The Super-Sufficiency of Christianity

 A few months ago, I wrote:

...we should always keep in mind that we have no control over how others will respond to our engagement with them. And we can't forcibly change one's ethical orientation. Nevertheless, we can always do something. Calvinism is not fatalism, and what we do makes a difference. Thinking about or planning for different situations before they happen helps one to be prepared to actually follow through when it comes time to make good (whether proactive or responsive). The less we reflect, the more apt we may be to hesitate on how to rightly respond when particular opportunities arise for exemplifying particular fruits of the Spirit. 

Regardless of how others (or even we) respond, all things Christians experience have been ordained for a reason. The Spirit will use our experience to some end that is good for us, others, or both - even if, in the moment, we don't understand how. I tend to try to live with Romans 8:28 in the back of my mind, and it saves me from anxiety. In fact, my struggle is less with assurance (keeping the big picture in mind) and more with daily application (focusing on immediate needs). I tend to need to set conscious, proximate goals for myself or make little progress. My weakness may be another's strength and vice versa: each of us needs the support of others (Hebrews 10:24-25). (link)

Reformed Christians are often asked how they balance God's sovereignty and man's responsibility: if God is in control of all things, does what I do make a difference? Or: if God's grace is sufficient to work through the weakest means, then is there a "need" for me to worry about how I present the gospel to others?

As I mentioned in the post from last year, we should have assurance that God is able to use our most meagre of efforts for good. Even so, Christians should not neglect the importance of sanctificatory progress (such as in one's apologetic or evangelizing, although one might of course extend this to all areas of our lives). We should always pattern ourselves after the work of our God.

Christianity is a religion of super-sufficiency. Our God Himself is wholly sufficient for us, yet with how much more are we gifted? His grace extends far beyond our needs. Indeed, God has even ordained that the means by which we are ordinarily blessed is through His church. But this is already a surplus of divine favor!

Another example: we are all blessed each Lord's Day. What might have been a simple, sufficient reading of God's word is typically beautified homiletically, a clear product of the session's meditation upon God's word. A plain presentation of God's word would suffice for a sermon, but is it improper to say that we are more benefitted from a wise and didactically intentional application of it? I don't think so.

Surely we would agree our pastors don't think that the root of conviction in the minds of his congregants lies in his own efforts. The Holy Spirit works the conviction... through the preaching. That is, we wouldn't want to say the preaching was irrelevant to the conviction even while we acknowledge the Efficient Cause of its effectuality. I think that good efforts (such as a hard-worked sermon) tend to coincide with an increased manifestation of God's presence - even if not in the worker's own life (e.g. "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church").

Likewise, I think a simple, sufficient defense of the faith might be rhetorically beautified. Is this "necessary" in all cases? "Need" and "necessity" is a function of context. Apologetics, for instance, can function as a means towards several ends: to stop the mouths of unbelievers, to persuade, to increase the psychological or epistemic assurance of believers, to solidify good habits, etc. Different contexts might relevantly bear on one's decision to speak or act differently.

Suppose one considers the different ways to speak or act in a given context but that in each scenario, he will speak the truth. Is consideration "unnecessary" under these conditions? I think framing the situation this way tends to dampen the recognition that Christianity is a religion of super-sufficiency. Are not the different ways in which one might speak or act relevant to the outcome - even while we believe that it is only due to the Spirit that anyone will be convicted of the truth? 

That we meet the needs of those around us is important. The way we meet the needs of those around us is important too.