“Ecumenical, Universalist, Idealist” critiques Jonathan Edwards

B

biscuit1953

Well-known member
Elect
Joined
Apr 18, 2012
Messages
1,671
Reaction score
304
Points
83
I saw this critique on Reddit and it reminded me of why I moved closer to Calvinism the more I studied the scriptures. I consider myself a “four point Calvinist” while not insisting the hard core T.U.L.I.P followers are “heretics.” I believe the main difference in Calvinism and Arminianism deals with the impossibility of reconciling the sovereignty of God with the responsibility of man in our human understanding. When one drifts too far away from the sovereignty of God in salvation, the dominoes quickly start dropping and drifts into Open Theism. Here are a few points taken from Jonathan Edwards’ sermon on “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” by this Reddit user and why he condemns them. I will give a verse or two that supports Edwards.
https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenChristian/comments/fpa6s9/the_gospel_of_christ_against_edwards_angry_god/

1. God may cast wicked men into hell at any given moment. The Gospel of Christ tells us that God cannot cast anyone into Hell, because God is love. Cf. Psalms 7:11; Rev 20:15.

2. The wicked deserve to be cast into hell. God’s own nature prevents him from destroying the “wicked.” Cf. Rom 3:10-19; Nahum 1:3 .

3. The wicked, at this moment, suffer under God's condemnation to Hell. The “wicked” do not suffer under God’s condemnation. Cf. John 3:18-19.

4. The wicked must not think, simply because they are not physically in Hell, that God (in Whose hand the wicked now reside) is not—at this very moment—as angry with them as He is with those miserable creatures He is now tormenting in hell, and who—at this very moment—do feel and bear the fierceness of His wrath. God does not torment anyone in Hell, and He cannot hate any of his lost sheep. Cf. Matt 25:46; Rev 14:11

5. Simply because there are not visible means of death before them at any given moment, the wicked should not feel secure. The Gospel of Christ tells us that it is the wickedness of the wicked that is inherently insecure. Evil is nothing, it has no substance, stability, or security. Cf. Luke 12:16-20; 1 Sam 20:3

6. All that wicked men may do to save themselves from Hell's pains shall afford them nothing if they continue to reject Christ. The Gospel of Christ tells us that when someone does good, then that is an acceptance of Christ for it is an act of obedience to His command to love others, even if it is done in ignorance of the reality of God which lies behind all goodness and loving-kindness. Cf. Titus 3:5; Rom 10:1-4.

7. God has never promised to save us from Hell, except for those contained in Christ through the covenant of Grace. God’s grace is irresistible and infinite. As Paul declared with joy, “Just as all die in Adam, all will be made alive in Christ. On this last point the Reddit user is correct in that we were chosen before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4). However, he went down to the last domino to teach universalism. Cf. Matt 22:14.
 
subllibrm said:
Hitler?
Click to expand...
Job 38:4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.

Job 40:2 “Shall a faultfinder contend with the Almighty? He who argues with God, let him answer it.”

Job 40:7 “Dress for action like a man; I will question you, and you make it known to me.

Job 40:8 Will you even put me in the wrong? Will you condemn me that you may be in the right?

Job 42:1 Then Job subllibrm answered the LORD and said:

Job 42:5 I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees you;

Job 42:6 therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes.”
 
???

Are you a universalist?
 
If radical autonomous human free will really is the key to solving the sovereignty/responsibility dilemma, as suggested by people like Bell and Boyd, how do they realistically position themselves that God has any ultimate authority to convert the sinner, either in this life OR in the next?
 
ALAYMAN said:
If radical autonomous human free will really is the key to solving the sovereignty/responsibility dilemma, as suggested by people like Bell and Boyd, how do they realistically position themselves that God has any ultimate authority to convert the sinner, either in this life OR in the next?
Click to expand...

It solves the dilemma by ignoring one side of it. Radical Arminianism and open theism are the flip side of the coin hyper-Calvinism is on.
 
Paul Washer refers to himself as a 5-point Spurgeonist. He admits that while the sovereignty of God in salvation is true, it doesn’t excuse man from his "complete and full responsibility to come to God." A mystery that causes much divisiveness among Christians because both groups have their extremists.

 
biscuit1953 said:
Paul Washer refers to himself as a 5-point Spurgeonist. He admits that while the sovereignty of God in salvation is true, it doesn’t excuse man from his "complete and full responsibility to come to God." A
Click to expand...
So, a Calvinist. Not surprising,since that is what Spurgeon was.

Emphasizing man's responsibility while minimizing God's sovereignty = Arminianism. Error.

Emphasizing God's sovereignty while minimizing man's responsibility = hyper- Calvinism. Error.

Teaching both as biblical truth = Calvinism. And as Spurgeon himself would have said: that is the Gospel, and nothing else.
 
Ransom said:
It solves the dilemma by ignoring one side of it. Radical Arminianism and open theism are the flip side of the coin hyper-Calvinism is on.
Click to expand...
Both sides are extreme and get into heretical viewpoint
 
If Calvinism is true…… I’m thankful he chose me to be born again and didn’t create me for destruction.

That’s all I can say.
 
Calvinism

Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means!
Rom 9:15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
Rom 9:16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
Act 13:47 For so the Lord has commanded us, saying, “‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’”
Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.
Eph 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love
Eph 1:5 he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,
Rom 3:10 as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one;
Rom 3:11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.

Arminianism

Luke 13:3 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. [God grants repentance – Acts 11:18]
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Paradox: A statement, proposition, or situation that seems contradictory, nonsensical, or against common sense, yet upon investigation reveals a deeper, often true meaning.

The only way to reconcile so many contradictory verses is to accept both as being true at the same time. Charles Spurgeon believed that man has a free will but because of his sinful nature will always choose to sin instead of seeking after God (total depravity).

Rom 9:11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—
Rom 9:13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
Rom 9:15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
Rom 9:20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”
Rom 9:22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,

“Paul is not addressing those with honest questions about this difficult doctrine, but those who seek to excuse their own sin and unbelief (v. 22). God does not make men sinful, but he leaves them in the sin they have chosen. MacArthur

Most view election in a negative light. If God did not choose some for salvation, then none would be saved for there is none that seeks after God, no not one (Rom 3:10-12). Election shows God's grace.

​
 
ALAYMAN said:
If radical autonomous human free will really is the key to solving the sovereignty/responsibility dilemma, as suggested by people like Bell and Boyd, how do they realistically position themselves that God has any ultimate authority to convert the sinner, either in this life OR in the next?
Click to expand...
Or why pray for someone's slvation if they make the decision and God is not the ultimate authority?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top