You Might be a Calvinist If...

I ran across this list on Tom in the Box, which is pretty good. Billy's comment was great. Here are a few more. Mostly charitable. :)


You might be a Calvinist if....

You rented King Arthur, and turned if off half way through.

You haven't actually read The Shack, but have read several books on why it's heretical.

You got goose bumps on Calvin's 500th birthday.

Pyromania makes you think of Phil Johnson, not Def Leppard.

You can decipher this code: 29:29, 21:1, 6:37, 6:43, 10:26, 8:30, 9:20, 1:4, 2:8

You found the error.

It irritates you when someone says the solas in English.

You added the unreached people widget to your blog, to head off Arminians at the pass.

When someone mentions New Zealand, the first thing you think of is particular redemption.

You hate rap, but listen to Lecrae because his lyrics are so good.

You have a plaque commemorating the Synod of Dort.

You're biggest complaint about John MacArthur is that he doesn't use the ESV.

You've come up with a working theory on how the Holocaust gives God glory.

You've considered moving to Minneapolis.

You initially didn't get the King Arthur reference, but looked it up and now strongly agree.

Roger Olson Challenges Calvinists to Rewrite "The Shack"

The Society of Evangelical Armininians has a post today by Roger Olson, where he issues a challenge to Calvinists: Rewrite "The Shack" from the Calvinist view.

Olson writes:

Since most Calvinists are harshly critical of the novel The Shack (which takes a similar approach to theodicy as Greg Boyd in Is God to Blame?) because of its alleged undermining of God's glory and sovereignty, why don't they (or one of them) write a similar novel in which God explains to Mack (or someone like him) why his daughter was kidnapped, raped and murdered--and avoid language about God permitting or allowing it (which is really Arminian language)?

Quite a tall order. I would not relish the idea of explaining why God decrees the rape and murder of a little girl. And that is one of the root problems with Calvinism. If God ordains everything and he is good, then why do evil things happen?

I personally nominate Tim Challies to write the book.

If you are unfamiliar with "The Shack", you have been living in a cave. :) It is a popular and controversial Christian novel. My review is here.

The ESV and Romans 16:7

Does anyone know why the ESV translates Romans 16:7 differently than the other major translations? I'm referring to where the ESV says that Andronicus and Junia (a female) were well known to the apostles. All the other major translations make it sound as if they WERE apostles (rather than merely known to them). Is this a legitimate interpretation?

Bold added by me.

ESV: Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me.

NASB: Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

KJV: Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

NRSV: Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

NIV: Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

TNIV: Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

NLT: Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews, who were in prison with me. They are highly respected among the apostles and became followers of Christ before I did.

ASV: Salute Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also have been in Christ before me.

(Click to enlarge and see the Greek interlinear text)

How to Worship (Funny Video)

This is funny, particularly since most of it applies pretty close to home. :)

Interesting Links - 9/19/09

This month's Christianity Today has some articles by Arminians in praise of John Calvin (yes, you read that right). Man of the Bible: What Calvin gets Right, by Ben Witherington. Theologian of the Spirit, by Roger Olson.

This pastor hates Obama, and preached a sermon on why he wishes the president dead. Although the article doesn't state it, I'm going to go way out on a limb and guess that the good reverend is not an Arminian. [update 10-2-09 : the pastor is NOT a Calvinist, although probably not an Arminian either: link - thanks to Rev for pointing this out]

Tim Challies has an article about his visit to Saddleback Church. He attended a service and met with Rick Warren for about 30 minutes.

Ben Witherington previews the NIV 2011.

Calvinist witnessing and Arminian witnessing. If you haven't already seen these clips, they're pretty funny. The Calvinist witnessing one is better of course. :)

The Calvinists Who Became Arminians at Dort

One of the fascinating facts of history is the "conversion" to Arminianism of several of the Calvinists who participated in the proceedings at the Synod of Dort. Below are accounts of three Calvinists, two whom changed their views during the actual proceedings, and one who had already changed his opinion prior.

John Hales (1584-1656): Hales was an English theologian. He was a quiet and gentle man. He was well read, had an excellent memory, and is reported to have had an "exact knowledge of the Greek tongue".¹ For some time he was a professor at the college of Eton, where he taught Greek. He was affectionately referred to as "The Ever Memorable Hales". During the proceedings at Dort, Hales was a chaplain for Sir Dudley Carlton, the English ambassador to the Netherlands. He attended Dort at the request of Sir Carlton. During Dort, Hales is reported to have "bade John Calvin good night"^.2 He became convinced of the merits of Arminianism after hearing Simon Episcopius' defense of Unlimited Atonement and exposition of John 3:16.

Thomas Goad (1576-1638): Goad was an English clergyman. He was fond of poetry and known for his skill in verse. He was a chaplain for George Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury. He was a rector in several locations, and was also precentor (music leader) at Saint Paul's Cathedral. Goad was sent to Dort by King James at the request of Abbot. Goad went to the Dort as a Calvinist, but like Hales, he became convinced of Arminianism during the course of the synod. He switched sides and began to defend the Arminians. As a result, he lost much prestige among his colleagues, and his name was omitted (perhaps accidentally) from the acts of the synod. After the synod, Goad returned to his chaplaincy.³

Daniel Tilenus (1563-1633): Tilenus was a Huguenot (French Calvinist). He was a professor at the Presbyterian college of Sedan. He was a staunch Calvinist in his earlier days, but had already embraced the Remonstrants by the time of Dort. Risking his position at Sedan, Tilenus strongly criticized the behavior of the Calvinists at Dort, stating that they treated their Arminian brethren according to "the methods of the Turks"⁴. As a result of supporting and identifying with Arminians, Tilenus was deposed from his professorship at Sedan. He moved to England at the request of King James, and became a capable defender of Arminian theology.⁵


(1) The 1917 Harvard Theological Review, Volume 10 Short biography about the life of John Hales.
(2) The Life of John Goodwin by Thomas Jackson, 1872, page 441
(3) Dictionary of National Biography (British) 1885-1900, entry on Thomas Goad
(4) Religious currents and cross-currents: essays on early modern Protestantism, 1999, page 9
(5) Memoirs of Simon Episcopius, By Frederick Calder, 1838, page 456

Great Wesley Quotes

Beware you be not swallowed up in books! An ounce of love is worth a pound of knowledge.

Catch on fire with enthusiasm and people will come for miles to watch you burn.

The world is my parish.

You may be as orthodox as the devil and as wicked.

My ground is the Bible. Yea, I am a Bible-bigot. I follow it in all things, both great and small.

Think not the bigotry of another is any excuse for your own.

I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out.

I value all things only by the price they shall gain in eternity.

When I have money, I get rid of it quickly, lest it find a way into my heart.

Once in seven years I burn all my sermons; for it is a shame if I cannot write better sermons now than I did seven years ago.

If there be any mistakes in the Bible, there may as well be a thousand. If there is one falsehood in that book, it did not come from the God of truth.

Though I am always in haste, I am never in a hurry.

Having, First, gained all you can, and, Secondly saved all you can, Then give all you can. (Dave Ramsey's motto also)

Believe nothing they say, unless it is clearly confirmed by plain passages of holy writ.

The Bible knows nothing of solitary religion.

In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church.

The best of it all is, God is with us. (possibly his last words)

Interesting Links - 9/5/09

The NIV and TNIV are going away. A new NIV will be out in 2011. Christianity Today has an explanation here. Scot McKnight has a different explanation here. (HT: William Birch).

The blog "Truth is a Man" has an excellent post entitled: Molinism is not Open Theism: A Critique of Dr. McMahon’s Assessment. He refers to a piece written by high Calvinist C.M. McMahon. McMahon also claims that Arminianism is "a deceiving doctrine of demons wrought up from the pit of hell".

Oldenbarnevelt the ship (Netherlands: 1930-1963). The cruise ship was named after the well known Remonstrant, and also carried troops for the Dutch during WWII. Oldenbarnevelt the person is perhaps best known for being beheaded after the Synod of Dort.

Blogger Churchmouse has an interesting article on the history of Calvinism in the West.

Need a funny Arminian phone message? Check out Bob Passantino's Supercalvinisticexpialidocious Link is in the middle of the page (HT: Bob from SEA)

ELCA (sung to the tune of YMCA)

This is pretty funny - Although I don't necessarily approve of all of the lyrics. (found here)

"Luth'ran"
Doesn't mean quite the same
As what you've been
Taught to know by that name.
We're removin'
All the scandal and shame
Of a church that stands for something.

Luth'ran,
No, you're not misinformed,
Yes, it's true now,
We commune the Reformed.
No forced union
Made us bow or conform,
Just a warm and fuzzy feeling.

It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
We have women in black,
Now there's no turning back
To the hang-ups of dead white guys.

It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
You can set yourself free
From dead orthodoxy,
You can do whatever you please.

Luth'ran,
Won't you please come along
To the Elca,
Where's there's no right or wrong.
In the Elca,
Heretics can belong,
They can teach at seminary.

"Luth'ran,"
But our fingers were crossed,
All our doctrine
Has been totally lost.
All that's Luth'ran
Is what we have embossed
On our cards and stationery.

It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
We have women in black,
Now there's no turning back
To the hang-ups of dead white guys.

It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
You can set yourself free
From dead orthodoxy,
You can do whatever you please.

Elca,
Where it's very uncouth
And unwelcome
To say you have the truth
And where seldom
Is a word ever heard
To discourage sin or error.

Elca,
Where it's all shades of gray,
I said, Elca,
Where it's hip to be gay.
Our umbrella
Is as big as a tent,
There's no need for you to repent.

It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
We have women in black,
Now there's no turning back
To the hang-ups of dead white guys.

It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It's fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
You can set yourself free
From dead orthodoxy,
You can do whatever you please. . . .

Interesting Links - 8/29/09

Did God send a tornado as a warning to the Evangelical Lutheran Church? John Piper says yes. Greg Boyd says no.

Blogger Ed Thompkins has a post entitled: What is Arminianism and Why am I an Arminian?

Blogger "cpyeager" thinks that John MacArthur has misrepresented Arminian theology.

A Nazarene/Wesleyan/Free Methodist merger? The Nazarenes have a motion to explore this. A Nazarene discussion board comments on it here. Wesleyan Keith Drury muses here.

Peter Lumpkins thinks that there is a tendency among some Calvinists for "artificial exegesis which leads to overstated conclusions. " He gives an example of R.C. Sproul and John 6:44.

For whom did Christ die? Three views: Calvinist (Paul Helm), Amyraldian (Michael Jensen), Arminian (Ben Witherington).

You Might be a Presbyterian if... (a little good natured Presbyterian humor)

Audio Link: Ephesians 1 Sermon by Greg Boyd

Here is an mp3 link to a sermon by Greg Boyd where he preaches on Ephesians 1: 3-10. He critiques Calvinistic predestination. Boyd is the pastor of the Woodland Hills Church in Minneapolis, MN. He's a well known open theist.

Link: 6/26/1994 – Predestination: Good News or Bad?

Boyd makes the following points against the Calvinist interpretation of Eph 1.
1. One must believe to be saved. Whoever believes is saved.
2. Human beings are moral agents, and are responsible for their sins. God does not program what our decisions are.
3. God doesn't always get what he wants from humanity. Because of our moral agency, things happen that God does not prefer. Hell is a testimony of this fact.
4. God is love. God loves every person. God's loving nature is incompatible with Calvinistic election.

Boyd positively interprets Ephesians 1 as follows:
1. Predestination is corporate, not individual - he gives a funny analogy here about eating chicken.
2. God chooses us in Christ. If you are in Christ, you are predestined.
3. We are not worthy of predestination, but in God's eyes we are worth it.

Search Queries

Here are some of the more interesting search queries that have lead people to this blog. (My comments are in italics)

arminians don't like to be called fundamentalists (True enough)
are all the tenth avenue north boys married?
are muslims allowed to touch a pig?
arminians burn stake (I hope they mean Arminians burn steak)
c.s. lewis calvinist quotes (good luck on that one)
calvinists vs arminians football audio
can an egyptian touch a pig (what is it with pigs?)
can demons be sent to the pit now?
catholic saints with name reed, jackson, or jack
cool arminian
does romans 9 talk about israel
frankenstein vs. bible
green baggins enns (tricksy hobbitses!)
indiana wesleyan greek witherington blog (sounds interesting!)
iranian arminian news (it's nice to see someone misspell Armenian)
is wesleyan arminianism heresy (I hope not)
jesus brings the pizza painting
john piper is an idiot (Piper is a lot of things, idiot is not one of them)
quotes with the word felicitous in it (I have one in mind)
slave owners preached eternal security (really?)
swine flu pizza substitition
what is samantha jones saying to richard (several queries for "samantha jones", odd.)
where is peter enns now? (Where is Waldo now?)
why arminians are idiots (Because God decreed it?)

Pursuing Righteousness by Faith

What is pursuing righteousness by faith? In Romans 9, Paul speaks of pursuing righteousness by faith rather than works:

What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone. -Romans 9:30-32 ESV

First, it is helpful to be familiar with the Biblical definition of righteousness. In English we often define righteousness as being moral and upright. This is something that a person must do himself. However, Paul had a different understanding than the English context. Biblically speaking, righteousness means to have a right standing before God. While righteousness also carries a sense of being moral, it is secondary and based not on ourselves, but our standing with God. Understanding this context helps to explain the problem that Israel had. Israel was trying to earn the right to stand before God by working for it with their self righteousness. In this they failed. It is impossible to earn a right standing before God by one's self righteousness.

One might reasonably ask, how then can righteousness (right relationship) be pursued at all, given that we cannot work towards it? It is possible through faith in Jesus. Paul goes on to explain:

Romans 10:8-13: The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

We learn in this passage that a right standing before God is possible. Not by works, but by faith in Jesus Christ. The Lord saves those who call on his name. The faith described here is ongoing. It is available to everyone who believes and confesses Jesus Christ. Faith is possible for all! Not because of our goodness, but because God desires to be in right relationship with us, and is already at work in us. His word is near to us and in us.

Pursing righteousness by faith is to pursue Jesus Christ himself. We are promised that everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.

Faith is not something that a person intellectually assents to once and is then is finished with. Rather, faith is an ongoing dependence on the Lord Jesus Christ. What distinguishes faith from works? It is trust in Jesus instead of ourselves. Faith by definition is Christ centered. We trust in Jesus to keep us in right standing with the Father. We trust in Jesus to conform us to his own image.

Moses under the inspiration of the Spirit wrote about this kind of faith in Deuteronomy 30. Paul had this passage in mind and quoted parts of it in Romans 10. In Deut 30 we learn that:

• Faith is not too difficult or beyond our reach
• It is very near to us, in our mouth and heart so that we may obey.
• It is set before us.
• It is God (Christ) centered. We are to love God, walk in his ways, and to keep his decrees.
• It is something that we can forfeit, by turning our dependence away from God or allowing ourselves to be drawn from him.
  
• It is a choice. We are admonished to chose life, for the LORD is our life.

What is striking about Romans 10 and Deut 30 is that the faith described in these chapters is precisely the Arminian definition of faith. Faith is not given to a few and hidden from most. Instead, faith is possible for all, because God wants to be in a right relationship with all of his creation. Faith in Jesus is not beyond our reach because God has made it possible through his work in us. It is genuinely available to all.

Pursuing righteousness by faith is a choice to trust Jesus Christ instead of ourselves. Not because of who we are, but because of what Jesus Christ has done. He will never fail us.

Arminian Audio: James White / Roger and Faith Forster

Justin Brierly, host of the UK program Unbelievable, recently hosted two discussions between James White (Calvinist) and Roger and Faith Forster (Arminians). Rumor has it that that Greg Boyd was originally supposed to participate too, but was unable to make it. (HT: darinhouston)

The broadcasts are available to download as a podcasts, or by clicking on the audio links on the front page of the site. Go to the August 1 and August 8, 2009 episodes. Run time is an hour and 20 minutes for each episode.

James White is a well known Calvinist apologist. Roger and Faith Forster are Arminians, they pastor Ichthus Fellowship in London. Roger also co-authored the book "God's Strategy in Human History".

I have listened to the first episode, but not the second. The debate was pretty good. James White was his typical self (long winded and imputing incorrect positions to his opponents). The Forsters capably represented the Arminian view. I was particularly impressed with Faith Forster, who was not afraid of calling White out on his usual tactics.

Interesting Links - 8/15/09

Calvin Leaves a Divided Legacy in South Africa. "Now, as Protestants worldwide mark the 500th anniversary of Calvin's birth, South Africans are remembering how the followers of the Protestant reformer were counted among the most strident supporters of apartheid, and eventually also among its most vociferous opponents."

Christianity Today has an interesting article about mega church seminaries. It mentions Mars Hill Seattle (Driscoll), Bethlehem Baptist (Piper) and Saddlback (Warren).

The blog Forest View is doing a detailed review of Roger Olson's book, Arminian Theology, Myths and Realities. Parts: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Lutheran Paul T. McCain argues that Calvin hijacked the Reformation. "I consider it a great tragedy that John Calvin did so much to corrupt the genuine evangelical Reformation of the Western Church. The errors that flow from Calvin’s theology of a limited atonement, an irresistible grace and a predestination of some to hell, are a corruption of the Scriptures and the Gospel of Christ." (HT: Wesley Wong)

Rev. Ronnie W. Rogers, who identifies himself as Calvinistic, has an excellent post that illustrates the problems with the "different types of love" argument that Calvinists sometimes make. He writes, "If God does not love everyone enough to at least offer a real chance to receive the help that they desperately need, e.g. salvation, how can we do so, based on the commands to love as He loves?"

Christian Traditions Selector Quiz

Here's a pretty good "what church tradition are you" type quiz. At least it pegged me about right. :) I had to view the source code to post the results, don't know if I missed an easier way.

HT: Nick Norelli

Your Christian Traditions Selector Results

(100%) 1: Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene

(97%) 2: Pentecostal/Charismatic/ Assemblies of God

(91%) 3: Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.)

(77%) 4: Church of Christ/Campbellite

(76%) 5: Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth Brethren/Fundamentalist

(67%) 6: Congregational/United Church of Christ

(64%) 7: Baptist (Reformed/Particular/ Calvinistic)

(56%) 8: Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England

(53%) 9: Presbyterian/Reformed

(53%) 10: Seventh-Day Adventist

(50%) 11: Eastern Orthodox

(42%) 12: Lutheran

(36%) 13: Roman Catholic

Interesting Links 8-8-09

Peter Lumpkins writes about the misuse of the word "monergism" among Calvinistic Southern Baptists.

Ben Henshaw asks: Do you really want to claim John Calvin as your homeboy? Check out the reply thread on this one.

Speaking of which, you can get your Arminian homeboy apparel here.

Chris Skinner asks, does all mean all?

Between Two Worlds (Justin Taylor's Calvinist blog) has a link to a series by Colin Hansen that looks at the dynamics of the Reformed Resurgence. (HT: Brian Abasciano)

Were the tunes to Wesley brother's hymns based on tavern songs? That's not true says Larry Withham. It is a wide spread misconception.

Don Heatly writes about the "myth" of the young progressive Christian. "I have been astounded by the disconnect between what I read younger generations are looking for in a church, and what many actually gravitate toward."

Scot McKnight has re-posted a letter regarding how a pastor should deal with "pesky Calvinists". There are lots of interesting comments in the thread.

"Fun" Calvinist Quotes on Arminian Theology

Here are some less than flattering quotes about Arminian theology from various Calvinists. You can click on the author's name if you're interested in the original context. As an Arminian there's really not much to say in reply to this kind of stuff. I have decided to use my God given free will to make fun of the quotes. My random thoughts are in italics. Don't take them any more seriously than you take the Calvinist quotes. :)

Agustus Toplady: If we sum up the evidence that has been given, we shall find its amount to be, that Arminianism came from the Church of Rome, and leads back again to the pit whence it was digged.

Now there you go again playing the Catholic card. If you can't successfully debate your opponents, you can always fall back and call them Catholics. By the way, "Agustus" sounds pretty ROMAN to me. You might want to take a look in the mirror buddy. Mind if I call you Gus for short? Growing up I had a dog named Gus. He was a cool little schnauzer. He could urinate on command. That chubby chocolate eating kid from Willy Wonka was also named "Agustus". That movie is one of my favorites. The Gene Wilder one, not the lame Johnny Depp one. Favorite Augustus line: "I feel very sorry for Wonka. It's gonna cost him a fortune in fudge!"

John Owen: Who would have thought that our church would ever have given entertainment to these Belgic semi-Pelagians, who have cast dirt upon the faces and raked up the ashes of all those great and pious souls whom God magnified, in using as his instruments to reform his church; to the least of which the whole troop of Arminians shall never make themselves equal, though they swell till they break?

But Gus said that the Arminians were dug from the pit of Rome. Now you think that they're entertained dirt casting Belgic semi-Pelagians? What the hey? Arminius was DUTCH, not Belgic. Belgic = Catholic. I hope you're not trying to play the Catholic card again. To help you remember the difference between Belgium and Holland, try memorizing the following: "If it ain't Dutch, it ain't much." Or here's another: "Remonstrants, common sense." Or you can simply visualize a windmill. At any rate, at least Arminius wasn't French. No pious souls have ever come from France. Well, there was Joan of Arc. But she was Catholic AND a female leader - no doubt that's two strikes in your book.

Christopher Ness: Lest this overflowing deluge of Arminianism should bring destruction upon us, there is great need that some servants of Christ should run to stop the further spreading of this plague and leprosy.

I like the word "deluge". It looks like "fudge" and makes me hungry for chocolate. Anyway, you're forgetting your theology again dude. Leprous Arminianism was decreed by God for his glory. Who are you oh man to talk back to the overflowing deluge? Besides, if someone tried to run and stop it, that would be a WORK, and that would give him something to boast about. Not to mention that he would get all wet. Also, I like your last name. It reminds me of Nessie.

Charles Spurgeon: And what is the heresy of Arminianism but the addition of something to the work of the Redeemer? Every heresy, if brought to the touchstone, will discover itself here. I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.

Can I call you Chuck? You're right, the work of the Redeemer is nothing without the the gratuitous addition of exhaustive determinism. And don't even get me going about those heretical Arminians, a bunch of tramps and thieves - the whole lot of them. As a side note, your own private opinion isn't private anymore if you put it into print. And what does Touchstone have to do with anything? Touchstone is just the front for Disney's R-rated movies. I fail to see how that is relevant. Oh wait...R-minian. I get it. Cute word play there Chuck.

John Piper: Here’s my rule of thumb: the more responsible a person is to shape the thoughts of others about God, the less Arminianism should be tolerated. Therefore church members should not be excommunicated for this view but elders and pastors and seminary and college teachers should be expected to hold the more fully biblical view of grace.

Whew, I had a scare there for a second. Glad I'm just a lowly church member! That means that you have to tolerate me. I'll stick to warming pews so that you can't kick me out. Don't worry, I won't do something rash like become an elder. Don't tell Chuck, but I have my own private opinion that we should run off the Supralapsarians. By the way, since y'all live in the same town, you should stop and have coffee some time with Greg Boyd. It could be a teaching moment, as Obama likes to say. You could discuss something interesting, like whether or not God decreed the Minnesota bridge collapse.

R.C. Sproul: I agree with Packer and Johnston that Arminianism contains un-Christian elements in it and that their view of the relationship between faith and regeneration is fundamentally un-Christian. Is this error so egregious that it is fatal to salvation? People often ask if I believe Arminians are Christians? I usually answer, "Yes, barely." They are Christians by what we call a felicitous inconsistency.

I'm curious, what does R.C. stand for? I'm guessing that it doesn't stand for Roman Catholic. Maybe Remote Control? "Remote Control Sproul" has a very nice flow to it, plus it is consistent with your theology. Whatever R.C stands for, it makes me thirsty for a cola. Back to the subject at hand. Weren't the egregious un-Christian elements of Arminianism decreed by God? And since your answer must be 'yes', I want to know was what was God thinking of when he came up with that particular felicitous inconsistency? Can you answer that without referring to Deut 29:29? Another thing I'm wondering about: how can anything be fatal to a fatalist?

John MacArthur: The question comes, “Can somebody who holds an Arminian view be a Christian?” And I would hate to say they couldn’t be. I really believe that it is possible to be Arminian and to be a Christian…to misunderstand your human capability, to misunderstand the election, to misunderstand the extent of the atonement, even to misunderstand the irresistible nature of God’s saving grace, and even to think you could lose your salvation. But, at the same time--while being confused or ignorant of those things--to know that you’re a sinner and know that the only way of salvation is through Jesus Christ. I guess you could say that someone could be an Arminian and push those points far enough, where they could jeopardize my confidence that they really are a Christian. You could push the point of not being totally depraved far enough where you’re actually being saved by your own works, by your own belief, by your own ingenuity, by your own self-induced faith. And you could get to the point where you could really wonder whether someone understands that it’s all a work of God.

Uh oh, the last thing I want to do is jeopardize your confidence, John. I'm probably going to lose some self-induced sleep over that one. By the way, it almost sounds like you think that Arminians can lose their salvation by thinking that they can lose their salvation. Now THAT would be a felicitous inconsistency.

C Matthew McMahon: Arminianism is not something hidden under a stone, but lives in full view, and in direct opposition, to the Gospel. It is a deceiving doctrine of demons wrought up from the pit of hell, where, in the consummation of the age, it will be cast for all eternity with the devil that spawned it and the false teachers who propagated it.

Devil spawned doctrine of demons huh? Tell me how you really feel C Matthew. Hmm, what does C stand for? Catholic? Sorry, redundant joke. Do you know how you can easily recognize demons? They're the ones who like to burn human beings at the stake. By the way, are you any relation to Ed or Jim? Naw, probably not, they're a lot nicer. And how did a hyper-Calvinist get on this list? Oh well, what's done is done. Que sera sera I always say.

Interesting Links 7-25-09

British Calvinist Peter Masters criticizes the new American Calvinism. "The new Calvinism is not a resurgence but an entirely novel formula which strips the doctrine of its historic practice, and unites it with the world." Masters is the current pastor of Charles Spurgeon's church.

God in the Hands of Angry Calvinists. Describing the angry behavior of some Calvinists, William Birch writes that "How we view God affects how we think and act."

New Testament Scholar Craig Bloomberg explains why he is a Calminian. He holds to middle knowledge (Molinism). HT: Robert

Nate rightly points out that you don't have to be Calvinist to be Reformed. Both Arminians and Calvinists are Reformed. "The difference in the end is that Arminians believe God gives a resistible grace unto all men..."

Methodist Dr. Riley Case has some praise for the new Calvinism. "Evangelical United Methodists should welcome the new interest in Calvinism. When we debate Calvinists we can appeal to Scripture, and talk about truth, and discuss meaningfully matters like salvation and grace and the blood of Jesus. Those who call themselves Progressive Christians, on the other hand, are a moving target."

A Meal on the Moon

Today is the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing. It is not often told, but one of the first things Buzz Aldrin did after landing on the moon was to take communion. He originally planned to quote scripture (John 15:5 - "I am the vine and you are the branches..."). He was asked by NASA not to do this because they were involved in a legal dispute with Madelyn Murray O'Hare. So Aldrin simply asked for a moment of silence, and then privately gave thanks to God.

Here is an account of the story from Guideposts: A Meal on the Moon

Here is a more detailed account: First Communion on the Moon