My rating: 3 of 5 stars
This volume was written as a companion volume for Shanks earlier work, Life in the Son, which defends the view that true believers can fall away.
Shank’s treatment of election is thorough and well-researched, as he interacts extensively with Calvin, Berkouwer and other Reformed writers. Of the three major views of election; Calvinist (unconditional particular election), Arminian (election based on God’s foreseeing faith) and class election (God chooses the Church as a category unconditionally, but chooses individuals to populate the Church conditionally), Shank defends class election.
While many of his arguments are strong, he fails to deal adequately with the fact that his system places man above God as the ultimate determiner of his destiny. In a few places Shank misunderstands or caricatures Calvin, but mostly his representation of Calvin is helpful as he quotes him at length.
The statement by Ferguson “that his system places man above God as the ultimate determiner of his destiny” is a biased inbred opinion based not on Shanks work which deserves better treatment but rather years of exposure to a Calvinist mindset that is hard to shake off.
His chapter “Election of Grace” found in his definitive work “Elect of the Son” deals squarely with the issues of faith so prevalent in Calvins System.
The extent to which Shank relied on textual exegesis and Biblical Theology as contrasted with Calvins Systematic Theology leaves anyone who has seriously studied Shank’s exegesis perplexed with what Ferguson means by “his system” because if Shank is correct then it is not Shanks system but Gods revelation which Shank has unearthed.
What is the “Sole determiner” of man’s destiny is it not the full application of God’s atonement to those who believe? What Shank has brought to light is a profound understanding that Gods Provision via “The Atonement” is Sufficient for all but Efficient for the Elect.
What Ferguson needs to come to grips with is, if he is willing to accept that God has a right being Sovereign in Calvins System to arbitrarily choose some individuals (Individual Particular Election) without any condition then why does God not have a right to apply the atonement (Efficiency) to those whose mental ascent has lead them to the scriptural realization that Gods “Provision via the Atonement” places our full trust in a dependent posture upon Gods Grace and our inability to save ourselves. If God so Chooses to make our trust in His provision the condition upon which his atonement is applied who is Ferguson to tell God he does not have a right to do so because he believes in his misguided notion that this makes man the sole determiner of his destiny.
Thank you for your comment Kerry. God certainly has the right to apply redemption only to those who believe, and that’s exactly what he does. All of that is very biblical. But there are other passages of Scripture that go further in making God the one who ultimately decides who will be saved. I believe all three of the traditional views fall short in handling certain passages. For a full description and defense of my view, see this post: https://drichardferguson.com/doctrine-of-election/.