Introducing Christotelism: A Biblical and Refined View of God’s Eternal Plan
The Core of Christotelism
At its heart, Christotelism centers on the Father’s desire and purpose (telos) to maximally glorify the Son by creating, redeeming, and transforming a people who willingly commune with Him. This eternal plan unfolds in five key stages:
- Initiation: The Father’s sovereign decision to create a world that would glorify the Son through a redeemed family.
- Conceptualization: The Father’s foreknowledge, election, and predestination, incorporating relational knowledge of human dispositions (willingness or resistance).
- Mediation: The Son’s central role as mediator, accomplishing redemption through His life, death, and resurrection.
- Actualization: The Spirit’s transformative work in regenerating, sanctifying, and glorifying the elect, ensuring the plan is realized in history.
- Culmination: The ultimate fulfillment of God’s plan, where Christ is glorified, evil is eradicated, and the redeemed dwell eternally in communion with Him.
Christotelism’s Biblical Foundation
Christotelism is firmly grounded in Scripture, drawing from key passages that emphasize the sovereignty of God, the centrality of Christ, and the relational work of the Trinity:
- God’s Sovereignty: "He chose us in Him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in His sight" (Ephesians 1:4-5). Election and predestination flow from God’s sovereign will, ensuring His purposes are fulfilled.
- Christ’s Centrality: "In everything He might have the supremacy" (Colossians 1:18). The ultimate goal of creation and redemption is the glorification of Christ.
- Relational Foreknowledge: "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father" (1 Peter 1:2). God’s foreknowledge is not merely decretive but deeply relational, encompassing His intimate knowledge of human dispositions.
- Trinitarian Harmony: "The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing" (John 6:63). The Father, Son, and Spirit work in perfect unity to accomplish salvation.
How Christotelism Speaks to Different Theological Traditions
1. For Calvinists: A Refined View of Sovereignty
Christotelism affirms Calvinism’s commitment to God’s sovereignty, monergistic salvation, and unconditional election, while refining its framework to address the foreknowledge gap:
- Relational Foreknowledge: Unlike Calvinism’s tendency to reduce foreknowledge to God’s decrees, Christotelism emphasizes that foreknowledge is deeply relational, incorporating God’s intimate knowledge of human dispositions (willingness or resistance).
- Trinitarian Harmony: Christotelism enhances Calvinism’s focus on divine sovereignty by emphasizing the relational unity of the Trinity, where the Father conceptualizes the plan, the Son mediates, and the Spirit actualizes.
2. For Arminians: Preserving Human Responsibility
Christotelism addresses Arminian concerns about Calvinism’s deterministic tendencies by incorporating human willingness into God’s plan without compromising His sovereignty:
- Disposition vs. Merit: Christotelism maintains that election is unconditional and rooted in God’s grace, but it respects human disposition (foreknown willingness or resistance) as part of God’s relational engagement.
- Prevenient Grace and Actualization: Christotelism affirms that grace precedes and enables human response, ensuring that salvation remains a monergistic act of God while respecting human freedom.
3. For Open Theists: A Relational Sovereignty
Christotelism engages Open Theism’s emphasis on God’s relational nature while rejecting its denial of God’s exhaustive foreknowledge:
- Exhaustive and Relational Foreknowledge: Christotelism affirms that God knows all possibilities and certainties, incorporating His relational foreknowledge of human choices into His sovereign plan.
- God’s Sovereign Plan: While relational, Christotelism asserts that God’s plan is not reactive but sovereign, initiated and directed by His eternal will.
4. For Molinists: A Unified Vision of Foreknowledge and Election
Christotelism shares Molinism’s desire to reconcile divine sovereignty and human freedom but avoids the speculative mechanism of middle knowledge:
- Foreknowledge Without Middle Knowledge: Christotelism emphasizes God’s relational and exhaustive foreknowledge of dispositions without positing a "best possible world" based on hypothetical free choices.
- Christ-Centered Telos: Christotelism focuses on God’s ultimate goal—the glorification of Christ—rather than on hypothetical worlds or philosophical abstractions.
Distinctive Contributions of Christotelism
- Christ-Centered Purpose: Emphasizes the glorification of Christ as the ultimate goal of creation and redemption.
- Trinitarian Harmony: Highlights the unique roles of the Father, Son, and Spirit in a relationally rich framework.
- Relational Foreknowledge: Bridges the gap between Calvinism’s deterministic tendencies and Arminianism’s emphasis on free will by integrating relational foreknowledge.
- Monergistic Grace: Affirms that salvation is entirely a work of God’s grace while respecting human willingness.
- Resolution of Theological Tensions: Provides a balanced response to Calvinism, Arminianism, Open Theism, and Molinism.
Objections and Responses to Christotelism
Objection 1: Christotelism Compromises Unconditional Election
Critics may argue that incorporating foreknown disposition into election suggests that God’s choice is based on human factors, which could undermine the doctrine of unconditional election and the monergistic nature of salvation.
Response:
Christotelism maintains that election is entirely unconditional in that it does not depend on human merit, works, or even the act of faith. Foreknown disposition is not the basis of election but reflects God’s relational foreknowledge of each person. The cause of election is God’s eternal purpose to glorify the Son, not anything within the individual, including their disposition. Disposition (willingness or resistance) is respected within God’s sovereign plan but is only actualized through God’s enabling grace. Thus, election remains rooted in God’s sovereign will and His eternal purpose to glorify the Son.
Objection 2: Christotelism Leans Too Far Toward Arminianism
Some may claim that Christotelism’s emphasis on human willingness or disposition brings it closer to Arminianism by prioritizing human responses over God’s sovereignty.
Response:
Christotelism does not equate foreknown disposition with a human contribution to salvation. It affirms that even a willing disposition is insufficient to save; grace must both enable and actualize the response. This approach bridges the gap between sovereignty and responsibility, demonstrating that human willingness operates within God’s monergistic framework. It retains the Reformed emphasis on grace while acknowledging the relational dynamics of foreknowledge.
Objection 3: Christotelism Overcomplicates the Simplicity of Calvinism
Critics may argue that Christotelism adds unnecessary complexity to Calvinism by emphasizing relational foreknowledge and Trinitarian harmony.
Response:
Christotelism refines, rather than complicates, Calvinism by addressing the foreknowledge gap and integrating the relational aspects of God’s work into the framework. The Trinitarian focus enriches the theology, highlighting how the Father, Son, and Spirit work harmoniously in salvation. Rather than overcomplicating, Christotelism provides clarity and depth by emphasizing the relational and Christ-centered nature of God’s eternal plan.
Objection 4: Christotelism Undermines God’s Sovereignty
Some may assert that incorporating human disposition into election weakens God’s sovereignty, making His plan contingent on human responses.
Response:
Christotelism fully upholds God’s sovereignty, affirming that salvation is entirely His work. Foreknown disposition is not a cause but an aspect of God’s exhaustive knowledge and relational engagement. The cause of election is God’s eternal purpose to glorify the Son, not anything within the individual, including their disposition. God’s sovereignty ensures that His purposes are accomplished regardless of human willingness or resistance. The framework merely emphasizes that God’s sovereignty operates in harmony with His relational nature, rather than through arbitrary decrees.
Objection 5: Christotelism Conflicts with Molinism’s Middle Knowledge
Proponents of Molinism may argue that Christotelism’s rejection of middle knowledge limits God’s ability to choose the best possible world based on hypothetical free choices.
Response:
Christotelism affirms God’s exhaustive knowledge of all possibilities and certainties but rejects the speculative notion of middle knowledge. Instead, it emphasizes God’s relational foreknowledge of actual human dispositions, which respects human freedom while affirming divine sovereignty. By focusing on God’s eternal purpose to glorify Christ, Christotelism avoids the philosophical abstractions of middle knowledge and centers on a biblical understanding of election and foreknowledge.
Objection 6: Christotelism Risks Anthropomorphism
Some may argue that emphasizing God’s relational foreknowledge and willingness to engage with human disposition risks making God’s actions too anthropomorphic, as if He is dependent on human traits.
Response:
Christotelism rejects any notion that God is dependent on humanity. Rather, it affirms that God’s relational engagement is a reflection of His character, not a limitation of His sovereignty. God’s relational foreknowledge is an expression of His omniscience and love, demonstrating His personal involvement in His creation. This approach highlights the richness of God’s nature without compromising His transcendence or sovereignty.
Objection 7: Christotelism’s Emphasis on Trinitarian Roles Is Redundant
Critics may argue that the traditional Reformed framework already accounts for the Father, Son, and Spirit’s roles, making Christotelism’s Trinitarian emphasis unnecessary.
Response:
While the Reformed framework acknowledges the Trinity, Christotelism provides a more explicit and cohesive emphasis on the harmony of the Father’s conceptualization, the Son’s mediation, and the Spirit’s actualization. This focus enriches the theological framework by showing how each Person of the Trinity uniquely contributes to salvation while working toward the common goal of glorifying Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment