I have worked in various youth groups over the years and there has always been one issue that has torn our groups apart...Calvinism. I also travelled on ministry teams with guys who would ultimately end up getting us a stern talking to by our leaders because they ended up confusing a youth group somewhere in thhe continental US and the Youth pastor and parents would have to fix the mess after we left.
I am tired of sitting around and not saying anything. When you confront one (Calvinist)...it always turns into a slugfest over scripture...which, they usually can out do you because they are ready to give a twisted answer to something that was meant to be so simple. God's love is a FREE thing...anything added to that, whether it be works or the fact that you have to explain exactly how God's grace works...well, is heresy.
I am just tired of hearing all of them. I have some friends who have like a million kids (almost sounds like being a mormon) and each one recites these "facts" about God that are triggered by their parents question....it's like brainwashing the kids.
My kids...I live my life in front of them daily and pray with them daily and talk about God with them daily so that they will ask the right questions, so that they will see that their daddy loves them, so that they can draw their own conclusions of God! I help them along in their journey. I don't give them the answers to be recited when necessary.
Tell me, whose faith will be real in the end? The one's who have come to God out of their own realization that they can no longer live their life without him, or the the one who is constantly afraid that they could not be elect...and yet have all the answers?
I am very disappointed, too, that this very argument does split churches.
I know of a church in my home town that was thriving! Suddenly there was a split over this issue. Soon enough, within the year, the parking lot only held a few cars. So, all of a sudden I start hearing of these "house churches" where a few of my old college buddies are pastors of. If that doesn't sound like an underground movement...I don't know what does.
Why do we need a movement? Why isn't our focus revival? Can you be a Calvinist and believe in revival? I am not sure that you can. Unless you only believe that revival is a staged process for God to get the "elect" to realize that they need to "get on board."
I totally believe that Jesus came to seek and save the lost. The bible is very clear that God sent his Son to die for ALL men, not just the ones that he decided were going to heaven. The scriptures are also very clear in the ORDER of how grace works so that we wouldn't get caught in the stupidity of Calvinism. Romans 8 says -- " 28And we know that [c]God causes (BG)all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are (BH)called according to His purpose.
29For those whom He (BI) foreknew, He also (BJ)predestined to become (BK)conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the (BL)firstborn among many brethren;
30and these whom He (BM)predestined, He also (BN)called; and these whom He called, He also (BO)justified; and these whom He justified, He also (BP)glorified."
Did you hear that -- there's an order! God in his infinite knowledge of past and future, because he lives outside of the realm of time, already knew that you and I were going to be idiot sinners who would eventually find Him! So after KNOWING, he then said, ok you are predestined...meaning, Hey I knew that you were going to do this before time even started, so you will be destined to be saved! So then he calls us and then justifies us! Now, how hard was that? How could you screw up theology as easy as that?
As for being an alum of Liberty, I don't speak for all of us. There are those there who are still trying to convert the SBCers to the saving knowledge that we really don't have a free will.
So, yes, I am a little bitter...but it has been building for years. And I am tired of cleaning up the mess when the Calvinists come thru. It is almost like a season of "Invasion", but there is a WHOLE lot more diologue than action.
Oh, and no...I am not very smart...IF YOU COULD ONLY HAVE SEEN MY GRADES IN COLLEGE! But, I do understand the love of God and His desire that ALL men would know him and know that special love.
And so, I finish with the only latin I know, so as not to be totally written off of the Founders.org blog:
Where is your home town? Do you know the specifics of the church split you refer to, or just general info about the split? Just curious about how the split developed, how theology may or may not have caused the rupture, etc.
I am not going to divulge to much. Though from my next comment, you will know i live in Lynchburg. One of the churches being Old Forest Road...which had even more problems than Calvinism. As I have gone thru your blog and friends of your blog and seen PLENTY of people I personally know and love. So I must stay very anonymous. This is about me being able to say what I have always wanted to without hurting the friends I know who believe Calvin, Piper, MacArthur, Sproul etc. etc. which is what this blog is about. I have found that getting some things off of my chest has been great. Should I have put the "idiot" comment up...probably not. I was a little fired up at the time. So if that offended you...which I am sure it didn't (Mr. Balaam's A$$)...but if it did, I am truly sorry. I DO LOVE my friends and those that believe in the ways of the authors above...however, i think that they are treading down a path that could be dangerous. Am I afraid that somehow they are not saved? NO WAY! I am sure that they are sure and have some of the best fire insurance ever. do I disagree with everything they say, NO. But I do disagree witht he nature of the whole movement. I am afraid that there are MANY modern day pharisees among you. JUST BE CAREFUL. I don't know you...but I can say in love...please be careful that you don't come off in a way that drives people away from the FREE gift that God gives.
I personally love your blog. I believe that we need to look at things common sensically...but we have some differing opinions...and that is OK with me. i enjoy the debate and I know that I will grow as I am challenged and seek the scripture for my own arguments and own enlightenment(a word I truly hate, but seems to fit).
First of all, I must say I did not appreciate your opening remarks at the Founders blog. This is not so much you gaining an avenue to vent long-held pent-up emotions as it is for you to say hurtful and divisive remarks while escaping all accountability. To me, that appears cowardly and unbecoming. And if I had not come here, and read your comments to Mopheos, I would not have expected any better out of you. But now I read your comments here and I am hopeful.
There are many nasty Calvinists in this world: I'll go on record as saying that. I consider myself to be a Calvinist (though not a good one). However, and this is from personal experience only (apparently yours has been the opposite), I have experienced far more gracious Calvinists than I have those of the mean-spirited kind. I probably do not have the need to say this, but I have met at least a few mean-spirited Arminians as well. In fact, I have seen some people who claim the name of Christ act in a manner unworthy of that glorious name and holy calling (and incidentally, the issue had nothing to do with Calvinism, as all involved including myself were not Calvinists at the time). I too have acted in a manner at the very least inconsistent with my Christianity, and at times blatantly opposed to it. For that I am in error, simply put.
Sir, have you considered that if perhaps your friends were to find your comments on the Founders blog, that they would read them and be offended, regardless of your anonymous identity? They would probably also be disappointed to learn the truth of your comments. Are you certain that they will not ever read your comments and be offended? I am sorry for directly rebuking you like this, because I do not know a softer way to put it. I am however greatly encouraged by your comments that reveal you apparently have genuine concern and sincere affection for your friends.
I am deeply sorry for your bitterness and anger against us Calvinists. No doubt some of it is well-deserved, judging from your comments. But as a Christian, you must look past that and focus on Christ. It is part of your lot (and mine, and that of other Christians) to be shamefully treated in this world, maligned, and generally disrespected. The temptation for us is to either develop a martyr's complex (which is unbecoming, especially in the face of true persecution of believers throughout the world), or to develop a spirit of bitterness that can eat on our innermost beings like cancer. None of us likes admitting that we are not as strong as we feel that we ought to be, and certainly are not invulnerable.
I am grateful I came here and read your remarks here for myself. I was afraid that you would be impervious to all sense of fairness and reason, but happily I see I am wrong. Welcome to the blogosphere. It's a weird, wild world out there. There's never a dull moment (at least, not for long), that's for sure.
Thanks for the further explanation. You have me at a bit of a disadvantage, as you know who I am (or you should have easily figured it out from posts on other blogs), but that is no matter. Divulging your identity would not make any difference in your perspectives - at least it shouldn't :>).
Having wrestled personally myself (over an extended period of time) through biblical teaching on issues such as election, predestination and the extent of God's sovereignty (all of which are strictly biblical terms and which should, in my opinion, be understood primarily from the perspective of Biblical Theology much more than Systematic Theology), I know experientially and intellectually the anguish that may ensue from such wrestling. Embracing some of the Bible's more difficult teaching is both humbling and mortifying to the flesh. On the grand scale of important things in the Universe I would not rank this next statement very high, but I have paid some painful prices for following the Scriptures in its very pointed teaching on election and predestination, as I understand the Bible's own explanation of these terms and their place in the grand scheme of salvation. So I have some empathy for your "consternation" over the damage you have apparently observed in connection with these things.
Having first hand knowledge of things at Old Forest Road, I can confidently say that "calvinism" was no cause of its split, but rather became a flash-point for other, more deep-seated problems in the fellowship. It was highly unfortunate that such biblical issues as church discipline and the nature and causes of conversion got hopelessly entangled and pejoratively identified with these other problems, thereby leaving bitter after-tastes in many mouths. But you would be mistaken to saddle the blame on calvinism.
I was not offended by your use of the term idiot - sometimes (at least in my case) it's appropriate :-) And I hear your warning to be careful. Our goal in discipleship is not convincing people to accept John Calvin as their personal theologian (to steal a great quote from Mark Dever). I have no illusions (or delusions) in this regard.
I think Dr. Caner is a committed, knowledgeable and zealous servant of the Lord, and for that I am thankful. His energetic defense of biblical truth in the area of apologetics has been fruitful, particularly in the Moslem arena. But I am equally distressed over his willful misrepresentations of things reformed or calvinistic, from the pulpit no less, when he clearly knows better. And to hear him stoop to a direct contradiction of Romans 9:10-12 before an entire congregation and on national TV is both mind-boggling and decidedly beneath a man of his stature and responsibility. And he did it knowing what the Bible clearly states. Now that is truly dangerous, and I hope Dr. Caner has the courage to mend this error as publicly as he made it.
I also hope and pray, EIMH, that your conversations and blogs will truly result in some genuine light and less and less heat. Perhaps in time, with patience and humility, the term "heresy" will be used with more clarity and discretion. I would not call those who are of an Arminian persuasion heretics (as I once was persuaded), and it is surely a misuse to toss it upon the vast majority of "calvinists" who take the Scriptures as seriously and as fearfully as you. Have a blessed night and grace to you,
Balaam's ass (which is actually a compliment - I wish I was as discerning as she was...)
I also at first took exception to your "modern day Pharisee" comment concerning Calvinists. However, now I can see how that can clearly apply in some cases. It certainly has applied to me in the past. Boy, talk about being blind to your own sins. ;-)
Please let me say in love to you both that this has been so muchh more enjoyable than being on the other site. I have been truly challenged. Last night, I was sitting on my couch thinking about the events of the past 2 days and came to a couple of conclusions for myself:
1) I realized that my "debating" was exhausting. Why? One because I let out more emotion in 2 days than I have in a long time. Which brought me to more clarity of thought...now that it was all out.
2) I realized that most of my friends, no matter what they believe, have a very deep knowledge of the scripture. So whether I believe what they say to be true or not...they genuinely love the Lord and want their children to do the same (which I never really doubted in the first place).
3) And I am CHALLENGED to jump into the scriptures and find out for myself what the right answers are. Which I have not been doing for a while because I have been so caught up in my life and the life of my family that God has taken a back seat in my life.
Mopheos - I hope that you did not take away from my comment that OFR split only on Calvinism - I said that was only one thing, I know there were other (very disheartening) factors that made that up and I think Calvinists and non, alike, left that place very hurt over the whole situation.
Byroniac - I am not sure that it should be turned on me that my friends would be hurt that I wrote some of this stuff. I feel like this was an anonymous "cleansing" for me. What about me? Why shouldn't my hurts be taken into consideration? I did realize, too, that a lot of the mistakes that I saw THEM make was due to the immature stage that they were in when it all occurred. They were new and zealous about their own "epiphany".
To both - I want you to understand me without knowing me.
One of my friends, he was a leader of mine at one point...and he never pushed his ideas on me...he just always challenged me to do better and too be a better man of God - which at the time, made me angry. Now we have kids and keep up, I miss him dearly because I miss him pushing me. HE IS A TRUE MAN OF GOD...he gets deep with me and challenges me without trying to convince me to believe the way he believes.
Another friend, I have to keep my distance spiritually. Any time that anything spiritual comes up, it becomes extremely tense. I can see it on his face...like, "You are not really gonna bring this up with me, are you?" I can literally feel arrogance build up and he begins to get sarcastic. It drives me nuts to the point that I have just let our friendship be very shallow. Really, he only calls me when he is looking for something free or advice on something in my field of expertise.
I have another friend - who is trying to make it in Hollywood. He understands grace TOO well.
And finally - a leader in High School who was so conservative in his mindset, he attacked me in front of a group of parents because I took my girlfriend to a charasmatic revival meeting just to open her eyes to the many facets of God's ministry. Not even to make her a believer, but to get her out of being so naive in her faith. which I must point out that the leader's mother fell into a cult and that was why he was really angry -- but he was too extreme with his own faith and tried to convert everyone.
More about me -- You should also know that I did not grow up SBC as you see a lot of comments in the founders.org blog. My parents were open thinkers saved in the Charasmatic movement in the late 60's and settled into a conservative, doctrinally sound church. My mother and father are true seekers of the Lord and love him with all of their hearts. They are truly the most Godly people I know. And they challenge me a lot...especially when I don't want to hear it.
Some things that I won't change my mind on...and maybe this makes me narrow minded:
1) I'll never totally like catechisms...whatever happened to good old scripture memory?
2) I'll never believe in limited atonement.
3) I'll always have problem believing that God is the author of sin.
So I guess I can never be a Hyper, but maybe a 3 or 4 pointer...does that count? :)
Thank you both for rebuke in love. I have no problem eating my words and pride when I feel like you actually care.
And, I do hope that you can also take something from my conversations. My prayer is that you would love Christ for the simplicity of his love and grace. Don't run after knowledge for the sake of debate, but that it would strengthen your own faith. Don't try to make disciples of your line of thinking...but of the one who for some reason decided to don our weak flesh so that everyone would at least have the chance to hear of His love.
Thanks for the last post - it is encouraging and, I think, honest. May you find renewed strength to pursue God harder than you ever have, and a quickening fear as you pursue the One who dwells in unapproachable light.
If I may make a few parting observations about your last post, think about these things if you have not already:
1. I'm with you on the catechisms and Scripture memory - I much prefer the latter to the former.
2. I think you already believe in some form of limited atonement - unless you believe in universal salvation :-) Some understand the atonement to be limited by God's free choice, and others by man's free choice. Either way, it is still limited. The point of debate, of course, is between the intent and exercise of the above mentioned wills. Whose will ultimately triumphs?
3. Most calvinists I know are pretty clear on God not being the author of sin, but conversly, He wouldn't be God (by definition) if the occurrence of the fall was outside of the scope of His will and purpose . I confess to seriously imperfect understanding here, but one thing I'm clear on - God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. But He is God, and He brings to pass all that comes to pass - Known to God from eternity are all His works.
As far as being a 3 pointer or 4? I woundn't worry to much about that. One point will do justice to the Scriptures - God is sovereign over all His works. Seeing that in Scripture was more convincing to me than anything else, and keeps me from being inordinately indebted to any particular man (although I owe a debt to more men than I could thank for their influence on the formation of my heart and soul, not the least of which would be many Liberty professors over the years I attended there). Press on.
OK, sorry. That wasn't entirely fair of me to use the idea of your friends reading your comments against you. However, I did want you to face that very real (if remote, I have no idea how remote) possibility. And I wanted you to understand that your words do have an effect, sometimes a powerful one. I was not sure what it would take to reach you. I'm not trying to offend you, brother, by any means. Having said that, I believe you should apologize on the founders board for your comments, as they truly did hurt many which I believe are innocent of any of those charges (I'm not saying that there cannot be mean Calvinists, even there, but as far as I know, there are not, if I am not wrong). Unfortunately, I do not know of a good way that you could have vented your hurt feelings. At the risk of sounding trite, something like that requires a lot of sincere prayer to God for healing of a wounded soul (I have had to do my share of this myself) and it is not easy. It might help you to read in Scripture how Godly men such as David (when Shimei cursed him in 2 Sam 16:5-13) and Joseph in Genesis and even Christ Himself were slandered and treated shamefully. I believe that God is compassionate and sympathetic to the falsely accused and those who have been wronged in some way or the other. But it especially hurts to be wrong by those who claim to be Christian brothers and sisters.
Proverbs 18:19 A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city: and their contentions are like the bars of a castle.
Well, I confess, I much rather convert you to Calvinism if I could. ;) (Hey, at least I'm honest!). But, even though I believe Calvinism to be true, Christianity is FAR larger than Calvinism. Christ is a Sovereign King, good and righteous to all, yet not sacrificing His holiness at any point. None of us deserve salvation (Calvinists sometimes tend to forget that, ironically). And everyone who perishes and goes to Hell is responsible for his or her own sins, as offenses against a Holy God. And only the blood of Jesus saves, cleaning us from all sin. The world has dozens of so-called "gospels," but for us, there is only Christ and Him crucified.
Concerning catechisms, you are right. Scripture memory is better. However, catechisms represent the wisdom of many brothers and sisters in the Lord who have prayerfully studied the Scriptures for their meaning. Catechisms serve as a teaching device to (ideally) teach good doctrine. However, their role of importance and use in the church should be secondary to study and mastery of the Scriptures themselves (in my opinion).
Concerning Limited Atonement, you already do believe in it. ;) (Thanks, Mopheos). Atonement by its nature must be limited in either scope or power, because not all are redeemed (and that much, at least, is agreed upon by all true Christians). And, now to play a silly little semantics game for a second. Even Universalists believe in Limited Atonement: only a finite number can be saved!
Concerning God's authorship of sin, I must confess this gives me some trouble. God cannot actually Himself sin, and He cannot support sin because it is contrary to His nature (Matthew 19:17, there is none good but God) but also God is in control, and in some sense decreed that sin would take place (Acts 2:23) without being responsible.
Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Here you see that the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God occurred first, and that it was active, not passive, because of the third word in the verse "delivered" which is the verb and has God as the subject. This was done by God, not only planned, but actively brought into being, that Christ would be crucified. However, the responsibility for such a ghastly evil deed is placed upon those people responsible, those "wicked hands" that crucified and slew the Savior. This is the evil they wanted to do in their hearts (Jeremiah 17:9), and they did it, to their own blood-guiltiness.
Now, this does not prove that everything that happens under the sun is directly God's responsibility. However, that is not my point. My point is this: the Scriptures show God's active determination that the crucifixion would take place (which is an act of heinous evil) and that it was foreordained from before the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8). My point is this, here is just one example of evil and sin, that is mentioned in the Scriptures in the most direct and emphatic of ways. How is God not responsible for this sin? How can God slay His own Son and be guiltless? Well, this is a deep mystery for all Christians, which ties into the beauty of God's redemption and Christ's own humility and obedience to the point of death on the cross. But Acts 2:23 helps explain part of this, by showing that the desire to do evil was in the human heart, not God's, whose only motives are Holiness and Love.
Well I did a pitiful job on that, but I hope you get the idea. There are a lot of passages which are quite deep theologically, too, such as Romans 1 (where it speaks about God giving people over to uncleanness, vile affections, and a reprobate mind) and this one.
2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
These are difficult verses. However, you and I both would agree that none of these show God to be guilty of sin. But fully understanding them is frankly beyond my ability. I accept them because I believe God's Word is true.
I am not sure if this is an active blog anymore, but I too would like to apologize and ask for your forgiveness for any of my brother’s comments to you in the past, whether on a blog or in person, that you have felt to be offensive or personal. I do not know you, nor do I know what kind of relationship you have had with people who have professed the doctrines of grace or Calvinism. Please understand that many, like myself, have also been whipped through the years because of our beliefs, and we have been ruthlessly attacked with very little or no Christian love mixed in. I fear that you may have encountered some of us when we have been neglectful to extend the grace that we so desire from our Christian brothers. Hopefully, if we can all come to the table with humble hearts knowing that none of us deserve our Father’s grace, and if He were obligated to do so then it we would have to find another name for it other than GRACE.
I am not sure why you have a problem with catechisms and that it seems to take priority over the other two points you make, but then again I don’t know your personal encounters with it. Maybe you have found some that abuse catechisms, but please don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. I discovered this very old technique of learning a few years ago, and we have been using it with the children at my church for about a year and a half. I don’t see it as “brainwashing,” but as a great tool that helps teach the doctrines of the Bible that is not as easily pulled from one particular verse such as the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. We definitely teach the Bible and have verse memorization, but I don’t see using a catechism to be any different than using a SS book that LifeWay produces, only better. The question and answer format makes it very easy for young (and old) minds to grasp the truth. Also, just so that you will know, every time a child gives a presuppositional answer my initial response is, “Where in the Bible can you back that up?” It has made the children understand that they can not take something for granted just because they heard their teacher say it.
You said in an earlier post:
“My kids...I live my life in front of them daily and pray with them daily and talk about God with them daily so that they will ask the right questions, so that they will see that their daddy loves them, so that they can draw their own conclusions of God! I help them along in their journey. I don't give them the answers to be recited when necessary.”
I am glad you are living an exemplary life in front of your children, and I hope I do the same, but your statement gives the impression that if you do these things you don’t have to teach your children, and I know you don’t mean that, but added with the paragraph that precedes the one quoted it definitely implies that. The word catechism comes from the Greek word katechein which means to teach. We are instructed to teach our children (Deut. 6, Psalm 78). For instance, look at Exodus 12: 26-27
"And when your children say to you, 'What does this rite mean to you?' you shall say, 'It is a Passover sacrifice to the LORD who passed over the houses of the sons of Israel in Egypt when He smote the Egyptians, but spared our homes.' " And the people bowed low and worshiped. (NASB)
Who knows, maybe this the first catechism question. I realize that you teach your children, and that you are really just venting over what you see as an abuse of a teaching tool. I understand that. When I see abuses of any kind to God’s children, I can become very emotional as well. Nevertheless, our forefathers of the faith have handed down a great tool to use to make sure that our children (and ourselves) have the ability to “contend for the faith” Jude 3.
We do not make the memorization of the answers mandatory to joining the church as paedobaptist churches do, and maybe that is what you are referring to as abuses, and I would agree, but probably because neither paedobaptism nor confirmation can be justified biblically.
Please consider what I have written, if in fact this blog is still active. If so, I would be happy to correspond with you privately and show you some stuff that the children are learning. It really is quite amazing.
17 Comments:
Heh he he, from one idiot to another, welcome to the blogosphere. How come you so mad at them nasty calvinists?
2:52 PM
I have worked in various youth groups over the years and there has always been one issue that has torn our groups apart...Calvinism. I also travelled on ministry teams with guys who would ultimately end up getting us a stern talking to by our leaders because they ended up confusing a youth group somewhere in thhe continental US and the Youth pastor and parents would have to fix the mess after we left.
I am tired of sitting around and not saying anything. When you confront one (Calvinist)...it always turns into a slugfest over scripture...which, they usually can out do you because they are ready to give a twisted answer to something that was meant to be so simple. God's love is a FREE thing...anything added to that, whether it be works or the fact that you have to explain exactly how God's grace works...well, is heresy.
I am just tired of hearing all of them. I have some friends who have like a million kids (almost sounds like being a mormon) and each one recites these "facts" about God that are triggered by their parents question....it's like brainwashing the kids.
My kids...I live my life in front of them daily and pray with them daily and talk about God with them daily so that they will ask the right questions, so that they will see that their daddy loves them, so that they can draw their own conclusions of God! I help them along in their journey. I don't give them the answers to be recited when necessary.
Tell me, whose faith will be real in the end? The one's who have come to God out of their own realization that they can no longer live their life without him, or the the one who is constantly afraid that they could not be elect...and yet have all the answers?
I am very disappointed, too, that this very argument does split churches.
I know of a church in my home town that was thriving! Suddenly there was a split over this issue. Soon enough, within the year, the parking lot only held a few cars. So, all of a sudden I start hearing of these "house churches" where a few of my old college buddies are pastors of. If that doesn't sound like an underground movement...I don't know what does.
Why do we need a movement? Why isn't our focus revival? Can you be a Calvinist and believe in revival? I am not sure that you can. Unless you only believe that revival is a staged process for God to get the "elect" to realize that they need to "get on board."
I totally believe that Jesus came to seek and save the lost. The bible is very clear that God sent his Son to die for ALL men, not just the ones that he decided were going to heaven. The scriptures are also very clear in the ORDER of how grace works so that we wouldn't get caught in the stupidity of Calvinism. Romans 8 says -- " 28And we know that [c]God causes (BG)all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are (BH)called according to His purpose.
29For those whom He (BI) foreknew, He also (BJ)predestined to become (BK)conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the (BL)firstborn among many brethren;
30and these whom He (BM)predestined, He also (BN)called; and these whom He called, He also (BO)justified; and these whom He justified, He also (BP)glorified."
Did you hear that -- there's an order! God in his infinite knowledge of past and future, because he lives outside of the realm of time, already knew that you and I were going to be idiot sinners who would eventually find Him! So after KNOWING, he then said, ok you are predestined...meaning, Hey I knew that you were going to do this before time even started, so you will be destined to be saved! So then he calls us and then justifies us! Now, how hard was that? How could you screw up theology as easy as that?
As for being an alum of Liberty, I don't speak for all of us. There are those there who are still trying to convert the SBCers to the saving knowledge that we really don't have a free will.
So, yes, I am a little bitter...but it has been building for years. And I am tired of cleaning up the mess when the Calvinists come thru. It is almost like a season of "Invasion", but there is a WHOLE lot more diologue than action.
Oh, and no...I am not very smart...IF YOU COULD ONLY HAVE SEEN MY GRADES IN COLLEGE! But, I do understand the love of God and His desire that ALL men would know him and know that special love.
And so, I finish with the only latin I know, so as not to be totally written off of the Founders.org blog:
Imago Dei,
ErgunIsStillMyHero
7:36 AM
Hello EIMH,
Where is your home town? Do you know the specifics of the church split you refer to, or just general info about the split? Just curious about how the split developed, how theology may or may not have caused the rupture, etc.
9:07 AM
sorry mopheos,
I am not going to divulge to much. Though from my next comment, you will know i live in Lynchburg. One of the churches being Old Forest Road...which had even more problems than Calvinism. As I have gone thru your blog and friends of your blog and seen PLENTY of people I personally know and love. So I must stay very anonymous. This is about me being able to say what I have always wanted to without hurting the friends I know who believe Calvin, Piper, MacArthur, Sproul etc. etc.
which is what this blog is about. I have found that getting some things off of my chest has been great. Should I have put the "idiot" comment up...probably not. I was a little fired up at the time. So if that offended you...which I am sure it didn't (Mr. Balaam's A$$)...but if it did, I am truly sorry. I DO LOVE my friends and those that believe in the ways of the authors above...however, i think that they are treading down a path that could be dangerous. Am I afraid that somehow they are not saved? NO WAY! I am sure that they are sure and have some of the best fire insurance ever. do I disagree with everything they say, NO. But I do disagree witht he nature of the whole movement. I am afraid that there are MANY modern day pharisees among you. JUST BE CAREFUL. I don't know you...but I can say in love...please be careful that you don't come off in a way that drives people away from the FREE gift that God gives.
I personally love your blog. I believe that we need to look at things common sensically...but we have some differing opinions...and that is OK with me. i enjoy the debate and I know that I will grow as I am challenged and seek the scripture for my own arguments and own enlightenment(a word I truly hate, but seems to fit).
ECIMH
12:14 PM
ergunismyhero:
First of all, I must say I did not appreciate your opening remarks at the Founders blog. This is not so much you gaining an avenue to vent long-held pent-up emotions as it is for you to say hurtful and divisive remarks while escaping all accountability. To me, that appears cowardly and unbecoming. And if I had not come here, and read your comments to Mopheos, I would not have expected any better out of you. But now I read your comments here and I am hopeful.
There are many nasty Calvinists in this world: I'll go on record as saying that. I consider myself to be a Calvinist (though not a good one). However, and this is from personal experience only (apparently yours has been the opposite), I have experienced far more gracious Calvinists than I have those of the mean-spirited kind. I probably do not have the need to say this, but I have met at least a few mean-spirited Arminians as well. In fact, I have seen some people who claim the name of Christ act in a manner unworthy of that glorious name and holy calling (and incidentally, the issue had nothing to do with Calvinism, as all involved including myself were not Calvinists at the time). I too have acted in a manner at the very least inconsistent with my Christianity, and at times blatantly opposed to it. For that I am in error, simply put.
Sir, have you considered that if perhaps your friends were to find your comments on the Founders blog, that they would read them and be offended, regardless of your anonymous identity? They would probably also be disappointed to learn the truth of your comments. Are you certain that they will not ever read your comments and be offended? I am sorry for directly rebuking you like this, because I do not know a softer way to put it. I am however greatly encouraged by your comments that reveal you apparently have genuine concern and sincere affection for your friends.
I am deeply sorry for your bitterness and anger against us Calvinists. No doubt some of it is well-deserved, judging from your comments. But as a Christian, you must look past that and focus on Christ. It is part of your lot (and mine, and that of other Christians) to be shamefully treated in this world, maligned, and generally disrespected. The temptation for us is to either develop a martyr's complex (which is unbecoming, especially in the face of true persecution of believers throughout the world), or to develop a spirit of bitterness that can eat on our innermost beings like cancer. None of us likes admitting that we are not as strong as we feel that we ought to be, and certainly are not invulnerable.
I am grateful I came here and read your remarks here for myself. I was afraid that you would be impervious to all sense of fairness and reason, but happily I see I am wrong. Welcome to the blogosphere. It's a weird, wild world out there. There's never a dull moment (at least, not for long), that's for sure.
1:58 PM
Hey EIMH,
Thanks for the further explanation. You have me at a bit of a disadvantage, as you know who I am (or you should have easily figured it out from posts on other blogs), but that is no matter. Divulging your identity would not make any difference in your perspectives - at least it shouldn't :>).
Having wrestled personally myself (over an extended period of time) through biblical teaching on issues such as election, predestination and the extent of God's sovereignty (all of which are strictly biblical terms and which should, in my opinion, be understood primarily from the perspective of Biblical Theology much more than Systematic Theology), I know experientially and intellectually the anguish that may ensue from such wrestling. Embracing some of the Bible's more difficult teaching is both humbling and mortifying to the flesh. On the grand scale of important things in the Universe I would not rank this next statement very high, but I have paid some painful prices for following the Scriptures in its very pointed teaching on election and predestination, as I understand the Bible's own explanation of these terms and their place in the grand scheme of salvation. So I have some empathy for your "consternation" over the damage you have apparently observed in connection with these things.
Having first hand knowledge of things at Old Forest Road, I can confidently say that "calvinism" was no cause of its split, but rather became a flash-point for other, more deep-seated problems in the fellowship. It was highly unfortunate that such biblical issues as church discipline and the nature and causes of conversion got hopelessly entangled and pejoratively identified with these other problems, thereby leaving bitter after-tastes in many mouths. But you would be mistaken to saddle the blame on calvinism.
I was not offended by your use of the term idiot - sometimes (at least in my case) it's appropriate :-) And I hear your warning to be careful. Our goal in discipleship is not convincing people to accept John Calvin as their personal theologian (to steal a great quote from Mark Dever). I have no illusions (or delusions) in this regard.
I think Dr. Caner is a committed, knowledgeable and zealous servant of the Lord, and for that I am thankful. His energetic defense of biblical truth in the area of apologetics has been fruitful, particularly in the Moslem arena. But I am equally distressed over his willful misrepresentations of things reformed or calvinistic, from the pulpit no less, when he clearly knows better. And to hear him stoop to a direct contradiction of Romans 9:10-12 before an entire congregation and on national TV is both mind-boggling and decidedly beneath a man of his stature and responsibility. And he did it knowing what the Bible clearly states. Now that is truly dangerous, and I hope Dr. Caner has the courage to mend this error as publicly as he made it.
I also hope and pray, EIMH, that your conversations and blogs will truly result in some genuine light and less and less heat. Perhaps in time, with patience and humility, the term "heresy" will be used with more clarity and discretion. I would not call those who are of an Arminian persuasion heretics (as I once was persuaded), and it is surely a misuse to toss it upon the vast majority of "calvinists" who take the Scriptures as seriously and as fearfully as you. Have a blessed night and grace to you,
Balaam's ass (which is actually a compliment - I wish I was as discerning as she was...)
8:16 PM
I also at first took exception to your "modern day Pharisee" comment concerning Calvinists. However, now I can see how that can clearly apply in some cases. It certainly has applied to me in the past. Boy, talk about being blind to your own sins. ;-)
8:23 PM
Please let me say in love to you both that this has been so muchh more enjoyable than being on the other site. I have been truly challenged. Last night, I was sitting on my couch thinking about the events of the past 2 days and came to a couple of conclusions for myself:
1) I realized that my "debating" was exhausting. Why? One because I let out more emotion in 2 days than I have in a long time. Which brought me to more clarity of thought...now that it was all out.
2) I realized that most of my friends, no matter what they believe, have a very deep knowledge of the scripture. So whether I believe what they say to be true or not...they genuinely love the Lord and want their children to do the same (which I never really doubted in the first place).
3) And I am CHALLENGED to jump into the scriptures and find out for myself what the right answers are. Which I have not been doing for a while because I have been so caught up in my life and the life of my family that God has taken a back seat in my life.
Mopheos - I hope that you did not take away from my comment that OFR split only on Calvinism - I said that was only one thing, I know there were other (very disheartening) factors that made that up and I think Calvinists and non, alike, left that place very hurt over the whole situation.
Byroniac - I am not sure that it should be turned on me that my friends would be hurt that I wrote some of this stuff. I feel like this was an anonymous "cleansing" for me. What about me? Why shouldn't my hurts be taken into consideration? I did realize, too, that a lot of the mistakes that I saw THEM make was due to the immature stage that they were in when it all occurred. They were new and zealous about their own "epiphany".
To both - I want you to understand me without knowing me.
One of my friends, he was a leader of mine at one point...and he never pushed his ideas on me...he just always challenged me to do better and too be a better man of God - which at the time, made me angry. Now we have kids and keep up, I miss him dearly because I miss him pushing me. HE IS A TRUE MAN OF GOD...he gets deep with me and challenges me without trying to convince me to believe the way he believes.
Another friend, I have to keep my distance spiritually. Any time that anything spiritual comes up, it becomes extremely tense. I can see it on his face...like, "You are not really gonna bring this up with me, are you?" I can literally feel arrogance build up and he begins to get sarcastic. It drives me nuts to the point that I have just let our friendship be very shallow. Really, he only calls me when he is looking for something free or advice on something in my field of expertise.
I have another friend - who is trying to make it in Hollywood. He understands grace TOO well.
And finally - a leader in High School who was so conservative in his mindset, he attacked me in front of a group of parents because I took my girlfriend to a charasmatic revival meeting just to open her eyes to the many facets of God's ministry. Not even to make her a believer, but to get her out of being so naive in her faith. which I must point out that the leader's mother fell into a cult and that was why he was really angry -- but he was too extreme with his own faith and tried to convert everyone.
More about me -- You should also know that I did not grow up SBC as you see a lot of comments in the founders.org blog. My parents were open thinkers saved in the Charasmatic movement in the late 60's and settled into a conservative, doctrinally sound church. My mother and father are true seekers of the Lord and love him with all of their hearts. They are truly the most Godly people I know. And they challenge me a lot...especially when I don't want to hear it.
Some things that I won't change my mind on...and maybe this makes me narrow minded:
1) I'll never totally like catechisms...whatever happened to good old scripture memory?
2) I'll never believe in limited atonement.
3) I'll always have problem believing that God is the author of sin.
So I guess I can never be a Hyper, but maybe a 3 or 4 pointer...does that count? :)
Thank you both for rebuke in love. I have no problem eating my words and pride when I feel like you actually care.
And, I do hope that you can also take something from my conversations. My prayer is that you would love Christ for the simplicity of his love and grace. Don't run after knowledge for the sake of debate, but that it would strengthen your own faith. Don't try to make disciples of your line of thinking...but of the one who for some reason decided to don our weak flesh so that everyone would at least have the chance to hear of His love.
In Love,
ECIstillMH
8:34 AM
Hello EIMH,
Thanks for the last post - it is encouraging and, I think, honest. May you find renewed strength to pursue God harder than you ever have, and a quickening fear as you pursue the One who dwells in unapproachable light.
If I may make a few parting observations about your last post, think about these things if you have not already:
1. I'm with you on the catechisms and Scripture memory - I much prefer the latter to the former.
2. I think you already believe in some form of limited atonement - unless you believe in universal salvation :-) Some understand the atonement to be limited by God's free choice, and others by man's free choice. Either way, it is still limited. The point of debate, of course, is between the intent and exercise of the above mentioned wills. Whose will ultimately triumphs?
3. Most calvinists I know are pretty clear on God not being the author of sin, but conversly, He wouldn't be God (by definition) if the occurrence of the fall was outside of the scope of His will and purpose . I confess to seriously imperfect understanding here, but one thing I'm clear on - God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. But He is God, and He brings to pass all that comes to pass - Known to God from eternity are all His works.
As far as being a 3 pointer or 4? I woundn't worry to much about that. One point will do justice to the Scriptures - God is sovereign over all His works. Seeing that in Scripture was more convincing to me than anything else, and keeps me from being inordinately indebted to any particular man (although I owe a debt to more men than I could thank for their influence on the formation of my heart and soul, not the least of which would be many Liberty professors over the years I attended there). Press on.
Ciao and grace to you.
9:29 AM
uh...Iwent one more round on founders.org...sorry:)
10:13 AM
Ergunismyhero,
OK, sorry. That wasn't entirely fair of me to use the idea of your friends reading your comments against you. However, I did want you to face that very real (if remote, I have no idea how remote) possibility. And I wanted you to understand that your words do have an effect, sometimes a powerful one. I was not sure what it would take to reach you. I'm not trying to offend you, brother, by any means. Having said that, I believe you should apologize on the founders board for your comments, as they truly did hurt many which I believe are innocent of any of those charges (I'm not saying that there cannot be mean Calvinists, even there, but as far as I know, there are not, if I am not wrong). Unfortunately, I do not know of a good way that you could have vented your hurt feelings. At the risk of sounding trite, something like that requires a lot of sincere prayer to God for healing of a wounded soul (I have had to do my share of this myself) and it is not easy. It might help you to read in Scripture how Godly men such as David (when Shimei cursed him in 2 Sam 16:5-13) and Joseph in Genesis and even Christ Himself were slandered and treated shamefully. I believe that God is compassionate and sympathetic to the falsely accused and those who have been wronged in some way or the other. But it especially hurts to be wrong by those who claim to be Christian brothers and sisters.
Proverbs 18:19
A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city: and their contentions are like the bars of a castle.
Well, I confess, I much rather convert you to Calvinism if I could. ;) (Hey, at least I'm honest!). But, even though I believe Calvinism to be true, Christianity is FAR larger than Calvinism. Christ is a Sovereign King, good and righteous to all, yet not sacrificing His holiness at any point. None of us deserve salvation (Calvinists sometimes tend to forget that, ironically). And everyone who perishes and goes to Hell is responsible for his or her own sins, as offenses against a Holy God. And only the blood of Jesus saves, cleaning us from all sin. The world has dozens of so-called "gospels," but for us, there is only Christ and Him crucified.
Concerning catechisms, you are right. Scripture memory is better. However, catechisms represent the wisdom of many brothers and sisters in the Lord who have prayerfully studied the Scriptures for their meaning. Catechisms serve as a teaching device to (ideally) teach good doctrine. However, their role of importance and use in the church should be secondary to study and mastery of the Scriptures themselves (in my opinion).
Concerning Limited Atonement, you already do believe in it. ;) (Thanks, Mopheos). Atonement by its nature must be limited in either scope or power, because not all are redeemed (and that much, at least, is agreed upon by all true Christians). And, now to play a silly little semantics game for a second. Even Universalists believe in Limited Atonement: only a finite number can be saved!
Concerning God's authorship of sin, I must confess this gives me some trouble. God cannot actually Himself sin, and He cannot support sin because it is contrary to His nature (Matthew 19:17, there is none good but God) but also God is in control, and in some sense decreed that sin would take place (Acts 2:23) without being responsible.
Acts 2:23
Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Here you see that the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God occurred first, and that it was active, not passive, because of the third word in the verse "delivered" which is the verb and has God as the subject. This was done by God, not only planned, but actively brought into being, that Christ would be crucified. However, the responsibility for such a ghastly evil deed is placed upon those people responsible, those "wicked hands" that crucified and slew the Savior. This is the evil they wanted to do in their hearts (Jeremiah 17:9), and they did it, to their own blood-guiltiness.
Now, this does not prove that everything that happens under the sun is directly God's responsibility. However, that is not my point. My point is this: the Scriptures show God's active determination that the crucifixion would take place (which is an act of heinous evil) and that it was foreordained from before the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8). My point is this, here is just one example of evil and sin, that is mentioned in the Scriptures in the most direct and emphatic of ways. How is God not responsible for this sin? How can God slay His own Son and be guiltless? Well, this is a deep mystery for all Christians, which ties into the beauty of God's redemption and Christ's own humility and obedience to the point of death on the cross. But Acts 2:23 helps explain part of this, by showing that the desire to do evil was in the human heart, not God's, whose only motives are Holiness and Love.
Well I did a pitiful job on that, but I hope you get the idea. There are a lot of passages which are quite deep theologically, too, such as Romans 1 (where it speaks about God giving people over to uncleanness, vile affections, and a reprobate mind) and this one.
2 Thessalonians 2:11
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
These are difficult verses. However, you and I both would agree that none of these show God to be guilty of sin. But fully understanding them is frankly beyond my ability. I accept them because I believe God's Word is true.
11:21 AM
OK, I just read your posts on the Founders org, including your apology.
11:30 AM
Ergunismyhero:
Well I wish you the best in your endeavor to search the Scriptures. May Christ guide you to Himself in everything.
11:33 AM
Thanks Byroniac...much to think about.
11:40 AM
So is this blog now defunct?
4:08 PM
ECIMH:
I am not sure if this is an active blog anymore, but I too would like to apologize and ask for your forgiveness for any of my brother’s comments to you in the past, whether on a blog or in person, that you have felt to be offensive or personal. I do not know you, nor do I know what kind of relationship you have had with people who have professed the doctrines of grace or Calvinism. Please understand that many, like myself, have also been whipped through the years because of our beliefs, and we have been ruthlessly attacked with very little or no Christian love mixed in. I fear that you may have encountered some of us when we have been neglectful to extend the grace that we so desire from our Christian brothers. Hopefully, if we can all come to the table with humble hearts knowing that none of us deserve our Father’s grace, and if He were obligated to do so then it we would have to find another name for it other than GRACE.
I am not sure why you have a problem with catechisms and that it seems to take priority over the other two points you make, but then again I don’t know your personal encounters with it. Maybe you have found some that abuse catechisms, but please don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. I discovered this very old technique of learning a few years ago, and we have been using it with the children at my church for about a year and a half. I don’t see it as “brainwashing,” but as a great tool that helps teach the doctrines of the Bible that is not as easily pulled from one particular verse such as the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. We definitely teach the Bible and have verse memorization, but I don’t see using a catechism to be any different than using a SS book that LifeWay produces, only better. The question and answer format makes it very easy for young (and old) minds to grasp the truth. Also, just so that you will know, every time a child gives a presuppositional answer my initial response is, “Where in the Bible can you back that up?” It has made the children understand that they can not take something for granted just because they heard their teacher say it.
You said in an earlier post:
“My kids...I live my life in front of them daily and pray with them daily and talk about God with them daily so that they will ask the right questions, so that they will see that their daddy loves them, so that they can draw their own conclusions of God! I help them along in their journey. I don't give them the answers to be recited when necessary.”
I am glad you are living an exemplary life in front of your children, and I hope I do the same, but your statement gives the impression that if you do these things you don’t have to teach your children, and I know you don’t mean that, but added with the paragraph that precedes the one quoted it definitely implies that. The word catechism comes from the Greek word katechein which means to teach. We are instructed to teach our children (Deut. 6, Psalm 78). For instance, look at Exodus 12: 26-27
"And when your children say to you, 'What does this rite mean to you?' you shall say, 'It is a Passover sacrifice to the LORD who passed over the houses of the sons of Israel in Egypt when He smote the Egyptians, but spared our homes.' " And the people bowed low and worshiped. (NASB)
Who knows, maybe this the first catechism question. I realize that you teach your children, and that you are really just venting over what you see as an abuse of a teaching tool. I understand that. When I see abuses of any kind to God’s children, I can become very emotional as well. Nevertheless, our forefathers of the faith have handed down a great tool to use to make sure that our children (and ourselves) have the ability to “contend for the faith” Jude 3.
We do not make the memorization of the answers mandatory to joining the church as paedobaptist churches do, and maybe that is what you are referring to as abuses, and I would agree, but probably because neither paedobaptism nor confirmation can be justified biblically.
Please consider what I have written, if in fact this blog is still active. If so, I would be happy to correspond with you privately and show you some stuff that the children are learning. It really is quite amazing.
2:32 PM
Thanks Deacon...again, much to think about.
2:04 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home