tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post5267376506735242587..comments2024-03-10T10:54:59.776-07:00Comments on Ben Witherington: John Piper explains Why Calvinists are so NegativeBen Witheringtonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06017701050859255865noreply@blogger.comBlogger83125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-21560521686631800412009-03-19T22:07:00.000-07:002009-03-19T22:07:00.000-07:00Greetings all.I hope this post helps others that l...Greetings all.<BR/><BR/>I hope this post helps others that like me have found themselves perhaps torn between systems like Calvinism and Arminianism.<BR/><BR/>Here is what God has shown me from His Word. I hope my experience can be a blessing to you.<BR/><BR/>1. Why is it that with two seemingly diametrically opposed systems such as Cal. and Arm., there are such large numbers of adherents on either side? Why isn't one of the systems clearly right and the other clearly wrong to all believers?<BR/><BR/>1a. Because there is some of God's truth expressed in each system, and this is recognized to varying degrees and in varying ways by redeemed believers in Christ. Thus there is a split. <BR/><BR/>But in an effort to create a systematic theology from God's Word - which does not detail a systematic theology - both systems incorporate human assumptions (logically derived or otherwise) to plug the gaps in our understanding. <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, these assumptions attempt to insert flawed human reasoning into God's flawless Word, and by their very presence give testimony that these systems describe movements away from God's word. Is God's Word augmented with human reasoning still just God's Word? No.<BR/><BR/>News flash.. God neither requires nor requests any augmentation on our part. <BR/><BR/>His Word is complete enough to bring us to faith in His Son. Going beyond what is written is not of faith, and that which is not of faith is sin. <BR/><BR/>Requiring some level of clarity, some level of understanding beyond what God has given us in His Word is not of faith, because it is not trusting (simply) in what God has given us. In no way is it child like trust, nor in any way is it obedient.<BR/><BR/>My advice: stick with the truths of God's Word and let the chips fall where they may. This side of our glorification we see in a mirror darkly. Lighting our own fires to try to brighten up the mirror only brings trouble and division within the body of Christ. It's not what we are called to do.<BR/><BR/>Here is what God has shown me from His Word:<BR/><BR/>1. God cannot sin.<BR/>2. #1 means means God cannot lie - He cannot bear a false witness.<BR/>3. God knows everything about everything and everyone. There is nothing hidden from Him because every thing and every fact exists because of Him and for His pleasure. God never has to assume anything - nothing ever occurs to God.<BR/>4. When God's Word indicates that anyone who will be saved must exercise repentance from sin & rebellion, and instead turn to Christ as their sole redeemer in complete and total faith and obedience, that is one thing.<BR/><BR/>When myself or any other preacher of God's Word, exercising our ministry of reconciliation based upon God's call on our lives and His Word, tells people that they must repent and exercise faith in Christ, we are making the assumption, to some degree, that they can do it aren't we? <BR/><BR/>We aren't merely informing them of a responsibility. We are also indicating possibility. At most we are indicating that they can in fact do this, and at least we are indicating to them that there is a possibility that they can do this.<BR/><BR/>Arminians may assume that they can because they believe everyone already can, Calvinists may assume that they can because they just might have won birth-lotto and are elect (Calvinist definition).<BR/><BR/>In no way are we lying to them, or misleading them, because we do not have perfect knowledge. Contained within our imperative is ignorance.<BR/><BR/>But for God to give such an imperative, with His perfect knowledge... that is another story altogether.<BR/><BR/>For God to indicate that anyone who will be saved must repent and turn to Christ in faith... well, that is merely indicating responsibility, not ability. I am responsible for many things in life that I don't have the ability to do... that's the short definition of life (being an adequate father of three comes to mind). There is no problem here with the difference between responsibility and ability.<BR/><BR/>But for God to give a personal imperative, a personal command, to every man, woman, and child that they must repent and turn to Christ in faith... that is again something very different (Acts 17:30-31).<BR/><BR/>For God to demand this personally of someone in light of His perfect knowledge would mean that there is a way for them to do what God is demanding. There must be, or otherwise God is lying to them. He is bearing a false witness. He is indicating to them that they can do something when in fact there is no way, internal or external, that they can do it.<BR/><BR/>It would be no different than someone demanding that a known paraplegic run the bases at the local ball field. It would be cruel, sadistic, and actually totally depraved. It would be lying about their capabilities.<BR/><BR/>5. God has shown me that He would rather exercise His mercy to sinners than His wrath against their sin. (Jonah 4:2 among many, many others).<BR/><BR/>6. God has shown me that nowhere in His Word does He *ever* hold out one hand in demand to someone, without offering them the means to obey with the other. God never demands something from us that He is not willing to grant. Everything that we have has been given to us by God. Everything that we will ever have has been given to us by God. <BR/><BR/>For instance:<BR/>When God gave Israel the law with one hand, His just law - birthed from His own justice - that must be followed perfectly or it will bring death, what did He do next? <BR/><BR/>With the other hand He delivered the offer of grace and mercy, sourced from His great love for us. He gave us the blood of a substitute for atonement of our failures to comply with His imperatives in the law.<BR/><BR/>An offer by the way that must be accepted and acted upon with faith. Faith that trusts God that the blood of the sacrifice does indeed cover our sin, and that the failure to meet the standards of His law personally and perfectly can be 'wiped away' and drowned in the sea of His forgetfulness.<BR/><BR/>The list of biblical truths in this regard are many. <BR/><BR/>7. God must grant repentance. (2nd Timothy 2:25). <BR/>We cannot repent on our own. The crippled cannot just decide to walk, the deaf cannot make themselves hear, the blind cannot make themselves see, no more than rebels can pronounce themselves exonerated, or dead men can make themselves alive. <BR/><BR/>8. God must grant faith.<BR/>(Phil 1:29). (Ephesians 2:8-9 - grammatically the 'gift' here is salvation (the being saved), not faith - check your gender in the Greek, but Phil 1:29 lays aside all doubt that faith must be granted from God).<BR/><BR/>Because of the same reasons above.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Thus enters the 'Good News': the Gospel of Jesus Christ.<BR/><BR/>The gospel of Arminianism is not good news, because it says that I possess something (the ability to have saving faith from within myself), when God clearly teaches that I don't.<BR/><BR/>The gospel of five point Calvinism intimates that God is either schizophrenic, or sinful, or possibly both. Quite simply it slanders God's character because it does not portray God as He has revealed Himself in His Word.<BR/><BR/>Because of Christ's obedience in laying down His life as the vicarious and substitutionary atonement for our sin (and not just ours, but for the sins of the whole world - 1 John 2:2) - God is willing and able (within the stricture of His justice) to grant repentance and faith to any and all that will simply ask Him.<BR/><BR/>Thus He is just, and also the One that justifies (Hallelujah!)<BR/><BR/>If you are reading this and you are not in Christ, you are not born again, if God has not made you into a new creature in the second Adam, His Son. If you don't meet the examination of 1st John (a proper belief, a proper obedience, and a proper love), I urge you will all my heart to let go of your own abilities (actual and assumed) and fall on your face before God and ask Him to grant you repentance and faith.<BR/><BR/>You cannot repent on your own. You cannot produce saving faith on your own. And without repentance from sin and saving faith in His Son, you cannot please God.<BR/><BR/>If you have been living legalistically, stop trying to please God with your own merit.. you don't have any. You are simply piling up wrath for yourself. Instead, accept what God has already done to put you into a right standing with Himself.<BR/><BR/>Time and time again God has shown us in His Word that He loves saving sinners... in fact, He *runs* to save sinners. He throws His arms around us, falls on our neck and kisses us. He gifts us with Himself. There is no greater gift that has ever been conceived by any mind, than what God gives us in Himself.<BR/><BR/>What ever could lead God to run, except His great love for you?<BR/><BR/>God does not promise any of us another hour on this Earth, not even another second. But He does promise us that those that call upon His name (His person and His character) will be saved. I urge you to make the call that God Himself is ready and willing to fulfill.<BR/><BR/>May you find His salvation and His peace.<BR/><BR/>In love and with a clear conscience before god...<BR/><BR/>C.S. Countryman<BR/><BR/>www.truthmill.com / www.truthmill.org / truthmill@yahoo.comTruthMillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11308720590096926012noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-76276055374847676292009-01-23T20:01:00.000-08:002009-01-23T20:01:00.000-08:00I am not sure it is helpful to press that Calvinis...I am not sure it is helpful to press that Calvinism is simply an expression of the 16th and 17th centuries, since it can just as easily be argued that the current preference for uncertainty is nothing but an expression of the times in which we live. Both are true, but not very helpful in a search for the truth. Likewise, Calvinism may attract certain mindsets, but other approaches attract other mindsets and are perhaps the products of those mindsets. All true but still not helpful. Ben W says that he does not like systems which claim too much certainty, but it seems to me that he is very certain about this being the wrong way to go. In other words, he is no different from Piper. We all do theology every time we think about God, and we all put it together in some order. Even uncertainty can be systematic. The only way not to have a 'system' is to not think at all, which I assume nobody would recommend. I am not a Calvinist, but I appreciate their efforts to come to grips with what God has revealed about himself. I share many of the criticisms voiced in this blog, but to have a go at them for trying to put it together while ignoring that we all do the same is a little hypocritical. Let everyone bring their reasons forward and leave it at that.djbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04985841485983455993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-28910098013694373832009-01-13T08:11:00.000-08:002009-01-13T08:11:00.000-08:00"I must confess that as a NT scholar I am inherent..."I must confess that as a NT scholar I am inherently suspicious about theological systems like Calvinism or Dispensationalism or even Arminianism and the like which seem to foster certain kinds of feelings of intellectual certainty and even smugness about things that are in fact profound mysteries."<BR/><BR/>I shall qoute you time and again, if I may, Mr. Witherington. I cannot express my complete agreement with this statement, that my lips have uttered countless times.<BR/><BR/>I love HaShem and figure He has given we His children the wisdom necessary to carry out His work upon His world. No more, No less, HaShem does the salvation work.<BR/><BR/>Thanks Ben.charles ray loudermilkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06030806533971017786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-15508142311967970452008-12-05T22:22:00.000-08:002008-12-05T22:22:00.000-08:00Caleb wrote:"I look at the scriptures and see pass...Caleb wrote:<BR/>"I look at the scriptures and see passages that talk of free will and those that talk of predestination."<BR/><BR/>Really?? I have never once seen a single verse of Scripture mention freewill. But what I do see in Scriptures over and over again is an enslaved will to sin and Satan. Freewill after the Fall is a myth. We are slaves who God must first make free in order for our wills to be capable of moving Godward.<BR/><BR/>On another note, "A Calvinist Poem":<BR/><BR/>With whom do I lash or turn obnoxiously brash? There are no tantalizing comments to bash, or commenter to sass. Woefully I must continue to endure this surly debate fast....Yet, Arminian, don’t bemock my resolve—neither gent nor lass. Such would be amply rash. If necessary, I shall come back with a Herculean cache, quivering in underpants the natural result from a Calvinist' blast. Trauma follows last; even urine may pass.Litl-Lutherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09790787494599438994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-79452655732296358022008-12-05T14:20:00.000-08:002008-12-05T14:20:00.000-08:00The original poster.The original poster.Calebhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15507439023181561757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-86315607204524768872008-12-04T23:08:00.000-08:002008-12-04T23:08:00.000-08:00Caleb,I don't mean to pry, but I'm not sure who yo...Caleb,<BR/><BR/>I don't mean to pry, but I'm not sure who you are speaking to. Can you please officially state that?Jc_Freak:https://www.blogger.com/profile/14780031497091443526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-34390567181166314882008-12-04T19:13:00.000-08:002008-12-04T19:13:00.000-08:00I have had the idea of predestination personaly ex...I have had the idea of predestination personaly explained to me by two calvinist leaning believers. Both times they emphasized the fact that we can't explain how it all occurs.<BR/><BR/>I am more of a four point Calvinist. But I look at the scriptures and see passages that talk of free will and those that talk of predestination. I believe it is because both are going on. Kinda like our natural birth. I believe God made us exactly as he wants us AND we are the product of two individuals' personal choice to engage in physical intimacy and the joining of two random sex cells. I don't see this position as neatly packaged or easily explained. It really doesn't make sense, atleast from out point of view.<BR/><BR/>I don't argue theology much but are you sure your generalizations of calvinists are accurate?Calebhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15507439023181561757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-91179425701116802102008-12-04T18:39:00.000-08:002008-12-04T18:39:00.000-08:00"Of course, I was deliberately using the descripti..."Of course, I was deliberately using the descriptions that each side uses against the other. Biblical theology, not systematic theology is what we aspire to. Any attept to systematize falls into a trap."<BR/><BR/>Well, that really only obfuscates. If the discriptions are wrong, they shouldn't be used, regardless of who uses them. It is best to define a theology best off of the adherants, not the opposition.<BR/><BR/>That in mind, all systematic theologies attempt to be biblically based. They have their advantages and disadvantages, but to disregard them for "biblical theology" is often premature. Though I agree that being bibilical is more important than being "consistant" or other systematic qualities, the act of trying to develop a conscience general framework to understand reality isn't a negative thing, and is very important for certain kinds of people. If you are disinterested in looking at systematics, fine. They are not required. But others need that kind of framework because of who they are, and how God made them.Jc_Freak:https://www.blogger.com/profile/14780031497091443526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-59567094485308649312008-12-04T15:28:00.000-08:002008-12-04T15:28:00.000-08:00Of course, I was deliberately using the descriptio...Of course, I was deliberately using the descriptions that each side uses against the other. Biblical theology, not systematic theology is what we aspire to. Any attept to systematize falls into a trap.Terry Hamblinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06346629921055055879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-33307952052279535412008-12-03T19:21:00.000-08:002008-12-03T19:21:00.000-08:00I'll have to agree with Ben. I found Schreiner' re...I'll have to agree with Ben. I found Schreiner' response to Dr. Abasciano to be sophistry at best. He never really rebuttal's Abasciano's points, since he constantly misses the mark on what they are. Basically, I kthink Abasciano went over his head. <BR/><BR/>As far as Scriptural use, Schreiner pulled out some verses they sounded a bit like what he was saying, but that was about it. Dr. Abasciano was interacting with the entire OT, and allowing that to speak to the NT verses.Jc_Freak:https://www.blogger.com/profile/14780031497091443526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-17270073539079437712008-12-03T10:03:00.000-08:002008-12-03T10:03:00.000-08:00Terry said:"This means neither Arminian, who can't...Terry said:<BR/><BR/>"This means neither Arminian, who can't boast that he made a contribution to his salvation by choosing God while others failed to do so, nor Calvinist, who cannot claim that there was something special about him that God chose him as one of the elect."<BR/><BR/>I believe you have misrepresented both positions here Terry. Litle-Luthr is right that no Calvinist would say there was something special about them. In Calvinism, God elects unconditionally. I would agree that this makes a sort of caste system, but the idea that there was any quality that made them special other than election itself is foriegn to Calvinism.<BR/><BR/>Likewise, you misrepresent Arminianism. Arminians do not believe that we can earn our salvation. We have always taught that we are saved by faith, which is not a meritous act. Works are but filthy rags. Arminianism is often libeled by popular Calvinists, so please look into what Arminians say about Arminianism.Jc_Freak:https://www.blogger.com/profile/14780031497091443526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-24671981760720807842008-12-03T05:21:00.000-08:002008-12-03T05:21:00.000-08:00Jason Dollar, You wrote: I did read a lengthy sect...Jason Dollar,<BR/> <BR/>You wrote:<BR/> <BR/><I>I did read a lengthy section from your Romans commentary (9-11), and find that Tom Schreiner's response to mere corporate election (Brian Abasciano's version) to be much more convincing and exegetically sound than what you have written.</I><BR/> <BR/>FWIW I found Schreiner's response to Dr. Abasciano to be very weak. He basically just repeated the same mistakes that Dr. Abasciano initially critiqued and demonstrated a continued misunderstanding of what corporate election entails. I also found that he continually begged the question of his position which really hurt the quality of his rebuttal overall.<BR/><BR/>I happen to know that Dr. Abasciano sought to respond to Schreiner, but was not allowed to do so in the same journal because the theological journal (as a rule) does not allow further responses to rebuttals. He has written a response and plans to publish it. So Schreiner had the luxury of the last word which alone will prove convincing to some, but Dr. Abasciano's response will eventually be published and, in my opinion, demonstrate the errors in Schreiner's essay as well as the Biblical superiority of the corporate view. I for one am looking forward to it.<BR/><BR/>God Bless,<BR/>Benkangaroodorthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04172265279507643348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-55774539965349884172008-12-02T07:10:00.000-08:002008-12-02T07:10:00.000-08:00The Bible teaches that we are saved without any me...The Bible teaches that we are saved without any merit of our own, but also that we are responsible for our sins. Any human system that says that the two cannot be reconciled is at odds with the Bible. Perhaps you can't get your head round it - if you could you lay claims to being God! For myself, I am happy to accept it. No-one ever got to heaven by passing an exam in theology.Terry Hamblinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06346629921055055879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-91548280159214124132008-12-02T06:21:00.000-08:002008-12-02T06:21:00.000-08:00Manisha,you wrote:If fallen people are not dead, t...Manisha,<BR/><BR/>you wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>If fallen people are not dead, then right from the beginning the serpent was right and God was the liar. I really wish Christians would take the “dead in sin” passages more seriously. This would bring about more Christian unity.</I><BR/><BR/>Arminians contend that these passages are being misused by Calvinists. Nowhere does the Bible equate spiritual death with the inability of a physical corpse. Spiritual death speaks to the fact that we are seperated from the only source of spiritual life- Jesus Christ. Only when we come to be in union with Christ can we share in His life and be born again. We come to be in union with Christ through faith.<BR/><BR/>Really, if you want to draw such a strict parallel with the inability of a physical corpse then you must also admit that a physical corpse cannot reject nor resist anything either. Therefore, we should also conclude that those who are dead in sin cannot resist the Holy Spirit nor reject the gospel. Yet we recognize that this is not the case which should serve as a red flag concerning the way the Calvinist understands "dead in sin."<BR/><BR/>The Arminian agrees that we need a resurrection but this resurrection comes by faith. The Arminian also agrees that God's enabling grace is necessary for one to believe but this enabling grace is not regeneration. God is powerful enough to overcome our depravity and enable a faith response.<BR/><BR/>The Bible is clear that <A HREF="http://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/2007/07/27/does-regeneration-precede-faith/" REL="nofollow">faith precedes spiritual life</A> and does not support the Calvinist understanding of what it means to be <A HREF="http://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/category/dead-in-sin/" REL="nofollow">dead in sin</A>.<BR/><BR/>You may disagree but at least you can see why it is not quite as simple as you would like it to be.kangaroodorthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04172265279507643348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-72386095609398505572008-12-01T23:48:00.000-08:002008-12-01T23:48:00.000-08:00Zefiriel writes:"[A] Calvinist ... cannot claim th...Zefiriel writes:<BR/>"[A] Calvinist ... cannot claim that there was something special about him that God chose him as one of the elect."<BR/><BR/>You must not understand what any Calvinists believe to ever make a statement like the above. There is nothing about us that made God choose us. That is the point of Calvinism! We have nothing, did nothing. There was nothing about us that made God choose us. It was merely the pleasure of God's will to show people mercy.<BR/><BR/>PS: I really appreciate the article on Romans 9-11 by Tom Schreiner which Jason Dollar encouraged us to read. It was "Spot on!"Litl-Lutherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09790787494599438994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-84316886881497172672008-12-01T14:20:00.000-08:002008-12-01T14:20:00.000-08:00"The context is Paul describing to the Ephesians j..."<BR/>The context is Paul describing to the Ephesians just how they were saved. He goes on to tell them that it was 'not of works so that no-one can boast'. This means neither Arminian, who can't boast that he made a contribution to his salvation by choosing God while others failed to do so, nor Calvinist, who cannot claim that there was something special about him that God chose him as one of the elect."<BR/><BR/>Faith is the opposite of boasting, so it makes no sense to say that those who have faith can boast that they have done something to earn or merit God's favor.<BR/><BR/>Moreover, if God's actions alone are sufficient to save, they are also sufficient to damn, so man is not blameworthy for his sin, but God is in Calvinism.Kylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01484003949277428168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-51511673798099319022008-12-01T01:02:00.000-08:002008-12-01T01:02:00.000-08:00Zefiriel:"Manisha has hit upon the central point. ...Zefiriel:<BR/>"Manisha has hit upon the central point. Those who are dead in trespasses and sin cannot believe unless the Spirit intervenes. Each believer is a miracle of grace. By grace are you saved, through faith - and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. How humbling is that!<BR/><BR/>I cannot disagree with your point, but somehow I feel you just quoted a verse out of context." <BR/><BR/>The context is Paul describing to the Ephesians just how they were saved. He goes on to tell them that it was 'not of works so that no-one can boast'. This means neither Arminian, who can't boast that he made a contribution to his salvation by choosing God while others failed to do so, nor Calvinist, who cannot claim that there was something special about him that God chose him as one of the elect.Terry Hamblinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06346629921055055879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-11804121488135997722008-11-30T19:16:00.000-08:002008-11-30T19:16:00.000-08:00I agree with Bobbyt in that even though bits and p...I agree with Bobbyt in that even though bits and pieces of Reformed thought existed from early on, Calvinism itself sprang from the religious extremism of the 16th century. <BR/><BR/>Even though I've always been a Methodist, I attended a Presbyterian Church in America church as a teen. My experience is that with all their Reformed teachings, Reformed universities, Reformed churches, etc., Calvinists have turned Calvinism into an idol. It's too bad that they haven't made as much to-do over Christ's teachings on loving one another as they have about Romans 8 and 9 and other verses they quote to back up their position. The people in the church I attended really do believe that God so loved some of the world that he sent his only begotten Son and purposely created the rest to burn in hell. All in all, the PCA turned me into a die-hard Methodist.<BR/><BR/>By the way, in the video, Piper mentions his death. When he gets to Heaven, he's going to be shocked on how wrong he and Grudem are on their position on women!himmiefanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02270899946791612366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-83521212309884142972008-11-30T13:55:00.000-08:002008-11-30T13:55:00.000-08:00"What he does not add, that could have been added,..."What he does not add, that could have been added, is that, for whatever reason, Calvinism seems to feed a deep seated need in many persons for a kind of intellectual certainty about why the world is as it is, and what God is exactly like, and how his will is worked out in the world, and most particularly how salvation works and whether or not one is a saved person."<BR/><BR/>I think, Dr. W, that this is moderately hypocritical of you to say. Surely every Christian will be interested in knowing what God is exactly like. Surely all believers will be interested in how God is working in the world. Surely all who are in Christ will be curious about how it came to be that they are in Christ.<BR/><BR/>Humble Calvinists are not seeking absolute certainty in these matters. Rather, they are seeking to understand the whole of biblical teaching on these matters. And surely, Dr. W, you are too. Those Calvinists who are not humble (along with those Arminians who are not humble) have bigger problems to deal with. Is it I, Lord?<BR/><BR/>I do appreciate the thrust of your post, especially in regard to our attitude in this discussion. Point well taken. However, I think your theology is mistaken, as so many others do. (Not spoken arrogantly at all - seriously :)<BR/><BR/>I did read a lengthy section from your Romans commentary (9-11), and find that Tom Schreiner's response to mere corporate election (Brian Abasciano's version) to be much more convincing and exegetically sound than what you have written. <BR/><BR/>The link:<BR/><BR/>http://www.monergism.com/Schreiner,%20Thomas%20-%20Corporate%20and%20Individual%20Elect.pdf<BR/><BR/>In spite, of this, I count you my dear brother in Christ and appreciate your insight into these matters. The same goes for the others, from both sides of the theological spectrum, who have commented.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-54637482635065148092008-11-30T12:51:00.000-08:002008-11-30T12:51:00.000-08:00wow - what timing Doc? I'm reading Death by Love ...wow - what timing Doc? I'm reading Death by Love by a modern day Calvinist Fire-cracker. It's amazing to me that, while the book contains great truth, it feels like it's coming from a really irritated person. It's sad really.<BR/><BR/>Beyond the negativity and the intellectual superiority complex, the down right mean behavior that is usually thrown at "other" Christians who don't share their thoughts or beliefs creates paralysis. When someone says be wary about an author who has pointed me to a deeper appreciation and love of Jesus I get tend to get frustrated myself. <BR/><BR/>It's sad really and again while I appreciate the truth which many of them speak the demand to be right overwhelms it to the point of scary certainty. <BR/><BR/>I'm no heady theologian (my time at ATS is proof of that) but I'm pretty sure Jesus, even as a Sage and truth speaker, didn't repel the lovers of God who were misled but rather corrected them. It was those who were more about being certain they were right that Jesus had a problem with.?.<BR/><BR/>Thanks Doc!Jim Nicholshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932893341195025233noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-61821266121493385412008-11-30T00:44:00.000-08:002008-11-30T00:44:00.000-08:00Manisha has hit upon the central point. Those who ...<I>Manisha has hit upon the central point. Those who are dead in trespasses and sin cannot believe unless the Spirit intervenes. Each believer is a miracle of grace. <B>By grace are you saved, through faith - and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.</B> How humbling is that!</I><BR/><BR/>I cannot disagree with your point, but somehow I feel you just quoted a verse out of context.zefirielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11792895283256095075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-29285701125914934212008-11-29T18:46:00.000-08:002008-11-29T18:46:00.000-08:00"The dead must be brought to life in order to repe..."The dead must be brought to life in order to repent and believe."<BR/><BR/>The problem with this is that it's not the biblical order of salvation. Scripture is very clear: repent, believe, then you will be saved/regenerated - not the other way around. <BR/><BR/>However uncomfortable it makes the Calvinist, it is sinners who repent and believe, not God - although God's grace enables it. Simply giving into God is hardly a reason to boast before God. Faith and boasting are mutually exclusive.<BR/><BR/>Calvinists also need to own up to the fact that God unconditionally sends people to hell in their system, a notion that is so contrary to what the Scriptures reveal about the character and will of God that it's amazing that it needs to be refuted.Kylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01484003949277428168noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-90286145668874894802008-11-29T13:54:00.000-08:002008-11-29T13:54:00.000-08:00Ben,Since it is clear that you disagree with Calvi...Ben,<BR/><BR/>Since it is clear that you disagree with Calvinism and Arminianism then what theological system would you fall under and how does it differ from these two?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03680507355194844574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-37488946843881703812008-11-29T02:50:00.000-08:002008-11-29T02:50:00.000-08:00Some of the discussions seem to miss the point. N...Some of the discussions seem to miss the point. No one would dispute that a work of the Holy Spirit is required to convict a person and to bring them to Christ. No one would dispute that our faculties are marred by rebellion and disobedience and that we naturally turn in on ourselves, rather than turn to God. But is it necessary for there to be a detailed working-out of the ‘exact’ mechanics of how all this works together? <BR/><BR/>Very often the verses (particularly OT) that are marshalled to prove (for example) the ‘total depravity’ of human beings are taken out of their textual context and their historical context. What the prophets complained of about the erring and idolatrous people of God in the OT, who had forsaken their first love, is surely not meant to be applied to human nature in general? This kind of thinking is where so many ‘isms’ of the Christian faith have erred. Their systems have been constructed on misunderstandings of the original context. <BR/><BR/>Is it not also true that the word ‘elect’ when used in the NT refers to those who are already saved and not to those God intends to save? And is it not also true that the context of Romans 9-11 is the story of Israel and how that story fits into God’s work through Christ to the Gentiles? It is not about individual salvation at all. <BR/><BR/>Of course, such textual arguments are quite apart from any moral arguments. When the Bible states that God is a God of justice and that he deals impartially with everyone and that all are given over to disobedience so that God may have mercy on all, what are we to make of justice and impartiality when we are told by Calvinists that God has in fact already made up his mind as to who will be saved and who will go to hell?bobbythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03040136839756235858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11840313.post-34011482466091464142008-11-28T19:16:00.000-08:002008-11-28T19:16:00.000-08:00Re Litl-Luther, That is an impressive array of b...Re Litl-Luther,<BR/> That is an impressive array of biblical quotations strung together. It also completely misrepresents the Arminian position. No Wesleyan Arminian with a partial understanding of his theological tradition would recognize him or herself as being rebutted by your verses, least of all Dr. Witherington. The Wesleyan position has been referred to as "free grace," not "free will." There is a concept of prevenient grace which holds that God has given enough grace to unbelievers to enable them to respond in faith to the Spirit's leading towards salvation, if they choose. You may not agree with this, but it is a far cry from the view you seek to refute. <BR/>God bless you,<BR/>Chuckyuckabuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05286909279733012915noreply@blogger.com