"As the very first commencement of every good thing, so likewise the progress, continuance and confirmation, nay, even the perseverance in good, are not from ourselves, but from God through the Holy Spirit" — James Arminius
Thanks for sharing the link. I need to work through Owen soon. It’s hard, though, to get through Packer’s introduction. Apparently no one ever taught him the whole flies-honey/vinegar thing.
If I were a Calvinist, I would be an Owenite. And a Warfieldian.
BTW, I love the roos!
Billy
Apparently no one ever taught him the whole flies-honey/vinegar thing.
The same could be said of Owen. As long as Calvinists hold he and people like him up as great theologians, Calvinism (for them) can never be just some minor variation of doctrine as exists between pre/post/mid trib rapture, because men tend to act like the ones they hold to be their fathers. For men like that, it’s their way or no way.
Thanks Ben. I hope you continue your series on falling from grace.
Dan
J.C.: The same could be said of Owen. As long as Calvinists hold he and people like him up as great theologians, Calvinism (for them) can never be just some minor variation of doctrine as exists between pre/post/mid trib rapture, because men tend to act like the ones they hold to be their fathers. For men like that, it’s their way or no way.
Right. This particular point of Calvinism is one where humility is especially called for. Limited atonement is patently contradicted by multiple passages in the NT; Calvin’s exact view isn’t totally clear; many fine “4 point” Calvinist scholars don’t buy into it. In fact it is a belief exclusive to Calvinism; even the otherwise very similar Lutherans don’t hold it. The burden of proof is definitely theirs.
Their best strategy would be to patiently and irenically argue why their view should be considered, but they don’t. I can forgive Owen because of his times, but Packer comes out swinging, “What? You don’t believe this? How dare you so distort the Gospel!” That doesn’t exactly encourage those not already convinced to be open to their arguments.
Thanks for sharing the link. I need to work through Owen soon. It’s hard, though, to get through Packer’s introduction. Apparently no one ever taught him the whole flies-honey/vinegar thing.
If I were a Calvinist, I would be an Owenite. And a Warfieldian.
BTW, I love the roos!
Billy
Apparently no one ever taught him the whole flies-honey/vinegar thing.
The same could be said of Owen. As long as Calvinists hold he and people like him up as great theologians, Calvinism (for them) can never be just some minor variation of doctrine as exists between pre/post/mid trib rapture, because men tend to act like the ones they hold to be their fathers. For men like that, it’s their way or no way.
Thanks Ben. I hope you continue your series on falling from grace.
Dan
J.C.: The same could be said of Owen. As long as Calvinists hold he and people like him up as great theologians, Calvinism (for them) can never be just some minor variation of doctrine as exists between pre/post/mid trib rapture, because men tend to act like the ones they hold to be their fathers. For men like that, it’s their way or no way.
Right. This particular point of Calvinism is one where humility is especially called for. Limited atonement is patently contradicted by multiple passages in the NT; Calvin’s exact view isn’t totally clear; many fine “4 point” Calvinist scholars don’t buy into it. In fact it is a belief exclusive to Calvinism; even the otherwise very similar Lutherans don’t hold it. The burden of proof is definitely theirs.
Their best strategy would be to patiently and irenically argue why their view should be considered, but they don’t. I can forgive Owen because of his times, but Packer comes out swinging, “What? You don’t believe this? How dare you so distort the Gospel!” That doesn’t exactly encourage those not already convinced to be open to their arguments.