Friday, September 27, 2019
Thursday, September 26, 2019
John 6:44 DeCalvinized
 |
| source: https://redeeminggod.com/john-6_44-total-depravity/ |
I think that there is a major problem in his arguments First, let's look at two of the verses he site.I will be attempting to get a little more context in the discussion.
43 “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. 44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. John 6:43,44
31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. 32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 33 He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die.The contention Professor Flowers tries to raise is that "draw" in John 6:44 does not mean "to compel" and then tries to run to John 12:32 to try to argue that "draw" means the same thing there as it does in John 6:44 and it should be interpreted as "invited" not "compelled". Does this make sense?
John 12:31,32
Well, going to the Greek text could help us in this case. The word "draw" in John 6:44 is the same as the word translated "draw" in John 12:32. The word has Strong's #1670 - ἑλκύω. And according to the Thayer's Lexicon entry I got from StudyLight.org, ἑλκύω means the following:
- to draw, drag off
- metaph., to draw by inward power, lead, impel
Which definition fits in John 6:44 and John 12:32? It's can't be the second definition given the context in both passages are about the source - the power - of the drawing is coming from outside of the drawn. That leaves us with the paraphrase: "no one is able to come to Christ unless they are dragged by the Father." Same for John 12:32. The word translated "draw" is also used in the context of the pulling in a net. There is no room here for assuming that the dragging has anything to do with those being dragged. Jesus even says in John 6:44 that the same ones the Father drags to him is the same ones that he will save. No one who comes will be lost and no one who is drawn by the Father will fail to come.
This is the problem with trying to read the context of John 12:32 back on 6:44. Jesus is not talking about the exact same thing. In John 6:44, Jesus is telling why the religious leaders are not believing Him. As for John 12:32, Jesus it talking about his crucifixion and how it will be through his death all people would be dragged towards him but He did not clearly say they would be raised up. Therefore, Jesus is not talking about the same "drawing".
The word "draw" shows up 8 times in the King James Version. One of the great things about the StudyLight.org site is that when you use the online Lexicon it tells you how many times the words appears in the King James Version and the New American Standard Version. Here are the 8 passages from the King James Version:
No man can (5736) come (5629) to me, except the Father which hath sent (5660) me draw (5661) him: and I will raise him up (5692) at the last day
And I, if I be lifted up (5686) from the earth, will draw (5692) all men unto me.
Then Simon Peter having (5723) a sword drew (5656) it, and smote (5656) the high priest's servant, and cut off (5656) his right ear *. The servant's name was (5713) Malchus.
And he said (5627) unto them, Cast (5628) the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find (5692). They cast (5627) therefore, and now they were not able (5656) to draw (5658) it for the multitude of fishes.
Simon Peter went up (5627), and drew (5656) the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was (5752) not the net broken (5681).
Some anti-Calvinists have gone as far as trying to interpret the "drawing" as "gently wooing". They claim that God "woos" us through His loving kindness such that we choose to love and serve Him. No way do any of these eight passages have "gentle wooing" in mind while the drawing is happening. Outside the Bible, the word was used in the first century to describe pulling a bucket water out of well. Good luck trying to woo water in a bucket.
Wednesday, September 25, 2019
Calvinism’s Conflation? No, A Needed Distinction
Professor Leighton Flowers has posted another video trying to critique Calvinism doctrine. He argues that Calvinists confuse believers being regenerated through faith by choosing to humble one's self with the choice by God to choosing to save people who believe.
I think that every Christian would agree that one becomes saved by humbling ourselves before our Holy God and agree that we are sinners and submit ourselves to God.The argument here is about how believers reach that level of humility. Professor Flowers does play Professor Sproul explaining how we are regenerated by God but Flowers does not explain how we go from rejecting God to loving God. Scripture is clear in explaining how we are unable to do things that please God apart from His grace. The thing that I think that Professor Flowers is ignoring is that Sproul is not arguing as if God snaps his fingers and then we are free to humble ourselves. We can humble ourselves when we have
been regenerated, No Believer is waiting for God to humble them so that they can be saved because we humble ourselves because God has done that miraculous work in us.
I think that it's really problematic to try to nail down which comes first: The faith and the humility to be saved or the empowerment to live and serve. I think it's akin to questioning your own desires. For example: what if you decided to have corn flakes for breakfast this morning. Is that because you autonomously wanted that or was it because God decreed from the foundation of creation that you would get corn flakes that day? I don't know. You don't either. And think of all the things God put into motion outside of your control leading up to the point that you could make that decision. It's not a simple answer. However given that we all hated God and was at war with him before we were converted, I fail to see how anyone could choose to accept Christ as Lord and head of their lives without God's help.
I think that it's really problematic to try to nail down which comes first: The faith and the humility to be saved or the empowerment to live and serve. I think it's akin to questioning your own desires. For example: what if you decided to have corn flakes for breakfast this morning. Is that because you autonomously wanted that or was it because God decreed from the foundation of creation that you would get corn flakes that day? I don't know. You don't either. And think of all the things God put into motion outside of your control leading up to the point that you could make that decision. It's not a simple answer. However given that we all hated God and was at war with him before we were converted, I fail to see how anyone could choose to accept Christ as Lord and head of their lives without God's help.
Tuesday, September 24, 2019
The Political Philosophy of Captain America: Civil War – Wisecrack Edition
Personally, I side with Captain America on this one!
Dead like Lazarus or the Prodigal?
Professor Flowers raises these arguments as an objection to the way many Calvinists view the concepts of "Original Sin" and "Total Depravity". He is a Christian so he does not reject either but he does have the view point that although people are sinners and undeserving of Salvation, we still retain the same kind of Free Will that Adam and Eve possessed before they fell under the curse of sin and death. Although he agrees that we are sinner but does not believe that makes us unable to respond to Jesus' out-stretched hands to us.
This leads Professor Flowers to argue against the idea that physical death does not mirror the spiritual death of unrepented sinners. The problem with all parables and symbols when it comes to the nature God's relationship with humanity is always going to be incomplete. It is impossible to come up with a single simple picture capturing it all at once. That is why I think Jesus told so many different Parables so we can look at things from different perspectives.
The reason why many people look at the death of Lazarus as a picture for what being dead in sin is like is because scripture describes the lost as being "dead in sin".
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. - Ephesians 2:1-3
The way this reads to me is as a description of being caught in something that you can't get free of and so hopelessly entrapped you don't even know you are caged.
Jesus describes people in this state as being enslaved. And although I have been in Christ for many years I did not realize that this had been my state to that degree before I was in Christ.
Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. - John 8:34
This is why I think the scripture is saying the sinner is more than just separated from God by their sins. When Professor Flowers appeals to scriptures about how believers should be separated from sin considering themselves dead to sin (ie Romans 6:11) I do not think that this means the same thing as being "dead in sin" but describe being separated from sin - which describe the Elect of God. The Elect are those who have attained salvation by faith. The argument comes up when we ask, "where did this faith come from - a gift from God or grasped by our own free will?" I am going to skip the question right now about whether this "will" is just described as "libertarian" and/or "autonomous" because it should be covered and distinguished in greater detail not just conflated together. It matters.
Instead, I think it's important to point out that I think Prodigal son parable should not be used here. if the Father in the story represents God, then one who had always been sinner would not be a son. This isn't the story of a sinner having a "come to Jesus" moment but of a back-slider coming home and how other believers should treat the ones that are coming back.The man had been a son. He knew his father not coming to home for the first time. A sinner coming to Jesus for the first time becomes adopted not having been a part of the family before that time of adoption. Such a person was deserving of the wrath of God.
Again, the reason why all of this resonates so strongly for me was that I missed the part that this was me. I would read these passages for years and never once connected it to me. I knew it described sinners deserving of hell, but I never really had owned that for me. I mean I was a sinner and I repented but never really thought I deserved to go to hell...that next guy sure....but me? Hitler? Of course. White colonist raping, stealing, enslaving and murdering my ancestors? Oh I just knew they should all burn, Me? Nah. Come to find out that the scripture was talking about me too.
Here is one of many scriptures about our inability to turn to Christ on our own terms and our own power.
5 Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God. - Romans 8:5-8
Sorry, Professor Flowers, but in that analogy of trying to climb up the rope to safety given in the video does not fit the above scripture. Paul points out that if you are living according to your flesh you are not just dead to (or separated from) the things of God, you are dead - unable to even see the rope that have been let down for you let alone to climb it. Not just that - we are so hopelessly depraved we don't even want to get out of the situation. Even the desire to be free is a gift from God because without it we have nothing but enmity (as the King James Version puts it) towards God. Like Joseph Stalin on his death bed, we shake our fist at God with hatred and a rebellious heart.
I think that there is a modern parable that can be used here: The Matrix from the Matrix movies. Remember how Morpheus explains to Neo how the people who are still plugged into the Matrix are a danger to them? Sounds like being trapped in sin to me.
So, how is it that any human being gets past ourselves and makes it to God? It's a miraculous work of the Holy Spirit. This discussion is far from over, but I think that describing the event of human beings coming to Jesus and obtaining salvation - freedom from sin and death - as being just as miraculous as Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead is a very good comparison.
Monday, September 23, 2019
In What Sense Did Christ Die for the Non-Elect? // Ask Pastor John
John Piper starts with 1 Timothy 4:10; Titus 2:11; John 3:16; Romans 8:32.
I find that I agree with Him. I don't think any Christian disagrees what Jesus's death means for the Elect. Jesus literally saved us and this effective to everyone who believes. The Gospel should be given and spread to everyone and we need not worry who is going to be elected for salvation because we do not know who will be believe or if they will ever believe. That's the job of the Holy Spirit to convict and thereby save them. We just need to tell them what Jesus did.
Sunday, September 22, 2019
Make money online with these legitimate jobs | Komando.com
Last week this podcast listed 20 legitimate ways to make money from home. Very interesting.
Make money online with these legitimate jobs | Komando.com
Make money online with these legitimate jobs | Komando.com
Monday, February 26, 2018
Black Panther Is Blacker Than You Thought (SPOILERS)
Danielle Radford does a really good of summarizing much of what much people have to say about how African the Black Panther movies truly is and how T'Challa relates to Eric Killmonger. I really like her comments and I think her commentary is better than Yvette Carnell's comments.
Carnell is wrong in her argument that Killmonger is wrong in how he wants to fix the problems he is
RAIN - Fan Film
Here is an interesting Fan Film on the X-Men known as Storm. It is like her version of the movie Old Man Logan. Definitely in the same style and taste!
The Urban Perspective - Dr. Vince Bantu - Mis-Reformed, the imperialism ...
Yes! This is something that I've been wanting to see a discussion on. It's about how the Reformation has changed over time and the relationship of Christian Europe and Christian Africa. I loved how Dr Bantu pointed out that both parts of Christianity talked past one another on things like the Deity of Christ. It is a problem because they did not understand each other when arguing about how many natures Jesus Christ has. I am amazed. I did not know that. This is a great interview.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)