October 31st look at the Presidential Election

The presidential election is only 4 days away and I have a mixed bag of emotions coming in to the election. Number one, I am a political junkie and am excited about November 4th. Being the nerd that I am, I have taken off a half day from work on November 4th in order to watch the election coverage from 1:00pm until I get tired of watching it (which will probably be in the wee hours of the morning of November 5th). I enjoy watching elections because it is democracy in action. On the other hand, by this time in October during general elections, I get campaign fatigue and am tired of all the "back and forth". I have already voted in the election, so I am somewhat relieved that my decision has already been made (although I will not make it public).

In an attempt to be non-partisan and have some pre-election analysis (as if anybody is going to care what I think...), here are some trends that I can see happening in this election:

1. Obama is the projected winner going into election day: although anything can happen in 4 days, the electoral map is largely favoring the Democrat candidate. Although there is significant tightening going on over the past couple of days, the electoral math is pointing to a significant victory for Obama.

2. Electoral Map: All the states that are considered "swing states" are states that George W. Bush carried in 2004. Barack Obama is currently leading in most of those. The only toss ups at the moment are Missouri, North Carolina, Indiana, Florida that could be considered swing states. The shocking thing is that not only are these states close, but also Montana, Georgia, and North Dakota. If Obama wins any of these swing states, McCain is in serious trouble. If McCain loses Florida (where Obama is currently leading and turn out is heavily Democrat in early voting), its over. McCain's only path to victory is centered on Pennsylvania. If McCain loses PA, there is litle or no chance that he can get to 270. Obama has been in double digit leads for weeks now, but Mason-Dixon released a poll yesterday showing that Obama only had a 4% lead. This can either be an outlier or the beginning of a surge for McCain in this state. It will be interesting to see the polling over the weekend and on Monday in this all important state. Really, if you want to look at it, you don't even need to worry about national polling numbers or electoral map coverage. All you really need to do is focus on Pennsylvania. If Obama wins this state, he basically only has to win one other swing state to win the election. If McCain wins PA, he doesn't win the election by default, but at least this would give him a "path" to 270. If McCain can win PA and sweep the swing states, he is our next President. This, "my friends", is a difficult proposition.

3. What can turn this election around for McCain?: well, not much. Wednesday, Barack Obama had a 30 minute informercial that attracted 33 MILLION viewers nationwide. It will be interesting to see what the polling will indicate of the effect of that media buy once Thursday is included in the mix. I would have to say that Obama gets some positive bump from it. This means that John McCain needs to do something to shake things up. With only 4 days to go, there is not much that he can do. Most of the polling is stabilizing and the early voting numbers are already getting locked in while Barack Obama is leading nationally. I read today that John McCain is going to be on Saturday Night Live. I don't know if this will provide the needed jolt. Sarah Palin showed up a week or so ago, and it did very little to help the numbers. The only thing that can happen to move this election to McCain is some sort of national security event that will focus the nation's attention away from the economy. In 2004 (on October 31st I believe), an Osama Bin Laden video was posted on national television declaring certain attacks on U.S. soil. Most political pundits would say that this video was one of the main reasons why Bush won re-election. I am afraid that something like that would have to happen in order to turn things around. McCain has tried the last couple of days to move the focus to national security by simply talking about it from the stump. That is not going to help much.

4. What about the Bradley effect? The Bradley effect is where African Americans in politics seem to poll better in the days leading up the election and then perform much more poorly than the polling indicated. In other words, voters would tell a pollster that they would be voting for the African American and then not do so in the voting booth. Even though it seemed that Bradley was at work in New Hampshire in the primaries, where Hillary Clinton came back from the dead, it does not seem that the general election will have the same effect. Number one, political historians say that the California election where Bradley lost, had polling that was not accurate. The polls did not track the significant tightening that was going on in the days leading up to the election. In New Hampshire, many political junkies site polling mistakes instead of change of hearts by the voters. Whatever the case, we all should want the election to be fair and we also hope that the polling is accurate one way or another. James Carville said on CNN a month ago after one of the debates in reference to the Bradley Effect that if Obama is consistently leading nationally by 5% or better going into election day, and then loses the election, it will be a bad day for American politics. Everyone can imagine what could happen. Let's hope that November 4th has a clear winner without any talk of the Bradley Effect. Unfortunately, if McCain wins, it will be considered the greatest comeback in political history AND EVERYONE will be talking about the Bradley Effect, which will be renamed the Obama Effect.

I am looking forward to November 4th, and I am sure you are too!

The Holy Spirit and Inclusivism

The following was a forum question in my Systematic Theology class at Southern Seminary and my response to the question. Feel free to comment and add to the discussion!

Since the Holy Spirit “blows where he wills” (John 3.8) discuss the implications of his work among non-Christian communities.

The idea that other people groups can encounter salvation apart from the Christian model through Jesus Christ is a very controversial issue. I would highly recommend the book 4 Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World edited by Stan Gundry. In that work, the pluralist, inclusivist, and particularist views are laid out with the particularist view being represented by a moderate and conservative branch. I tend to (at this point) side with Alister McGrath in this work as a Particularist / Agnostic. The theme of Scripture from beginning to end is found in the person and work of Christ and the sovereignty of God. I cannot see through the biblical evidence a way to salvation except through the blood of Christ and His grace through faith. The Holy Spirit is the agency by which that salvation process is worked out in each believer. I enjoyed reading the specifics of this process in Ferguson's book and was enlightened as to the implications of the biblical record on the Spirit's work in salvation. It made me have a fresh look at the entire doctrine and the Spirit's work in my own life! With regards to the question posed here, Ferguson points out in his work that the role of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the Trinity are to glorify the other members of the Trinity. Therefore, the Spirit's work is found within the parameters of the glory of the Son and of the Father. The Spirit will not do anything that does not glorify the Son and the Father and vice versa. John Piper in his excellent book Desiring God says that the chief end of God is to Glorify God and enjoy himself forever. The Triune God's main task throughout eternity has been His glory for His name sake. That means that the Holy Spirit will work and act in concert with the Son and the Father. I don't see how salvation or a working of the Spirit can occur outside the preaching of Christ crucified and resurrected and of God the Father and His providential plan for humanity. Nonetheless, I am not God nor will ever consider myself knowledgable to understand the fullness of His mysteries - and the question of the eternal destiny of those who are "moral pagans" of this era or of antiquity is definitely a mystery! Therefore, I must claim that I am agnostic in that regard and defer to the sovereignty of God and his perfect plan for all the universe.

Nonetheless, I must say that Jesus did say that "I am the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6). That passage (in the midst of Jesus' discussion of the Holy Spirit who was to come) along with the witness of scripture points on a Christocentric salvation experience. Anyone who feels that they can come to a salvation experience outside of Christ is "playing with fire". Although I am saying that I cannot be one hundred percent sure that moral individuals of other faiths will be condemned, I certainly would not want to "test" the Lord on that issue. I would much rather now "fall on my knees and confess Jesus as Lord and Savior" (Philippians 2:5-11) than as to wait until the day of Judgement and be forced to do it and then hope for an exception to the rule.

The Sufficiency of the Atonement

The following post is a forum contribution that I made in my Systematic Theology III course this semester on the sufficiency of the atonement. Enjoy and comment at your leisure!

From your notes, explain and evaluate James P. Boyce's statement, “The atoning work of Christ was not sufficient for the salvation of man.” [James P. Boyce, Abstract of Systematic Theology, 367-68.]

The Atoning Work of Christ is not sufficient for the Salvation of Man

Taken at face value and out of context, this is a startling comment by J.P. Boyce, the founder of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.[1] The atoning work of Christ was effectual in that it, as Boyce puts it, “removed…all the obstacles in the way of God’s pardon of the sinner”. Without the atonement, salvation could not take place. In other words, the atonement was a work of Christ to God so that the righteous judgment of God could be atoned for at the cross instead of on the souls of humanity as a whole. The atonement declares the righteousness of God and the holiness of God. The atonement makes it possible for God to save the elect for the sake of His own glory and righteousness. As Boyce puts it, it is a “Godward” act. The atonement places humanity in a position to where they can now have a relationship with God. The atonement along with the resurrection of Christ is the Gospel’s power.
Nonetheless, even if the atonement is essential for salvation, it is not completely sufficient for the salvation of the sinner. Individually and positionally speaking the sinner as a human being is still at enmity with God. If the atonement was all that was sufficient for the salvation of the unbeliever, then the atonement would have resulted in a universal salvation for all of humanity. Maybe this is what liberal theological thought would like to be the case, but it is simply not biblical. The atonement crashes down the barriers, tears the veil in two, grants access to God in a personal relationship, but it does not justify the sinner. The sinner is still a sinner. The sinner needs to hear the gospel, but because of the sinful nature in the unbeliever, that Gospel falls on deaf ears. This is the case, even though, as Boyce points out, the Gospel “has all the elements which should secure its acceptance.” This passage from Boyce’s Abstract of Systematic Theology is focused on the effectual calling of the elect, whereby God gives to those who are to be saved “such influences of the Spirit as will lead to their acceptance of the call.” However, as Dr. Moore mentioned in the lecture on this topic, even the effectual calling itself also does not save anyone. It is by the grace of God, through faith, that one is saved. This faith involves a knowledge of the Gospel truth, an assent that the gospel is the truth, and a trust in the person of Christ for salvation. As George E. Ladd questions, “Is the Kingdom of heaven to be entered merely by taking the name of Jesus upon one’s lips and making a verbal confession?”[2] Ladd answers that question by saying, “In Christ, the Kingdom now confronts us. The life of the Age to Come now stands before us. The One who shall tomorrow be the Judge of all men has already come into history. He faces us with one demand: decision.”[3] The Kingdom of God makes a demand for a decision. Yes, the atonement was necessary for salvation, but it is not sufficient. This decision is to be resolute, urgent, radical, costly, and eternal.[4] The decision points to all the work of God in the salvation experience, including Christ’s atonement over two millennia ago, but it is a crucial ingredient. The salvation experience is a glorious and mysterious working of God in the life of the believer. One must not over emphasize the importance of one particular aspect. Each phase of salvation has its place and its effect. When one experiences this phenomenon, the believer can only say, “Amazing Grace!”
[1] All quotations of James P. Boyce come from Abstract of Systematic Theology, p. 367-68 as referenced in the class lecture outline notes.
[2] George E. Ladd, The Gospel of the Kingdom: Scriptural Studies in the Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 96.
[3] Ibid
[4] Ibid, 98-106.

New Poll - Mars Hill Election

Please see the new poll that I have posted to the left. Please vote to see who you will be voting for November 4th, 2008.

Thanks!

Josh