¶ … Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God Packer's latest work is a brief, nontechnical discourse about how God's sovereignty and responsibility of humans impacts evangelism. It is not a guide to the latest in evangelistic action. The primary objective here is to quell the ideal that faith in God's sovereignty barricades evangelistic initiatives and demonstrate it strength to evangelism. The book is laid out in four chapters. The concepts explained therein are[footnoteRef:2]: [2: Naselli, Andy (2008)]

Being a devout Christian, you have a staunch faith in God's sovereignty as you pray. Therefore, you already accept that God is sovereign due to two reasons: you thank God for being a Christian and pray for others' conversion as well. Conflict arises when an attempt is made to combine God's sovereignty with responsibility of humans[footnoteRef:3]. [3: Ibid 1]

Antimony exists, which is an inherent mismatch between two diverging truths, not viewed as a paradox, which is expendable, a clever play of words combining two divergent ideas. The contradiction of divine sovereign and human responsibility in context of evangelism can either lead to a selective concern with responsibility of humans or with divine sovereignty.

People often misinterpret evangelism as they think of it with respect to effect instead of its underlying message. Evangelism essentially means preaching gospel. Paul's own narration about his personal evangelistic ministry is archetypical. Moreover, he evangelized for Jesus Christ as his assigned delegate, messenger, diplomat, and steward. His mission was to convey the message of Christ and convert more people to Christianity[footnoteRef:4]. [4: Ibid 1]

The core message of evangelism is about Christ (prophet and his message), God, sin, faith and repentance. Belief of sin leads to an awareness of being unfaithful to God, it is an acknowledgement of sins for which one should repent; therefore, it comprises of one's acceptance of transgression and of rebirth. The belief of people about evangelistic message should be isolated from scope of their atonement[footnoteRef:5]. [5: Ibid 1]

Evangelism is not constricted to limited evangelistic gatherings; rather, there are many ways to congregate such meetings such as:

Home meetings

Personal evangelism

Group bible discussion

Sunday services

It is reasonable to differentiate between God's purpose (plan) and precept (law). Precept is what believers are aware of while God ordains purpose, and thus, is his sole discretion. Packer is defending two propositions here. Firstly, the independent nature of God does not in any way affect the mission and nature of evangelism. Moreover, it does not impact evangelism's authenticity, resolution, necessity and responsibility of sinner in any way. Secondly, the independence of God is the only source of hope for the devotees with respect to evangelism. In the absence of acceptance of God's sovereignty, evangelism can not be conveyed successfully as human nature is to contradict God and Satan maintains that state of mind. Faith in God's independence leads to successful evangelism. This certainty and confidence is transmitted to its followers as well. It makes them patient, strong, and empowered[footnoteRef:6]. [6: Ibid 1]

In conclusion, Packer accepts the fact that accepting God's sovereignty with respect to evangelism is not a prerequisite to evangelization, but "he would have evangelized better if he believed it first." Packer's book is an antithesis to Bible. However, the conclusions drawn in Packer's book are critical, logical and meaningful[footnoteRef:7]. [7: Ibid 1]

Critique

J.I. Packer contends that God's sovereignty and human responsibility are both contradictions per se. Using the word 'antimony', he specifies an emergence of ambiguities between deductions that are seemingly rational, sensible and unavoidable (p. 18). According to him, "it's unnecessary and incomprehensible….it's just inevitable and inexplicable[footnoteRef:8]" (p. 18). Since we didn't design it, therefore, we can't clarify it "(p. 21). In his own words, God "has total control over everything, including human actions"…but, "Each man is responsible for his own actions / decisions as he outlines his own path" (p. 22). "For our limited intellect, it is incomprehensible" (p. 23).[footnoteRef:9] [8 J.I. Parker (2012) ] [9: Ibid 7]

What leads Packer to infer this idea of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility is 'indescribable' to our limited intellect? Is he implying that humans cannot comprehend these entwining universal truths? Is it that he has invested four decades in attempting to explain and realized he can't? Is he appealing to the non-stop debates in church over this subject? Packer does not provide a clarification as to why antimony is what...

He suffices it to say that, "it seems like an ambiguity" to everyone. [footnoteRef:10] [10: Piper (A Response to J.I.)]
Packer cites (p.23) Romans 9:19, 20 "He will ask me then, " Why does he look for faults? Has anyone defied his will? O. man, how can you dispute (antapokrinomenos) God? ." Is Paul reprimanding here? A noble intention to understand God and his ways? No. He is reprimanding the overconfidence with which God's actions are brought into question. The term antapokrinomenos denotes 'debate, protest, making uninformed allegations' (Lk. 14:6). Paul's animosity is apparent because he clarified in 9:14-18 how God selectively elects men and rejects others irrespective of their characteristics. The dissident, still unsatisfied with the answer questions God's authority again. However, Paul irrespective of what he says, cannot fully justify the subject at hand. In verse 22 and 23, he attempts to justify God and his ways. If men with limited intellect do not understand God and his ways and God denounces those who question his authority, what was the motive behind penning Rom 9:14-23?[footnoteRef:11] [11: Ibid 9]

Packer is clearly mistaken as he states his opinion about Paul's rebuttal in Rom 9. "He fails to justify the actions of God with propriety." He did actually. Hence, he penned Rom 9:14-23. Moreover, I discard the emotional weight of these lines: "The Lord has informed us to accept his sovereignty and as a fair judge, which should be sufficient for us" (p. 24). What if, it isn't sufficient for us? If that was indeed the case, then Paul would have asked the objector to stop asking questions in Rom 9:14. Surprisingly, Paul only tells people to keep silent when they act arrogantly. There is no instance in New Testament where we are restricted in our attempts to know God and his actions. The other conflicting point in Packer's contentions is his supposition about man's responsibility and God's sovereignty feels like an ambiguity to everyone. How did he come to account for everyone's presumed ambiguity? It feels somewhat opinionated in a certain way.[footnoteRef:12] [12: Ibid 9]

Probing deeper, from where is Packer inheriting these ideas? Is he looking too deep for answers? What does this mean to his readers? What are they supposed to understand? What exactly is Packer attempting to imply here?[footnoteRef:13] [13: Writer Thoughts]

Application

Being a devout Christian myself, I am constantly challenged by the belief of divine sovereignty over everything in existence. Nevertheless, I still contemplate, how is it equalized? The question that nags me even today is, is God is really independent? Why do I think about that? How should I complete my task? Is the task to be completed? As a matter of fact, is it remotely worth it when indulged in logically?[footnoteRef:14] [14: Ibid 12]

There are myriad of practical examples as to why it is becoming acceptable to question God's sovereignty. During the course of the past one and a half decade, too many catastrophic calamities that have taken place across the globe have shaken faith. Major global mishaps such as Indian tsunami, 9/11, Haiti earthquake, Japan earthquake and hurricane Katrina have wrought widespread destruction and calamity. Therefore, it is becoming more understandable for Christians to feel cynical and shallow at times. My doubts for one have definitely increased now.[footnoteRef:15] [15: Ibid 12]

I am always lured back because of Packer's exemplary work, keeping in mind the critique leveled against it. As a matter of fact, the ideas pitched in the book compelled me to experiment and remove my own doubts. Certain methods exist which church attendants and non-attendants can apply on themselves. Even Christians and non-Christians can apply them. Discuss what you read in the Holy Bible with office colleagues, friends or within interested groups. Make a noting of how it changed your thought process and how you intend to implement it in real life. This is one of the ways of using the book practically and making the reading meaningful..Essentially, work out a plan in simple words. Jot down the actions and execute them differently. Think differently. Think about what would make a person decent along the biblical lines. One can even create a group of friends that can assist in helping each other out in being true to himself and implement one's learning in real life and share it with others. For instance, read something from Bible and convey its message to others.[footnoteRef:16] [16: Ibid 12]

There are multitudes of methods used for conveying the message learned in church environment. Following one adequate method is advisable, rather than trying out different paths, that may lead to further confusion. Packer suggests the path of evangelism. In essence, it is about understanding the concept behind the method and ensuring that it's the right…