Which Soteriological view is more "Humanistic?"

About this sermon

These are some recent comments sent to me via social media: “Your theology is man-centered…” “You are a humanistic Pelagian…” “You start with man and build your view of God around humanistic reasoning.” “Making God in your own image is not theology, Mr. Flowers!!!” And those were the nice ones. First, I would like us to try and objectively consider which soteriological perspective is actually more “humanistic.” To do so we need a good working definition. The American Heritage Dictionary defines humanistic as “one who is concerned with the interests and welfare of humans.” I’ll objectively concede this point: When compared to the claims of Calvinism related to God’s ultimate desire for self-glorification it does appear that our soteriological perspective does put more emphasis on God’s concern with humanity over and above His concern for self-glorification. Notable Calvinists are known to argue that God’s primary concern is not the welfare of man, but for Himself and His own glory. In my journey to becoming a Calvinist, I was very drawn to the teachings about God’s desire for His own glory. This was especially attractive to me coming out of the more “seeker-sensitive” movement that seemed to put way too much focus on pleasing man rather than on glorifying God. And quite honestly, Calvinistic authors introduced me to many texts within scripture which so clearly supported the doctrine of God’s self-glorification that I could not begin to understand how any Bible-believing Christian could deny such truth. They would have to be selfish and humanistic to do so, right? Regardless of what some of my Calvinistic friends may think; in my journey out of Calvinism, I did not abandon the truth that God seeks His own Glory. Instead, I realized that God’s Glory is best revealed in His self-sacrificial love for all. I came to understand that God does not sacrifice creation for the sake of His own glory, but instead He sacrifices Himself for sake of His creation, which in turn reveals Him as the most glorious of all. By putting the welfare of man above His own self-glorification, God reveals Himself to be so much more abundantly glorious than anything we could imagine. The Calvinist seems to think that God’s glory is best manifest by putting His own exaltation first, whereas the example of Christ reveals just the opposite. It is through giving up His glory, by putting the needs of lowly undeserving humans first, that He is most abundantly glorified. In the flesh, I always care more about my own glory than the needs or wants of others. Don’t you? Yet, would Calvinists have us believe that God has this same “humanistic” characteristic? Does God care more about His own glory than the welfare of humanity? Or, does God’s care for all humanity reveal just how glorious He really is? How can the Calvinist rightly accuse our view of God as being “humanistic” when their view of God looks and sounds just like self-seeking humans who desire all the glory for themselves even if it means the sacrifice and suffering of others? John Piper is quoted as saying, “God is the one Being in all the universe for whom seeking his own praise is the ultimate loving act. For him, self-exaltation is the highest virtue.” And I would re-word that by saying, “God is the one Being in all the universe who actually deserves to seek His own glory, praise, and self-exaltation, but instead chooses to empty Himself for the sake of worthless humanity in the ultimate act of love on Calvary. This act, once accepted by faith, leads us to freely praise, exalt and glorify Him for the self-sacrificial God He is.” Are God’s genuine care and loving provision for all humanity the true reflection of His glory? Or, is God seeking His own glory at the expense of most humanity? And which of those views is really more “humanistic?” For more go here: https://soteriology101.com/2019/11/05/is-man-centered-theology-bad-theology/