- Fred Butler wishes Covenant Theology folks understood a little more about the theology of Dispensationalism. But since it has changed so much in its short 150-year history, maybe he'll cut us some slack.
- When arguing against total depravity, one should not misinterpret Romans 3:10-11 to mean "there is no one who has done good enough (achieved perfection)." The text is quite clear: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God." And let's not forget Romans 14:23, which says that "whatever does not proceed from faith is sin."
- So, there is no Calvinist resurgence?
- Well, maybe there is, despite what the recent Barna survey says.
- Remember, dear Christian, Satan's schemes always backfire in the end.
Friday, November 19, 2010
This Week in Calvinism - November 19, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
In regard to Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism, must you really make a point of Church history?
In regard to total depravity, must you really make a point of scriptural context?
Why don't you just forget Church history and scriptural context and let people have their own ideas?!
;)
Well, like I pointed out, the "change" isn't any different than what CT has experienced in its short history. It predates the development of Dispensationalism maybe another 150, maybe 200 years. The same with Calivinism that wasn't really articulated in full as a theological system until the late 1500s and certainly by 1617 after the Synod of Dort. But at least I am not just citing only Tobias Crisp as an example of all Calvinism or Wistus as the only example of Reformed CT. I mean, I do take it that you are a Baptist, right?
I read your post and subsequently made some changes to my blog post, wherein I only briefly mentioned Romans 3. At the very least, I would agree with you that what I originally had did not do Romans 3 justice. But I still don't see Romans 3 as teaching Total Inability. Humanity is, in a general sense, unrighteous, lacking understanding, not seeking for God, deceptive, and murderous.
At face value, these are simple statements of fact, not abstract descriptions of human nature and will. It does not say no one can be righteous or no one is able to seek God.
And Romans 14:23 is clearly referring to believers, and the interpretation that every action committed by an unbeliever is, in my judgement, eisegesis rather than exegesis. Romans 2:14-16, I believe, contradicts your interpretation of Romans 14:23.
Rev, if you read my post and come across any errors in context that I've made, let me know and I'll make the requisite changes. God bless.
Post a Comment