Also, we have said that although everyone is not responding to the Holy Spirit, He is still working his work (because God is love and wants all to be saved) gently, quietly in everyone – often in ways we don’t understand.

    Secondly, if we are saying that “not all have the Spirit of Christ” then does that mean that there are some “places” where God is “not” But that doesn’t seem to make sense to my little brain.
    God is omnipresent and therefore isn’t he “in” everyone – even those who have not responded and not participating in the gift of relationship with God?

    You write “Now, God, in Christ and through the Spirit’s ongoing ministry, is drawing believers into a spiritual union (union with Christ) that involves participation….” But can’t that also be said about non-believers? In ways that we don’t always understand but because of God’s great love for all He is drawing non-believers into a spiritual union…..?” Because isn’t it true that we are only able to
    respond to God because, He, in the first place enables us to respond?

    Also, are you saying that when we say “yes” to God’s “yes” (to a Person, a relationship) it is only then that the Holy Spirit starts His work of sanctification? If so, it sounds like the Holy Spirit lies dormant (in us?) until we respond to God’s invitation. I realize dormant is not the correct word but I’m trying to understand where He is and what is He doing in the lives of non-believers.

    I hope I am making myself clear. I’m just finding it difficult trying to wrap my brain around this (and explain it to others). What am I overlooking, misunderstanding?

28. Here is Gary Deddo’s reply to the comment from Anonymous (above):

    In these clarifications, we are upholding our understanding of what Christ accomplished in his earthly incarnate ministry on behalf of all. What is being filled out because not well explained before is the nature of our participation—the subjective aspect, we could say. Making use of as much of Scripture as is relevant to fill out our understanding of our participation has led to us to see that it would be best or more faithful to shift some words or phrases previously used for Christ’s work and ministry over to the ministry of the Spirit and our (subjective) participation. Probably the biggest change is to use “union with Christ” to refer our subjective participation by the Holy Spirit in the finished work of Christ. This matches the biblical pattern not only of the word “union” or synonyms for it, but also matches descriptions of the particular ministry of the Holy Spirit. Union with Christ and synonyms always indicates actual participation—it is a quality of relationship which indicates communion, responsiveness, fellowship, in short, faith, hope and love for God because of Jesus Christ, who he is and what he has accomplished for us.

    There is a way in which it is still correct to say Christ is “united” to all. That is, he as assumed human nature, the human nature common to all, to himself and transformed and restore human nature itself to be in harmony with God. “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.” That is a particular theological use of the idea of “union” (the hypostatic union) that means something different than what the NT writers meant when using that word or synonyms. Union being in Christ and in the Spirit, and members of the Body of Christ, etc. in the NT mean the result of the ministry of the Holy Spirit that has elicited the response of faith hope and love. These are most often and simply referred to as believers or those who are believing, or saints or those who are living as a part of the church, the ekklesia. They are enjoying a quality of relationship, a participation, that those who are not believing or not participating do not (yet) have.

    To avoid confusion and make sense a majority of the teaching of the whole of the NT directed to the church (members of the Body of Christ who are participating) it is best to reserve the idea of union with Christ and synonymous words or phrases for the subjective aspect and follow the biblical pattern. If we do speak of union with Christ to refer to his completed work then we need to consistently remind folks of the ministry of the Holy Spirit and our spiritual union which is the goal and aim of the hypostatic union (or vicarious human nature of Christ).

    One final comment about your question above. Participation and response to the truth and reality of Christ by the Holy Spirit is far more than a knowing about something that is already true. Participation is a transformative interaction and dynamic relationship. Participation makes far more than a cognitive difference. It involves repentance and the obedience of faith and hope and love and being witnesses to Jesus Christ and participants as members of his body, worshippers. It involves devtion to the teachings of the NT, being disciples and followers of Jesus. Ultimately it involves what the entire ministry of the Holy Spirit is about.

    The Spirit’s ministry is to free and enable everyone to receive the Gospel bring them to a lived knowledge of Christ so that they repent, believe and live lives of the obedience of faith. Only by the Spirit will anyone come to say in faith Jesus is Lord. The Spirit convicts of sin and so enables individuals to share in all of what Christ has done. The Spirit’s ministry is to bring to fulfillment the ministry of Christ, or to work out in persons what all Christ has done for them. That is why it is best to say that we are united to Christ by the Holy Spirit—which manifested by a growing participation in Christ. The Holy Spirit always prepares the way for us to get involved in drawing others to Christ that they might begin receiving what he offers. We join in with what the Spirit is doing which is to continue the outworking of Christ’s ministry.

    You commented, “if we are saying that ‘not all have the Spirit of Christ’ then does that mean that there are some ‘places’ where God is ‘not’?” My reply is that though this line of reasonging might be a possible logical implication, it is false. (No simple logical inference is ever necessarily true, logically or theologically. It’s one possibility. The Spirit’s ministry is not like that. While the Spirit can be said to be present everywhere and to everyone, the Spirit is not present or active in the same way everywhere and to everyone. Also the Spirit’s ministry is not an impersonal or mechanical or automatic one. So the Spirit works in may ways and can be present and active in any number of ways, and indeed in some ways we don’t’ and perhaps even can’t understand. But this can be seen in at Pentecost where the Spirit works very locally, falling on some, but not all are equally affected. Some scoff and say those affected by the Spirit are drunk. Pauls says to be filled with the Spirit and not to quench the Spirit. The spirit distributes gifts as he sees fit. All do not have the same gifts. The Spirit calls somefor some ministires and others not. And people can resist the Holy Spirit, for instance Annanais and Saphira or Simon the Sorcerer. Also recall that there is the possibility of blaspheming the Holy Spirit—as nearly unimaginable as that might be. The Spirit is the personalizing and personal Spirit and does not work in a force-field or vector kind of way, in a cause-effect way, or as a impersonal universal principle. The Holy Spirit ministry is to bring about personal, individual corporate transformation—by enable us to receive and participate in all that Christ has done for us, including participating or echoing his responses made in our place and on our behalf. Of course we make the distinction by saying of those who are participating that they are “in Christ” and “have the Spirit” and that (as far as we can tell) others do not yet, not on our own authority. But that is how Paul and Jesus speak. They make the distinctions themselves between believers and non-believers in that way.

    All humans are on the same continuum, but there are phases, perhaps we could say, so that not all are at the same spot, location on the continuum. There are those who are responding, and not rejecting. Perhaps would could say that there are those who are moving in one direction or the other. Moving towards Christ by the Spirit and Word of God always looks like participation, fellowship, communion, repentance and faith. And in the NT those moving in that direction are described in certain ways while those who are not are described in other ways. We want to follow that pattern. Direction is important. It means for those who are moving towards him, growing up in him, to keep on—don’t give up because God won’t given up. And for those moving in the opposite direction there is hope for change, for forgiveness for renewal, for a new kind of life and relationship with God (from our side). And for those who continually resist and reject there is to be warning. This is the biblical pattern—yes even though we are all on the same continuum, God’s intention is one. But participation does make a difference compared to non-participation. No one would ever respond and receive were it not for the personal and dynamic and interactive ministry of the Holy Spirit.

    The Holy Spirit works dynamically and personally and life itself, including Christian life, is dynamic, personal, relational and ongoing. It is impossible to say exactly “how” the Holy Spirit works in ways we can’t directly apprehend. But we are told certain things and we can experience the manifestations of the working of the Holy Spirit the Holy Spirit works out in us the whole of what Christ accomplished for us, give to us personally and dynamically our justification, sanctification and eventually our glorification, that is our whole salvation what is worked out in whole in Christ. The one whole work unfolds in our lives dynamically and manifests itself in our transformation, our participation more and more fully. The terms used to describe that unfolding are not exact, especially entirely sectioned off—the are all complete in Christ.

    But in general by the Holy Spirit we share in Christ’s righteousness (justification) and then as we grow in our relationship with Christ responding more and more fully we are said to be growing in our sanctifiction, that is grow up into Christ or become more and more conformed to him. On the other side of death we’ll be able by the Spirit to participate fully in Christ’s life and the NT calls that our glorification. But it’s all more and more participating in what Christ has accomplished for us. We participate progressively by the Spirit in what is complete in Christ.

    Why an individual is where they are we cannot exactly know. But as noted above, the NT indicates our responsiveness to the Holy Spirit is not static but can be resisted. So when we don’t see much or no participation it might be due to resistance. But the Spirit’s own decision to wait to interact in a certain way at a certain time according to his wisdom and love will also be involved. This process has been likened to wooing. So all we can do is encourage folks to begin to participate or continue to participate and warn against resistance. But we can always count on the Spirit’s wise yet dynamic ministry.

    I hope this is helpful. I think mostly we’re all concentrating more on seeing what our participation is like and the nature of the Holy Spirit’s ministry and how that’s jointed to Christ’s earthly and continuing ministry. So we’re all trying to get up to speed on this so we can better fill out more of the whole picture and bring to bear more of Scripture on our understanding and practice of ministry. I think some of this will come out in the next installment. So stay tuned.

29. This article does help explain some questions I have had. I think of the first stage new human as accomplished, but union with Christ through the work of the Holy Spirit not accomplished unless we are in relationship with Christ and the Holy Spirit. But if we reject the relational union with Christ would we be the new man but analougus to the angels who became demons in rebelling against God?

30. Anderson, I don’t think we have biblical warrant to compare the union all humans have with Christ via the hyposatic union with the state/staus of angels. Angels are, like humans, creations of God, however, Christ did not unite his divine nature with the nature of angels. Rather, via the Incarnation, with is hypostatic union, the eternal Son of God added humanity to his divinity. As a result, all humanity was placed on a new foundation—all, in Christ (via his representative humanity), are forgiven, accepted and so given new birth (no longer of Adam, now of Christ). This stunning, objective reality is then lived out (experienced) personally (subjectively) as the Spirit unites a person to Christ via the spiritual union. No angel experiences either the hypostatic union or the spiritual union other than in the ways all creation benefits from the reversal of the fall (leading to a new heaven and earth).

31. Thank you, thank you, thank you for this clarification. As you remarked above there was some “inconsistency and hesitation if not confusion … beginning to develop. It’s easy to make logical inferences (that are never necessarily true) from a word or phrase that is used, especially, when used informally. And that had begun happening.”

    My conversations over the last few years with many GCI pastors and lay members were becoming more and more perplexing and troubling, and honestly, I was afraid that we had jumped into another ditch. Thank you for the clarification. I will encourage everyone to read these essays to avoid unintentional heresy. Thank you!