Monday, May 29, 2006

Anonymous Response

This morning, I recieved a response to my article about Ergun Caner's recent anti-Calvinism sermon. I would like to briefly address this response sent in by "Anonymous".

Oh, my! All this wears me out!! I am sick and exhausted of all this debating, etc.

So have you been debating this issue yourself? If so, where? When? Certainly not here. If not, then how can you be exhausted from something you have not engaged in?

For me, I will follow the Lord Jesus Christ! I want to be available to hear His still small voice.

Okay, so are you suggesting that because I and others choose to debate relavant issues within the Church that we do not follow the Lord Jesus? And just what does it mean to be "available to hear His still small voice"?

How can this happen if I jump on every bandwagon that comes along in Christianity?

By "bandwagon", do you mean denomination, or perhaps a particuliar theological view? If so, are you denying that you are a member of a denomination with particuliar theological views (i.e. bandwagons)? If you are a protestant, are you not on the "protestant bandwagon"? If your theological viewpoints put you in agreement with Jacob Arminius, are you not on his "bandwagon"?

Can we come together in the essentials of the Word of God and eliminate all this debating?

As long as false doctrine exists within Christ's church, then no. Would you want to fellowship with someone whom you believed was teaching false doctrine? Or perhaps someone in your congregation that openly attacks what you believe to be the Gospel? Are you seriously suggesting that Christians should throw out doctrine in favor of unity?

No wonder the American Christian Church is going down the toilet!!

I would agree that evangelicalism is indeed swirling down the toilet. But who is to blame? Those who are trying to confront false teachers and their doctrines or those who stand idly by and do nothing?

The drug addict whose life is transformed by the Gospel of Christ couldn't care less about your debates.

This would depend on whether or not this former drug addict cared about what Scripture so plainly teaches on watching your doctrine closely (2Timothy 4:2-4)

Mike Ratliff is correct when he says, "it's a sad day when 'Christians' are more in love with their traditions than they are with their sovereign Lord".

Mike Ratliff was indeed correct but not in the way you mean. What Mike is talking about are those who would sacrifice clear and unambiguous passages of Scripture for the traditions of men. You are thus in error by trying to turn Mike's statements into an endorsement of Christian complacency.

I might add: it is a sad day when "Christians" are more in love with their "interpretation of theology" than they are with their Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ!

What I see here is nothing more than a veiled attack on my, and every other Calvinist's status as a believer. It is a common thing for folks such as yourself to suggest that just because a Calvinist dots his soteriological "I's", and crosses his theological "T's", that he is somehow a subversive heathen seeking to destroy the truth of God's Word. What is telling about such assertions is that they can never be demonstrated and I would invite you to try. But that would involve going to the Scriptures for such things just as the Bereans did, which, based on your comments is apparently something you would be unwilling to do. This tells much about who really cares for God's truth as revealed in Scripture.

8 comments:

Larry said...

I would say that no one loves the sovereign Lord more than a Calvinist, because he truly believes God is sovereign and worships him as such, rather than as an impotent being wringing his hands in heaven hoping folks on earth make good choices.

J. Matthew Cleary said...

Larry,

I agree. Good point. And thanks for stopping by and taking the time to post your thoughts.

Bulldawgy said...

JMC -

It is good that folks like you are passionately defending the truth of the Scriptures.

A funny thing - evangelical churches send their future pastors to seminaries to learn many things, including theology - and when they return - they teach the church to "fall in love with Jesus" and "to listen to His still small voice" and to "just abide in Him" - all at the expense of the entire counsel of God found in the whole Bible.

It is a cheap, sad, watered-down gospel - if it can be considered the gospel at all.

From a fellow Georgian, keep fighting the good fight. Do not shrink from the truth.

John

J. Matthew Cleary said...

John,

Thank you for the kind words and encouragment!

Chris said...

"I would say that no one loves the sovereign Lord more than a Calvinist, because he truly believes God is sovereign and worships him as such, rather than as an impotent being wringing his hands in heaven hoping folks on earth make good choices."

Then you would say wrongly. I'm not a Calvanist and love my Lord to the bitter end! My theology does not consider God as impotent or as one who wrings His hands or paces the floor. He never wrings His hands because of the provision He divinely made for us in Romans 8:28. Those things that work together are the bad choices we as humans make. Larry, have you ever made a bad choice??? Please be honest and say yes. Do you think your bad decision caused God to wring His hands? J. Matthew, come on, just because it was a point made in the favor of Calvinism doesn't mean it was a good point!

J. Matthew Cleary said...

Chris,

"J. Matthew, come on, just because it was a point made in the favor of Calvinism doesn't mean it was a good point!"

I disagree and would reiterate that it is indeed a good point. Your theology gives lip service to God's sovereignty over men and his affairs yet, God is powerless over the decisions that men make. This means that along with positing God's impotence, you also posit a glaring contradiction seeing as how human history is determined by the choices that men make.

Chris said...

"Your theology gives lip service to God's sovereignty over men and his affairs yet, God is powerless over the decisions that men make."

I never said God was powerless over the decisions that men make. My theology believes in a God that chooses to allow mankind to make his own decisions. Key word being "Chooses". Sure God could have created a world full of robots who move, speak, make decisions etc... whenever He turns the key but that idea absolutely defeats the purpose of so many things such as faith; Who needs faith to believe when the decisions are being made for them?

God's omnipotence is reflected in the fact that He can do whatever He wants to do. If He chooses to allow a man to make a choice, it occurs that way because God chose it to be. If I allow my children to use their own free will to make a choice, does that make me an impotent father? No it doesn't.

J. Matthew Cleary said...

Chris,

Since this post is a bit old, I'll be responding to your comments here on a serperate blog entry.