Last night I received a phone call from a friend venting about Calvinism. He said that Calvinism highlights how bad God is instead of focusing on how good God is.
Generally, from my work on a campus, people who need Christ could care less about some of these issues that receive a lot of heat on different web forums (look up names like Ken Silva, Jack Deere, Rob Bell to investigate some of the issues in controversy). For instance, while in college, eschatology was our big thing. We were stanch pre-tribulation pre-millennialists and were quite against anyone who believed otherwise. I'm familiar now with the pre, post, and a-millennial views, but the average guy in the frat house could care less about the issue. However, they think it is important that Jesus will return.
But there are some issues that should garner little debate from those that hold a high view of scripture - like the fact that Jesus is the Son of God. In reference to my friend who called last night, my first thought is to not get too hung up on these issues, but rather to help those around you walk with Jesus - that these issues can consume too much time.
After spending an hour or so myself this morning reading articles and listening to some web casts, I realize that I'm quite ignorant of these hot issues. So here are some of my questions:
- Does Calvinism remove any free thought or will from man?
- Why is the Emergent Church a threat?
- If I'm constantly around guys who have no spiritual background, what is vital for them to do or know in order to be on the path of walking with Jesus all the days of their life?
I know more questions will arise, but that should be enough to get us going. Thanks for input.
Hey Joel, I must say your blog has now found its way onto my bookmarked pages now, you should update more often!
ReplyDeleteI've actually never posted a serious comment online before, aside from maybe a facebook message, but I'll actually try to give my input seeing as how you meant this to be some sort of discussion.
To be certain which angle I'm coming at it with, I do consider myself a "Calvinist" (if that word hasn't lost all meaning). According to Calvin, the Westminster Divines, and even RC Sproul, Calvinism does no violence to human "free will". It does, however, contest with what many people mean by free will. The popular question is in soteriology, or the doctrine of salvation. An Arminian might say that the decision to accept Christ's atonement is a decision that is entirely Dependant on the person. A Calvinist would say yes, the person made a free decision (he or she did what they wanted to do), but that decision was made with God's sovereign power over it. They would also say more things, that God foreordained their salvation in eternity past. Also that God's sovereignty is a mystery (as to how it works), but your free will is self-apparent (thus putting the mystery in God, not man). The common reference points are Romans 9 and Ephesians 1, though there are many others. A more full exposition on the "Calvinist" model of free will can be found in Chapter 9 of the Westminster Confession of Faith and in well written books like "Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God" by JI Packer. A book from the opposite perspective can be "Why I am not a Calvinist" (I don't know the authors). Hope that wasn't too long!
Really briefly- I get worried about the Emergent Church sometimes because guys like Rob Bell sometimes don't hardly mention the gospel. Sometimes it seems like the message is "you are a clean person who just needs to be shown the way". No word on the substitutionary atonement of Christ. But its not all bad stuff.
I think if God's word talks about it, it is important enough. Staying gospel centered is the most important, but you can't neglect anything God decided to share with us, even if it is under debate. However, when it comes to finer things like the millenium debate, I just try to talk about it if someone else brings it up. Having a good Systematic Theology handy, like Wayne Grudem's, is a good thing!
That is my 2 cents anyway
John Carter