The obligatory “cussing pastor makes Calvinism cool again” post
posted at 5:55 pm on January 10, 2009 by Allahpundit
We’re tossing grenades over it in Headlines, naturally, so I thought I’d move it to the front page for general consumption. Having watched a few of his videos on YouTube, I think the Times gave him a bad rap. For one thing, he didn’t curse. For another, they overplay the machismo angle. There are indeed preachers whose mission is to re-masculinize Christianity, but that theme was conspicuously absent from the eight or so clips I saw.
Or maybe I’m just watching the wrong clips.
God called Driscoll to preach to men — particularly young men — to save them from an American Protestantism that has emasculated Christ and driven men from church pews with praise music that sounds more like boy-band ballads crooned to Jesus than “Onward Christian Soldiers.” What bothers Driscoll — and the growing number of evangelical pastors who agree with him — is not the trope of Jesus-as-lover. After all, St. Paul tells us that the Church is the bride of Christ. What really grates is the portrayal of Jesus as a wimp, or worse. Paintings depict a gentle man embracing children and cuddling lambs. Hymns celebrate his patience and tenderness. The mainstream church, Driscoll has written, has transformed Jesus into “a Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ,” a “neutered and limp-wristed popular Sky Fairy of pop culture that . . . would never talk about sin or send anyone to hell.”
If you want to hear him discuss masturbation or oral sex, poke around here. The Times gives the impression that he’s some sort of heretic or shock jock, but every lesson I saw was entirely conventional. More interesting are these two vids. The first deals with predestination, which seems more mundane as he explains it than I thought it would be. God chooses the Christian, he insists, the Christian doesn’t choose God, but since the evidence of who’s “chosen” appears to be how devoutly one practices the faith, the distinction seems mostly semantic. In the second clip, we get into who’s “really” a Christian and who’s not. He justifies making fun of Mormons in yet another video, so I’m guessing they’re in the “not really” column.
Update: Actually, it’s not just semantic. Belated exit question: If God’s doing the choosing, how and when did he decide whom to save and whom to let burn?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Actually, you’re the only one tossing grenades, sweetheart.
baldilocks on January 10, 2009 at 5:58 PM
And using an unconventional method to lead young men to Christ is bad because…? I guess you can complain about anything if you want to.
I fail to see any victim in this. Can somebody help me out here?
Wino on January 10, 2009 at 6:00 PM
How do you justify any of the stuff in the Constitution, as an atheist? I mean, all of our rights are God-given, according to those 18th century minds. If there’s no God, then what’s the point of defending those rights?
jimmy the notable on January 10, 2009 at 6:00 PM
Always consider the source. :oP
DannoJyd on January 10, 2009 at 6:00 PM
Wacky Protestants…
JetBoy on January 10, 2009 at 6:02 PM
Masculinization of the church–ANY church–would be a Good Thing.
My Dad quit taking us to Mass after returning from Vietnam and getting puke sick of guitar-playing “Kumbayah” hippy music, even in the Air Force chapel on base.
I rediscovered the joy of attending Mass when I was a Recruit on Parris Island. The God worshipped there was a strong, masculine God, the “Lord of Hosts”. When we sang the “Battle Hymn of the Republic”, we sang it without the castrated “New Age” rendition of the song, shouting out “LET US DIE TO MAKE MEN FREE!” every Sunday. It was a motivating, affirming, and joyous celebration of a God who approved our chosen profession as warriors. Our chaplain was a Navy Lieutenant who’d graduated Parris Island in 1967 as a Marine Rifleman, and who had fought in Hue. There was a MAN.
Unfortunately, the civilian services I’ve attended have been milquetoast, guitar-playing, hand holding, warm fuzzy crapola.
quikstrike98 on January 10, 2009 at 6:03 PM
I hope the grenades don’t escalate to JDAMS,
or SLBM’s!Haha
canopfor on January 10, 2009 at 6:03 PM
HotAir DOES have a few Calvinists mixed among the participants. Of those that I have encountered, ColtsFan is one of the better read individuals. I’d be interested in hearing his take on this guy.
My collie says:
Of course, that particular principle, collie, is not necessarily unique to Calvinism.
CyberCipher on January 10, 2009 at 6:05 PM
You expect a resolution to predestination in the comments? It was a facade all along, you’re the eternal optomist.
VolMagic on January 10, 2009 at 6:05 PM
NB: The New Age version to which I refer has changed the verse:
“As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,”
to
“Let us live to make men free”.
I about retch every time I watch the Army choir at some Presidential event spout this emasculated version.
The difference is…contribution…versus commitment.
quikstrike98 on January 10, 2009 at 6:06 PM
That’s a mystery of God’s. This is the biggest problem I have with predestination. The notion of grace in Calvinism and Lutheranism is that it is prevenient and irresistible. So, how do you know if you’re one of the elect? You don’t–not really. As one who has received grace, you should be more inclined to follow Gods Will of your own volition rather than being coerced to do so, but again, there’s no guarantee.
For me, the notion that God has already chosen those to be saved bespeaks an arbitrariness regarding Him that I’m not too comfortable with as a Christian. I take more of an Erasmian view here in that I ascribe a slightly greater role to free will where God offers grace, but that ultimately it must be the individual’s decision whether to accept it or reject it. While the offer of grace is very powerful, one’s heart can be hardened to the point where it cannot penetrate. Hence, free will does play a role in my belief–in the end it’s a choice the individual must make for him or herself.
Matt Helm on January 10, 2009 at 6:08 PM
If I can ask a follow-up, why did God feel the need to create us in the first place, knowing that some of us would suffer for eternity?
RightOFLeft on January 10, 2009 at 6:11 PM
My biggest problem with Calvinists is this whole thing about the supposed “elect”…That Christ died only for the “elect”, and not for all men.
JetBoy on January 10, 2009 at 6:14 PM
Hey, I’m all for Christianity with teeth and b@lls, but this guy is into ‘carnal christian’ territory.
Calvinism breeds a horrendous entitlement mentality that comes with a get out of h3ll free card, too. This puts ‘em on tunnel vision par with the Muslims and their doctrine of ‘allah selects and protects whom he wills’ – everyone else is screwed.
Calvinists just need a good dose of Arminianism.
locomotivebreath1901 on January 10, 2009 at 6:14 PM
By the council of His own will, in eternity. A “when” question implies a temporal location, but the question is being asked of an atemporal event.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:14 PM
I think Christians were being way too dismissive of AP’s concern. It’s hard to think of anyone being so bad that they deserve eternal torment or that a loving God could stand by and watch you in agony for all eternity without stopping it.
Usually, if something is great to do you get a great reward for achieving it but nothing bad happens for not achieving it, or something is awful to do you get a great punishment for it but you don’t get a reward for not doing it (like murder). With Heaven and Hell, you have the biggest extremes of the carrot and stick at the same time. If Heaven is so great, why would we need Hell to motivate us towards it, and if Hell is so bad, why would we need the rewards of Heaven to motivate us away from it?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:17 PM
Certainly, saying he admires people who tell him he’s going to burn even though he won’t actually befriend people like that.
Isn’t that something like saying you admire Bin Laden for his passion?
Though I agree with Allah that nick’s response seemed malicious.
Esthier on January 10, 2009 at 6:20 PM
As a Calvinist, I’d say that the pleasures of Heaven and the pains of Hell, as well as the doing of good or the doing of evil, are immaterial to salvation. Salvation is a gift that humanity, in its “total depravity”, cannot achieve or even really desire except by God’s grace.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Christ died to show men the way to God. The elect are those that follow the way. Some men’s nature is such that they are unwilling to follow, so why would God act against their nature?
pedestrian on January 10, 2009 at 6:21 PM
And what in the world does that mean?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:22 PM
Because it’s not about rewards and punishment. If we accept that evil exists, then a utopia isn’t possible unless we can eradicate it. If completely destroying evil is impossible, then separating evil is the next best thing.
Esthier on January 10, 2009 at 6:22 PM
Didn’t he create their nature?
Esthier on January 10, 2009 at 6:23 PM
If you guys what Calvinism go to whitehorseinn.org
Driscol is cool though.
Election is a hot topic,
Christ died for ALL men, but only the elect will respond to the salvation message. Our job is to preach the gospel to ALL because God didn’t put a streak on the backs of the elect. Just preach the word, the rest is up to God!
I love me some Jesus!
Mercy4Me on January 10, 2009 at 6:24 PM
Also, if God knows the future and how everything will turn out for all eternity, isn’t this just a big dog and pony show?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:24 PM
That how great Heaven is going to be doesn’t make someone get saved. Neither does being afraid of how hot Hell is going to be. And doing good doesn’t save anybody. And doing evil doesn’t damn anybody. They’re secondary effects of salvation: not the cause.
The cause of salvation is God’s free choice of sinners to be saved.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:24 PM
And what again is the reason for not electing everybody?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:25 PM
If Heaven and Hell were directly in front us, then of course we would do what we are told to get the reward. But that is not what God did, and it is not hard to see why he didn’t do that. If God had made the world that simpe, it would have taught us nothing about God and sin. Only by struggling here without direct evidence of the hereafter do we really learn about the true nature of sin.
pedestrian on January 10, 2009 at 6:26 PM
I’m still not getting any many out of this. So what is salvation again? And why not just hand it out?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:27 PM
The same inscrutable reason for not damning everybody.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:27 PM
If it’s important we know about sin, why not just download us with the information?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:28 PM
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:25 PM
The Bible says that God is not willing that any should perish, but that all would come to repentance.
God is a Gentleman – he will not barge into your life and make demands. Instead he says “I set before you life and death; blessings and cursings. Choose life!”
innominatus on January 10, 2009 at 6:28 PM
1 Timothy 2:3-4 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
There are no “elect”.
If there were such a thing as predestination, I agree…there would be no reason for life.
JetBoy on January 10, 2009 at 6:28 PM
If it’s inscrutable, how can you be sure he even has a reason? He could just be a mean fickle old Coot and Satan was right to rise up against Him.
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:29 PM
It is just handed out. That some don’t want it is an entirely different issue.
Esthier on January 10, 2009 at 6:29 PM
Creating us sounds a lot like barging.
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Can they change their mind later?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:31 PM
My former Marine husband is a GIGANTO Calvinist-and was laughing his butt off when I read the headline to him.
I’m a Jewish-born “Cath-erene”(Catholic in training/Nazarene)and I told my husband that if he wanted someone to “obey” he should get a cocker spaniel.
LOL
annoyinglittletwerp on January 10, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Because God is reasonable.
But even if God were a mean fickle old Coot, Satan cannot be right to rise up against him because there is no standard for right and wrong apart from God.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:32 PM
Why not just make us robots? Why even bother giving us the choice? Why even let us think for ourselves, fall in love, learn to hate or any of that.
Maybe he is, but if you believe the story, then you also know Satan lost.
Esthier on January 10, 2009 at 6:33 PM
You might want to try visiting an Orthodox church. It’s pretty dang rigorous. And, from the Divine Liturgy: Priest- “For the President, for all civil authorities, and for the armed forces, let us pray to the Lord.” People- “Lord have mercy.”
exlibris on January 10, 2009 at 6:33 PM
They can’t want to be saved without God giving them the desire… so no.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Good idea, poorly executed. Take the vid AP linked regarding Mormons and look at how he answered the question about language. Faced with what seems like a pretty straight-forward verse, he dodges, first arguing that Christians are only supposed to uplift other Christians, then he channels George Carlin to explain away language that can be considered objectionable. I could care less about what language someone chooses to use, but to try and make the case that it’s Biblicaly sanctioned, or at least an unregulated area is just too much of a stretch.
Dead Hand Control on January 10, 2009 at 6:34 PM
AP’s ex-friend said that, not anyone in the headline thread. Yet that is where the grenades were being tossed. Are you implying that because AP’s ex-friend misunderstands her religion that he should take it out on other Christians?
It amazes me how some alleged conservatives have yet to master the concept of individualism and apply it when trying to communicate.
baldilocks on January 10, 2009 at 6:35 PM
No one knows the mind of God but himself, but it seems to me that he determined that if he created a world were everyone was saved that we would not really understand God’s full glory.
All he is asking is that we accept forgiveness from him for our sins, and try to be decent to each other. If he didn’t even require that much in order to be granted eternal life, that he would be our personal assistant, not our Lord.
There is a lot of other requirements that are piled on by self-righteous people of various religions, but that was not put there by God. All the other observances are there to help us appreciate God, not the other way around.
pedestrian on January 10, 2009 at 6:35 PM
So why not give them the desire? You really seem to be arguing that God is an unreasonable, fickle bastard.
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:36 PM
To paraphrase Nietzsche, “I could only believe in a God who cussed”.
venividivici on January 10, 2009 at 6:39 PM
If us understanding His full glory is so important to Him, couldn’t He just write a “For Dummies” book?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Alright….alright…alright…
I’m a calvinist.
I love Mark Driscoll. Sure, he kicked up some controversy for sometimes saying crude things…I liken him to Peter…a bit outlandish, sometimes foolish…but totally burning for the truth of Jesus Christ and defense of the faith.
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Doesn’t mean he was wrong in trying.
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Yeah, any person who tells another person that they’re “not saved” or “you’re going to hell” just goes totally against God.
God alone will judge each individual based on faith and good works. Or based on whatever He wants to base salvation on.
JetBoy on January 10, 2009 at 6:40 PM
I watched both clips. Seems like a pretty nice guy to me.
Unless of course “you got some thin skinny skin going on. Like Paris Hilton”.
We weejuns all have thick skin. Like umm.. Cattle. Yes. Not like silky Paris Hilton skins.
Good preaching in my opinion.
/Signed, Weejuns
:Definition of Weejuns: Weejuns are the populous of large cities. Weegjuns are also known as well made leather shoes, dyed in cherry wood. The buyers of Weejun shoes used to place pennies into the carved tounge of the shoe. As times evolved, pennies were replaced and dimes made their entrance. We still wore our board shorts and surfed off of Martha’s vinyeard.
Key West Reader on January 10, 2009 at 6:41 PM
“What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so in order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory” (Rom. 9:22-23)
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Good Lord, please delete that last post. I’m so sorry. I’m Ted Kennedy. no.. really.
Key West Reader on January 10, 2009 at 6:43 PM
I know that you’re playing the Devil’s Advocate with the Calvinists. (To some of them that’s probably not a metaphor.) I just wanted to point out that the above is the exact nature/personality of the other Allah and it’s why Islam’s apostates usually become atheists. Usually.
baldilocks on January 10, 2009 at 6:43 PM
Not true. The verse is totally take out of context. Though we cannot fully know the end of someone’s life, we can say, as the bible says, that some in certain lifestyles who are unrepentant are, at that moment, if they renounce the savior, most likely unregenerate. But, so were we all…
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:44 PM
It is handed out–freely. But you, because you possess free will (according to the Erasmian view I adhere to) have the option of accepting or rejecting it.
To put it another way, there’s an old joke that goes something like this (forgive the length, it takes a while to get to the punchline):
When a hurricane was threatening to strike, the order came out to evacuate, but one stubborn old man refused the order saying “God will save me,” when a relief worker driving a van came over to take those without transportation. The hurricane struck and the flood waters rose up to the man’s front door. Then, a boat came up and a relief worker told the man to get on board, but the stubborn old man just replied, “God will save me,” so the boat left to pick up more people. The flood waters now were so bad that the man had to climb up on his roof. A helicopter came and a man went down on a hoist telling the old man to get on the hoist and they’d take him away, but, sure enough, the old man just said, “God will save me.” So, the helicopter went away to look for more people.
Needless to say, the man drowned in the flood. So, he’s in Heaven and sees God and the first thing he asks the Creator is, “Why didn’t you save me? Why did you let me drown?” God just looks at him and answers back, “I sent you a van, a boat, and a helicopter. What more did you expect me to do?”
In other words, you’re a human being and not a robot. You get to make up your own mind.
Matt Helm on January 10, 2009 at 6:44 PM
God cannot be unreasonable, just like God cannot be unjust. It’s a contradiction of terms because it assumes there is a standard for reason or justice apart from God to which we can compare him.
God does not give them the desire because God’s desire is to display infinite mercy and infinite justice, because both of these things are part of God’s nature. Apart from that, God has no obligations to humanity anymore than I have an obligation to the keyboard I’m typing on. That God even selects one person is an infinite mercy.
Andto describe God as fickle doesn’t hold because it presumes that God ought to have done otherwise, when there can be nothing that God “ought” to have done differently. If God does it, then it is perfectly done, because God is the standard of things.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:44 PM
taken
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:44 PM
Would you rather be in love with someone or read a book “Love for Dummies”?
pedestrian on January 10, 2009 at 6:44 PM
awesome.
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:45 PM
“Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, ‘My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure’” (Isaiah 46:10
“…to do whatever Thy hand and Thy purpose predestined to occur” (Acts 4:28)
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Accepting salvation means you accept a transformation much like an enlightenment that completely changes your point of view.
Many would argue that because of that you would not change your mind.
As to those who reject it, it’s not over until it’s over. Some people believe it isn’t even over when you die.
Esthier on January 10, 2009 at 6:47 PM
I misunderstood what you were saying. Sorry.
baldilocks on January 10, 2009 at 6:48 PM
So God can torture babies and that’s just because He says so. That’s making God like the kid from that one Twilight Zone episode where he keeps sending people to the corn field.
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:49 PM
Now THAT’S taken out of context…
If Paul was saying that God predestined the unbelievers of Israel for damnation, why would he be praying and working for thier salvation?
JetBoy on January 10, 2009 at 6:50 PM
It depends. Am I being threatened with eternal torment?
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Ever read the Book of Job? Essentially, it boils down to God having the power to do something, and deciding to do it, as well as retaining the right to do things that don’t make sense to humans because He created the universe. Now, this is a very low standard, in which it is “might” making “right”. At the end, God restores Job’s material wealth and gives him a new family, because that’s what He decided to do, since Job admits to “abhorring” himself for questioning God.
From a human perspective, it is all very strange, indeed.
venividivici on January 10, 2009 at 6:50 PM
So if God decided one day that we should all murder our own families, it is by definition correct and proper? Is a thing good because God endorses it?
ToddW on January 10, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Ultimately, Calvinism presents both choice in this present realm along side the exhaustive foreknowledge and predestined will of God for all His creation. If He is God, and IF He created all, and IF He exists completely outside of this Universe and within an utterly different dimension of being and reality, it is quite reasonable to believe there is actual choice in this time in space as well as the sovereign will of God. Either way, you are living now and whether or not you choose Him has everything to do with your own moral culpability and responsibility. In a nutshell…
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:51 PM
Why don’t you just ask God to choose you? “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved”
flash044 on January 10, 2009 at 6:52 PM
You just dated yourself. BTW, the actor in that role was Billy Mummy.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on January 10, 2009 at 6:53 PM
Given that Satan has been cast to roam this earth, he is a spiritual being but is relegated to this realm. He is not omniscient or omnipresent. He went before God, as it is written, and asked God to inflict Job with pain, etc., to test him. God allowed it. Whether this is literal or figurative, the point would be that God allows and/or ordains evil and suffering to refine us at times ultimately for His glory and our sanctification. Job is an eloquent, poetic work, heartbreaking and terrifying but deals directly with the sovereign hand of God and the redemption there of.
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Yes, these discussions of Calvinism rarely center around the real joy that Calvinism allows. Accepting the full measure of God’s control in our lives lets us appreciate each and every moment as a gift directly from God.
We watched Driscoll’s sermon in a bible study group I am in, and a lot of people at least appreciated Calvinism better than before.
Even if he did present the watered-down half-predestination version. ;-}
pedestrian on January 10, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Your hypothetical doesn’t hold, because it assumes a standard of behavior for good and evil to compare God to. There is no such standard, since good and evil, like all things in the cosmos, are what God says they are.
God can do whatever He pleases, and because God is good, what He does is good. That we know he won’t “torture babies” is only because God is consistent and won’t do things the He wouldn’t do. Comparing him to the twilight zone kid doesn’t hold either, because the twilight zone kid and his captives were on the same moral plane. It would be more accurate to compare if the twilight zone kid were trapping fireflies in a bottle.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 6:55 PM
Calvinists do not mince words, avoid scripture, do mental gymnastics. We maintain that election runs side by side with evidence of choice within this linear construct in time and space. It is a paradox, you bet. But should not be seen as something to be deconstructed to better manage or comprehend.
I call on Him daily. :o)
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 6:56 PM
Many Bible scholars believe that the book of Job is the oldest book in the Bible — i.e. that it was actually committed to papyrus BEFORE Moses wrote the Pentateuch.
My collie says:
Yes – and even though God tried to address the issue right up front, people still continue to whine “why do bad things happen to good people?”.
CyberCipher on January 10, 2009 at 6:58 PM
I’m sorry, but the more I learn about Calvinism, the more it sounds like Islam to me.
JetBoy on January 10, 2009 at 6:58 PM
Psalm 19:1-4b
INC on January 10, 2009 at 6:58 PM
I’m not sure fireflies in a bottle is that much better. And all your reasoning still seems to amount to, “We better do as he says because he’ll hurt us and there’s nothing we can do about it!”
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 7:00 PM
People get freaked out…haha. You know how it goes. Calvinist, oooooh…scary…heh.
I grew up in a armin, pre mil, disp home. hahaha. So, I felt weightless and was easily picked off in college. I bucked against the “inconsistencies” within the bible. I seriously did not even know that calvinism existed. I just heard everyone talking about free will this and open future that and I knew it didn’t square with 1) His nature and character, and 2)scripture about predestination. I began to study the historic church beginning with Augustine and Aquinas and…well…it’s all blessed history. I have found sooooooooo much assurance and joy and stability.
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 7:00 PM
Books three and four of Calvin’s Institutes. There, that’s my contribution.
Weight of Glory on January 10, 2009 at 7:01 PM
I couldn’t have said it better. He is consistent with His own immutable character.
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 7:02 PM
God created man and woman. He gave them the entire world except one tree. Man and woman disobeyed and ate from the tree. Because it was the “Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil,” they immediately knew they committed evil. Instead of running to God, they ran from God and tried to hide themselves and cover themselves with fig leaves. God confronted Adam first and Adam blamed both God and Eve saying, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” Gen. 3:12.
Eve blamed the Serpent, Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” Gen. 3:13.
God could have ended it all right there. But He didn’t.
If you go to hell, you go to hell because you reject God. Jesus cane and die on a cross FOR THE WORLD!
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
– John 3:16
Whosoever!! Whosoever! Whosoever!
The decision is ours. We are free to follow,, or free to reject. It is a decision!
JellyToast on January 10, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Man I wish I had time to keep up with this discussion.
Predestination is a rough topic, precisely because it cuts both ways. It is a part of the New Testament – Paul says that we are predestined to be God’s sons and daughters – yet the implications of such a doctrine are seemingly simultaneously bitter and beautiful. Indeed, it is not just semantics. I imagine that AP, for whom I have much respect, notes that it is not just semantic because whether we choose/don’t choose God, or God chooses/doesn’t choose us, leads one logically to ask and answer the question of whether God’s judgment is applied because of something we’ve done, or because of preexisting God’s decision. In some ways the Bible, I believe, answers in the affirmative to both. I think it is one of the pitfalls of dealing with an infinite God intersecting finite humanity. I know that’s not a complete answer (is there one?)but, that’s just me.
On the beautiful side of predestination is that salvation, if it exists at all, is based not on my own, fallible self or tainted choices, but on the mercy and grace of God alone. This is one of my central attractions to Calvinism.
I’m not a Driscoll fan. I especially dislike his position on women’s roles in society and in the church – maybe I’m “sinning by questioning.” But, like Allah said, I think he got a bit of a bad report in this article.
One more funny thing. Calvinism is a matrix for making sense of life and Christian faith. It cannot contain all of the intricacies of either. All systems are fallible. I find it a bit disturbing when any pastor takes it for more than it is, or elevates Calvin beyond his place. 2 cents.
nailinmyeye on January 10, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Masculinization of the church–ANY church–would be a Good Thing.
My Dad quit taking us to Mass after returning from Vietnam and getting puke sick of guitar-playing “Kumbayah” hippy music, even in the Air Force chapel on base.
I rediscovered the joy of attending Mass when I was a Recruit on Parris Island. The God worshipped there was a strong, masculine God, the “Lord of Hosts”. When we sang the “Battle Hymn of the Republic”, we sang it without the castrated “New Age” rendition of the song, shouting out “LET US DIE TO MAKE MEN FREE!” every Sunday. It was a motivating, affirming, and joyous celebration of a God who approved our chosen profession as warriors. Our chaplain was a Navy Lieutenant who’d graduated Parris Island in 1967 as a Marine Rifleman, and who had fought in Hue. There was a MAN.
Unfortunately, the civilian services I’ve attended have been milquetoast, guitar-playing, hand holding, warm fuzzy crapola.
quikstrike98 on January 10, 2009 at 6:03 PM
Sapwolf on January 10, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Romans 8:28-30 (emphasis mine)
Here’s the way I see it. God exists outside of time. To Him the future and the past just are. He already knows if we are going to choose Him. Those He knows that are going to choose Him, He predestines to be conformed into the image of Christ. You have freewill of the individual along with the predestination of God.
Ordinary1 on January 10, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Oh, you are going to get SO dumped on for that remark (even though I happen to agree with you). You Catholics would do well to study the various Protestant sects. Calvinists are the “pit bulls” of the Protestant reformation. They practice a peculiar “Peter O’Toole” (Lawrence of Arabia) kind of evangelism.
My Calvinist collie says:
CyberCipher on January 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM
He created a world where we can all see the negative consequences of sin. All we have to do to avoid spending the rest of eternity suffering the consequences of sin is to say, “Lord, you are my savior, please save me.”
pedestrian on January 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM
I wasn’t giving any reasoning for anything. I was describing the mechanism by which God interacts with the universe.
In fact, my reasoning for obeying God is 180 degrees out from your description. I’m not afraid of God hurting me, and I don’t believe that the fear of God hurting us actually makes anybody saved. Salvation is a merciful gift given to us entirely by God’s own grace, and my obedience to God – such as He gives me the strength for obedience – is an outgrowth of that gift; not the product of any sense of fear that God might do something to me.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM
So’s a serial killer.
frankj on January 10, 2009 at 7:06 PM
Jetboy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am sorry that you have that impression. There is such a vast difference. Mainly, there is no Christ in Islam. There also is no concept of original sin. In Islam, you are not inherently sinful, but, you also have no way to approach an utterly “other” being called Allah. With Allah, there is no trinity of Father/Son/Spirit. These three aspects of the trinity have different functions and although paradoxically are one, they do different things. God IS HOLINESS. And goodness, truth, light, righteousness, purity, justice, love. All these things. The Son is also God but is our High Priest…the final sacrifice…the perfect lamb, the second Adam…He took our punishment for sin, past present future upon Himself and MADE A WAY TO APPROACH and be ADOPTED AS SONS AND DAUGHTERS!!!!!!!!! This is amazingly beautiful news!!!!!!!
The Holy Spirit regenerates us and will awaken your heart to this…if you are “chosen” before the foundations of the world, as we believe and scripture attests, you will come. You will! If you have any, any desire to be in Him…to know the Father and have remission of sin, then you are being called to Him.
This is not Islam. That almost made me cry…oh, this is precious, life giving, beautiful freedom. He was our substitute, JetBoy!!!! Now we can draw near!!!
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Oh man! I so disagree with you, but have to say: touche! That was kind of funny.
nailinmyeye on January 10, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Serial killer’s aren’t immutable.
Lehosh on January 10, 2009 at 7:11 PM
I won’t dump on you.
nailinmyeye on January 10, 2009 at 7:11 PM
As you know, blanket statements are generally an accurate reflection of reality. On the other hand, perhaps most doctrines on this issue face pitfalls of their own. Like perhaps a works-based salvation frenzy that seems to hang people paranoid about “losing their salvation” because they didn’t save EVERYONE – because it IS their responsibility after all.
See how that works? Now you get to respond how that’s totally not true in your experience, I respond with people in my life who act this way, and none of us is any better for it. Because that’s what this sort of blanket statement crap does. Satisfying to type, but not terribly useful to anyone.
And Allah asks the question I ask myself. Frankly, I don’t know for sure. I have my theories, but I can’t really claim a straight answer from scripture.
I’d be very interested in what ColtsFan has to say. As someone else said, he’s by far the best read among the election crowd.
TheUnrepentantGeek on January 10, 2009 at 7:12 PM
In this realm. A calvinist does not dispute this scripture. God condescends and ministers to us, to past saints in the word, etc. in ways we understand in this constructed plane. If you come to Him, you were already chosen. Arminians are uncomfortable with these verses:
“Declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, ‘My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure’” (Isaiah 46:10
“…to do whatever Thy hand and Thy purpose predestined to occur” (Acts 4:28)
“[God] who has saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity” (2 Tim. 1:9)
“for though the twins had not done anything good or bad, in order that God’s purpose according to His choice might stand, not because of works, but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, ‘The older will serve the younger.’ Just as it is written, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’” Rom. 9:11-13
“For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy…So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires” (Rom. 9:15,16,18)
“…for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed” (1 Pet. 2:8)
“What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so in order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory” (Rom. 9:22-23)
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 7:13 PM
I have to agree that it does attract people who are authoritarian. Perhaps it is because some people overcompensate in fear of the notion that freely given grace means that sinning does not matter anymore, and so they impose especially harsh human rules because they don’t trust a reliance on people’s love of God to maintain social order.
pedestrian on January 10, 2009 at 7:13 PM
Uh…we’ve had enough of this in American Christianity, thank you very much.
Mommypundit on January 10, 2009 at 7:14 PM
DUDE I KNOW! Like, all those Calvinist suicide bombers and terrorists! Wait a minute …
Just the other day I heard one of those Reformed Death Squads TOTALLY wrote some strong letters to people! The horror!
TheUnrepentantGeek on January 10, 2009 at 7:15 PM
Our founders and the people that built this nation had no conflict carrying both a Bible and a gun. The one never interfered with the other.
I do think we have become so feminized we do not even realize it.
JellyToast on January 10, 2009 at 7:16 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »