High Calvinism hides the Gospel!

03/29/10 08:57 PM

Page_1

I listened to a ‘video-blog’ yesterday that broke my heart, and made my anger (I think it was righteous anger) burn. I go to seminary and run into ‘popular calvinism’ often, but for some reason hearing a popular ‘apologist’ whom I respect advocating High-Calvinism it pushed me over the depression edge. Why? Because High-calvinism hides the gospel of Jesus!

The apologist was arguing that ‘God is not obligated to save anyone.’

My response to Him was:

I often hear the "God is not obligated" to save anyone 'argument'. This argument saddens my heart in the deepest degree. Has God not bound Himself to bless all the families of the earth in Gen. 12? Your argument diminishes the covenant God made with Abraham!! God bound Himself to bring salvation to the world (all people, Jn 3:16) in the Abrahamic covenant! The hebrew text says that in Abraham all the families (mishpachat) of the earth would be blessed, is that not everyone?! And Has God not atoned for the sins of entire world in Jesus death (1 Jn 2:2)? Does God not want all to repent (1 tim 2:4)? Does God not want none to perish (2 Pet 3:9)? He is the savior of all men (1 Tim 4:10)! Many people will reject God, even though He has purchased them with the blood of His own Son (2 Pet 2:1). Your argument completely ignores the universal reconciling work of Jesus on the cross (2 Cor 5:18-21, Col 1:19-22, Rom 5:8-10). My heart is breaking because, in my judgment, you are ignoring the gospel.

The apologist has not responded to me yet, but if He does I will post His response on my blog. Whenever I talk about the reconciling work of God through Jesus I always get asked if I am a universalist, which I am not. In the discussion thread a guy name Sam asked me this question.

Sam asked:
Jesse, are you advocating universalism?

My response to Sam was:

Sam,

Universalism is unbiblical in the highest degree, that is not what I am arguing for. In my judgment, scripture is clear, more people will end up in Hell than heaven, but this is not what God intended. I am affirming here that in this world things do happen that are against the will of God. God does not will for anyone to go to Hell (2 Pet 3:9, Ezek 33:11). This is why He sent Jesus to take away our sins through His universal atoning death (Jn 1:29, 1 Jn 2:2, 1 Tim 4:10, 2 Pet 2:1). This is why He sent the Spirit to convict the world of Jesus Lordship (Jn 16:8-9). God does indeed command all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:11). Why does God command all people to repent? Because He has appointed a day when He will judge the world in righteousness by Jesus Christ. He commands all people to repent and believe in Jesus the Lord, because He does not want them to go to Hell (2 Pet 3:9, 1 Tim 2:3-4).

Look at the parable of the Final assize, when Jesus separates the sheep from the goats. The sheep (believers) inherit life eternal, and the goats (unbelievers) inherit death and hell. If there was ever a better time for Jesus to tell us plainly about How God prepared Hell for certain people this would be it, but what does Jesus say to the unbelievers? Jesus says in Matt 25:41 to those on His left hand at the assize "Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels." Why does Jesus not say to the cursed, "Depart from Me, you cursed into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil, His angels, and you!" with an angry sneer in His voice. Why? Because God did not prepare Hell for anyone, nor does He have pleasure when people go there (2 pet 3:9, Ezek 33:11).

It saddens me in the deepest degree that we do not love sinners the way Jesus did. However, it is as Jesus said it would be in the last days

"And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold." (Matt 24:12)

If you are interested in reading more on these issues.

Here is a PDF of Bruce Ware Ph.D (A moderate Calvinist from SBTS) on Unlimited Atonement
Here is a PDF of Leon Morris Ph.D (Well liked among Reformed) on Romans 9
Here is a PDF of James Deyoung Ph.D (Professor of NT at Western Seminary) on “The Doctrine of Reconciliation against the shack and other emergent fiction.”
Scott Mcknight has a good article on the ‘New Calvinists’

Tags: rants, thinking, upset, stoked, blessed, wierd worldwierd world, upset

Comments

Test everything by scripture...even John Piper.

02/17/10 10:10 AM

Summary only available when permalinks are enabled. Read More...

Comments

Foreknowledge: Part 3

11/02/09 11:57 AM

I have recently undertook studying foreknowledge. The theologians of the early church emphatically denied that foreknowledge implies any predetermination of events. Justin Martyr, for example, said, “What we say about future events being foretold, we do not say it as though they come about by fatal necessity.” In other words, this means that just because God knows what is going to happen before it happens does not necessarily mean that God has caused it to happen.
Read More...

Comments

Foreknowledge: Part 2. Apostolic Fathers

11/02/09 11:08 AM

I searched the apostolic Fathers on Foreknowledge and Here is what resulted from the search. Read More...

Comments

Foreknowledge: Part 1

10/26/09 05:18 PM

Here are some objective statements about foreknowledge I pulled together from bibleworks!! If you disagree with them then please let me know. Read More...

Comments

New Calvinism 2

05/27/09 08:51 AM

new_calvinism

Some of the good things about the “new calvinism.”

Four Ways 'New Calvinism' is So Powerful

Old Calvinism was fundamental or liberal and separated from or syncretized with culture. New Calvinism is missional and seeks to create and redeem culture.
Old Calvinism fled from the cities. New Calvinism is flooding into cities.
Old Calvinism was cessationistic and fearful of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. New Calvinism is continuationist and joyful in the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.
Old Calvinism was fearful and suspicious of other Christians and burned bridges. New Calvinism loves all Christians and builds bridges between them.

I have recently been thinking much about the Calvinist system of soteriology. Mainly because the circles I run in tend to be reformed. I believe the God of Israel (Ex 34:6-7) is ultimately revealed in the person of Jesus Christ (Jn 1:1-3, Heb 1:1-4). The Old and New Testaments are our only source documents for faith, theology, and practice. The faithful prophets, the apostles, and ultimately Jesus Christ are the people to whom I look for cues. The conclusions reformed thinkers come to make me think the Westminster Catechism, the Institutes, and reformation era writings are placed alongside scripture and that Luther, Calvin, Bullinger, Owen, and Edwards are looked to for cues. Here are a couple good articles on the “New Calvinism” by Scott Mcknight.

Scott Mcknight on the “neoreformed” 1 and 2

I take great issue with the particular atonement (limited) issue. It seems so imposed on the text from without I have no restraint in my mind to call this eisegesis. The passover (Ex12), the day of atonement (lev 16), the Servant of Israel (Is 53) all which foreshadowed Jesus death seem to leave no room for the type of schema that the particular atonement thinkers have created, though it follows some of their basic assumptions (which need be called into question). The Atonement issue is so central to the character of God (1 Jn 4:8, Rom 3:21-27), and His plan for the ages (Col 1:20-21, Eph 3:10-12), that I cannot help but speak fervently against the issue. Jesus died for all and made propitiation for sins toward God (1Jn 2:1-2, 4:10-11, Heb 3:17, Rom 3:25), thus reconciling God to His world (2 Cor 5:18-21), and providing an access point by which God can justly justify those who come to God through Jesus (Rom 3:26). That is how God can command “all men everywhere” (does that mean everyone...yes!) to repent (Acts 17:31). He has not only commanded all men to repent, He has sent the Spirit into the world to convict people (Jn 16:7-10) of the truth of this good news that forgiveness of sins, and the gift of the Holy Spirit is free to those who repent and trust Jesus (Acts 2:38).

Check out what Bruce Ware thinks about the extent of the atonement I think He (as a calvinist) clarifies the issue very well and shows that there is no room for a limited atonement scheme in scripture, but that Jesus died for all.

Tags: rants, thinking, upset, stoked, blessed, wierd worldthinking

Comments

New Calvinism

05/26/09 10:09 AM

Fernandes_Bio.htm

I thought I would post an e-mail correspondence I had with Phil Fernandes on the “New Calvinism.” My first E-mail is here and His reply follows.

Phil,

I am doing well. Marriage is awesome and refining. I am daily reminded of Jesus who is a better man to his more unfaithful bride that I am to my faithful bride. I am really enjoying Western Seminary. I am becoming more convinced that following this program, I should push through for 3 more years to complete a Ph.D in New Testament. But I may just go for a Th.M. The Holy Spirit is working zeal in my heart each day for the truth of the scriptures and the glory of Jesus. Consequently, I am thinking lots about how to "give an answer" to people about various philosophical, historical, and theological issues. I am particularly interested in explaining the Existence of God, Jesus resurrection, and the reliability of OT & NT. Theologically, I am very interested in conveying/defending the message of universal atonement/reconciliation over and against the particular atonement scheme. I have been saddened by the ways in which Calvinists, soft or hard, portray the God of Israel who is ultimately known for us through Jesus Christ. Though calvinists may say He is not capricious, arbitrary or unjust, the very soteriological system through which they interpret God's character often portrays Him as arbitrary, capricious and unjust. Since I know Yahweh is not these things (Ex 34:6-7) I get really zealous to give a clear, respectful, loving answer to so many young theologian types who are being lured away, in my estimation, into this theological error. Time Magazine ranked the "New Calvinism" the third most influential idea in the US right now. A liberal newspaper in Portland picked up on Calvinism and this is how they defined it in an article about evangelical christianity which is becoming more calvinist,

"Reformed: Protestants who affirm the five points of Reformation-era
theologian John Calvin: total depravity of mankind, unconditional
election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance
of the saints. These roughly translate to a belief that humans are
hopelessly wicked and condemned to hell, and that God has decided
since before Creation which people he will save through the sacrifice
of Jesus." - Willamette Weekly

This definition is half-straw man half-not. The half-straw man is that the definition defines the worst of calvinism instead of showing the strengths of the system like God is in control, He is all knowing/powerful/able. Yet this “worst” of Calvinism is the logical conclusion of what calvinists have always said whether or not they are using these exact words or not. I think that when scripture stops speaking and we keep speaking as Christians we begin engaging in what Paul referred to as "fruitless controversies, " and "idle talk." I think theologians are trying to "know the mind of the Lord" and the fact is...we don't! When we say we do know His mind, we get ourselves in trouble and contradict clear parts of scripture to explain unclear parts.

Other than that, I am really looking forward to reading your new book on Atheism. I am sure you have enjoyed studying this issue and answering these naturalists. I look forward to benefiting from your work. I always really enjoy reading your stuff. Jesus has gifted you to make the academic accessible to the layman, which I am thankful for and will seek to emulate as I study to show myself approved to Him. I love you deeply for your love of Jesus and passion for scripture and truth. I do not know when I will be back in the area, but if I am I would love to grab coffee with you or have you to dinner.

Blessings,

Jesse

Here is a link to His new book.

Phil’s response follows:

Jesse,

I am afraid that you're hitting the nail on the head. Just as there are the new, miltant atheists, now there are the new, militant Calvinists. If this movement of young Calvinists continues to grow, I fear that non-Calvinist evangelicals will be labled as "cultists." Now more than ever we need a defense of God's goodness and a defense of His desire to save all mankind. We need a defense of His loving universal offer of salvation without forcing people to accept it. After I finish my next two books I'll probably have to reluctantly write a critique of five-point Calvinism. I would rather refute atheists and non-Christians. However, a defense of God's goodness and justice, as well as a defense of human free will, is needed now more than ever. I'm looking forward to seeing you again someday. Continue to fight the good fight of faith.

Love Always,

Your Brother in Christ,

Phil

Here is the Time magazine article on Calvinism
Here is the Willamette Weekly article on “Harris Boys”

Tags: rants, thinking, upset, stoked, blessed, wierd worldthinking

Comments

Biblical and Systematic Theology

05/21/09 10:19 AM

I have been thinking more about the relationship between Biblical and Systematic theology. Here are some conclusions I have come to. Biblical Theology is the "bridge" which brings theologians to Systematic conclusions. If theologians do not first do good biblical theology than there systematic theology will be poor. Biblical Theology emphasizes to the same degree, in the same way, with the same words the theological issue at hand. Systematic theology can quickly degenerate into asking questions the text does not ask and answering questions the text does not answer. Biblical Theology done well will trace the major plot line, themes, and persons in the bible story. The Biblical Theologian will rightly see him/herself as part of the church living between Acts 28 and Revelation. Systematic Theology can degenerate into personal withdrawn a temporal conclusions that undercut our place as the church in redemptive history awaiting Jesus promised return. I really like reading the scriptures, studying the scriptures, and responding to the God who is revealed in the scriptures. I think the categories Systematicians have debacled so long to fill with "right" answers usually tend to be the "secret" categories that we are never suppose to fill (Deut 29:29, Isaiah 55:8-9, Rom 11:30-32). Many things have been revealed to us. The Biblical Theologian tends to emphasize and affirm these things. Many things are still mysterious too us, and the biblical text leaves us with irreconcilable tensions we have to live with. The Systematic Theologian tends to emphasize and fight over these irreconcilable tensions.