An Evaluation of the Son-Spirit Relation in ’s : An Exercise in Trinitarian Reflection Stephen J. Wellum

Stephen J. Wellum is Associate Introduction often appeals to various aspects of the Professor of Christian at The It is certainly an understatement to say doctrine of the Trinity in an illegitimate 1 Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. that the doctrine of the Trinity is of critical manner. But, unfortunately, this fact is Dr. Wellum received his Ph.D. degree importance to all Christian thought, life, also true within evangelical theology. in theology from Trinity Evangelical and practice. The very heart and soul of Specifically, I have in mind recent appeals Divinity School and has also taught —the gospel itself—is to the role relations within the triune theology at the Associated Canadian rooted and grounded in our view of God Godhead, particularly, the Son-Spirit Theological Schools and Northwest as triune. Contrary to what many people relationship, to ground a “wider-hope” Baptist Theological College and Semi- sadly think, the doctrine of the Trinity or “inclusivist” theology. A “wider-hope” nary in Canada. He has contributed to is not some esoteric, abstract doctrine theology is one that wrestles with the several publications and a collection unrelated to the “practical” affairs of life. relationship between the gospel and other of essays on theology and worldview Nothing could be further from the truth. world religions, especially regarding the issues. Rather, understanding God as triune is status of the person who has never heard central to everything Scripture says about the gospel. It attempts to argue that the God. For example, without it, we could not person who has never heard the gospel make sense of the salvation that the Bible still may be saved by grace through faith presents centered in a divine Father who due to the universal work of the Holy initiates, a divine Savior who redeems, Spirit, but this is apart from actually hear- and a divine Spirit who applies Christ’s ing and believing the gospel. In my view, work to us by doing only what God can we find in this position an illegitimate do, namely, give us resurrection life. In the appeal to the doctrine of the Trinity and a end, the doctrine of the Trinity is at the presentation of the relations between the heart of what distinguishes the Christian Son and Spirit that is simply unbiblical. view of God from all its rivals. And that is In order to substantiate this assertion, certainly an important point to emphasize this article will proceed in four steps: in our pluralistic and postmodern world First, I will briefly describe the position of that is constantly attempting to challenge inclusivism. Second, I will explain how it the exclusive claims of the gospel. attempts to ground its view by appeal to Now it is precisely because the doc- a specific understanding of the Son-Spirit trine of the Trinity is so important that relation by outlining the view of one of its we must be very careful how we appeal most prolific proponents, Clark Pinnock. to the doctrine and make use of it in our Third, I will give a biblical-theological theological proposals. As Keith Johnson critique of Pinnock’s proposal by thinking reminds us in his important article, a lot through the Son-Spirit relation across the of current non-evangelical theologizing canon of Scripture. Fourth, I will offer a 4 number of concluding reflections on this believe in the Lord Jesus Christ alone as important subject. Lord and Savior. In addition, in relation to other non-Christian religions, exclusivism A Description of Inclusivism contends that salvation is not found in the Living in a pluralistic and postmodern structures of those religions even though, age not only challenges the exclusive it is admitted, non-Christian religions are claims of the gospel, but it also raises not always wrong in what they believe. afresh legitimate issues that cannot be Where their teachings conflict with the ignored by Christian theologians. One teaching of Scripture, though, they are 5 such example is the question of the status necessarily wrong. of those who have never heard the gospel, Third, inclusivism is the view that and whether such persons may experi- attempts to provide a mediating position 6 ence the saving grace of God apart from between pluralism and exclusivism. On hearing the gospel message and placing the one hand, it agrees with exclusivism faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. over against pluralism in affirming that In recent years, the threefold typology Christianity is true and that Jesus Christ is of pluralism, inclusivism, and exclusiv- the only Savior and Lord; no human being ism characterizes the various theological will be saved apart from him. However, responses to the issue of the gospel’s it disagrees with exclusivism in that it 2 relationship to other world religions. affirms that God has revealed himself, Each of these views includes a spectrum even in saving ways in other religions, of positions. For heuristic purposes, I will and that it is possible for someone who briefly describe each of the views in the has never heard the gospel to receive sal- broadest of terms, not noting all the fine vation apart from explicit faith in Christ. 3 nuances within each position. At this point, inclusivists often make a First, pluralism is the view that relativ- distinction between an ontological and izes all religious claims to superiority epistemological necessity when it comes over any other religion. This view entails to Christ, salvation, and those who have a denial of the claims of historic Christi- never heard the gospel. A person cannot anity, including a denial of the Trinity, be saved apart from Christ (an affirmation and its corollary, the uniqueness of Jesus of the ontological necessity of Christ for Christ as Lord and Savior. If there is any salvation), but it is possible for people to “salvation” at all (which is variously con- experience salvation apart from explicit ceived), pluralism teaches that people may faith in Christ, at least in this life (a denial be “saved” through a number of different of an epistemological necessity of believ- 4 religious traditions and communities. ing in Christ). But this distinction raises Second, in direct opposition to plural- an important question: How exactly does ism, is the view of exclusivism. This has one receive the benefits of Christ’s work if been, at least up until recent times, the one does not necessarily believe in him? position of most evangelicals. It argues Does not Scripture say, “For there is no not only that the central claims and doc- difference between Jew and Gentile—the trines of Christianity are universally true, same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses but also that in order to receive salvation, all who call on him, for, ‘Everyone who one must consciously repent of sin and calls on the name of the Lord will be 5 saved’” (Rom 10:12-13)? Pinnock develops a theology of the Inclusivists differ in their answer to Spirit—what he calls the “pneumatologi- this question. Most inclusivists affirm that cal proposal”—that, in my view, provides one may trust in God (be a “believer”) a much needed theological explanation as as known through God’s self-disclosure to how inclusivists attempt to reconcile in the created order (general revelation), the difficult challenge of affirming the or even through, in some limited way, uniqueness of Christ while denying that a person’s religion. Some even affirm a knowledge and faith in Christ is necessary post-mortem, second chance theology. for salvation. Ultimately this explanation But whatever precise position is argued, fails in regard to biblical fidelity. Pinnock’s in the end, inclusivists argue that “the pneumatological approach also has been wideness of God’s mercy” is of such a a catalyst for other inclusivists to think 8 nature that God will accept and save through these important matters. Obvi- those honest, humble, and genuine seek- ously within the confines of this article I ers, who through no fault of their own, cannot do justice to his entire argument. have never heard the gospel. If they cry Instead, I will focus primarily on his out to the Lord, stirred by his prevenient specific arguments found in chapter 6 of grace, and turn to him as he is revealed Flame of Love, namely, “Spirit and Univer- in creation and their religious setting, sality.” Why this chapter? Because in it, they will discover, most probably after Pinnock succinctly gives what he believes death, that the one who saved them was is the biblical and theological grounding Christ, whether they were aware of it or for his proposal and thus the inclusivist believed in him. position. However, this fairly standard inclusiv- ist answer raises some further questions. A Description of Clark Pinnock’s How does God’s Spirit bring people to “Pneumatological Proposal” salvation when these people have no A brief description of Pinnock’s pro- access to the gospel message? Does not posal will help prepare the way for a Scripture teach that salvation is grounded critical evaluation. Inclusivists, including in Jesus Christ both ontologically and Pinnock, often present their view in light epistemologically in this life (see John of the tension between two biblical axi- 3:16; 14:6; Acts 4:12; cf. Heb 9:27)? How oms: universality and particularity. The does God manifest his saving presence “universality axiom” is related to expres- in the world apart from one hearing the sions of God’s universal salvific will (e.g., gospel and placing faith in it? How are 1 Tim 2:4; 2 Pet 3:9) grounded in God’s we to make theological sense of this kind universal presence in the world. Pinnock, of viewpoint? Clark Pinnock, a highly in contrast to much of historic evangelical influential evangelical inclusivist, has theology, seems to understand the will sought to address these very questions. It of God solely in terms of God’s universal is his answer to these questions that I now salvific stance towards the world. He is want to describe in some detail, specifi- not fond of making distinctions, such as cally showing how his answer is centered God’s decretive and perceptive will, that in an illegitimate appeal to the doctrine have allowed theologians to speak of God 7 of the Trinity. In his book, Flame of Love, genuinely valuing many states of affairs 6 that are not compatible with his chosen ing and reaching out are rooted in God’s 9 plan for the world. Nor is he fond of mak- grace and are aimed at bringing sinners 15 ing distinctions between “common” and home.” This is not to say, as Pinnock “saving” grace, which has allowed theolo- clearly states, that there is not “depths gians to speak of God’s relations to people of darkness, deception, and bondage in in different ways, since, as he argues, “if them [world religions]” nor is it to affirm the Triune God is present, grace must be that “religions themselves as such are 10 present too.” That is why, for Pinnock, to vehicles of salvation.” But it is to affirm speak of the “universality axiom” entails that “God may use religion as a way of that God’s grace must be available to all gracing people’s lives and that it is one of people. He states, “If God really loves the God’s options for evoking faith and com- 16 whole world and desires everyone to be municating grace.” saved, it follows logically that everyone But how is one to make theological 11 must have access to salvation.” sense of this? What biblical warrant may But this creates a tension with the be given for this proposal? This is where “particularity axiom,” namely “the belief Pinnock’s pneumatological approach 12 that Jesus is the only way to God.” Why enters. The approach is centered in a the tension? Because, as Pinnock argues, specific understanding of the personal “if hearing the gospel clearly is required relations within the triune Godhead. How for salvation, it would seem that God does are we to conceptualize the universality 13 not want all to be saved.” Pinnock asks, of God’s grace? How are we to conceive of “Does God love the whole world or not? access to God’s grace given the “scandal God may desire all to be saved, but it is of historical particularity?” Pinnock’s hard to see how they possibly can be. How proposal is that we see it in relation to can a large number meet the requirement the universal work of the Holy Spirit. In of believing in the gospel? It would seem fact, as he states it, we must conceive of it 14 that they cannot.” in relation to the “twin, interdependent 17 So how do we resolve this tension? Pin- missions of the Son and Spirit.” Here is nock entertains the possibility that gen- his proposal in summary: eral revelation, including non-Christian Christ, the only mediator, sustains religions, may play a role in the salvation particularity, while Spirit, the pres- of the human race, a role preparatory to ence of God everywhere, safeguards the gospel of Christ. In contrast to much universality. Christ represents par- ticularity by being the only mediator of historic evangelical theology, Pinnock between God and humanity (1 Tim affirms that general revelation is salvific. 2:5-6), while Spirit upholds univer- sality because no soul is beyond the Since God meets us everywhere, includ- sphere of the Spirit’s operations. ing the natural world which includes Spirit is not confined to the church non-Christian religions, “no nook or but is present everywhere, giving life and creating community. Hov- cranny is untouched by the finger of God” ering over the waters of creation, and “God is always reaching out to sin- Spirit is present also in the search for ners. . . . There is no general revelation or meaning and the struggle against sin and death. Because inspiration natural knowledge of God that is not at is ubiquitous and works everywhere the same time gracious revelation and a in unseen ways, Spirit is in a posi- potentially saving knowledge. All reveal- tion to offer grace to every person. Because Spirit works everywhere 7 in advance of the church’s mission, Wherever the Spirit touches, which is preparing the way for Christ, God’s everywhere, God’s good gifts are spread will can be truly and credibly uni- 18 versal. generously, even to people outside of the church. And grace is found where the Once again, it is important to stress Spirit is. By the Spirit, God reaches out that Pinnock’s proposal is a move away to sinners both in general and special from historic evangelical theology. How revelation, so working in them that they so? Simply, in how he conceives of the may ultimately become obedient to Jesus relationship of the work of the Son to the Christ. In this sense, Pinnock argues, we Spirit and then to that of the Father. His- should not say there is no salvation out- torically, and a point that Pinnock admits, side the church, but simply that there is 24 evangelical thought has viewed the work no salvation outside of grace. Thus with of the Spirit in relation to Christ. However, this proposal, Pinnock believes that he Pinnock believes that this approach has has greatly reduced the tension between had the effect of exalting Christ above the “universality” and “particularity” the Spirit and subordinating the Spirit to axioms. He states, 19 the Son. Instead, he suggests, we should The truth of the incarnation does try a new idea. After all, he states, “it lies not eclipse truth about the Spirit, within the freedom of theology to experi- who was at work in the world before 20 ment with ideas.” What is this new idea? Christ and is present now where Christ is not named. The mission of It is that we view “Christ as an aspect the Son is not a threat to the mission of the Spirit’s mission, instead of (as is of the Spirit, or vice versa. On the more usual) viewing Spirit as a function one hand, the Son’s mission presup- 21 poses the Spirit’s—Jesus was con- of Christ’s.” ceived and empowered by the Spirit. What advantage does this new approach On the other hand, the mission of the Spirit is oriented to the goals offer us? Pinnock is convinced that it not of incarnation. The Spirit’s mission only will help reduce the tension between is to bring history to completion universality and particularity, it will also and fulfillment in Christ. Thus the double mission of Son and Spirit can allow us to consider “particularity in the provide the perspective we need to 22 context of universality.” Thus, prior to, handle the tension of universality 25 and geographically larger than, the Son’s and particularity. mission is the universal and gracious work Pinnock is convinced that viewing the of God’s Spirit in the world. Pinnock links Son’s work in the context of the universal the work of the Spirit with the Wisdom of work of the Spirit, instead of the other way God (Prov 8:1-4) and then concludes that around, supplies the theological warrant “God’s wisdom is present in creation, and for seeing “the offer of grace as something God calls out to all people everywhere 26 as broad as history itself.” Creation by means of it. Beyond Torah and special and redemption, then, for Pinnock, are revelation, wisdom speaks within human continuous, not discontinuous. Creation experience itself . . . God speaks even and redemption are both works of grace where Christ is not yet named—God does thus grounding the possibility that God’s not leave himself without witness (Acts 23 salvific intent is both universal and found 14:17).” Pinnock conceives of history as in creation itself. a stage play with the Spirit as its director.

8 Pinnock’s Biblical Warrant for the “holy pagans” as Enoch, Melchizedek, Pneumatological Proposal and Job. All of these individuals, Pinnock To what biblical texts does Pinnock argues, were saved by the gracious work appeal in order to warrant his proposal? of the Spirit in them apart from explicit There are four kinds of texts to which he faith in Jesus Christ. In fact, Pinnock con- refers: (1) Pinnock appeals to texts such tends, on the basis of John 10:16, one can as 1 Tim 2:4 and Hos 11:8-10 to argue that say that there are “believers who do not 29 God’s stance toward the world is that of belong to any church.” In this, Pinnock grace, and not wrath, which seems to is playing off a common distinction made entail, at least for him, that God makes his by inclusivists between “believers” and grace available to all without exception. “Christians.” “Believers” are those who (2) Texts such as Acts 17:27 are refer- are saved simply because they have faith enced in order to justify that God’s pres- in God. “Christians” are those who have ence, by his Spirit, is everywhere, and as heard the gospel and have placed their 30 such, given (1), God’s grace must then be faith in Jesus Christ. Both groups are viewed as universally accessible through saved by the name of Jesus, but only the general and special revelation. At this latter are informed about that name. And juncture, Pinnock also correlates texts it is these “believers” that Jesus refers to that speak about the wisdom of God and in John 10:16 who are not yet part of the the Spirit of God (Prov 8:1-4, 24, 30-31) to sheep fold, but who are wooed by the buttress his point. Spirit who is at work universally in the (3) Texts such as Rom 5:18 imply, for world, drawing people to himself. Pinnock, that the mission and work of Christ, as our representative, not only have Pinnock’s Theological Warrant for universal implications, but in some sense the Pneumatological Proposal must be applied to all people everywhere, In addition to the above biblical rea- short of universalism, which can only take sons, Pinnock gives us at least three theo- place by the universal work of the Spirit. logical reasons to warrant his proposal: (1) He states, “Christ’s work is complete and Pinnock appeals to his understanding of for all—‘one man’s act of righteousness the doctrine of the Trinity—a relational leads to justification and life for all’ (Rom ontology—as the ground of his proposal 5:18). There is no way around it—we must and a further justification of his view that hope that God’s gift of salvation is being God’s stance toward the world is always applied to people everywhere. If so, how that of love and grace. In the triune iden- else than by the universal presence and tity, he argues, we discover a God who 27 activity of Spirit?” Christ’s universal is relational, non-static, open—a God of 31 work, then, requires the universal work love. Since God is a loving relationality, 28 of the Spirit in all people. Pinnock concludes that we must think (4) Texts that speak of God’s salvific of grace as primary, because it is rooted will not merely being limited to Jews in the loving divine communion. God is and Christians imply that the Spirit is at love and as such, when it comes to grace work outside of the covenant community. and salvation he has “the whole human Proof of this is found in such figures as race in view in his desire to save, and the Cornelius (Acts 10:34-35) and in such OT Spirit everywhere draws sinners from the 9 32 far country to the Father’s love.” persons of the Godhead, by employing the (2) Pinnock appeals to the theological Eastern church’s rejection of the Western doctrine of “prevenient grace” to account church’s insertion of the filioque clause 35 for the universal, gracious operations into the Nicene Creed. Pinnock thinks of the Spirit in the world, even in the that this insertion represented a misuse sphere of non-Christian religions. Pin- of power. But his main problem with the nock writes, clause is due to how the Western church has viewed the Son-Spirit relationship in God wants a relationship with sin- ners, and if we accept the category of light of it. Historically, as represented by prevenient grace, we acknowledge the filioque clause, the work of the Spirit is that God offers himself to creatures. viewed in light of the Son and gospel reali- The Spirit speaks to everyone in the depths of their being, urging them ties. Thus, when the Spirit operates in the not to close themselves off from God world, it is always in relationship to the but to open themselves up. Because of the Spirit, everyone has the pos- Word. In this sense, the work of the Spirit sibility of encountering him—even is viewed in light of the work of the Son, those who have not heard of Christ something Pinnock wants us to reverse. may establish a relationship with 33 God through prevenient grace. Listen to Pinnock’s complaint: The idea of adding filioque was not Interestingly, Pinnock does not place perverse theologically. The risen prevenient grace in the context of sote- Lord did and does pour out the riology—where it is normally placed by Spirit on the church. But the phrase in the creed can lead to a possible evangelical Arminian theologians—but misunderstanding. It can threaten in the context of the doctrine of creation. our understanding of the Spirit’s universality. It might suggest to the This is clearly evident in Pinnock’s rejec- worshiper that Spirit is not the gift tion of the Reformed distinction between of the Father to creation universally “common” and “saving” grace. He states but a gift confined to the sphere of the Son and even the sphere of the his opposition when he writes, church. It could give the impression that the Spirit is not present in the God’s presence fills the world and whole world but limited to Christian touches every heart. Spirit should territories. Though it need not, the not be restricted to one segment filioque might threaten the principle of history or one sphere of reality. of universality—the truth that the The Spirit flourishes everywhere, Spirit is universally present, imple- beyond the boundaries of church. menting the universal salvific will The Spirit’s ministry is global, not of Father and Son. One could say only domestic, and ontic, not only that the filioque promotes Christo- noetic. The Spirit can be encountered monism. in the entire range of experience, In my view the phrase diminishes having always been present in the the role of the Spirit and gives the whole world, even in the groaning impression that he has no mission creation, preparing it for new birth 34 of his own. It does not encourage (Rom 8:23). us to contemplate the broad range of his operations in the universe. In this regard, Pinnock’s view of “preve- It tends to restrict Spirit to the nient grace” has more in common with churchly domain and deny his pres- ence among people outside. It does Karl Rahner than John Wesley. not encourage us to view the divine (3) Pinnock continues to appeal to mission as being prior to and geo- the doctrine of the Trinity, especially in graphically larger than the Son’s. It could seem to limit Spirit to having a regard to the role relations between the 10 noetic function in relation to Christ, over the centuries the majority of human- as if the Spirit fostered faith in him ity has existed without hearing the gospel, and nothing more. It undercuts the idea that Spirit can be active where it is important to affirm that the Spirit is at the Son is not named and supports work in the world, even in other religions. the restrictive reading of the axiom On the question of revelation in other ‘Outside the church, no salvation’…. The creed [Nicene] was better before religions, we must preserve the decisive this term was added to it, because self-revelation in Jesus Christ, but we are it recognized Spirit as the power not to think that God is our property and permeating the cosmos and ener- 39 gizing all of history. The mission of possession. In fact, we should view other the Spirit is not subordinate to the religions in a similar situation to the his- Son’s but equal and complementary. The filioque was introduced into tory of Israel. Just as the history of Israel the creed in an irregular way and led to the coming of Jesus, and as it shows adversely affects our understanding 36 God at work apart from Jesus Christ and of salvation. leading up to him, Pinnock believes that From these biblical texts and theologi- we may “watch for anticipations in other cal arguments, Pinnock believes he has faiths to be fulfilled in Christ . . . [this] warranted his pneumatological proposal allows us to hear the word of God from and thus grounded his understanding of others and deepens our own understand- 40 the Spirit’s universal, salvific work in the ing of revelation.” world, even in other religions. For, after But, it may be legitimately asked, by all, asks Pinnock, “If the Spirit gives life to what criterion does one discern whether creation and offers grace to every creature, the Spirit is at work in other religions? one would expect him to be present and After all, as Pinnock acknowledges, “there make himself felt (at least occasionally) are things in the world that cannot be 41 in the religious dimension of cultural attributed to God.” For Pinnock, the life. Why would the Spirit be working answer is found in the double mission 37 everywhere else but not here?” Why of Son and Spirit and the link between cannot non-Christian religions be viewed them. He states, as beneficial for Christian theology, just Truth incarnate is the criterion for as non-Christian philosophical thought testing spirits. The question to ask has been? This is not to say that Pinnock is christological (1 Jn 4:2-3). Spirit is in agreement with the Son and thinks everything in non-Christian reli- agrees with what he said and did…. gions is equally valid. He states, What the Spirit says and does cannot be opposed to revelation in Christ, We have to say both yes and no to because Spirit is bound to the Word other religions. On the one hand, we of God . . . To identify provenience, we look for the fruit of the Spirit and should accept any spiritual depth 42 and truth in them. On the other for the way of Jesus Christ. hand, we must reject darkness and error and at the very least see other But what exactly does this mean? His- faiths as insufficient apart from fulfillment in Christ. The key is to torically, as we have noted, the work of the hold fast to two truths: the universal Spirit has been linked to the work of the operations of grace and the unique- Son. When we ask the question, “How do ness of its manifestation in Jesus 38 Christ. we discern whether the Spirit is at work in the world?” the answer is found in terms But Pinnock is quite convinced that since of the gospel. Is there repentance of sin 11 and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ? Is there Here is Pinnock’s “pneumatological a turning away from what we once were proposal” in a nutshell, his new way of and a turning to God by faith in the gos- viewing Christ as an aspect of the Spirit’s pel message? Obviously that is not what mission, instead of the other way around. Pinnock means since that would entail At its heart, his proposal is tied to the doc- that the universality axiom would have to trine of the Trinity, and even more impor- be placed under the particularity axiom. tantly, it is through his understanding of Instead, for Pinnock, the Christological the Son-Spirit relation that he believes he criterion is one that looks for the fruit of has provided biblical and theological war- the Spirit and the way of Jesus Christ, rant for inclusivism, namely, that God’s primarily in the ethical domain. Pinnock wide mercy is extended to all, regardless underscores this when he states, of whether they have heard the gospel or not. So wherever we see traces of Jesus in the world and people opening up to his ideals, we know we are A Critique of Clark Pinnock’s in the presence of Spirit. Wherever, Pneumatological Proposal for example, we find self-sacrificing love, care about community, long- What should we think of this very ings for justice, wherever people creative proposal? Certainly within the love one another, care for the sick, confines of this article, I cannot do justice make peace not war, wherever there 46 is beauty and concord, generosity to every aspect of it. Point after point of and forgiveness, the cup of cold exegesis and theological argumentation water, we know the Spirit of Jesus 43 is present. is interrelated with other doctrinal com- mitments that would take a whole book In this regard Pinnock appeals to Matt to unpack and evaluate properly. Pinnock 25:31-46 to argue that this is Jesus’ own truly gives us a whole theological vision criterion for recognizing his sheep. Pin- of the God-world relationship that at nock asks, “Why does he [Jesus] consider any point is intertwined with numerous these his sheep? Because they are just other theological views, such as, an open like the children of the merciful Father. view of God, a libertarian view of human Obviously they belong to the kingdom, freedom, a risk view of divine providence, because their faith is manifest in their a certain conception of Scripture and a actions. They are doing the works of specific methodological and hermeneu- 44 the kingdom by the grace of God.” He tical approach to reading it, and so on. then goes on to argue that “fruits of the Instead, I want to focus on one main point Spirit” are not merely cognitive. Rather, of critique that takes us to the heart of his signs of the kingdom have to do with the proposal, namely, his understanding of transformation of life. He states, “Good the Son-Spirit relation as it unfolds along works do not merit grace, but they may the redemptive-historical plot line of signal a response to grace . . . Jesus is the Scripture. It is my contention that Pinnock criterion of salvation even for those who fails to do justice to an overall biblical never knew him or his message. Partici- theology, and as such, his “new” idea of pation in salvation is not impossible for viewing Christ as an aspect of the Spirit’s people outside the church. The factors are mission is not biblically warranted, and 45 behavioral as well as cognitive.” thus, it must be rejected. 12 A Preliminary Observation on truest, fullest, divine intention. In fact, to Theological Method read the Bible as unified Scripture is not How does one do a theology of the Holy just one interpretative interest among Spirit? In fact, how does one resolve the others, but the interpretative strategy that question that is at stake here: What are the best corresponds to the nature of the text role relations within the Godhead with itself, given its divine inspiration. specific focus on the Son-Spirit relation- What does this have to do with dis- ship? In other words, how does one move cerning the Son-Spirit relation in Scrip- from biblical text to theological formula- ture? Everything. As we seek to unpack tion? Obviously, much could be said on this relation, it is best to do so along the such a subject and my reflections here redemptive-historical story line, in light are only for the purpose of making clear of the whole canon, discovering how the how I approach the task, especially in my Spirit of God is presented, both in the OT 47 evaluation of Pinnock’s proposal. and in light of the coming of Jesus Christ. It is of crucial importance that our And when we do so, it is my contention reading of Scripture must reflect what that what we discover is the opposite of it is and claims to be. What, then, is it? Pinnock’s proposal. Instead we discover What does it claim to be? Scripture is what much of evangelical theology has nothing less than God’s self-revelation always claimed, namely, that the Spirit through human authors—God’s Word is the Spirit of the crucified and exalted written—that comes to us progressively Christ and, in the words of Kevin Van- and with a Christological focus. Since hoozer, is “the deputy of Christ rather Scripture is God’s self-revelation, there is than an independent itinerant evange- 50 a unity to it—a unified divine commu- list.” 48 nicative act —declaring God’s unfail- ing purposes and plan. Furthermore, Toward a Biblical Theology of the God’s self-revelation, in Word and Act, Son-Spirit Relationship involves historical progression, along a This section uses the word “toward” for redemptive-historical story line, which the simple reason that all I can do in this entails that the task of a biblical theology article is sketch out the main structures is to trace out this historical unfolding of thought in regard to the Son-Spirit of redemptive history, which presses on relation as it is progressively revealed in toward its consummation in Jesus Christ the canon. (cf. Heb 1:1-2). In light of this, it is helpful to think of reading Scripture according The Work of the Spirit in the OT Era to three horizons: textual, epochal, and and His Relationship to the Son 49 canonical. Thus, in reading any text we There is much that could be said at this not only exegete it in terms of its syntax, point. There are just under one hundred context, and genre, but we also place that explicit references to the “Spirit [ruach] text in light of where it is in redemptive- of God” throughout the OT, starting 51 history, and even, in the final analysis, from Gen 1:2. None of these references where it is in light of the entire canon of unambiguously demand that we think of Scripture. It is only when we do the latter the “Spirit of God” as one with God yet that we read Scripture according to its differentiable from him (except possibly 13 Isa 63:7-14). The Spirit’s distinct “personal” 34:9; Judg 3:10; 6:34; 11:29; 13:25; 14:19; nature will become clearer in the NT, in 15:14; 1 Sam 10:10; 11:6). (7) It was God’s light of the coming of the Christ, since Spirit who equipped people with skill and there we must think of the Spirit not strength for creative work, such as in the merely as the “power” of God, nor merely construction of the tabernacle and temple the “manifest presence” of God, but as the (Exod 28:3; 31:1-11; cf. 1 Kgs 7:14; Hag 2:5; third person of the triune Godhead. But Zech 4:6). with that said, when it comes to describ- At this point, contra Pinnock, it is ing the work of the “Spirit of God” in the important to stress that this general OT, it is important to distinguish between work—even universal work of the “Spirit a general and more specific work. Let us of God” in the OT—does not entail that look at each of these in turn. the Spirit’s presence is always a saving First, we may think of the work of or transforming presence (e.g., Balaam, “God’s Spirit” in a general way, active Saul). Nor should we hastily conclude as creator, sustainer, revealer, quickener, that what is true of a particular individual and enabler. We may even summarize in Scripture is assumed to be true of all the Spirit’s work in terms of seven main humanity. As Sinclair Ferguson wisely 52 functions. (1) We see the Spirit’s work reminds us, we cannot assume from the in creation in the way God created and fact that the Spirit endowed Bezalel with sustains the universe and all animate gifts of design and craftsmanship (Exod beings (Gen 1:2; 2:7; cf. Ps 33:6; Job 26:13; 31:1-15) that all artistic gifts, however 33:4; 34:14-15; Isa 55:19). (2) The Spirit of used, are general endowments of the 53 God is active in the control of nature and Spirit, let alone evidence of God’s sav- history (Ps 104:29-30; Isa 34:16; 40:7). (3) ing presence. Yes, the Spirit is described God’s Spirit is active in revelation as he as the one who works in relation to the makes known what was not known (Num created order, but it is clear, in both the 24:2; 2 Sam 23:2; 2 Chron 12:18; 15:1; Neh OT and NT, that this general ministry of 9:30; Job 32:8; Isa 61:1-4; Ezek 2:2; 11:24; the Spirit should not always be identified 37:1; Mic 3:8; Zech 7:12). (4) By these revela- with the Spirit’s work in saving grace. It is tions the Spirit of God taught the people of possible for the former to be present when 54 God the way to be faithful and obedient the latter is not. to the Lord (Neh 9:20; Ps 143:10; Isa 48:16; Second, in a more specific and signifi- 63:10-14). (5) The Spirit’s power is that cant way, as we read through the OT, the which elicits personal responses to God Spirit’s work is not only viewed in these in terms of faith, repentance, obedience, general terms, but it is also narrowed willingness to listen to God’s instruc- and focused in a more direct way as it is tions, as well as fellowship with the Lord linked with a future, eschatological age through praise and prayer (Ps 51:10-12; Isa tied to the coming of Messiah and the new 11:2; 44:3; Ezek 11:19; 36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29; covenant, Messianic age. Pinnock fails to Joel 2:28-29; Zech 12:10). (6) The Spirit of do justice to this point. Let us think of God is instrumental in equipping people this more specific work of the Spirit in at 55 for leadership, particularly those leaders least two ways. in Israel—prophets, priests, and kings (1) The OT predicts that when Messiah (Gen 41:38; Num 11:16-29; 27:16,18; Deut comes, David’s greater Son, he will have 14 the Spirit in full measure (Isa 11:1-5; 42:1-8; people to him in saving faith. After all, 61:1-3; cf. Luke 4:17ff and Matt 12:28). This the Spirit is the Spirit of Christ. taps into a whole stream of thought in the (2) The OT predicts that the coming OT. In the OT, leaders (primarily prophets, of the Holy Spirit will signify nothing priests, and kings) were anointed by the less than the dawn of the new covenant Spirit (see 1 Sam 16:13-14), but they often age (Isa 32:15-17; 44:3-4; 59:20-21; Ezek failed in their representative tasks before 36:25-27; 37:14; 39:29; Joel 2:28-32 [cf. Jer the Lord and the people of God. The 31:29-34]; Zech 12:10). OT prophets often prophets, however, announce a coming presented the time of the Lord’s visitation Messiah, Abraham’s promised seed and of his people, “the time of the anticipated David’s greater Son, who will have the new covenant, as the time when the Spirit Spirit in full measure. And, most impor- will be poured out upon men and women, tantly, he will not fail in his saving work, young and old, without the distinctions for in his coming, he will literally usher implicit in the essentially tribal nature of 58 in the “age to come.” Of course, this is the old covenant.” Joel 2 is significant in precisely what is picked up in the NT as this regard. Peter, in Acts 2, quotes Joel 2 the Spirit is linked with the conception, as proof that the work of Jesus, the Christ, birth, growth, baptism, temptations, is complete, and as a result, that the Spirit, ministry, and cross work of Christ (Luke anticipated and promised in the OT, has 1:31, 35; 2:47; 4:16-21; John 1:33-34; Mark now come. That is why, as D. A. Carson 1:10; Matt 4:3, 6; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 reminds us, Cor 3:17-18; 1 Tim 3:16; 1 Pet 3:18). This when in Acts the prophetic Spirit portrait of Jesus and the Spirit functions falls upon the church, mediating primarily, as Max Turner reminds us, “to God’s presence, enabling believers to confirm to readers that Jesus is indeed the speak with tongues and to perform 56 deeds of power, forging the early Messiah anticipated by the OT,” that the links among Jewish, Samaritan, and eschatological era predicted in the OT has Gentile believers, and gently nudg- ing the church into an expanding finally dawned in him. But it is also more vision of Gentile mission, this is than this. As Jesus himself reminds us in understood to be nothing other than what God himself had promised in John 13-16, the primary significance of the 59 Scripture. Spirit’s coming is announced in program- matic terms: “When the Counselor comes, That is why it is best to interpret the events whom I will send to you from the Father, at Pentecost as a unique, redemptive- the Spirit of truth who goes out from the historical event, rooted and grounded in Father, he will testify about me. And you OT prophetic expectation. In this crucial also must testify, for you have been with sense, Pentecost must be viewed as part me from the beginning” (John 15:26-27). and parcel of Jesus’ saving work; in fact it In other words, the linkage of the Spirit is the culmination of his earthly work (cf. with Christ is to bear witness to him. As John 7:39) by which he has inaugurated Ferguson reminds us, “From womb to the new covenant age, thus giving the tomb to throne, the Spirit was the constant Spirit to all Christians, so that they may 57 companion of the Son.” As a result, his not only come to know him, but also be work is that of chief witness for Christ, gifted and empowered for service. to bear witness of him, indeed to bring 15 The Work of the Spirit in the NT Era in Spirit to the believer in the NT. First, the Relation to the Son Spirit testifies of our “sonship” (Gal 4:4- In describing the work of the Holy 5; Rom 8:14-27). The Spirit bears witness Spirit in the OT, I have already made that we are the children of God now, specific application to the Spirit’s work even though we still await our full rights in the NT. Probably the best way to associated with sonship. Second, the role capture the Spirit’s work in the NT is in of the Spirit is that of “firstfruits” (aparchē, terms of “inaugurated eschatology” and 1 Cor 15:20, 23; Rom 8:23), which speaks the famous “already/not yet” tension. both of what we have now and what we As I have observed above, the NT picks await in the future. Third, the Spirit is up the OT perspective and expectation. our “pledge” or “deposit” (arrabōn, 2 Cor The Spirit’s work, in a direct and specific 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14) guaranteeing our future way, is linked to the coming of Messiah inheritance. Fourth, the Holy Spirit is also and the new covenant age. The NT pro- called a “seal” (2 Cor 1:22; Eph 4:30; 1:13) claims, beyond question, that what the which signifies that believers are noth- OT anticipated has now come about in ing less than God’s possession. Fifth, the terms of fulfillment. The eschatological, Spirit is related to the resurrection of our future age that the prophets anticipated bodies (Rom 1:3-4; 8:11; 1 Cor 15:42-44). has now arrived even though it still awaits Not only is the Spirit said to be active in the final consummation. And the proof relation to Christ’s resurrection, but ours of all of this, is not only found in the as well, which signifies that some day our coming of the Messiah—his life, death, bodies shall be raised from the dead, just resurrection, and exaltation—but also in as Christ, the Last Adam, was risen from the gift that the risen and exalted Lord the dead, so that we may share in the has now poured out at Pentecost, namely glorious existence of the final, consum- the promised Holy Spirit (Acts 2; cf. John mated state. Anthony Hoekema nicely 14-16; Eph 1:13-14). summarizes this data when he writes, “In That is why, especially in Paul, the Holy conclusion we may say that in the pos- Spirit “not only prompts us to look back- session of the Spirit we who are in Christ ward to God’s earlier promises about his have a foretaste of the blessings of the age coming and work, but forward as well, for to come, and a pledge and guarantee of in Pauline thought the Spirit is the arrabōn, the resurrection of the body. Yet we have the deposit and hence the guarantee, of the only the firstfruits. We look forward to promised inheritance awaiting us in the the final consummation of the kingdom of 60 consummation.” Thus, for Paul and the God, when we shall enjoy these blessings 61 rest of the NT, the reception of the Spirit to the full.” means that one has become a participant It is crucial to stress the significance of in the new mode of existence associated this framework of inaugurated eschatol- with the future age, and now partakes of ogy in seeking to understand the work the powers of the “age to come.” Yet Paul of the Spirit (and the Son). David Wells also insists that what the Spirit gives is captures its importance when he asserts, only a foretaste of far greater blessings to When Paul speaks of the God-sent come. This understanding is borne out in Holy Spirit, his perspective is always the five ways that Paul relates the Holy eschatological, looking forward 16 to the end, of which our present of Christ to us so that we may be brought experience of redemption and life to saving faith in Christ and increasingly in the Spirit is the beginning. The Spirit is the gift of the new age, the conformed to his image. What, then, is the guarantee and foretaste, the pledge main problem with Pinnock’s proposal? and first installment of what is to It is simply this: the work of the Spirit come when the fullness of salvation is revealed at Christ’s return (Eph is stripped of its redemptive-historical 1:13-14; Rom 8:23). It is this teaching connections, and then made to buttress on the relation between the old and the new, the flesh and the Spirit, the theological underpinning of the the historical and the eschatological inclusivist’s understanding of the “uni- that forms the whole context within versality axiom.” Or, as Daniel Strange which Paul expounds his doctrines of the church and of salvation. It is states it in a similar fashion, “rather than in this context that he elaborates on being Christocentric in his inclusivism, 62 his doctrine of the Spirit. which I believe he [Pinnock] would claim to be, Pinnock’s position is pneumato- I would also add to Wells’ statement: it centric and as a result the particularity is this teaching and framework of inau- of Christ is compromised. . . . Pinnock’s gurated eschatology that expounds the desire to universalize the particular has Christology of the NT as well. meant a separation of the epistemologi- 65 cal from the ontological.” And, I would Concluding Reflections add, Pinnock’s desire to universalize What are we to conclude from this the particular has further compromised redemptive-historical look at Scripture in the whole plot line of Scripture and the terms of the role relations within the God- presentation of the Son-Spirit relation in head, with specific focus on the Son-Spirit 66 redemptive history. relation? Does it yield the same conclu- Second, the rejection of Pinnock’s sions that Pinnock has proposed? I offer pneumatological proposal on biblical three concluding reflections regarding grounds removes the crucial theological Pinnock’s view and his “pneumatological grounding for the inclusivist separation proposal.” of the epistemological from the ontologi- First, even though Pinnock’s view is cal. The Spirit’s work is to bring people creative, it does not have any biblical to Christ so that they may know and warrant. As we trace out the Son-Spirit believe in him. To affirm that the Spirit relation progressively throughout the may work in us graciously so that we canon, what we discover is the opposite “believe” in God, but not in Jesus Christ of Pinnock’s proposal. In the canon, the as the object of our faith, is foreign to the work of the Spirit, as it is progressively entire work of the Spirit as described in disclosed, is never divorced from the the NT, as well as the OT. In fact, when work of the Son; his work is always tied 63 the NT speaks of faith, it is never faith in to gospel realities. Thus, in light of the the abstract or divorced from the proper coming of Christ, it is the Spirit’s role to object of saving faith. Nor is it the Spirit bear witness of him; to convict the world so working in people that they exhibit of sin, righteousness and judgment so “Christ-like” qualities and a mere faith that they may believe in him (John 16:7- 64 in “God.” There is no biblical evidence 11). In truth, the Spirit’s work, now in for Pinnock’s assertions. The only NT tex- redemptive history, is to apply the work 17 tual data that Pinnock appeals to is Matt “particularism” and “inclusivism” is 25:31-46, which should not be interpreted called “accessibilism.” to refer to people in general, but, in con- 3The literature on this is vast. For exam- 67 text, to Jesus’ disciples. No, the Spirit’s ple, see John Sanders, No Other Name: work, as we see it disclosed in the NT, is An Investigation into the Destiny of the to bear witness to him so that people, by Unevangelized (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, grace, may be brought to saving faith in 1992); Clark H. Pinnock, A Wideness in Christ and Christ alone. I cannot help but God’s Mercy: The Finality of Jesus Christ concur with the late Ronald Nash when he in a World of Religions (Grand Rapids: asserts, “I believe it is reckless, dangerous, Zondervan, 1992); idem, “The Finality of and unbiblical to lead people to think that Jesus Christ in a World of Religions,” in the preaching of the gospel (which I insist Christian Faith and Practice in the Modern must contain specifics about the person World (ed. Mark A. Noll and David F. and work of Christ) and personal faith in Wells; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 68 Jesus are not necessary for salvation.” 152-68; William J. Crockett and James G. Third, no doubt the issue of the status Sigountos, ed., Through No Fault of Their of those who have never heard the gospel Own? The Fate of Those Who Have Never is not an easy subject. But the proposal of Heard (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991); Den- inclusivism, at least at this point, is found nis L. Okholm and Timothy R. Phillips, wanting. That, of course, places upon us ed., Four Views of Salvation in a Pluralistic the challenge to take seriously the procla- World (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996); mation of the gospel. We may have a lot of Ronald H. Nash, Is Jesus the Only Savior? questions to wrestle through, but we must (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994); Mil- never compromise this point: apart from lard J. Erickson, How Shall They Be Saved? the preaching, hearing, and believing of The Destiny of Those Who Do Not Hear of the gospel, there is no salvation. May we Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996); D. A. not attempt to construct theological pro- Carson, The Gagging of God: Christian- posals that are not warranted in Scripture, ity Confronts Pluralism (Grand Rapids: and may we call out to the sovereign Lord Zondervan, 1996); Harold Netland, of the church to make us more faithful in Encountering Religious Pluralism: The gospel proclamation as we seek to do what Challenge to Christian Faith and Mission he commands, namely, to take the gospel (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001). to the nations (Matt 28:18-20). 4See for example, John Hick, God and the Universe of Faiths (London: Fount, ENDNOTES 1977); idem, “The Non-Absoluteness of

1See Keith Johnson’s article, “Does the Christianity,” in The Myth of Christian Doctrine of the Trinity Hold the Key to Uniqueness: Toward a Pluralistic Theology a Christian Theology of Religions? An of Religions (ed. John Hick and Paul F. Evaluation of Three Recent Proposals,” Knitter; Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1987); in this issue of The Southern Baptist Jour- idem, “A Pluralist View,” in Four Views of nal of Theology, 24-47. Salvation in a Pluralistic World, 29-59. 2These are not the only names given 5See, for example, Carson, Gagging of God; to these three positions. For example, Netland, Encountering Religious Pluralism; sometimes “exclusivism” is also called Nash, Is Jesus the Only Savior?; R. Douglas 18 Geivett and W. Gary Phillips, “A (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R, acted as the representative of all Particularist View: An Evidentialist 2001), 105-18. humanity, so that in his act of repre- Approach,” in Four Views of Salva- 10Clark Pinnock, “An Inclusivist sentation, not substitution, creation tion in a Pluralistic World, 213-45. View,” in Four Views of Salvation in is restored. As Pinnock states, “God 6There are a variety of inclusivist a Pluralistic World, 98. effected the conversion of humanity positions. For example, there is 11Pinnock, A Wideness in God’s Mercy, in Jesus, who represented the race a Roman Catholic inclusivism as 157. and thereby altered the human situ- represented by such people as Karl 12Pinnock, Flame, 192. ation. In his death and resurrection, Rahner, Theological Investigations 13Ibid., 192. humanity de jure passed from death (23 vol.; trans. Karl and Boniface 14Ibid. For a similar statement of the to life, because God has included it Kruger; Baltimore: Helicon, 1969), tension see John Sanders, No Other in the event. Its destiny has been 6:390-97; and Hans Küng, “The Name, 25. objectively realized in Christ—what World Religions in God’s Plan of 15Pinnock, Flame, 187. remains to be done is a human Salvation,” in Christian Revelation 16Pinnock, “An Inclusivist View,” response and salvation de facto. The and World Religions (ed. Joseph 99-100. possibility of newness must be laid Neuner; London: Burnes and Oates, 17Pinnock, Flame, 192. hold of by faith” (Flame, 95-96). Of 1967), 25-57. There are also evan- 18Ibid. course, this does not mean that in gelical inclusivists represented by 19See ibid., 79-82. the cross Christ paid for my individ- people such as Norman Anderson, 20Ibid., 80. ual sin, rather as Pinnock states, “as Christianity and World Religions 21Ibid. a result of his vicarious humanity, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1984) 22Ibid., 197. we are adopted, justified, sanctified and the works of Pinnock and 23Ibid., 193. and glorified in relation to him . . . Sanders mentioned in note 3, along 24See ibid., 194. we are saved by his representative with Reformed inclusivists such 25Ibid. journey. The redemption of Jesus as Terrance L. Tiessen, Who Can Be 26Ibid., 198. Christ as the last Adam is ours by Saved? (Downers Grove: InterVar- 27Ibid., 188. virtue of solidarity with him, into sity, 2004). 28It is impossible to unpack all of which we are drawn by the Spirit” 7Clark H. Pinnock, Flame of Love: A Pinnock’s thought, given the con- (ibid., 96). Importantly, Pinnock Theology of the Holy Spirit (Downers straints of this article; however, it draws out some of the theological Grove: InterVarsity, 1996). is important to stress that Pinnock’s implications of this understand- 8See, for example, Amos Yong, “Dis- understanding of the cross work ing of Christ’s cross work, namely cerning the Spirit(s) in the World of Christ is not in terms of penal that in Christ, God reconciled the of Religions: Toward a Pneuma- substitution, but Christus Victor world by including everyone in it. tological Theology of Religions,” and the governmental theory of the Furthermore, “the effectiveness of in No Other Gods Before Me? Evan- atonement (see Clark H. Pinnock, this reconciliation is not so much gelicals and the Challenge of World “From Augustine to Arminius: A opting in as not opting out. In faith Religions (ed. John G. Stackhouse, Jr.; Pilgrimage in Theology,” in The we add our yes to God’s prior yes” Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 37-61; Grace of God, The Will of Man: A Case (ibid., 109). and Stanley J. Grenz, “Toward an for [ed. Clark Pinnock; 29Ibid., 195. Evangelical Theology of Religions” Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989], 30See John Sanders, No Other Name, Journal of Ecumenical Studies 31, nos. 15-30; and Clark H. Pinnock and 224-25; Pinnock, A Wideness in God’s 1-2 (1994): 49-65. Robert C. Brow, Unbounded Love Mercy, 161; idem, “The Finality of 9On this distinction see John M. [Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1994], Jesus Christ in a World of Reli- Frame, No Other God: A Response to 99-110). In Pinnock’s view, Jesus gions,” 162-67. 19 31See Pinnock, Flame, 21-48; idem, “An Western church added the filioque this observation. First, why should Inclusivist View,” 102-106. When clause to the Nicene Creed thus we think that “If God really loves Pinnock states that God is “open” endorsing the view that the Spirit the whole world and desires every- he is referring to his view that God, was sent by the Father and the Son. one to be saved it follows logically in creating creatures with libertar- The Eastern church argued that that everyone must have access to ian freedom, has limited himself in only the Father sent the Spirit. What salvation” (Pinnock, Wideness in terms of his sovereign power and is the importance of this debate? At God’s Mercy, 157). As Ronald Nash knowledge in the world. For a more least two points historically. First, reminds us, “Even if we grant the detailed treatment of his open view the issue of order and role relations truth of the first clause (that God of God see the following works: within the Godhead. Second, by not desires the salvation of every human Clark Pinnock, ed. The Openness of viewing the Spirit as sent from both being), does the second follow (that God (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, the Father and the Son, there was a God necessarily will give every 1994); idem, Most Moved Mover tendency in the East to separate the human access to that salvation)? (Dowers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001); work of the Spirit from the Son, and Even evangelical Arminians would Clark H. Pinnock and John B. Cobb, the objective realities of the gos- answer no. As these non-inclusivist Jr., ed. Searching for an Adequate God pel. This is the point that Pinnock Arminians see things, God may (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000); cf. picks up in his view even though desire the salvation of all men, but Gregory Boyd, The God of the Possible Pinnock’s view is quite out of step getting the gospel to those people (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000); John with Eastern theologians. For a suc- is our task” (Is Jesus the Only Savior? Sanders, The God Who Risks (Down- cinct summary of the debate and 135). Second, it has been shown ers Grove: InterVarsity, 1998). description of positions see Robert repeatedly that Scripture speaks 32Pinnock, Flame, 23. Letham, The Holy Trinity (Phillips- of both the love of God and the 33Ibid., 199. burg, NJ: P&R, 2004), 201-51. will of God in a variety of complex 34Ibid., 200. 36Pinnock, Flame, 196-97. ways, and as such, we must be very 35Let me explain this debate briefly. In 37Ibid., 200-01. careful that we do not draw logical John 15:26, we are told that the Holy 38Ibid., 202. inferences that are not biblical infer- Spirit proceeds from the Father, but 39See ibid., 208. ences (see D. A. Carson, The Difficult at the same time Jesus sends the 40Ibid. Doctrine of the Love of God [Wheaton: Spirit. Which is it? Does the Spirit 41Ibid. Crossway, 2000]; Frame, No Other proceed from the Father or from the 42Ibid., 209. God, 49-118). For example, we know Father and the Son? This question 43Ibid., 209-10. that it is illegitimate to draw the sparked a major debate in the his- 44Ibid., 210. conclusion that since God’s stance tory of the church which eventually 45Ibid., 210-11. toward the world is gracious and led to the Western church adopting 46In passing, there are a number of salvific then this must entail some the filioque clause—“and from the points that could be said in terms kind of universalism. However, it Son.” The adoption of this clause of a critique of Pinnock’s proposal, is just as illegitimate to infer from was one of the theological factors even though my main point of God’s stance towards the world that that led to the first major division critique will center on the Son- all must have access to salvation or within the church, known as the Spirit relation. Here are six items that God’s knowledge or power is Great Schism in 1054 A.D. The for consideration: (1) Inclusivists then limited, or even self-limited. question at debate was whether appeal to the love of God and the When we appeal to the love of God both the Father and the Son send universal salvific stance of God in a we must do so in such a way that the Spirit or whether it is only the reductionistic manner. A number of does justice to all that Scripture Father who sends the Spirit. The points need to be said in regard to says about the nature and ways of 20 God in the world—e.g., God’s sov- non-Christian religions. In addi- Reconstructing Theology: A Critical ereignty, holiness, justice, wrath, tion to elements of truth, the great Assessment of the Theology of Clark and so on (see Carson, Gagging, religions of the world frequently Pinnock (ed. Tony Gray and Christo- 285-91 and the essays by Geoffrey display a sensitivity to the spiritual pher Sinkinson; Carlisle: Paternos- Grogan, Tony Lane, and Paul Helm dimension of life, a persistence in ter, 2000], 226-47). in Nothing Greater, Nothing Better: devotion, a readiness to sacrifice, (4) There is an incipient reduc- Theological Essays on the Love of God, and sundry virtues both personal tionism in understanding God’s ed., Kevin J. Vanhoozer [Grand Rap- (gentleness, serenity of temper) and presence in the world. Why is all ids: Eerdmans, 2001], 47-66, 138-85). social (concern for the poor, nonvio- presence a saving presence? Evan- Third, many of the texts that are lence). But in spite of these positive gelical theology has believed that it commonly cited to prove that God features, natural man, operating is important to distinguish a variety loves everyone without distinction within the context of natural reli- of different ways God is present in and with a redeeming love cannot gion and lacking special revelation, creation. See what Louis Berkhof necessarily bear the weight that possesses a fundamentally false has to say on this issue: “Though inclusivists often place upon them understanding of spiritual truth” God is distinct from the world and (see Carson, Gagging, 287-89; Nash, (General Revelation [Grand Rapids: may not be identified with it, He is Is Jesus the Only Savior?, 142-43). Zondervan, 1982], 259). yet present in every part of his cre- (2) There is little biblical evidence (3) Pinnock’s understanding of ation, not only per potentiam but also that general revelation is salvific prevenient grace shifts the catego- per essentiam. This does not mean, (see Bruce Demarest, “General and ries from soteriology to the doctrine however, that He is equally present Special Revelation: Epistemological of creation, where prevenient grace and present in the same sense in Foundations of Religious Plural- has now become a matter of ontol- all his creatures. The nature of His ism” in One God, One Lord (2nd ed.; ogy. makes an indwelling is in harmony with that ed. Andrew D. Clarke and Bruce astute point when he states, “For of his creatures. He does not dwell W. Winter [Grand Rapids: Baker, these theologians, there is only on earth as He does in heaven, in 1992], 189-206; Nash, Is Jesus the one kind of grace, one kind of call, animals as He does in man, in the Only Savior?, 117-22; Erickson, How and one kind of way in which God inorganic as He does in the organic Shall They Be Saved?, 143-58). In addi- is related to the world. God exerts creation, in the wicked as He does in tion, Pinnock does not distinguish a constant attractive force on the the pious, nor in the Church as He clearly “common” and “saving” soul—a kind of divine gravity. does in Christ. There is an endless grace. Pinnock is not wrong to link This universal call comes through a variety in the manner in which He grace with creation and re-creation, variety of media: the creation itself, is immanent in His creatures, and but it should be understood as that conscience, as well as proclamation in the measure in which they reveal of “common” grace. Furthermore, about Christ. Grace is therefore God to those who have eyes to see” the issue of people of non-Christian ‘prevenient’: that which ‘comes ( [1941; reprint, religions showing the Spirit is bet- before’ a person’s ability to repent Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982], 61). ter explained within the categories and believe . . . For much of modern Furthermore, also see the important of general revelation and common theology, then, prevenient grace discussion in Strange, “Deciphering grace. As Bruce Demarest states, has become a matter of ontology” the Conundrum,” 242-47. Thus, one “On the basis of God’s universal (Kevin J. Vanhoozer, First Theology need not conclude, then, that God’s general revelation and common [Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2002], presence is necessarily a “redemp- enabling grace, undisputed truths 103-04). Also see Daniel Strange, tive” presence. Strange states, “I about God, man, and sin lie embed- “Deciphering the Conundrum of think that in his desire to prove ded to varying degrees in the Pneumatological Inclusivism,” in universal accessibility, Pinnock has 21 blurred and confused the general so forth” (ibid.). Moreover, appeal the Spirit (Old Tappan, NJ: Revell, and universal operations of the to such individuals often overlooks 1984), 55-63. Spirit in creation, the specific and the fact that these believers in the 52See Wells, God the Evangelist, 3-4, for particular operations of the Spirit OT were responding in faith to these seven main ways the Spirit’s in salvation, and mistaken saving special revelation, and “were not work is described in the OT. presence with divine providence” simply exercising some sort of gen- 53Ferguson, Holy Spirit, 246. (ibid., 246). eral ‘faith’ in an undefined ‘God’ 54See Carson, Gagging of God, 291-96, (5) Pinnock’s inclusivism tends to (ibid.). who makes this same point. underemphasize the guilty nature 47For an in-depth treatment of these 55For a development of these points, of all humanity with the result that issues, see, e.g., Richard Lints, The see Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible divine saving grace is replaced with Fabric of Theology (Grand Rapids: and the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerd- divine saving obligation. But this is Eerdmans, 1993); Michael S. Hor- mans, 1979), 55-67; cf. Geerhardus not at all obvious in Scripture. See ton, Covenant and Eschatology (Lou- Vos, “The Eschatological Aspect ibid., 252. isville: Westminster John Knox, of the Pauline Conception of the (6) When appeal is made to holy 2002); T. Desmond Alexander, Spirit,” in Redemptive History and pagans in Scripture (e.g., Enoch, Brian S. Rosner, ed. New Diction- Biblical Interpretation (ed. Richard B. Melchizedek, Naaman, Cornelius) ary of Biblical Theology (Downers Gaffin, Jr.; Phillipsburg, NJ: Presby- and the work of grace in them, as Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000); terian & Reformed, 1980), 91-125. well as their religious traditions, Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of 56Turner, “Holy Spirit,” 552. there is often a failure to discern Doctrine (Louisville: Westminster 57Ferguson, Holy Spirit, 37. where these people are placed in John Knox, 2005). 58Carson, Gagging of God, 265. the story line of Scripture. Most of 48On this, see Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 59Ibid. the pre-Christ believers to which First Theology; idem, Is There a Mean- 60Ibid., 265-66. appeal is often made are those who ing in This Text? (Grand Rapids: 61Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 67. enter into a “covenantal, faith-based Zondervan, 1998). 62Wells, God the Evangelist, 9-10. relationship with the God who 49The three horizons are taken from 63Pinnock’s dismissal of the filioque had disclosed himself to them in Lints, The Fabric of Theology. clause is disappointing. For an the terms and the extent recorded 50Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “Does the Trin- excellent discussion of the historical up to that time” (Carson, Gagging, ity Belong in a Theology of Reli- and theological issues surrounding 298). Furthermore, Carson adds, gions?” in The Trinity in a Pluralistic the clause, see Gerald Bray, “The “From the perspective of the bibli- Age: Theological Essays on Culture and Filioque clause in History and The- cal plot-line, there is some genuine Religion (ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer; ology” Tyndale Bulletin 34 (1983), continuity between such Old Testa- Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 91-144; cf. Letham, Holy Trinity, ment saints and the New Testament 66. 201-251. saints (e.g. Rom. 1:1-2; 11; Phil. 3:3, 51Max Turner, “Holy Spirit,” in New 64See J. I. Packer who likens the Spir- 7, 9). Under the old covenant, insti- Dictionary of Biblical Theology, 551- it’s work as a floodlight ministry. tutions, sacrificial systems, entire 58; cf. See David F. Wells, God the He states, “The Spirit’s message to priestly orders, were to be adhered Evangelist (Grand Rapids: Eerd- us is never, ‘Look at me; listen to to as part of obedient faith on the mans, 1987), 1-4; Gordon D. Fee, me; come to me; get to know me,’ part of the people, but such insti- Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God but always, ‘Look at him, and see tutions and systems also pointed (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996), 9-15; his glory; listen to him, and hear his forward, as we have seen, to Jesus Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit word; go to him, and have life; get Christ—to his sacrifice, his priest- (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1996), to know him, and taste his gift of hood, the heavenly tabernacle, and 15-33; J. I. Packer, Keep in Step with joy and peace.’ The Spirit, we might 22 say, is the matchmaker, the celestial marriage broker, whose role it is to bring us and Christ together and ensure that we stay together. As the second Paraclete, the Spirit leads us constantly to the original Paraclete, who himself draws near, as we saw above, through the second Parclete’s coming to us (Jn 14:18). Thus, by enabling us to discern the first Para- clete, and by moving us to stretch out our hands to him as he comes from his throne to meet us, the Holy Spirit glorifies Christ, according to Christ’s own word”(Keep in Step with the Spirit, 65-66). 65Strange, “Deciphering the Conun- drum,” 250. 66See Bruce A. Ware, “How Shall We Think about the Trinity?” in God Under Fire (eds Douglas S. Huffman and Eric L. Johnson; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), 260-64, who makes a similar point. 67See D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositors Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 518-23. 68Nash, Is Jesus the Only Savior? 126.

23