ryan.the.calvinist

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… Consulting the Old Testament A discussion of any Christian theology necessarily requires consultation with an authoritative text: the Bible. Throughout the biblical narrative, there are numerous examples of God sovereignly electing individuals for his purposes. An early example, found in Genesis 6, is that of God showing grace to Noah. God’s choice to spare Noah and his family from his righteous judgment was not the result of any first action on Noah’s part. God did not save Noah because he was a righteous man who kept God’s commands. While the text records “Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God” [1] , it does so only after first declaring that God had given grace to Noah. [2] Several other examples are prevalent throughout the Hebrew Bible – from Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, to Joseph. Having been sold into slavery by his older brothers, Joseph was truly on the r

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… The Arminian and Calvinist Positions Compared Having defined terms relevant to the discussion of Reformed Theology and Arminianism, one may now be able to approach how these two very distinct theologies contrast with one another on five major parts of contention between the two camps: human ability to obey God, the cause of an individual’s election, the scope and  intent of Christ’s atoning work, the efficacy of the grace of God, and whether or not a Christian can lose his salvation. These five areas of theology and soteriology [1] are the major reasons there is disagreement between the monergists and synergists. While the details of Calvinist and Arminian positions are greater than this paper allows for discussion, the following chart [2] offers a brief comparison between the major differences and the emphasis held by each position. Arminian Position Calvinist Position Human Ability

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… The History of the Discussion – Pelagius & Augustine While obviously connected to the Protestant Reformation, much of the framework for the Calvinist-Arminian debate, in terms of the freedom and nature of the will, had been laid by St. Augustine of Hippo in his dealings with the teachings of Pelagius – who was later condemned by the Church as a heretic for his teachings. Pelagius had taken great exception to a prayer in Augustine’s Confessions, which read: “Give what you command, command what you will.” [1] His objection was that God would never command something if man was utterly unable to accomplish that command. [2] What stemmed from this debate was a view that came to be known as Pelagianism . This position holds that man’s ability to obey God, indeed his very nature, was unaffected by the Fall of Adam. [3] An appropriate analogy for Pelagianism would be that human beings are all bor

“ My toaster doesn’t have a love button! ” “No! And neither does a robot!” [1] This exchange, neither written nor uttered by C.S. Lewis, certainly represents his theology concerning the notions of God’s sovereign decree in election and of man’s autonomous will to freely choose God. Discussions concerning the freedom of the will, and by contrast divine election, are visible throughout Lewis’ writings - from his fictional works to his BBC broadcast-inspired theological Mere Christianity. In his unpublished paper To Choose or Be Chosen: C.S. Lewis’ Contribution to Free Will and Predestination , Georgian pastor John Alexander attempted “to reconcile predestination and free will through Lewis’ works and examine Lewis’ impact on modern Christianity through this reconciliation.” [2] Such “reconciliation,” however, is not necessary to understand the impacts of both Reformed Theology and C.S. Lewis’ theology on Christendom as a whole. Lewis’ relevant writings clearly point to a synerg

Here is an example of how irrational the followers of Ergan Butch Caner can be.   This is an exchange I partook in via Facebook with a student who, while claiming to be at least somewhat Reformed, attends Liberty University. I don’t know if I would believe this mess if I had not been involved in it directly… and even then I am bewildered.  You would think that, just because someone is a “Christian leader”, they get a free pass to lie and do anything they want – and NO ONE can question them when they are caught in their lies!  This is nuts and cult-like at the very least. (btw… the exchange ended because I was promptly removed from Leah’s friends list, making it impossible for me to reply.) This is nuts!

Head on over to Justin Taylor’s blog @ http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2010/05/04/new-hymns-from-page-cxvi/   There you can preview the new album from Page CXVI – HYMNS 2. Visit PageCXVI.com for more info on buying the cd.   If you like the old hymn lyrics with new music … this may be for you!

This is a chart I created for my paper on C.S. Lewis, Free Will, and Predestination, comparing the 5 Points of Calvinism to the 5 Points of Arminianism.   - Arminian Position - - Calvinist Position- Human Ability The Fall has damaged human nature, but not rendered it totally disabled. Human nature is not enslaved to sin, and is more or less sick. As a result, the unrepentant sinner’s ability to either freely choose or reject Christ is unaffected by the Fall. Total Depravity The Fall has not only damaged human nature, but has rendered it completely corrupted. Human nature is enslaved to sin, and even spiritually dead – unresponsive. This deadness makes him utterly unable and unwilling to ever choose God. Conditional Election God’s choice to save the sinner is based upon his knowledge of that sinner deciding to come to him, freely at a point in the future. The sinner’s choosing God does not depend on God’s first choosing him or her. Unconditional Election God’s

This past week, I caught up in my Bible reading calendar… and came to John 14:18-21 a few days ago: I will not leave you as orphans;  I will come to you.  Yet a little while and the world will see me no more, but you will see me.  Because I live, you also will live.  In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.  Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me.  And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him. In all honesty, the thought of this saying of Jesus causes me to tremble a bit.   If it doesn’t cause you to tremble, look at your own life for a bit. Why do I tremble? I do not obey Christ perfectly.  We know from Scripture that God’s law – his statutes – his commands demand perfect obedience.  I can’t wonder, how many people can I be really unjustly angry with and NOT be counted a murderer?   Or how many girls can I lust after and NOT be counted an adulterer?   That isn’t how