I have studied some bits of predestination when I was a Charismaniac and turned Calvinist. I came with the conclusion that if I were to be a Calvinist, the only logical position is to be SupraLapsarian. Praise God I got delivered from Calvinism.
At any rate, today I reason that surely I must grant that if God knows everything, then surely God knew that I would believe when he presents the Gospel to me. I said, surely that must be granted. This is not being an Arminian, it stands to reason that if God foreknew, he knew everything beforehand including my standing up and sitting down, that includes my faith. The authors seems to argue for a neither Arminian nor Calvinistic understanding of predestination - hence, a Lutheran view.
The question is this - did God predestine us based on the foreknowledge of that faith? I have no Biblical data for this yet and I am of course very happy to learn. However, I now must grant the point that God knew my faith, nevertheless. Yet Calvinist do not put any weight to this. That is why when taken to final conclusion, you cannot distinguish God from Allah under those terms.
Calvinistic universalism goes like this - since God is Sovereign and since he wants all to be saved, his Sovereignty is never thwarted and so all will be saved.
When I read the articulation of Missouri based on the book Errors of Missouri, I have no doubts that Walther and Co have fallen into the Calvinist paradigm. Which is why I chuckle why they are allergic to Calvinists when in fact Calvinists would be happy at their articulation of predestination!!!
Glende's scholarship has nothing to offer, he simply says "ooh, Schmidt and Stellenhorn etc believe in intuitu fidei". He assumes by default it is wrong and he does not deal with the arguments of the authors. He offers no counter arguments and no counter data. The argument used is band wagon. What he can do is to get the best argument from anti-Missouris and shoot it down from Scripture but we do not see that in his posts. The teacher in me can not help but mark his posts down.
***
GJ - Calvinism easily passes into Universalism, as Lito observed. Karl Barth, the main theologian for Fuller Seminary, advocated Universalism in his Dogmatics. Actually, Barth's hawt mistress did most the writing.
UOJ is cowardly Universalism. If the Little Three keep promoting it, they will produce Universalists and atheists for the next generation. They already have. I know several key WELS Shrinkers who either open, loud atheists or pan-religionists.
The UOJ Advocates are Shrinkers, and the Shrinkers slaver over UOJ - Valleskey, Glende, Bivens, et al.
5 comments:
Is there anything wrong with the statement:
"Man is not a robot. He can TURN AWAY FROM the Gospel if he so choses. He canNOT accept God by his own power, but only through the Holy Spirit via WORD and SACRAMENT".
What need is there to study God's word if we are already chosen by God for salvation? Seems like a lot of wasted effort.
Ironically, science increasingly disagrees with the idea that man has any free will (free will from a secular standpoint).
In that sense, adherents to religious predestination could join hands with many scientists and say that there is no free will, we only follow the playbook that already has been written (whether by God, biology, or physics).
The horrors of social engineering, eugenics, euthanasia, etc. all have roots in the idea that free will is an illusion.
Grumpy,
Actually it is a lot worst that that.
The MEANS OF GRACE becomes superfluous!!!!
That is the reason why the Errors of Missouri authors say that the Waltherians are engaging in straw man arguments. Yes they were because they took up the cause of Calvinists in their predestinarian articulation.
And yet these UOJers have the nerve to call JBFA people Calvinists!
LPC
Since Glende is on tract to defend Waltherian Predestination which has taken up the cause of Calvinistic predestination ala decree. Then we can ask these Waltherians did God decree the salvation of some and damnation of others Supra, Infra or Sub lapsarian??
Here is a link as to why Calvinism taken to its final conclusion leads to universalism as we know now that UOJers are in the same school of thought.
http://www.patheos.com/community/rogereolson/2010/12/10/calvinism-leads-to-universalism/
LPC
Calvinists would believe in Double Predestination and thus there is no Gospel, as it could be predestination to destruction or in the case of the Waltherian all are predestined for life according to Romans 11:32-33 ; only if I believe as Walther did. This would be as unscriptural as Calvinism and make Walther and Calvin twins seperated at birth but at different sides of the spectrum and essentially Rob Bell universalists then Atheists.
I remember Nagel once saying in a sermon that what God wants to do he cannot do by force. If faith is cultivated by Godly force it is coercion and not faith. Coercion leads one to ve universalistic and then atheistic because there is no need for Christ or his merits. Am I on to something here?
Northwest,
Arminianism and Calvinism have a paradigm. When one engages with these isms assuming their paradigm, the result is already determined.
It is a blunder to assume the assumptions of Calvinism or Arminianism and the argue from there.
Yes you are onto something. Simply put on the Calvinist side and the Waltherian side, once you posit that God does things according to decrees, and once you posit that the only aspect of God that is to be adored is His Sovereignty one will commit a blunder.
a.) It means that the person is idolizing an aspect of God to the exclusion of all his other aspects. For the Calvinist this is his Sovereignty, for the Pentecostal this is his Miraculous Power. Nothing else matters but these, then the person has made God into an idol.
b.) Since God can not be thwarted in his purpose, the God will always wins and since he wills that none be lost, all will eventually will desire what God wants, and so all will be saved.
This blunder exists because the person has focused on one aspect of God to the exclusion of others, and so an error.
LPC
Post a Comment