tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post9209699426788986358..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Rampant Calvinism in Wesleyan HymnologyPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-68743434321846179462010-08-10T22:10:09.468-07:002010-08-10T22:10:09.468-07:00Oh, Wesley. Such eloquence, used so mightily to pr...Oh, Wesley. Such eloquence, used so mightily to praise our great God and His awesome truth.<br /><br />And yet, such incomparable spiritual schizophrenia.<br /><br />I imagine Surgeon and Wesley have had some <b>very</b> interesting conversations in glory. :-)David Alveshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09252954313261233579noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-72927427126883326012010-08-05T17:09:18.584-07:002010-08-05T17:09:18.584-07:00Trav.,
I take the "label" Calvinist bec...Trav.,<br /><br />I take the "label" Calvinist because Calvinism is not a monolithic reality, historically. The Scottish strain I associate myself with is at odds with the Westminster Calvinism that you would associate with (in part). The Scottish version I follow developed concurrently alongside the developing Post-Reformed orthodoxy; unfortunately, the kind of Calvinism you follow (in part) was the kind that took hold in America through the influence of the Puritans (namely through Ames' propogation of William Perkins' style of Calvinism). <br /><br />This issue just isn't as "simple" as you want it to be, Trav. --- i.e. if it's what the Bible teaches then that settles it [what if the Bible doesn't teach it?] ---as I've been alluding to, there is a development, a history of ideas, that has given us the kind of Calvinism that you follow today. There are certain philosophical traditions that have been used by Christians to articulate the teachings of Scripture --- or not -- in these kinds of theological areas. The level I am speaking at is questioning those "traditions;" and what impact they have had upon how we interpret Scripture. The kind of Calvinism you follow is w/o a doubt informed by what is called Thomism (Thomas Aquinas' integration of Aristotle's categories with Christian theology --- Prot. Reformers like Beza, Perkins, et al picked up on this synthesis and used it to articulate their understanding of God and salvation as they engaged in the work of theology). If you want to be a critical student, Trav., you will spend the time to see if what I'm asserting is so. If you don't want to spend that kind of time, then I suppose we really don't have much left to talk about.<br /><br />A good book to start with is "The Age of Reform" by Steven Ozment. If you want to be a person of the "truth," then you will try to make sure that what you understand Scripture to be saying is actually what it is saying; and you will humbly realize that none of us approach scripture in a theological vacuum. I suppose that decision, i.e. if you want to be a person of the truth, is up to you.<br /><br />Peace brother.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-11588666981001846892010-08-05T08:01:37.432-07:002010-08-05T08:01:37.432-07:00Thanks, I’ll check that out. I saw that you had th...Thanks, I’ll check that out. I saw that you had that blog and it certainly made me curious. If you believe what you said about Calvinism’s doctrine of God being fundamentally wrong then why do use the label for yourself? Just curious.<br /><br />“thus they believe that God deals with humanity through impersonal decrees and not relationally”<br /><br />I understood that you are saying they have similarities at their foundation, and to a small degree I would agree. However, I think the question is the character of God that stems from both systems. In that capacity they are very different. And this statement above I would say is totally inaccurate. God has personally foreknown (foreloved) and predestined all believers to heaven. His reasons/thinking may be unknown but we have no grounds whatsoever to call His decrees impersonal, or at worst arbitrary. So I disagree with you very initial descriptions of the theologies. To de-spiritualize them into mere philosophical grids to interpret God is to presuppose that neither is truly biblical or actually what Paul taught. The only question that needs to be asks is if the doctrine is found in the Bible. If Calvinism is true then that and exactly what Jesus and the apostles were teaching then all the points about philosophical grids and impersonal decrees is what become moot. Which is obviously where I’m at.Traever Guingrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13755405635085785126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-17127630543995051382010-08-04T23:34:12.168-07:002010-08-04T23:34:12.168-07:00Traever said,
You sound fairly convinced that you...<strong>Traever said</strong>,<br /><br /><em>You sound fairly convinced that you have a very in-depth understanding of the debate and history behind it. I’m not saying you don’t, but your descriptions of it lead me to believe you’ve missed the heart of it and are determined to make them appear far more similar than they truly are. . . .</em><br /><br /><br />I've spent years, formally and informally studying (and even teaching) historical theology; and I've plenty more to learn, no doubt! Nevertheless, I surely understand the "difference;" but what you seem to be failing to grasp is the significance of the similarities between the two at a basic and fundamental level (they both fit into the category of classical theism relative to their doctrine of God). They both are Aristotelian in their orientation; thus they construe God as the unmoved mover (read His sovereignty) --- thus they believe that God deals with humanity through impersonal decrees and not relationally (thus Trinitarianly) and <em>im</em>mediately as Scripture clearly discloses God's dealings and nature to be. <br /><br />So what I'm saying, at an even more basic level --- vs. the level of your point on "the debate" between the two --- is that the philosophical grid or source through which Classic Calvinists and Arminians interpret God through is not the best grid for capturing and emphasizing the categories and capacities that the God of the Bible is presented to us in (again think the Trinitarian stuff I mentioned). God as Trinity and God as Unmoved Mover (a la Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, and the Scholastic Calvinists) don't mix. So before we ever get to "your debate and 'differences'" there is something bigger to deal with; and that is, does Classic Calvinism (and Arminianism) ever get off the ground in the first place relative to their doctrine of God (which then will shape any subsequent discussions on theories of salvation). So I'm not missing your point; it's just that I think your point is moot, because I don't think Calvinism/Arminianism ever do get off the ground relative to their doctrine of God as disclosed in Scripture and revealed in Jesus Christ.<br /><br />As far as your second point on where I am, theologically. I am what TF Torrance has called an "Evangelical Calvinist." There's not the room to get into that on this thread; but I have a blog and a book coming out that explains this view further --- you can read about all of that at my blog: http://evangelicalcalvinist.com<br /><br /><strong>Bobby Grow</strong>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-86010703489183504412010-08-04T19:39:13.788-07:002010-08-04T19:39:13.788-07:00Mrs. O’Reilly,
To answer your question about Adam ...Mrs. O’Reilly,<br />To answer your question about Adam and Eve, yes they had free will. They died spiritually as a result of their fall into sin. This is where their sin nature was cursed on them. So no, God is not responsible for their sin. It sounds like you are unfamiliar with the very basics of Calvinism (not meant as an insult, just an observation). You are asking common questions and it may benefit you to get you hands on an entry level book on the subject. If I may suggest that if you are going to read about Calvinism that you read an author with orthodox Calvinistic beliefs.<br /><br />Bobby,<br />“It's interesting. Calvinists and Arminians yell back and forth at eachother; and never get anywhere”<br />“Scripture will never settle this issue.”<br /><br />Scripture is constantly settling this issue. And the so-called yelling back and forth does get somewhere. I myself was convinced of Calvinism through fruitful discussion and study of Scripture. It settled it for me. Of course the debate won’t go away, there are new Christians everyday that need to be taught the truth as they become sanctified. But Scripture still is the determining factor convincing people and it happens all the time.<br /><br />You sound fairly convinced that you have a very in-depth understanding of the debate and history behind it. I’m not saying you don’t, but your descriptions of it lead me to believe you’ve missed the heart of it and are determined to make them appear far more similar than they truly are. I’m just going out what little you’ve written here. I’m assuming you would classify yourself as neither one nor the other since you claim both have problems at their core? Again, if this is true it would convince me even more that this is a consistency lacking in your beliefs. But this would probably not be the best venue to search that out and to get more explanation.Traever Guingrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13755405635085785126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-48723328096041228902010-08-04T12:58:18.381-07:002010-08-04T12:58:18.381-07:00@Traever,
Don't know if you're still here...@<strong>Traever</strong>,<br /><br />Don't know if you're still here, but you said:<br /><br /><em>. . . to gloss over the large difference the debate creates in regard to the character of God. . . .</em><br /><br />And yet this is the very point; i.e. the character of God (or doctrine of God). My point pivots around the kind of God who relates to His creation through decrees instead of immediately through Christ. Both Calvinism and Arminianism say that God has "absolutely decreed" (<em>absolutum decretum</em>) creation, sin, salvation, etc.; so the way God must relate to us is through working through these decrees. This is the problem that both Calv. and Arm. have at the core of their articulation of God and the Gospel. As far as "order" of knowing goes, at a basic or foundational level, this is certainly a prior consideration before we ever get to the "second order" stuff --- i.e. the "popular" debate that you mention.<br /><br />It's interesting. Calvinists and Arminians yell back and forth at eachother; and never get anywhere. Their relationship is like two strangers yelling at eachother; yet all along never realizing that they in fact are brothers. Prooftexting will never settle this issue. Scripture will never settle this issue. Because what is being argued is an issue of trying to parse out the implications or inner logic or inner clarity of the Scriptures --- i.e. none of this stuff is "straightforward." It is highly naive to think that this discussion is as basic as so many here seem to think it is --- and that's just the simple truth.<br /><br />I don't think anyone should really talk about this stuff, with any kind of force, if they haven't spent the time studying at least some of the history of Calvinism and/or Arminianism. This isn't a casual discussion, or an "American" discourse (wherein mere opinion matters). There is an actual history of development to Calvinism; and from what I typically see at this site, most have little to no knowledge of that (and don't seem to care if they do). There are some excellent books, introductory level, on this stuff; if anyone is interested let me know and I can point you to it. Then maybe we can at least have a fruitful discussion.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-88598899458813980742010-08-04T12:53:40.181-07:002010-08-04T12:53:40.181-07:00"YES, GOD would be justified in sending us AL..."YES, GOD would be justified in sending us ALL to HELL." -O'Reilly<br /><br />That's the bottom line for us isn't.<br />We are all children of His wrath. And once we really know this in the best way we can, (and to honest, none of us really think we deserve Hell), then we will begin to understand God's incomprehensible mercy for sinners like us.<br /><br />The world thinks God owes us forgiveness. And so does the church at large. We speak about God with our lips, but our hearts are far from His truth of sin, judgment, wrath, grace, mercy, and love.<br /><br />It's wonderful you long to know these things.<br /><br /><br />Our Lord will enlighten you for sure. He promises to teach us His truth, and though His deep, deep truths can be difficult, Christ will give us a humble attitude to embrace them as best we can.<br /><br />The Word of God is where our human teachings and learnings are renewed, and corrected, through the power and wisdom of the Holy Spirit, who brings us to the truth, and embeds the truth in our hearts and minds.<br /><br />Stay hungry my sister.<br /><br />Robert has brought forth some good Scripture truth as well.donsandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03665794015011057098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-54324598205836406022010-08-04T12:01:44.336-07:002010-08-04T12:01:44.336-07:00I pray for them and the lost because it is command...I pray for them and the lost because it is commanded. I guess taking it to the logical end, though, I pray because God predestined for me to pray and that He would act in answering those prayers (one way or another). "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." (Ephesians 2:10) God prepared the good works Christians would do before Creation. I would say that this includes prayer.<br /><br />And let me say that the point of view you present would be that of a hyper-Calvinist...that fatalistic view that it doesn't matter what we do so we have no responsibility. The thing is, we have to make all of Scripture work together and not against itself. <br /><br />Let me ask you a question: can anybody act outside of the will of God? Before you answer, really think about the implications of that...it would mean that the person acting outside of His will is equal to Him. <br /><br />Can I totally understand how it all works out? No. Can I understand that it does work out? Yes. Do you really think that God has to react to what we do? God doesn't live in time or space...the Bible says He already sees us as glorified...although we won't be in glorified bodies until Jesus Christ comes again in glory. <br /><br />Again, back to Romans 3:10-18...no man chooses to do good...no one seeks God. I don't see how anybody that fits that description (which Paul is saying is the whole world) can choose to follow God of their own volition.<br /><br />I am saying this lovingly and as a defense of Scripture...just answering your questions.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-49097969974028029642010-08-04T11:40:49.096-07:002010-08-04T11:40:49.096-07:00So Adam and Eve were just predestined to sin and G...So Adam and Eve were just predestined to sin and God was wasting His time telling them not to eat of the tree? <br /><br /> If I get to heaven at all, and God doesn't decide to dump me, (after all, it's HIS choice, not mine) then I'm going to deck John Calvin to within an inch of his life. <br /><br /> Why are you praying for your sons. What if God has already chosen to consign them to hell? Why pray at all, since God's made up His mind and, according to Calvin, nothing we do will change it. <br /><br /> Something does not add up here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-16670342053136613622010-08-04T11:35:58.158-07:002010-08-04T11:35:58.158-07:00Mrs. OReilly,
Noah is a good example of predestin...Mrs. OReilly,<br /><br />Noah is a good example of predestination. There was no reason for God to choose Noah...he just did. Skipping forward in Genesis, the same can be said for Abram (Abraham after God renamed him). God even told Israel that He chose them not for any value that that had, but rather because He loved them. Deuteronomy 7:6-7 clearly demonstrates this. And if you read the preceeding verses, you can see that God is instructing Israel to destroy ALL of the people in the land He is giving to them...women, kids, etc. <br /><br />The thing we have to remember is that God is not tied down into one characteristic. He is loving, holy, just, truthful, kind, merciful...the list goes on and on. But He is perfect in all of them, which is something we honestly can't totally comprehend. His thoughts are not our thoughts. He is the Potter...we are the clay. and Paul is clear in Romans 9 that some vessels are prepared for destruction in His wrath, while some vessels will receive His mercy.<br /><br />Also in Romans 9, Paul writes that righeousness comes by faith...and in Ephesians 2:8, Paul writes that this faith is a gift from God and is not earned by any human merit.<br /><br />Yes, I am sure that I have people in my family who are unsaved. I can not even have assurance that my sons will be, although I pray for that constantly and teach them up in the Word. What do we do with this though:<br /><br />"Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." (Matthew 10:37) Yes, I love my family...and I pray that those who are lost will be saved, but not at the expense of my love for Jesus (which is also a grace gift from God).Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-26495632546647250902010-08-04T11:27:33.312-07:002010-08-04T11:27:33.312-07:00Question: Did Adam and Eve have the CHOICE to sin ...Question: Did Adam and Eve have the CHOICE to sin or NOT to sin? Was it up to THEM whether they obeyed God or not, or did God decide that they should sin so that the whole matter of the cross would be played out? <br /><br /> God IS sovereign. He is in control. And He knows the end from the beginning, but is to KNOW something is going to happen the same as making it happen? <br /><br /> If the choice to sin was up to Adam and Eve, then are we not equally free to accept God's gift of forgiveness in Christ? <br /><br /> However, if God was a party in making Adam and Eve, and...humanity sin (which doesn't wash) then the White Throne Judgment will be a Kangaroo Court. If Adam and Eve were predestined to sin with no choice in the matter then doesn't that make GOD an accomplice? <br /><br /> Doesn't work, does it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-66380882937963246332010-08-04T10:41:21.175-07:002010-08-04T10:41:21.175-07:00To those of you who take the Calvinist stance, can...To those of you who take the Calvinist stance, can I assume that you have no UNSAVED loved ones?<br /><br /> YES, GOD would be justified in sending us ALL to HELL. But JESUS made the way to escape that, didn't HE? What else does John 3:16 mean? <br /><br /> I was caught in a minor rain storm this morning, which got me thinking about Noah. In the time it took Noah and sons to get the ark built, his neighbors had something like 100 years to come to faith and eventually join Noah on the ark. <br /><br /> There is another verse that says that God has no pleasure in the death of the ungodly, but that they would turn and live. Doesn't that imply that we have some choice in the matter?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-41351232274727885142010-08-04T10:34:05.199-07:002010-08-04T10:34:05.199-07:00I am simply saying that I want to get to the botto...I am simply saying that I want to get to the bottom of the whole matter of personal choice or predestination to heaven or hell, in light of verses like 2 Peter 3:9, Titus 2:11, and 1 John 2:2 <br /><br /> I'm sorry if I sound 'self righteous' but I am beyond confused with all this. Is the Bible telling the truth when it says that God would love for ALL people to receive salvation, but that, through stubborn pride, we go our own way, or is it an arbitrary choice on God's part that so many go to hell. <br /><br /> In Romans 1:24, it says "...God gave them up...." From the text, I get the idea that God pleaded with these people, who were determined to go their own way til God finally let them have their way. This gives the impression of free choice on our part, for better or worse. Because it makes no sense that God would plead with people to abandon their ways when He'd already chosen their destination. <br /><br /> I apologize for my angry tone but I am desperate to get to the bottom of this matter! The Bible says that God is NOT the Author of confusion, but this doctrine has been nothing but confusing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-91403042657293991952010-08-04T10:19:13.923-07:002010-08-04T10:19:13.923-07:00"Hitler and Manson would be just as suitable ..."Hitler and Manson would be just as suitable to my company!"<br /><br />What if God decided to not have mercy on any of us sinners. Suppose Christ decided to call 12 legions of angels and condemn the world instead of saving it?<br /><br />Would God be just in sending all of us, you and me included to hell?<br /><br />You have a self-righteous mind-set my friend.<br />But the Word of God can bring conviction and the truth can set you and me free.donsandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03665794015011057098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-65088520419514848302010-08-04T05:18:44.350-07:002010-08-04T05:18:44.350-07:00Mrs. OReilly,
If you're saying God has to be ...Mrs. OReilly,<br /><br />If you're saying God has to be the way you want Him to be or else you don't want Him, that is very sad. I ask how anybody can read Romans 9 and think that God leaves it up to us. Or read Romans 3:10-17 and tell me how any of us would even make the right choice regardless. It doesn't add up. We are the clay in Romans 9 and we have no right to look to the Potter and complain about how He has shaped us.<br /><br />Also, your comments regarding Calvin show both a lack of grace and a low account of heaven. People are going to be glorifying God in heaven, not busy worrying about the abundance of wrong thoughts and beliefs they espoused while alive on earth.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-18880739882700097772010-08-03T23:29:05.213-07:002010-08-03T23:29:05.213-07:00Oh man! Not this argument again?!
I had issue...Oh man! Not this argument again?! <br /><br /> I had issues with it a while ago, and then thought it was cleared up with a Q&A on gracethrufaith.com (Jack Kelly). Then I read something John McArthur wrote, and he's a staunch Calvinist. <br /><br /> Titus 2:11 talks about salvation offered to all men. 2 Peter 3:9 says that it is NOT God's will that ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance. Tragically, pride gets in the way. Arrogance. A host of things. But if someone is going to spend eternity in hell, bad as it is, I would rather it be that person's foolish choice than God's ARBITRARY <b> Eeeny, Meeny Miney Moe </b>, <i> To HEAVEN with YOU. To HELL with YOU </i> attitude. Like He's casually picking petals off a VERY large daisy. <br /><br /> Truth to tell, I liked that song by Wesley. That's exactly how I feel about such an idea! WHOM does WHOSOEVER include if Calvin is right? If God has already decided, then He knows WHOM He had decided to leave out, which would have me burning my Bible and whooping it up, because I would sooner go to Hell than spend eternity in heaven with such a ruthless monster! Hitler and Manson would be just as suitable to my company! <br /><br /> Should Calvin be wrong, I hope he's getting a bitter taste of his own poison berry pie. <br /><br /> Long story short: (Too late!) WHOSE CHOICE IS IT?!?! Do we have a choice or don't we?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-56399965391598755552010-08-03T16:45:23.751-07:002010-08-03T16:45:23.751-07:00"What I do know is that God has said to preac..."What I do know is that God has said to preach the gospel to all of the world, and that the message is that anyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. I know that we are saved by grace through faith, and that there is nothing that we can do in our own power to save ourselves. I also know that the life of the redeemed will be marked by good works, the evidence of the Holy Spirit's power in their lives. Can we not all agree on these things?" -Matt<br /><br />I agree with you. And I can serve with you to the glory of God.donsandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03665794015011057098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-25032000132197431722010-08-03T16:20:49.583-07:002010-08-03T16:20:49.583-07:00Traever,
That was very well-said, and echoes my ...Traever, <br /><br />That was very well-said, and echoes my sentiments as I read Matt's comment. I am very encouraged by your words.Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-35899832346612519912010-08-03T14:41:05.115-07:002010-08-03T14:41:05.115-07:00Matt, I would echo Robert’s comments. Nothing in t...Matt, I would echo Robert’s comments. Nothing in this day and age is more dangerous than compromising on biblical truth, which is what would need to happen in order for what you are referring to to actually happen. I think my largest issue is with your statement that “they both give full glory and honor to God”. This is impossible because by necessity one of two must be false and would therefore be incapable of giving full glory to God, especially in contrast with the true doctrine. I know it’s unfortunate that there is a large portion of Christians today that have incorrect beliefs, but let’s not dull the polemic between the two for the sake of not wanting that to be the case.<br />We are unity in Christ even amongst our differences, but that does not mean that we will not have severe doctrinal disagreements, nor does it mean that something is happening that God did not “intend”. Besides, pretending the difference is not as big as it truly is does not create unity; it creates a veneer of agreement that is false. Not only that, but theology matters and bad theology will manifest itself in practice and tradition.<br />So while I can agree with you that I’m not a fan of the fact that the debate exist, I completely disagree that we need to minimize it or that we cannot know. If the Bible ignores it then you can make the argument that we may not be able to understand it in this life; however, this is not the scenario with the doctrines of grace.Traever Guingrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13755405635085785126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-86060850104273478252010-08-03T12:32:45.596-07:002010-08-03T12:32:45.596-07:00Matt,
I would say you've understood what I...Matt,<br /><br />I would say you've understood what I'm getting at, in a nutshell.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-14011143975540452402010-08-03T12:08:43.478-07:002010-08-03T12:08:43.478-07:00Matt,
The two beliefs are exclusive of each other...Matt,<br /><br />The two beliefs are exclusive of each other and there is no way to bridge the gap with regards to the work of salvation. This doesn't mean we can't show each other love and respect. But we shouldn't compromise our beliefs and convictions in the name of comfort. Otherwise we risk getting back into the discussion we had about an article by Vern Poythress last week where scalpels are buzzsaws and PhDs are surgeons.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-18400267910104260032010-08-03T11:47:39.174-07:002010-08-03T11:47:39.174-07:00traever,
Then again, perhaps that is the problem:...traever,<br /><br />Then again, perhaps that is the problem: we continue to construct barriers between the two sides without recognizing how very much alike we are.<br /><br />When you consider what is called the "Doctrine of Grace" and what is called "Wesleyan Arminianism", we find that they both give full glory and honor to God. He alone can save us, and to Him belongs all of the glory. Perhaps it is the harder lines of true Calvinism (and certainly hyper-Calvinism) and Arminianism that cause the greatest divisions and animosity.<br /><br />God never intended His church to be divided, and there are true men and women of God on either side of this narrow divide. I fall back to my earlier assertion: perhaps we are not meant to know in this life -- perhaps we are not even <i>able</i> to know -- the exact nature of the workings of grace and faith. Does God save us irresistibly? Does God quicken a heart to point of decision?<br /><br />What I do know is that God has said to preach the gospel to all of the world, and that the message is that anyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. I know that we are saved by grace through faith, and that there is nothing that we can do in our own power to save ourselves. I also know that the life of the redeemed will be marked by good works, the evidence of the Holy Spirit's power in their lives. Can we not all agree on these things?Matt Aznoehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01886592758527878686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-37858502894824108082010-08-03T09:23:23.050-07:002010-08-03T09:23:23.050-07:00Idk Bobby, I think to boil it down and create supp...Idk Bobby, I think to boil it down and create supposed equivalence all the way up to the ordo solutis is to gloss over the large difference the debate creates in regard to the character of God. After all, that is the reason there is so much vitriol coming from Arminians against Calvinists- they can’t stand the character of God as Calvinism portrays Him. They don’t want a God that elects unconditionally. So while you may be able to use intellectual jargon accurately in the description of the scholastic difference between the two views, you surely miss the heat of battle in doing so.Traever Guingrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13755405635085785126noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-68728797076864688002010-08-03T02:54:19.434-07:002010-08-03T02:54:19.434-07:00Bobby,
Let me see if I am understanding you. (I ...Bobby,<br /><br />Let me see if I am understanding you. (I did no attend seminary or Bible college, so I do not know most of the terms you are using). You are saying that both Arm. and Cal. are trying to frame Christianity in a logical system (like Physics or Mathematics) as opposed to a relationship with the person of a living God. Is that correct?Matt Aznoehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01886592758527878686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-28417677873972527242010-08-03T00:19:43.130-07:002010-08-03T00:19:43.130-07:00Mike,
I know, Calvinism, the kind you hold to is ...Mike,<br /><br />I know, Calvinism, the kind you hold to is so cut and dry --- with no history but the Bible. But to be sure, Mike, your Calvinism has a development "behind" it; I'm sorry that you haven't taken the time to understand some of the concepts and lingo that shapes what you think Scripture simply teaches. Maybe next semester you'll spend some time in Reformation theology, and then (one could only hope) you will become familiar with what a Reformation Theology 101 course should offer (in re. to some of the basic vocab and grammar behind your "received" Calvinism). <br /><br />My assertions on Calv. and Arm. shared heritage is a simple fact of Church History --- even a cursory knowledge of these facts will make this clear (why mock that?).<br /><br />Funny vid. thoughBobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.com