Here are the conclusions that Garry Friesnen comes to in his book:
Here is Garry Frienen's proposed alternative:
1. In those areas specifically addressed by the Bible, the revealed commands and principles of God (His Moral will) are to be obeyed.
(I agree 100%.)
2. In those areas where the Bible gives no command or principle (non-moral decisions), the believer is free and responsible to choose his own course of action. Any decision made within the moral will of God is acceptable to God.
(This is the "Where the Bible speaks, we speak. Where the Bible is silent, we're silent" thinking coming through. I found it interesting that he isn't a church of Christer but a United Evangelical Free Churcher. As you know if you have been reading my blog, I disagree with this one. However, I do agree to an extent. Unless you are prompted by God otherwise, you need to make a decision based upon common sense and wisdom. Never can the decision you make go against the teachings of Scripture.)
3. In nonmoral decisions, the objective of the Christian is to make wise decisions on the basis of spiritual expediency.
(I would repeat what I just said.)
4. In all decisions, the believer should humbly submit in advance, to the outworking of God's sovereign will as it touches each decision.
(I believe that all believers should humbly submit to the promptings of God, not just the results of his will being worked out. Some times our actions prohibit God's will from being implemented in our lives. He waits patiently for the faithful to rise up in order to shower them with the blessing of his will being manifested through them. God is patient, and he usually doesn't force his will. This does not go against the teaching in Romans that "God uses all things for the good of those who love him." It just means that all things aren't always what God intended them to be. No matter what is done God will use those events to create the world into what he wants it to be.
The flood could be a good example of this. It wasn't "good" for those clawing the outside of the ark as they were trying to escape the raging water. But it was "good" for those who loved God.
Or how about the persecution of the church in Jerusalem. It wouldn't appear to be a "good" thing at first. It wouldn't be perceived as good to those whose family members were executed. But for overarching community of God is was good. It forced the good news of the kingdom to be spread throughout the world.
This is the conclusion I have just arrived at. It could be wrong. I'm just throwing it out there. On the collective level, everything always works out for the good of those who love God. On the individual level, it doesn't always happen that way. Thoughts?
Watch out for the potholes.
Reference: magick-keys.blogspot.com
