Dr. Allen starts with John 3:16. He plans on quoting only Calvinsts to prove his case against limited atonement. Calvinists are going to be “shocked.”
What two things to these men have in common – Calvin, Bunyan, Bullinger, Watts, Brainerd, Hodge, Edwards, Shedd, Barnes, Strong, etc. etc.? (I couldn’t get them all) Dr. Allen wants to be firm but fair. Answering the questions of must a Calvinist hold to the L, did they all hold to it and does Scripture teach it.
He mentions Tony Byrne at theologicalmeditations.com who is a four-point Calvinist. Dr. Allen gave a six page hand-out. (I’ll see if I can upload it tonight.)
Intent – I missed this summary. Sorry.
Extent of the atonement
- Jesus died for all humanity equally.
- Jesus died for the elect only.
Application
- From eternity passed (If I remember correctly.)
- At the cross held by some hypers and Calvinists.
- Applied at the moment the sinner exercises faith. He says this is the correct view.
Sufficiency -Sufficient for all, but only efficient for the elect. (I missed some of this.)
The opening question answer – all men mentioned are Calvinists who did not hold to limited atonement. He is putting proof of this in a book to be published. He mentions signers of Dordt who rejected limited atonement. He says we don’t know this because we’re reading popular high Calvinists who are gatekeepers rather than the original sources.
He mentions reading the minutes of Westminster and the debates of limited atonement. He challenges us to read the primary sources rather than Piper and MacArthur. He mentions the Calvinists past did not hold to “strict” particularism. This is the first time he’s inserted the qualification “strict.”
John Owen’s view has always been the minority view in history. He mentions Gottschalk as the first person to hold to limited atonement and he was condemned by three French councils.
Calvin’s rejection of limited atonement
On Romans 5:18, Hebrews 9:25, John 3:16, Acts 1-7, sermon on Isaiah 53:6
On John 3:16 he seems to think that quoting Calvin here goes against limited atonement, but he doesn’t quote the part where Calvin says only the elect will be saved. Nor the last line of the commentary: “redemption, in the order of time, goes before salvation.”
It is Allen’s contention that no one goes from a four-point Calvinism to hyper-Calvinism. He claims that this is a five-point problem. He didn’t have time to argue this today though.
Westminster Assembly – Henry Scudder, pp. 279 Walk in Peace.. quote that Christ’s sacrifice is enough for all men. That all men might become salvable by Christ.
Arrowsmith – Chain of Princples – all of the world.
Baxter -Christ died for all, though not equally.
Bunyan – Death of Christ extends to all, then points to John 3:16.
Edwards – Christ in a sense died for all and to redeem Christians and by the whole world. Freedom of the Will, Vol. 1, page 88. Redemption accomplished is unlimited.
Categories of high Calvinism, amyraldianism, arminianism – it’s wrong to have only these three categories. He quotes Richard Muller about the amyraldian view is consistent with Dordt.
Here he mentions Bryne and David Ponter to read all their quotes of four-pointers in history.
All and world texts
Owen on Death of Death denies Jesus has any love for the non-elect on Vol. 10, point 24. He hangs Owen’s entire case on this belief. Hypers get this idea from Owen and others.
D.A. Carson who is wavering on limited atonement due to exegetical problems. Christ died for the whole world. Here’s Carson on the atonement.
Dabney – world in John 3:16 does not mean elect.
JC Ryle – Allen loves him, especially, on holiness. Ought to say God loves you and Christ died for you.
Limited atonement is built on a faulty foundation and should be rejected. Calvinists make a negative inference fallacy when
Robert Raymond – a hyper-Calvinist. Gives a logical, long quote.
Sam Waldron – In Calvinism: A Southern Baptist Dialogue the free offer of the Gospel does not require that we tell people that Christ “died for you.” No where in the Bible is the Gospel proclaimed that Christ died for “you.”
Opposition to Waldron – 1 Cor. 15:3 – Paul that Christ died for their sins. Acts 3:26 on Peter. Luke 22:20-21 where Jesus states His blood was shed for Judas. Calvin says Judas was at the table.
Go to www.Baptisttheology.org to read Dr. Allen’s arguments interacting with Dr. Nettles and others.
Mentions Ligon Duncan approving a dissertation that’s against limited atonement.
Quotes Tom Ascol on desiring all people to be saved, but God shows two wills. Quoting from the almost Caner debate.
James White is a hyper-Calvinist by the definition of Phil Johnson. Oct. 10 on the Dividing Line White denied God wills the salvation of all men which is against Tom Ascol.
Some evangelize out of obedience of God’s command not because God’s desire the salvation of all men.
Mark Dever leaves two crucial things out of the book The Gospel and Personal Evangelism: Christ died for all men as motivation for evangelism and God universal saving will.
A consistent five-point Calvinist cannot say “Christ died for you.”
Nathan Finn mentioned.
Invitations and altar calls
SBC professor said we do not need and should not extend and evangelistic invitation. As it is an attempt to manipulate the sovereignty of God.
Quotes MacArthur when he was at Woodstock saying “Jesus was a Calvinist.”
Allen has the largest library of Calvinists than any of his fellow professors.
Closing with “Five point Calvinism is a move away from the Gospel and not towards it.”
Mark
tagged as Arminianism, calvinism, First Baptist Woodstock, hyper-calvinism, John 3:16 Conference, Southern Baptist, TULIP in Arminianism,Baptist,calvinism,Church Issues,Gospel,Southern Baptist,theology
About the author
Mark is a Christian, husband and father. He is a businessman by day working to support his family while attending seminary in the off hours as he prepares for vocational ministry.
{ 294 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Dear Robert: We are all wanting in the smarts dept, if the truth be told. I am constantly astounded at my own obtuseness. That’s long hand for just plain dumb, unthinking. Like Thomas Aquinas I am an ox, a rather dull witted person. And Bro. Stuart is not such a bad fellow. Who knows, he might be the next Whitefield? God has a wonderful sense of humor. Just look at Paul the preacher and Saul the persecuter. I think we are all going to be utterly displeased with our own lacks and utterly dumbfounded by the fact that God could love such sorry sinners as we are so much that He would give His only begotten Son to die for us!!!! Was it John Wesley who said of a certain sinner, “If God would save him, he would never despair of any one ever again.” And was it John Newton who said, “Since God saved me, I have never despaired of any one.” We need the attitude of Whitefield who said, “The Lord would even save the devil’s rejects.” He was rebuked for such a statement and at that time received a note from a couple of fallen women who had dared to hope in Christ after his message and he showed the note to his critics. As one preacher said, “God can strike a straight blow with a crooked stick.” Ha! In this world there ain’t no other kind. We are all crooked sticks in theology, experience, practice. We are all wanting in every department, and yet the Lord loves us and receives our service if we are His. I think our service is much like when my sister and I use to make mud pies for grandma down on the sharecropper’s cotton farm in Arkansas. Grandma would pretend to at those mud pies like they were the greatest things on earth. I just hope the Lord considers my service half as well as grandma considered my mud pies. His approval means more than the whole world, and Bro. Stuart probably needs and wants that approval just as much as you and me. In fact, if he is truly saved, I am sure of it. Sometimes I utterly despair that anything I do could possibly receive our Lord’s commendation like the woman of Mt. 15 or the Roman Centurion. I would bet, if I were a betting man (and I am not. I despise gambling), that bro. Stuart feels the same way. Well,o you Bro. Stuart
Dr. Willingham,
I’m with you on Stuart, we of all people (Calvinists) should realize that nobody understands without God doing the eye opening…and I didn’t mean to sound so harsh…it was wrong of me.
I guess I’m just still thinking about the senseless exchange we had on this combox…
It all comes down to trusting God for the understanding.
Have a good day…
Soli Deo Gloria….
With respect to the Passage John 6:35-45 I lately started another blog to Combat the Doctrins of Grace. I started with this passage showing the reformed misuse of this text to establish calvinstic doctrine. Link provided here.
Check out!
A Helmet,
Nice…”To combat the doctrines of Grace”
How aptly said.
What makes you think that you can combat that passage when you couldn’t effectively do it here?
I’ll check the link anyway.
bob
Hi Robert,
well, you insisted that it was actually off-topic. Never mind.
A Helmet, sorry to hear that.
“reformed misuse of this text to establish calvinstic doctrine” – I know that I and other reformed believers here are not trying to estlablish any doctrine of ourselves, nor of Calvin. God has established the doctrine in His Word – these brothers are just understanding and communicating what He has revealed.
Darrin,
I went to Helmet’s blog to see what he had and truthfully, I can’t figurne out what his argument is.
I can’t figure out what he’s getting at.
Oh well.
bob
Hi Darrin and Rober,
But isn’t it strange that no reformed believer ever answers this simple question: What does it mean “to hear and learn from the Father” according to John 6:45? What is the message there, what is the content of the teaching here?
Certainly it is not 1+1=2, but there must be something taught.
Knowing what this is is absolutely vital, because it causes someone to believe in Christ. So we must know what the message is there.
Greetings
-a helmet
a helmet,
What do you mean no reformed believer ever answers your question? Have you read any reformed commentaries on John for your answer?
What do you think of this answer?
This explains the preceding verse. God teaches a man to know himself, that, finding his need of salvation, he may flee to lay hold on the hope which his heavenly Father has set before him in the Gospel. God draws men by his love, and by showing them what his love has done for them. Fear repels, but love attracts. He who is ever preaching the terrors of the law, and representing God as a vindictive judge, will never bring sinners to him. They are afraid of this terrible God: but they love him, who so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him might not perish, but have everlasting life.
Mark
Also, from a small piece of Matthew Henry’s analysis of these verses:
“How shall those who are given to Christ be brought to him? Two things are to be done in order to it: a. Their understandings shall be enlightened; this is promised, v. 45, 46. It is written in the prophets, who spoke of these things before, And they shall be all taught of God; this we find, Isa. 54:13, and Jer. 31:34. They shall all know me. Note, (a.) In order to our believing in Jesus Christ, it is necessary that we be taught of God; that is, [a.] That there be a divine revelation made to us, discovering to us both what we are to believe concerning Christ and why we are to believe it. There are some things which even nature teaches, but to bring us to Christ there is need of a higher light. [b.] That there be a divine work wrought in us, enabling us to understand and receive these revealed truths and the evidence of them. God, in giving us reason, teaches us more than the beasts of the earth; but in giving us faith he teaches more than the natural man. Thus all the church’s children, all that are genuine, are taught of God; he hath undertaken their education.
(b.) It follows then, by way of inference from this, that every man that has heard and learned of the Father comes to Christ, v. 45. [a.] It is here implied that none will come to Christ but those that have heard and learned of the Father. We shall never be brought to Christ but under a divine conduct; except God by his grace enlighten our minds, inform our judgments, and rectify our mistakes, and not only tell us that we may hear, but teach us, that we may learn the truth as it is in Jesus, we shall never be brought to believe in Christ.”
Strange…no Arminian ever answers the question…what type of socks did John the baptist wear??
Are they afraid to answer?
Frankly Helmet…I still don’t get what’s significant about that question concerning the reformed exegesis of the passage?
Helmet,
Ok…so I didn’t see the significance. I went ahead and checked out the verse and noted the context.
No surprise; every one of them mentions that the “learning” is synonymous with “believing” “coming” etc.
Here is what Baker, JFB, and the Bible Knowledge Commentary have to say about it:
Baker
LXX Isaiah 54:13
καὶ πάντας τοὺς υἱούς σου διδακτοὺς θεοῦ.
John 6:45
καὶ ἔσονται πάντες διδακτοὶ θεοῦ.
In the LXX the quoted words are in the accusative as object of the verb θήσω; in the passage from the Fourth Gospel the words form a complete sentence. The idea, however, is the same.
Here again the divine and the human activities in the work of salvation are juxtaposed, for immediately after “And they shall all be taught of God” there follows, Everyone who listens to the Father and learns of him will come to me. In this connection, however, it should be emphasized that in showing how sinners are saved Scripture never merely places side by side the divine and the human factors, predestination and responsibility, God’s teaching and man’s listening. On the contrary, it is always definitely indicated that it is God who takes the initiative and who is in control from start to finish.
It is God who draws before man comes; it is he that teaches before man can listen and learn. Unless the Father draws, no one can come. That is the negative side. The positive is: everyone who listens to the Father and learns of him will come. Grace always conquers; it does what it sets out to do. In that sense it is irresistible. The absolute character of the cooperation between Father and Son, which, in turn, is based upon unity of essence, is stressed once more as in so many other passages in this Gospel: he who listens to the Father (not merely in the outward sense but so that he actually learns of him) comes to the Son, “will come to me.” Such a person will embrace Christ by a true and living faith. This listening and learning, however, does not indicate that any human being would ever be able to comprehend God (or to have an immediate knowledge of him apart from his revelation in Christ). Such fullness of knowledge is the prerogative of the Son. Hence, we read: Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who comes from God, he has seen the Father. (On this see also 1:18. On the use of παρά in 6:46 cf. 1:14.)
——————————————
JFB
all taught of God—not by external revelation merely, but by internal illumination, corresponding to the “drawing” of Jn 6:44.
Every man therefore, &c.—that is, who hath been thus efficaciously taught of Him.
cometh unto me—with absolute certainty, yet in the sense above given of “drawing”; that is, “As none can come to Me but as divinely drawn, so none thus drawn shall fail to come.”
Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., Fausset, A. R., Brown, D., & Brown, D. (1997). A commentary, critical and explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments. On spine: Critical and explanatory commentary. (Jn 6:45). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
————————————–
BKC
6:45. In support of this doctrine of salvation by God’s grace, Jesus cited the Old Testament. The quotation, They will all be taught by God, is from the Prophets, probably Isaiah 54:13, though Jeremiah 31:34 has the same thought. This “teaching” of God refers to His inner work that disposes people to accept the truth about Jesus and respond to Him. Everyone who listens to and learns from God will come to and believe in Jesus.
Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-c1985). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (2:296). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
—————————————
That’s just a sample of what they have to say about it. I could go on and on but I’m left wondering…what’s the significance again?
Wow! You all can get on a subject and just worry it to death. Personally, I would rather look at having some fun and doing something beneficial in the process. Think of how the believers in TULIP, Predestination and even Reprobation were instrumental in the First and Second Great Awakenings and in the beginnings of the Great Century of Missions. Brother Stuart much earlier was talking about heresy and how all this was so utterly false, and I wanted to lie down and howl with laughter. God was please to use such sorry people who believed such things to effectuate the events mentioned above. And by the way I do not claimed to be Reformed. I claim to believe in Sovereign Grace, because I am a Baptist and, tho I am not a Landmarker, our predecessors in the Faith were dying for these doctrines as well as baptism on profession of faith and symbolic communion before Luther ever posted his 95 theses and even before he or Calvin was ever born. Actually limited atonement is like the mathematical equation that has an inverse funtion. To put it anoher way, it is paradoxical. The woman got down and worshipped, when she heard Jesus say to His disciples, “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” When he spoke of inability, depravity, and reprobation, she agreed and admitted that that term well described her. She even used it to make her case, saying, “the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” I still think God is full of good humor, and He is better than we expect. His most negative teachings are the way to the greatest joy and highest goals, e.g., “great is thy faith.” Here we might be on the verge of THE THIRD GREAT AWAKENING, THE ONE WHICH WINS THE WHOLE WORLD IN ONE GENERATION FOR CHRIST AND PERHAPS EVEN FO A THOUSAND GENERATIONS. We ought to be happy, joyful, winsome, charming, spiritual, compassionate. Yep, all these teachings ar wonderfully irresistible, utterly compelling in the freest sense of the word. They produced religious liberty, union of Separates and Regulars, getting General Baptists to become Regular Baptists and become evangelistic and missionary, establishing educational institutions to train preachers. Ironic is it not that the Father of Southern Baptist Missions, should state:”Presdestination is in the Bible and you had better preach it?” O by the way God has a delightful sense of humor in history. Finney attends the ministry of a calvinist and gets converted on his own and gets the calvinist to become more arminian like in his theology. Then Finney is instrumental in the conversion of A.H. Strong and his family, and Strong is at least a four point calvinist. Look you folks give one another room to think and work on these things on one’s own. I had some little influence on a fellow named Spurgeon, a friend of mine in college and a distant relative of C.H.. I told him grace was irresistible. He didn’t believe it. He won a woman to Christ, who told him, “O it was so wonderful that I couldn’t resist it.” He said when she said that he thought of what I said. It didn’t change his mind then (circa 1965-66), He still hadn’t changed his mind, circa 2003-3. But when I called him 1/2007, he said, “Where have you been, I have been trying to get a hold of you.” To make a long story short. He had come to the conclusion that grace was irresistible, because it was so wonderful. He also found out that he was a relative of C.H. so one genealogy researcher said. He visited Metropolitan Tabernacle while doing summer work at Oxford. Ain’t God great. That’s enough to shout about. Be sweet, gentle, in meekness instructing those who oppose themselves. Sovereign Grace is going to win in the end. The brother so opposed today, might be the Whitefield of tomorrow, but if he is the Wesley, remember it as an old Wesleyan exhorter that cried to Mr. Spurgeon, “Young man, you are the most miserable looking young man. Look to Jesus.” Spurgeon said, “I looked and was save.” An Arminian is to blame for one of the great Reformed, Calvinistic Baptist preachers of all time. I tell you God has a sense of humor or we could not laugh. At one time I knew of many cases like that, but such knowledge is beginning to take its place in the memory bins of forgetfulness.
Dr. W,
We know. We aren’t angry with Stuart or anyone else. We also know that our great arguments won’t win Stu or anyone else.
But (and I can only speak for myself) I love the Lord. Period. I HATE anyone to preach something that demeans Him. Period.
Before I understood, that is before GOD OPENED MY EYES I was oblivious to this subject…I ASSUMED that the whole shebang was some sort of a cooperation between me and God…why not?
Then I accidentally read Romans.
Since that time, I’ve had a deeper apprectiation for what God has done for me, I’ve seen it in a different light…one that elevates him, gives Him the credit that He deserves.
I know that I get a little worked up and that’s a personal fault of mine, I’ll work on it, but when people make statements diametrically opposed to the truth…I won’t stand for it.
PS: I’ll quote you:
Personally, I would rather look at having some fun and doing something beneficial in the process.
Uh…this IS fun…
Hello johnMark,
Thanks for resonding. If this cursive text that you provide is the content of the teaching of John 6:45 then we can do the following:
1) Mark this text:
This explains the preceding verse. God teaches a man to know himself, that, finding his need of salvation, he may flee to lay hold on the hope which his heavenly Father has set before him in the Gospel. God draws men by his love, and by showing them what his love has done for them. Fear repels, but love attracts. He who is ever preaching the terrors of the law, and representing God as a vindictive judge, will never bring sinners to him. They are afraid of this terrible God: but they love him, who so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him might not perish, but have everlasting life.
2) Right mouse click and copy
3) Open an email client
4) Right mouse click and paste
5) Send this text to everybody who’s email address you can fill into the recipients list. Especially include the addresses of all non-christians you know.
So send this email to all unbelivers who you know. Upon reading this very text, they must necessarily all convert to Christianity.
Really? Of course not! Imagine Muslim apologists like Ahmet Deedat or Shabir Ally, read your lines that utter the words “his only begotten son” – will they say “Uh, God has an only son, all this information emailed here is irrefutable” and then become christians?
Hardly.
Will they, after reading your email say: “This text is irresistible. It is an irrefutable conviction, now I am convinced that Jesus Christ is the son of God!!” ??
Hardly!
Imagine atheists like B. Ehrman. Upon reading your email will he become a christian? Hardly.
Does this email inevitably cause its readers to convert? No way!
So is this email text the trigger, that causese a person to come to Christ? No!
So is this email the content of the teaching that I was talking about? By no means! For “Everyone who learns from the father (=the content!) comes to me”. Everyone will definitely come.
So what about your text, which is supposed to be the content of what converts learn according to verse 45? It is only much talk about the content, about the teaching, but not the content itself ! Do you understand that?
This cursive text of yours above, is NOT the precious “access data to heaven”! It is only talking about this precious access data! About, about about.
But you do not acutally provide the content itself, the “password” so to speak.
Another example: Suppose there is a password that goes like this:
fre4_abc
Now imagine someone asks: What is the password?
And you say something like this:
This password is made up of the symbols of the alphabet. It has security level 3. Moreover it contains also digits, that is, symbols of the set 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. And it includes also special characters.
So, did you answer the question, what the password is?
By no means! You just said something about the password, but by no means does this show the password itself.The answer would rather have to be:
“The password ist this: fre4_abc ”
Then everyone would be very disburdened.
—-
Perhaps now the problem has become clear.
So either you are holding the content behind your back and talk about it without actually ever showing it, or you do not possess this knowledge at all.
Greetings
-a helmet
Helmet,
Again…you completely miss the point of the passage…forest for the trees.
Not only are you going on and on over nothing, it’s getting old….
What’s the SUBJECT of John 6:35? From the TEXT ITSELF?
Is the SUBJECT “some secret knowledge” that one has to have? or is “hearing/learning” another way of saying “coming/believing”?
to me it looks like in your zeal to “stump the calvinists” you’ve missed the whole thing.
I’m not going to waste much more time on this one…it’s just not that interesting and it seems to not have a real point.
Robert,
did you understand what I wrote to johnMark?
Is the SUBJECT “some secret knowledge” that one has to have? or is “hearing/learning” another way of saying “coming/believing”?
“hearing/learning” is the precondition to “coming/believing”. It precedes the coming/believing. They are not the same thing.
Note: “Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comest to Me.”.
Clearly, the learning is a prerequisite, the cause, to faith. So and this is only “secret” as long as you do not say what it is! You can make it public. If you don’t know what the knowledge is, then this proves that you haven’t got it. It is rather odd to say you have learned something, without knowing what.
So if you cannot pronounce, articulate the content of John 6:45 then your faith is dead. It cannot be shown.
Greetings
-a helmet
A Helmet:
Quote:
So if you cannot pronounce, articulate the content of John 6:45 then your faith is dead. It cannot be shown.
This is the premise that you HAVE YET TO PROVE. You keep asserting it without proof.
Yes, I did understand.
bob
Robert,
You wrote to a helmet:
Isn’t this always the case with anti-Calvinists and their “exegesis”? It’s why I find it frustrating to dialog with those who deny the meaning of the text. Perhaps God will grace me with greater patience.
Grace and Peace…
abclay
Abclay,
You are right. I find that “on the whole” Synergists of all stripes look to things OTHER than exegesis as their primary way of understanding the text itself.
Also, yes; I too get impatient and it’s something that’s wrong, and I have to work on to correct.
May God grant us all patience in presenting the truth of the Doctrines of Grace because “there but for the grace of God , go I”
And we, more than anyone should get that.
Robert,
So if you cannot pronounce, articulate the content of John 6:45 then your faith is dead. It cannot be shown.
This is the premise that you HAVE YET TO PROVE. You keep asserting it without proof.
——————————————
That’s simple. Here we go.
“What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but has no works? Can faith save him?” (James 2:14)
Robert, you are in such a situation now as well. You claim that your faith is of any use.
“Show me the faith by your works!” is James’ challenge to all professing believers.
Can you show your faith at all? Can you? How do you show your faith?
You must now show the content of the teaching of John 6:45. You must explain the drawing. You must show, that you have been drawn. That is crucial. So James brings us to the point I have been talking about here all the time.
You must SHOW your faith!! How do you do that? You must use the Logos (Word or God, Power of God) to reveal the content of John 6:45.
Suppose someone needs the bread of life for everlasting life. And a white wedding garment to enter the lamb’s wedding banquet. And the water of life to drink. Now Calvinists say: “Go in peace, ask God if he might graciously meet these needs for you.”
Calvinists say “I eat the bread of life. As a proof, I give you Manna! ” Doesn’t profit much, does it?
So can calvinsitic faith save? Can “saving faith” save anyone? BY NO MEANS! Why? Because saving faith CAN NEVER BE SHOWN!
Do you understand that? So-called saving faith is intrinsically inscrutable. It is by nature the very opposite of anything demonstrable. Saving faith cannot be domonstrated at all.
So you have two options, Robert:
1) Either you admit that you have not the slightest idea whether you have ever been drawn, and admit that you have not the slightest idea whether you are not just a deluded hypocrite and admit that your “genuine faith” is just smoke and dust
or
2) You stand condemned, heading for the lamb’s wedding banquet without any wedding clothing! Will you be able to explain “how were you drawn?”, when you’ll be asked at the judgment?
a helmet,
What are you talking about? You come to my blog and belittle my comment that was directly addressing yours? Keep it up and I will ban you.
If you would have read your own question and my response where I asked specifically about your question, you could have easily seen the *what* I was responding to.
I was laying some ground work to show how your first assertion about reformed folks not answering John 6:45. I asked you about that quote to see where you stood. The quote I gave was from a commentary by Adam Clarke, an Arminian.
And why are you proof-texting James to try and show what John means? You quote James and then say You must now show the content of the teaching of John 6:45. Well, I’ve got news for you. James is not the content of the teaching of John.
Mark
A Helmet,
what IN THE WORLD are you talking about???
What IN THE WORLD does James’ discussion on fruitless Christians have to do with John 6???
All you’ve shown so far is your inability to understand sound biblical exegesis.
PLEASE…PLEASE…get real.
Whoops…Johnmark beat me to it!
Hi johnMark,
I was laying some ground work to show how your first assertion about reformed folks not answering John 6:45. I asked you about that quote to see where you stood. The quote I gave was from a commentary by Adam Clarke, an Arminian.
Okay, I do not agree with that quote. Because, it is not an “irresistible” information, right? You seem to agree that this text cannot serve as an answer to the question what message is transported by the illumination according to John 6:45. That was my point. But why did you quote from an Arminian anyway, if you do not agree with that? But never mind.
You quote James and then say You must now show the content of the teaching of John 6:45.
James’ test is as follows: “Show me your faith by works”
Now, how do you do that? Note, if you show the content of the teaching I’m talking about, then you thereby show your faith, because that teaching inevitably leads the others to faith. It is the “drawing”. You thereby demonstrate that you were drawn. On the other hand, if you cannot explain the drawing, you are obviously one of those who were “drawn by themselves”.
Well, I’ve got news for you. James is not the content of the teaching of John.
It is vice versa. In the judgment situation described in James you’ll have to describe the content of the teaching of John! Show me your faith That’s vital.
That is elaborated more thoroughly in my new blog “Combating the Doctrines Of Grace”. You’re welcome to comment there.
-a helmet
My side is hurting… before continuing this discussion with helmet, could we examine the possible outcomes? It has already been established that his hermeneutic is not legitimate.
It is almost like arguing with a KJV onlyist.
I tend to agree, abclay. There are probably more thoughts we all have regarding these verses, but it’s almost impossible to tell what is relevant because of this oddly incredible communication barrier. It’s as if we all and a helmet are speaking two different languages. I wish we could help answer his concerns directly, but until he makes clear just what those are, and what his point is, we may just be wasting time.
I apologize for my offensive communication style yesterday. I realize that this must have sounded very harsh. To johnMark: I used this email-example to get my point straight, not in any way to belittle you comment.
To Robert: I’m not calling you a hypocrite nor am I making a judgment. Please forgive me for this “forensic” style I used and which I’m not entitled to. I’m ending this here now, but you guys are welcome to my blog.
Greetings
-a helmet
A helmet,
No problems. We can disagree on these things but I don’t take it personally.
bob
Sirs: Inability requires irresistible power. Spiritual deadness requires irresistible power. Darkness requires light, irresistible light. Slavery requires irresistible power to set one free from its bondage, especially the slavery of sin. A heart transplant requires what one cannot perform for one’s self. As an atheist I saw Jesus knocking at door just like it says in Rev.3:20 and like the description of 3:17 as J.P. Boyce suggested in a sermon on the text I could not and would not open the door. Then something changed my mind. Was it the Lord opening my heart for me as He did for Lydia (Acts 16:14)? I consider that whole affair an example of irresistible grace, for it sure knocked my atheism into a cocked hat as the old saying goes. That night as I prayed I felt a burden lifted off of my heart and then I was crying tears of joy. I think the Lord’s irresistible power can lie in an open hand extended in friendship, compassion, love. It is hard to resist a hand put forth to be shaken. Whosoever can be more irresistible than the predestination. Interestingly enough, Dr. Eusedin in his introduction to his translation of William Ames’ Marrow of Divinity declared that “predestination is an invitation to begin one’s spiritual pilgrimage.” Particular redemption/limited atonement was used by our Lord as an irresisitible invitation to the woman of Canaan in Mt.15:24,25 to worship. Ha! I laugh! What a blessing. God is sure enough bigger, better, whatever than anything in this world or in me. In me is death, sin, hell, but His grace is greater, They abound; He superabounds with grace. Such favor, such a salvation, is so wonderfully, it just melts the heart of stone, wins over all resistance. Such is the theology of the Great Awakenings and of the beginnings of the Great Century of Missions. Get ready, Brethre, I feel it coming in my bones. I just hope I get to see it.
Great new blog. Check it out!
http://fromonewecanjudgetherest.blogspot.com/
Hi JohnMark and gang,
I would invite you all to follow the discussion I am having with Frank Turk of Pyromaniacs on his debate blog. I believe you will appreciate the questions and answers that are being given.
http://q-and-a-blog.blogspot.com/
Pastor Wood
Sirs: No on seems to inclined to discuss paradoxical intervnion. If human counelors can use such technique then surely God must have anticipated it. And He did. Besides,if a mathematical equation can have an inverse function, then ideas, doctrines, etc. can. So limited atonement or “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel” could be the invitation of the greatest extent and the greatest impact. You fellows waste a lot of verbiage on due to your narrow methodologies. TULIP along with Predestination and Reprobation are mot intensive evangelistic invitations than even Whosoever will. Ideological inverse functions are more compelling in reverse psychology (pop view) than are straight forward “gotchas of sweet helpless love”. As one fellow says universal atonement folks preach an atonement more lmited than do limited atonement preachers. Truth is, the partcular approach depends on the individual’s situation and need. The paralysis of analysis has seized so many today. We need the synthetical, digital,intellectual, spiritual, two pole approach of the Bible. Jesus not only preached limited atonement to the woman of Canaan, he preached it to His neighbors in Nazareth by speaking of Elijah not being sent to any widow in Israel but to a widow of Sarepta a city of Sidon and Elisha did not heal a single Israelite of leprosy, but he did heal Naaman the Syrian. After that He never got to the issue of Total Depravity and Reprobation, because His neighbors immediately proved that that was what they were (totally depraved and reprobate).
Dr. J…
That’s way to high-falutin’ for me…I’m not that smart.
I’ll just stick with the easy stuff…
Dear Robert:
You don’t really have the option of saying it is to high-falutin’ for you. Jesus said, Mt.10:16: “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” Our faith has suffered enough from the romantic, emotional, anti-intellectual perspective, so much so, in fact, that now we ignore the real meaning of repent, saying, “It is turning around.” The truth is that it is a change of mind based upon reflection; it is a turning as a result of thinking through what God has revealed to us and about us and then being fully persuaded we change our outlook, turn our lives around. Also your service cannot be worth baloney, if you do not use your mind. The Bible calls fo “your logical service.”(Roms.12:1) (reasonable service could be rendered rational service, but I choose logical because the term in the GNT could easily be translated by almost a virtual transliteration of the term for logical. The word of God was written for the mind. If some one says the heart as I am sure they will, I simply point ou that God chooses to reach the heart, the inner essence of man by way of his mind. That is where the doctrine of total depravity establishes the doctrine of man’s dignity. God dignifies our conduct by addressing us in a human way, mind to mind. Thus, He uses human language (nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc.), the rules of logic, empirical and experiential evidence as well as intuitive. The full court press for the heart comes by way of the mind.
Dr. James W,
I was just having fun with you..
On a serious note…I love your passion for God and his word….
Dear Robert: I am not adverse to a little fun. In fact, we all should take some time out and laugh. I think the crowd must have roared with laughter, when Jesus said, “First, get that big house beam out of your eye, and then you will be able to see how to get the speck out of your brother’s eye.” Healing, spiritual healing, is wholesome, beneficial, upliftng, inspiring,elevating, engaging, arousing, exciting, thrilling, ecstatic, stirring, moving, happy power. And why not? The Holy Spirit of God is the source and conduit and essence of such a benefit. That is what is coming upon the earth in its hour of greatest trial (Rev.3:10). Life is going to get plumb mind-boggling for the great wonders of Heaven descending upon the earth in its invisible and yet wondrous and wonderful presence. The theology which that presence shall attend could well be called THE DIVINE PARADOXICAL INTERVENTION, THE IDEOLOGICAL EQUATION WITH AN INVERSE FUNCTION. EACH TRUTH (PREDESTINATION, TOTAL DEPRAVITY, UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION, LIMITED ATONEMENT, IRRESISTIBLE GRACE, PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS, AND REPROBATION) IS AN INVITATION TO TRUST AN PRAISE GOD OUT OF GRATITUDE. EACH TRUTH ESTABLISHES THE DIGNITY OF MAN AND SHOWS GOD’S RESPECT FOR THE HUMAN PERSONALITY. CRAZY, HUH!
I get really excited when I think of how healing these divinely revealed truths are. The God who they reveal and convey to our hearts is beyond comprehension in His grace and love to falling mankind.
Dr.Jw…
amen.
I get so excited over what I discover in His word and what he’s done for me…
I wish I could retain 1/10th of what I’ve studied…
bob
when i was searching google is where i met this ministry and we have been looking ministry can partnership with our ministry in kenya so that we can work together to build the body of christ.I.m independet in ministry here in kenya saving jehova God. I was called in 1989 when i was working in the govment of kenya i stopped working my wife she was a secondary teacher we disided to save jesus christ who is our savior.Plse you can view our webside for the ministry http/www.gmikenya.com come we work together. Thank you
Since I wrote my last blog here on 3/30, I have had a ht. attack (day before mother’s day)(Sat.) (got out of hosp. Weds. after mothr’s day), preached our son’s 10th anniversary (5?31), preached an ordination sermon in the Sandy Creek Assn (6/6), preached a prayer meeting at the church where we are members (6/24) fo our pastor (gone to convention), and will meet with a pulpit committee on (7/19). Please pray for us. Also will meet with someone on 8/4 regarding teaching course on Sovereign Grace Evangelism. some believers in Sovereign Grace seem to think they can just sat down and wait on God to save people. They need to read Spurgeon’s Evening Devotions for 8/6 and 12/24. In speaking wih Rev. Drew Garner today (7/16), we both expressed th sense and feeling that the Thrid Great Awakening is near; it maybe upon us shortly. So I have prayed for 36 yrs, and so another has prayed for over 50 yrs. God grant it is my prayer for the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ who died for a number no man can number (so Spurgeon who believed and preached particular redemption and despised a general atonement – his words- that redeemed no one without adding man’s power to it). And he was won to Christ by an Arminian as was William Kiffin as was Strong, and then there were those Sovereign Grace ministers who won people who became Arminian preachers, e.g., Whitefield in death winning Benjamin Randall, founder of Free Will Baptists in New England. God has a sense of humor. Remember the patriarch named LAUGHTER, WE PRONOUNCE HIS NAME AS ISAAC. I actually have a friend who was named Isaac and who was raised an orthodox Jew who got converted and became a Baptist preacher. His wife won Margaret Mitchell (author of Gone With the Wind) to Christ shortly before she was killed by a car. His wife also won the man who supervised her torture in World War II (it lasted for 8 hrs. a day, 7 days a week, for 2 mos. and 28 days.). God has been doing, is doing, and will yet do even even greater things fr the glory of His Son, and He will use us in that service.
.-= Dr. James Willingham´s last blog ..The Climax of the Reformation =-.
Dr. Willingham,
Welcome back…sorry to hear about your heart attack…glad you’re up and around though.
I too see the extremism of the “let’s just sit because God’s sovereign” thing…
Although i do NOT witness my faith as much as I should, I see that it’s the right thing to do
.-= Robert´s last blog ..Rick Warren speaking at the ISNA…ahh Ricky…did you forget something? =-.
Dr. Willingham,
I’m glad the Lord left you with us for a while longer. Glad you are feeling better. I did pray for you for your preaching at Sandy Creek as you asked.
Funny, the how the Gospel saves us in spite of doctrine of particular or universal atonement. And in spite of ourselves.
It’s a shame that folks think and (not) act as such. It is because of the very reason that God is sovereign that motivates evangelism.
Thank you Mark and Robert for your kind wishes. I pray God will help you fellows to become the souls of responsibility and soul-winners par excellence. Also pray for me as I will be speaking with someone regarding a course on Sovereign Grace Evangelism. That is Aug. 4. Can’t say who, etc., but just pray. By the way, did you all know that in his address at the Spurgeon Centenary in England, Geo. W. Truett commented on how Calvinism pressed down upon th brow of man the sense of responsibility. Some of the most responsible people the world has ever seen were the Pilgrims, Puritans, and Baptists of England and America in the 1600s & 1700s. It was these people who had the blessings of the First and Second Great Awakenings and who initiated the Great Century of Missions. A Third Great Awakening might be just around the corner. I was speaking with a fellow by phone today who said that he felt that it might be. Of course, we must exert ourselves in prayer and other labors, if we would have any hope of such a visitation. After all, the Lord said, he would yet be inquired of by Israel to do it for them. God grant you all the grace to pray and plead the promises that Jonathan Edwards recorded in his Humble Attempt, the work that inspired Carey an others to launch the great missionar movement and even others in America who prayed for and witnessed the Second Great Awakening.
.-= Dr. James Willingham´s last blog ..The Climax of the Reformation =-.
← Previous Comments
{ 3 trackbacks }