Copyright © 2010 Christopher James Bosson. All Rights Reserved. The
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright © 2010 Christopher James Bosson. All rights reserved. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has permission to reproduce and disseminate this document in any form by any means for purposes chosen by the Seminary, including, without limitation, preservation or instruction. A SCRIPTURAL APPRAISAL OF THE NECESSARY CONNECTION BETWEEN PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION AND COMPATIBILIST FREEDOM A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Christopher James Bosson May 2010 UMI Number: 3411531 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed. a note will indicate the deletion. UMI ----Dissertation Publishing ---- UMI 3411531 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Pro uesr -- ---. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor. M148106-1346 APPROVAL SHEET A SCRIPTURAL APPRAISAL OF THE NECESSARY CONNECTION BETWEEN PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION AND COMPATIBILIST FREEDOM Christopher James Bosson Read and Approved by: Bruce A. Ware Date-----""~"-------=-~I -/---,~r--I=..!d_o-,-/ D_" _ To Dad and Gramps, my two favorite theologians TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS. VI PREFACE. .. .. .. viii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION............................................. 1 Thesis. 2 Background. 6 Methodology. 9 2. TWO MODELS OF HUMAN FREEDOM. 15 Libertarianism. 17 Libertarianism on Trial. 26 A Valuable Experiment? . 34 Determinism. 35 Compatibilism . 41 Compatibilism on Trial. 52 Conclusion. 63 3. THREE MODELS OF SANCTIFICATION. 67 Wesleyan Perfectionism. 69 iv Chapter Page Keswick. .. .. 80 Augustinianism. 88 Conclusion. 100 4. ANALYSIS OF KEY SANCTIFICATION TEXTS................... 108 Romans 7:14-8:8. .. 109 1 Corinthians 10:13 . 120 Galatians 5:16-17 . 126 Ephesians 4:22-24 . 132 Philippians 2:12-13 . 143 1 John 3:6-9 . 147 Conclusion. 157 5. QUESTIONING LIBERTARIAN INTERPRETATIONS. 161 Revisiting the Sanctification Texts. 163 Conclusion. 188 6. FINAL THOUGHTS. 192 A Return to Common Sense. 193 A Return to Scripture. 194 A Return to Mystery. 195 BIBLIOGRAPHy................................................... 198 v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AB Anchor Bible ACCS Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture ACT Ancient Christian Texts ANF Ante-Nicene Fathers BDAG W. Bauer, F. W. Danker, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich, Greek-English Lexicon ofthe NT BSac Bibliotheca Sacra CB Century Bible CC Creeds of Christendom CCC Crossway Classic Commentaries EB Expositor's Bible ECLS Early Christian Literature Society ECNT Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament FC The Fathers of the Church I CC International Critical Commentary Institutes Calvin: Institutes ofthe Christian Religion IVPNTC Inter-Varsity Press New Testament Commentary JETS Journal ofthe Evangelical Theological Society VI LCC Library of Christian Classics MNTC Moffatt New Testament Commentary NAC New American Commentary NICNT New International Commentary on the New Testament NIGTC New International Greek Testament Commentary NPNP Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 1st Series PNTC Pillar New Testament Commentary SOSO Sermons on Several Occasions SVF Soticorum Veterum Fragmenta TNTC Tyndale New Testament Commentary TPINTC Trinity Press International New Testament Commentaries WBC Word Biblical Commentary Works Works ofJohn Owen Works Works ofJohn Wesley Works Works ofJonathan Edwards Works Works ofRev. C. H Spurgeon VlI PREFACE Wendell Berry once wrote, "One mind alone, like one life alone, is perfectly worthless, not even imaginable."! The following work would have been unimaginable without the love and encouragement of many. I am eternally grateful to my parents, Allan and Cynthia Bosson, who held my hand from the first day of grade school until now, offering incalculable guidance and support along the way. My two younger brothers, Tim and Andrew, also deserve mention for their continued interest and support during my time writing. I am also indebted to a praying grandmother, Betty Colmey, and a one-time-dissertation-supervisor grandfather, Dr. James Colmey, whose sage advice to resist the urge to write my magnum opus prevented untold hours of wasted effort. Bruce Ware deserves special thanks for suggesting that I write a dissertation on the connection between compatibilist freedom and progressive sanctification. My supervisor, Gregg Allison, was kind enough to take me under his wing after I suddenly changed topics, though he was already overseeing the doctoral work of many others. For this, I am exceedingly grateful. I would also like to thank Jim Parker for his willingness to befriend a young, shy, soccer-loving, just-off-the-field missionary from Africa who had no initial desire to pursue a doctorate degree. His Lutheresque wit and humor regarding the more quotidian aspects of life afforded a much needed respite from the deep-end 'Wendell Berry, The Way a/Ignorance (Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint, 2005), x. VlIl theological discussions of seminary. Though we disagree at points, David Ciocchi graciously offered many helpful insights regarding recent trends in free will theory. Many thanks to Josh Farris, David King, Josh Nelson, Richard Lindstrom, Andrew Wilkes, Samuel Amati, and Rony Kozman for reading over drafts, giving critical insights, loaning books, and finding typographical errors in the very same sentences that I read tens oftimes. A constant partner of my thoughts and soon-to-be lifelong partner, Rahel, was never satisfied nor intimidated by the words, "Trust me, I'm getting my Ph.D. in this," in response to her challenge that my thinking was mistaken on a matter of theology. More often than not, she was right. She is convinced that writing is always easier when there's a box of Belgian chocolates nearby. I took her up on this suggestion on countless late nights and never regretted it. More than any other, Rahel has helped to advance my sanctification by teaching me what it means to "taste and see" that the Lord is good. For this, and much more, I'm forever grateful. Soli Deo Gloria. Christopher James Bosson Louisville, Kentucky May 2010 IX CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Throughout the long-standing debate over the interplay between divine and human action, a surprisingly negligible amount of dialogue has centered on the relationship between human freedom and the doctrine of sanctification. This lacuna has in turn led to a number of assumptions concerning what type of human freedom best explains a biblically-faithful doctrine of sanctification. This dissertation endeavors to generate discussion related to the connection between one's view of human freedom and one's view of sanctification by arguing that one is consequential to the other. Trinity Evangelical Divinity School professor, Tom McCall, is one of few theologians who have acknowledged the implications of one's concept of freedom on one's doctrine of sanctification. In a paper delivered at the 2007 Evangelical Theological Society meeting, he argued that all attempts to combine theological determinism with sanctification are exegetically and theologically inconsistent and, what is worse, pastorally insensitive. Given the constraints of a determinist model of freedom, McCall argued, for example, that the "way of escape" promised in 1 Corinthians 10: 13 is incapable of offering any kind of meaningful assurance to the believer struggling with temptation. After all, "What does it mean," asked McCall, "to say that God is 'faithful' to provide a way of escape when God does not, at certain times and places, either provide 2 such a way or make it accessible to the believer?"l The intended response to McCall's question is frighteningly apparent: God is, at best, impotent and, at worst, a liar. While I applaud McCall's willingness to engage in this all-important discussion, I believe his premise needs revising. McCall must also be commended for his desire to use Scripture to question compatibilism's validity. The same cannot be said for David Ciocchi who has recently pushed for a suspension of the Divine Sovereignty vs. Human Freedom (DSF) debate altogether and decries the use of biblical exegesis as a way of opting for one model of human freedom over another. Ciocchi argues that Scripture does not endorse anyone form of human freedom, and that we must first "work on the logically prior problem of determining what it is about human beings that justifies God in treating them as morally responsible agents" before we pretend to know what type of human freedom persists in this world.2 This dissertation takes issue with Ciocchi's premature stance toward Scripture and attempts, in part, to refocus the debate upon Scripture as a primary means of inquiry into the true nature of human freedom. Thesis I argue that a compatibilist account of human freedom characterized by non- constraining causation is an essential component of the Augustinian doctrine of ITom McCall, "The Metaphysics of Sanctification and the Problems of Pastoral Care: Questioning Theological Determinism," (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, San Diego, CA, 17 November 2007), 13. 2David M. Ciocchi, "Suspending the Debate about Divine Sovereignty