A good and dear friend who writes on matters of faith and religion for the Louisville Examiner recently posted an article: Why Be a Calvinist? I’ve known Mike for quite a while now we’ve had many really good and deep discussions related to faith-related issues that I struggle with including Calvinism, the will of God, open theism, etc. Even though I may have profound disagreements with Mike, I have immense respect for him and I invite readers of this blog to visit his site at:
http://www.examiner.com/x-13763-Louisville-Evangelical-Examiner~y2009m11d4-Why-believe-in-Calvinism?#comments
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Author: Bob
I’m an upper Midwestern guy who has recently entered the "Buick stage" of life and decided to migrate to Florida. This blog is an attempt to rectify discordant aspects within my Christian faith ... or what often feels like my lack of Christian faith. Things which make life more enjoyable include strong black coffee, charcoal grilling anytime of the year, putz'ing at a table saw, playing chess, a good orthopedic surgeon and an occasional IPA. Please feel free to poke around and comment as you wish. I welcome discussion and the insights of others.
View all posts by Bob
Martin's Mercurial Musings 
I placed this comment under Mike’s article in part to help start some discussion on Mike’s article and also in part to express my own sentiments:
That contemporary PhD theologians i.e. John Piper and Greg Boyd can have diametrically opposed perspectives on the same scriptural text is, I think, problematic within Christianity. I say that as one who struggles in my own faith. If indeed the term ‘theology’ means the science of God, are there not “constants” that all Christians can agree on. In essence, I submit you’re discussing the most fundamental tenant of Christianity – salvation. And yet, even on this most fundamental aspect of faith, there is significant disagreement as to whether man is free to choose to accept Christ (Arminianism) or if it is God who predetermines who will (and conversely who will not) be saved (Calvinism). I appreciate that you’re admitting to a Calvinist perspective. However, I respectfully submit that subsequent posts to explain the differences will be through a Calvinist-affinity/anti-Arminian lense. If JP & GB can’t agree on these things, how can I know that you’re being fair to the subject matter?
This spillover is ahetnor example of what I was just replying to you about over on my blog. Not just the IFB movement, but the American Evangelical movement as a whole has a very strong Calvinist heritage which is inconsistently adapted by many to Arminian emphases on soteriology. They still have, at least, many great hymns rattling around in their heads written by Calvinist writers, preachers gleaning from Calvinist commentators and old preachers many Calvinistic catch-phrases such as the kind your Arminian scholar cites. There’s traces of the Calvinism of our heritage in many things we Evangelicals do, so all Evangelicals need to get back to the basics!