Attack on Doctrines of Grace

[batteredsheep]

Not sure if anyone's followed the recent attack and misrepresentation on Calvinism by Dave Hunt in his new book "What Love is This?" (following on the heels of the ill-advised book by Norman Geisler, "Chosen But Free"). In both cases, James White of Alpha & Omega Ministries has responded capably to the caricatures (whether malicious or ill-informed I'm not sure); see: www.aomin.org

(Also check out www.whatloveisthis.com)

What disturbs me in Dave Hunt's case is his utter ignorance of church history, his lack of sound exegesis, and his unfair misrepresentation of Calvinistic soteriology. And yet, his book will appeal to many Christians, because it is written largely to the emotions. Secondly, the fact that most Christians share Hunt's ignorance means that they will be easily swayed by Hunt's flawed argumentation. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but when "The Prayer of Jabez" and "Left Behind" are top selling books in 2001/2002, I think the ability of many Christians to discern truth from error is a bit suspect.

(By Hunt's own admission, he has not read any of the Reformers, nor has he any familiarity with exegesis in the original Greek and Hebrew -- not that this necessarily disqualifies him from any dialogue; but it should give him pause to be more careful and guarded in his comments).

I'm all for theological debate, but it dismays and discourages me to see Christians resorting to unfair and ill-informed tactics to win their theologicall battles. It seems Mr. Hunt is very close-minded, and not really interested in learning from those he disagrees with. Not to mention his utter antagonism to calvinism.

I've had to admit to my own biases and narrowness of thinking on many issues (women's role, eschatology, the "charismatic gifts", etc.). Even in cases where further study affirmed my position, I learned a lot from engaging with other positions. Heck, a lot of my best friends are arminians and/or charismatics!

It almost seems hopeless to carry on any theological debate, when there is so much divisiveness that inevitably results.

Is there a way out of the entrenched polarity that seems so prevalent in Christianity? Why can't we calmly dialogue and learn from each other?!

[Brandan Kraft]

Originally posted by batteredsheep
Not sure if anyone's followed the recent attack and misrepresentation on Calvinism by Dave Hunt in his new book "What Love is This?" (following on the heels of the ill-advised book by Norman Geisler, "Chosen But Free"). In both cases, James White of Alpha & Omega Ministries has responded capably to the caricatures (whether malicious or ill-informed I'm not sure); see: www.aomin.org

I'm not surprised that an attack on Calvinism is based upon misrepresentation. In defense of most Arminians, there seems to be a tendency by Calvinists to misrepresent their theology as well.. Although, we are usually guilty of arguing against their seemingly pelagian stance rather than their "semi-pelagian" stance.

What disturbs me in Dave Hunt's case is his utter ignorance of church history, his lack of sound exegesis, and his unfair misrepresentation of Calvinistic soteriology.

Whoah! I think you just described the majority of people who claim to be Christians today. I know very few men other than those I have met online and my local church that can tell you about even some of the major themes of the reformation. Most are just simply ignorant and seem to be happy about it! I was exactly like that as well, so I shouldn't be too critical I suppose.... whaddya think? As for Calvinistic soteriology, I warmed up to it almost immediately. I suppose a lot of it had to do with the fact that I wasn't entirely happy with what I believed about the Bible at the time. Those passages that dealt with predestination so plainly in the past didn't match up with what I thought about free will and conditional election so I simply assumed that whatever my teacher said was true. Quite simply, I didn't really care what Scripture stated so I casually glossed over those passages rather than try to reconcile them with my erroneous theology.

And yet, his book will appeal to many Christians, because it is written largely to the emotions. Secondly, the fact that most Christians share Hunt's ignorance means that they will be easily swayed by Hunt's flawed argumentation. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but when "The Prayer of Jabez" and "Left Behind" are top selling books in 2001/2002, I think the ability of many Christians to discern truth from error is a bit suspect.

I think you're right.

I'm all for theological debate, but it dismays and discourages me to see Christians resorting to unfair and ill-informed tactics to win their theologicall battles. It seems Mr. Hunt is very close-minded, and not really interested in learning from those he disagrees with. Not to mention his utter antagonism to calvinism.

I've had to admit to my own biases and narrowness of thinking on many issues (women's role, eschatology, the "charismatic gifts", etc.). Even in cases where further study affirmed my position, I learned a lot from engaging with other positions. Heck, a lot of my best friends are arminians and/or charismatics!

I think that comes with maturity in Christ. I have had pleasant discussions with non-charismatics when I was a charismatic, and now vice versa. It should not anger me when I meet someone I don't see eye to eye with on every single doctrine. However, I have found it most frustrating when I find myself in a discussion where "straw men" and ignorant arguments are made. I think a good class on logic is in order for most Christians - I know it did me wonders in college.

It almost seems hopeless to carry on any theological debate, when there is so much divisiveness that inevitably results.

Yes, no doubt about it. I have found the best setting for a good thought provoking and worthwhile debate is within the context of a local church where people are united in love. Also, I have found some of the discussions online to be edifying, however, those are far and few between. Hopefully this website will continue to serve as an oasis for genuine open minds to come and discuss the Scriptures in a non-threatening, intelligent, and loving environment.

Is there a way out of the entrenched polarity that seems so prevalent in Christianity? Why can't we calmly dialogue and learn from each other?!

I know this is a rhetorical question, but I'll go ahead and answer it.... S-I-N. Also, there are many men who have crept in unawares who cling to their man centered theology... but I've also seen some of the most stubborn unloving Calvinists as well. I do think there is an answer - and it lies in Christ and the New Testament church environment... Proper ecclesiastical practice is a key in my opinion.

[Lonesoldier]

What you think of them largely depends on your view of eschatology-a lot of people will no doubt disagree but I thought that the story is quite good-and there is eveidence of God in his mercy saving some people who have read them. I may be a rarity but I would generally hold to pre-millenialism as well as holding to the Doctrines of Grace. Still the one thing we can all agree is that Jesus is going to return!

[Brandan Kraft]

I don't have a problem with the eschatology in the Left Behind books as much as I do with the rank arminianism

But the eschatological stuff is simply ludicrous. So much of it is speculation, it's not even funny. Seriously, if one is going to take a pretrib premill stance, then one should back it up with scripture rather than the daily newspaper

But you are correct! Jesus will return

[Lonesoldier]

Dear Brother I am quite happy to be wrong on this as I admit to not having a very good understanding of the subject. There are many views on the end times, but each day is a day nearer being with him, praise THE LORD for that! When we are in Glory though don't spend eternity saying "I told you so!"

[Odyssey]

Originally posted by Lonesoldier
...Still the one thing we can all agree is that Jesus is going to return!

That is not quite right either. I, for one, believe that He already returned.

Grace to you,

jak

[Brandan Kraft]

LOL Odyssey - I forgot you don't agree

[disciple]

Originally posted by batteredsheep
(By Hunt's own admission, he has not read any of the Reformers, nor has he any familiarity with exegesis in the original Greek and Hebrew -- not that this necessarily disqualifies him from any dialogue; but it should give him pause to be more careful and guarded in his comments).

you have to listen to this sound clip. it is amazing!

anyway, i've been sort of following this debate although i haven't read either of the books. what i have read though, is white's open letter to hunt. hunt obviously has a theological bone to pick and axe to grind but it is apparently without basis. he'll find the evidence he's looking for whether it's there or not simply because it seems that he wants to find it so bad. some people just can't remove their cherished theological goggles and let Scripture speak for itself no matter how uncomfortable (myself included). perhaps he's had some bad experience in the past with calvinists...who knows. anyway, this sound clip is quite interesting (you must have realplayer).

[batteredsheep]

Thanks for the clip ... I've heard it before on James White's site, but it was good to hear it again.

You're right that Hunt seems to have a theological bone to pick.

[wildboar]

While Hunt certainly get many things wrong and misrepresents Spurgeon's view entirely, he does make one valid point. He sees a contradiction in those who hold to the Calvinistic system but then believe in the "well-meant offer of the gospel" and speak of God as having essentially two wills. Elimination of these beliefs causes Hunt's argument to crumble.

For a further explanation, Check out a review of Hunt's book at:
http://www.prca.org/standard_bearer/...#ReviewArticle

Go to the article entitled "What God is this?".

Sola Gratia,
wildboar

[Nacmij!]

I must agree with the statements about the popular writings of the times. I am deeply saddened by the fact that people read (or watch) some of the things they do and accept them as truth so blindly. Ive known people who base the entirety of their faith on shows like "Touched By and Angel" or other such productions. Im sure that we, also, sometimes blindly accept what we have been told. Lord, please keep us from being decieved....

[Brandan Kraft]

Originally posted by disciple
you have to listen to this sound clip. it is amazing!

anyway, this sound clip is quite interesting (you must have realplayer).

I just heard the clip... Unbelievable - the arrogance - "I probably know more about calvinism than those who call themselves calvinists."

You can't talk to people like that.

[Christ_†_Alone]

Indeed, it is rather arrogant to say what Hunt said - but this is the mindset of the willie (arminian, free willer, whatever).

In the frame of mind that God gave man free will to choose (Him, and living holy, or the world, and living in sin), these folks will often boast of their knowledge of the reformed faith, then bash it, all in the same breath.

Thing is - what they're bashing - is the teaching of the absolute sovereignty of God... because this flies in the face of what they stand for. They hate this teaching, because it denies them their own teaching, that God steps back and lets men choose Him - gives man a little 'sovereignty' of their own, so to speak.

No, the attitude refected in Hunt's comment - you cannot talk to people like him - they already have all the answers.

It's folks who easily admit they don't have all the answers, and would like to learn more, that I enjoy talking to, about the reformed faith.

Just a few thoughts...

[disciple]

Here are a couple articles and websites that unveil more of the situation:

http://aomin.org/CalvCon.html
http://aomin.org/DHOpenLetter.html
http://aomin.org/huntvsspurgeon.html
http://www.straitgate.com/jwdh1.ram
http://www.straitgate.com/aom/
http://www.antithesis.com/reviews/whatloveisthis.html
http://www.whatloveisthis.com/

[disciple]

Originally posted by wildboar
...he does make one valid point. He sees a contradiction in those who hold to the Calvinistic system but then believe in the "well-meant offer of the gospel" and speak of God as having essentially two wills. Elimination of these beliefs causes Hunt's argument to crumble...

here is a quote from DA Carson's book, The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God:

If the love of God refers exclusively to his love for the elect, it is easy to drift toward a simple and absolute bifurcation: God loves the elect and hates the reprobate. Rightly positioned, there is truth in this assertion; stripped of complementary biblical truths, that same assertion has engendered hyper-Calvinism. I use the term advisedly, referring to groups within the Reformed tradition that have forbidden the free offer of the Gospel. Spurgeon fought them in his day. Their number is not great in America today, but their echoes are found in young Reformed ministers who know it is right to offer the Gospel freely, but who have no idea how to do it without contravening some element in their conception of Reformed theology.

[disciple]

http://www.antithesis.com/reviews/wh...isthis_05.html