Calvinism – Page 17 – Martin's Mercurial Musings

Responding to a Calvinist’s Perspective on Faith

Dear Colleen,

Your response to my post on the simplicity of believing as outlined by the Apostle’s Creed went in a direction I didn’t expect and so I’ve created a new post.

First of all – we need a definition for faith and the best definition of faith (that I know of) comes from Heb 11:1, which in the NIV says:

Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

Christian faith makes intrinsic sense (to me, at least) when boiled down to the simplicity of believing per the Apostle’s Creed. However, you surprised me stating that God is the giver of faith in the same way that God predetermines who’ll be saved (and conversely – who will not be saved). Perhaps from a Calvinist perspective that makes sense. In your response you stated that faith is a gift of God according to Eph 2:8-9 and that (I’m quoting you here) “the scriptures tell us that we must be asking God for that faith because it is His gift to give.” Really? The NIV reads:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast.

That the English punctuation breaks Eph 2:8-9 into six “pieces” may or may not be significant. Nevertheless, it’s an easy way to dissect these verses and so here’s my $0.02 worth as to why I disagree with your premise that God withholds faith from some while giving it to others:

For it is by grace you have been saved. This is a demonstrative statement without ambiguity. We are saved by grace. The author doesn’t say we are saved by grace AND faith.
Through faith. My trusty Webster’s Dictionary tells me that the word “through” is not only a preposition, it is also a “function word” used to indicate any number of things such as movement, time, means, completion, exhaustion, as well as to indicate acceptance or approval. Could it be that God’s “approved way” of us receiving His grace (the free gift of salvation) is through faith? There’s no indication here that God gives faith to some and withholds faith from others.
And this not from yourselves. Notice that the author uses the singular word “this” and not the plural word “these”. I believe that the author is referring only to grace here.
It is the gift of God. Again, notice that the author uses the singular word “it” and not the plural word “they”. This would again seem to indicate that only one thought – in this case, grace, is being referenced.
Not by works. Self-explanatory – good deeds won’t cut it.
So that no one can boast. Self-explanatory.

You’ll probably chastise me for re-ordering Eph 2:8-9. However, it makes my point – the author isn’t saying we must ask God for faith and that God may (or may not) give that person faith.

Through faith, you have been saved by God’s gift of grace. You didn’t earn God’s grace. Grace is God’s gift so don’t even bother boasting about your good deeds and actions.

With all due respect, Colleen, I think you’re making Eph 2:8-9 say something other than what it is saying. These two verses state – we’re saved by grace. Period. From Eph 2:8-9 I don’t see that faith is a gift of God given to some and not given to others. Rather, we’re saved by grace. We’re saved by grace through faith. We’re saved by grace through being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

Well, there’s more I could add but this seems to be a good place to stop.

Take care, my friend. I welcome and await your response.

The Free Will of the Wind

Dear Colleen,

What a delight to hear from you. It’s been quite a while since we’ve written and I’ve been wondering how things have been with you.

First of all, I regret that the hyperlinks aren’t working and I can’t figure out how to fix them. However, you can copy and paste the link into the “browser bar”. I wish I was better at this internet stuff.

My struggle to understand God’s character and the nature of God’s will is about the same. Many work and extraneous activities have somewhat limited my posting. However, I recently posted about an insight from a photography trip experience to South Dakota’s Badlands last week.

The John Piper sermon you linked http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Sermons/ByDate/2009/3865_The_Free_Will_of_the_Wind/ has provided some thought. As you know, I do take issue with Reformed theology in general and sovereign election in particular. I’m not familiar with Dr. Piper’s work. However, the little I have listened to and studied – particularly as it relates to God’s will gives me pause. You can read a post I wrote regarding Dr. Piper’s perspective on Rom 12:1-2 pertaining to the will of God here: https://martinsmercurialmusings.wordpress.com/2008/03/20/14/

Here’s my $0.02 worth for what I see taught in this passage:

Vs3 Jesus declares to Nick that everyone must be born again to see the kingdom of God.
Vs4 Nick asks if Jesus is talking about one’s physical birth from their mother.
Vs5 Jesus explains that we have to be born of water and spirit.
Vs6 Flesh gives birth to flesh and spirit gives birth to spirit.
Vs7 Jesus tells Nick that he shouldn’t be surprised at this.
Vs8 The wind blows where it pleases – we can hear (the wind’s effect) but can’t see (the wind’s origin or destination). Yet we can hear and see evidence of the wind.

Not being real familiar with this passage, I did a Goggle search on “Jn 3:8 commentary” and found the following sites:

Unfortunately, I “lost track” of which points came from which web site. Nevertheless, the main points made by the above links include:

This is a play on words. “Spirit” can also mean “breath” or “wind.” Wind is something we can’t see, but we can see the affect it has.
There is no “litmus test” to prove that a Christian has the Holy Spirit, but the evidence is the changed life of the individual.
We can know the wind exists because we can see its affect on the things it touches and the sound it makes. We cannot see the wind, but we can see what it does. The Spirit is invisible to human eyes, but His work or regeneration can be clearly seen.
We cannot see God, but we can see what He does. Jesus said it is the same with those born of the Spirit of God.
We can see the result a spiritual birth has on those who experience the new birth. Nicodemus was rejecting what Jesus’ teaching. Even though the Lord explained it to him, Nicodemus didn’t understand or accept this truth. Jesus is saying to Nicodemus that he could see and know the wind was real and existed. Likewise, though not actually seen the Spirit also exists and spiritually changed the lives of men.
A baptismal ceremony can be seen. However, the forgiveness, clean conscience, and receiving the Spirit cannot be seen.
Like the powerful wind, though invisible, its power is nevertheless profound.
Jesus tells Nicodemus that he shouldn’t reject a doctrine merely because he couldn’t understand it. Neither could the wind be seen, but its effects were well known and no one doubted the existence or power of the agent.
Jesus’ idea to Nicodemus is, “You don’t understand everything about the wind, but you see its effects. That is just how it is with the birth of the Spirit.”
Jesus wanted Nicodemus to know that he didn’t have to understand everything about the new birth before he experienced it.
The Greek word pneuma can mean both wind and spirit, much like its Hebrew equivalent ruach. Both meanings are in fact present here. John uses this double meaning to make the point that the activity of the Spirit, much like the wind, can’t be precisely described, defined or contained. However, its impact and results can certainly be experienced.

Honestly, Colleen, this is the first time I’ve seen Calvinist thought related to this passage in general and verse eight in particular. To that end, I disagree with Dr. Piper’s comment that Jn 3:8 teaches “that being born again is decisively, ultimately, the work of the Spirit’s will, and secondarily and dependently the acting of our will.” Dr. Piper, I believe, has a pre-determined outcome regarding sovereign election and will use Scripture in convoluted ways and twist logic and meaning to support that perspective. It is my contention that the concept of “election” is corporate and not individual. The book, Across the Spectrum, states on pg 144:

Paul’s concept of election in these passages is corporate, not individual. The church is God’s elect people in the same sense that Israel was God’s elect nation. According to this interpretation, before the foundation of the world God chose to have a people (the church) who would believe in him and would be predestined “to be holy and blameless before him in love.” When a person chooses to be incorporated into this group by believing in Jesus, all that is predestined for the group now applies to that person. Hence, Paul can say to all who have chosen to become part of the church, “He chose us [as a group] in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love. He destined us for adoption as his children (Eph 1:4-5). (This) interpretation is more plausible than the Calvinist interpretation, which depicts God as deciding who would (and thus who would not) believe in him before the foundation of the world.

Also, Dr. Piper also confuses those who are “threatened” or “thrilled” by Jn 3:8. However, in fairness, that is a function of his (or probably any Calvinist’s) perspective based on their reading of those verses listed: Jn 6:44-45, Acts 13:48, Rom 9:15-16, Phil 2:12-13, Eph 2:8-9. Suffice it to say that I have a different understanding (interpretation?) of those verses. However, to keep this letter from becoming inordinately long, I’ll differ until later. Perhaps we could banter back and forth on our different perspectives.

In short, I’m not persuaded by Dr. Piper’s sermon that the wind Jesus refers to in Jn 3:8 is related in any way to Calvinistic thought. Well, this probably isn’t the response you had hoped for. Nevertheless, as always, I welcome your response and feedback.

Most Sincerely,

Bob

The Simplicity of Believing

When we arrived in the middle of the afternoon on a trip to South Dakota’s Badlands, it was hot, dry and dusty. There was a bareness and an overriding appearance of nothing but wasteland. The next morning it was bitterly cold with strong winds and some rain. However, there was color and contrast to the land where before there appeared to be nothing. Two inches of snow the following morning highlighted peaks, ridges, rock formations and other details. Seeing the same landscape through different lenses (pun intended) was quite interesting. Nevertheless, on whichever day, the more one looked at the same area of landscape, the more detail there was to see. Still, the breadth and beauty of the land is missed if one only myopically looks at the incredible detail.

A good friend asked me the question: If one takes away all of the questions, all of the assumptions, all of the preconceived notions that we as believers have – what is left? I wasn’t sure. Readers of this blog know that I’ve been struggling to understand the nature and character of God. In all honesty, my relationship to my heavenly Father has been at best distant as I’ve struggled through such issues as the will of God in the life of the believer and predetermination as advocated by ardent Calvinists. This good friend put it like this: perhaps it all boils down to the simplicity of believing as spelled out in the Apostle’s Creed.

The Apostle’s Creed states:

I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth

And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord

Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary

Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead and buried: He descended into hell

The third day he rose again from the dead

He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty

From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead

I believe in the Holy Ghost

I believe in the holy catholic church: the communion of saints

The forgiveness of sin

The resurrection of the body

And the life everlasting

Perhaps the will of God is indeed an impenetrable mystery.

Perhaps the debate between Calvinists and Arminians doesn’t really matter.

Perhaps it would be best to start again at the beginning – from the perspective that God is God and that through faith I am His child because Christ died on the cross to forgive my sins so that I can have fellowship with Him.

Is it so simple?

Can one just believe?

I don’t know.

The Will of God According to Wall Drug

Anyone traveling through the upper midwest surely knows of a certain drugstore in Wall, SD. After all, it’s next to impossible to miss the billboards. I happened to be in the area and thought it would be fun to visit what has to be one of the all-time great tourist spots. The Wall Drug facility is immense and thankfully there are store maps conveniently located at each entrance. There’s a short summary of Wall Drug’s history in the brochure that includes the following statements:

Our families agreed that we should all pray about the decision (for Ted & Dorothy Hustead to buy a small drug store in Wall, SD in 1931).
We asked God’s guidance.
In the end everyone felt that it was God’s will for us to go to Wall.
But now that Dorothy and I were all alone here (in Wall, SD), we wondered if we’d heard God right.

Did God have a plan for this young pharmacist related to a location in Wall, SD? Was it God’s will for Wall Drug to prosper during the middle 1930s when so many people and businesses were struggling through the Great Depression? If so, then is it reasonable to believe that God picks and chooses which businesses will thrive and which ones will fail? If that is so, is it reasonable for one to believe that it is God’s will for many people to suffer financially because God has decreed this current recession?

I personally don’t think so as I don’t believe God is in the business of picking and choosing winners and losers – for eternal salvation, a business adventure, one’s health, or any number of other things. Could it be that it frustrates (or even angers) God when, as per the Wall Drug founders, people act out their faith based on “feelings” and then when circumstances change or situations become difficult, people question their faith?

Spring in Minnesota – a glimpse into the meaning of Easter

Although the winters are long and cold up here in Minnesota, I do enjoy the four seasons and there is no time so pleasant as the end of winter and the early breaking out of spring. There are buds on the trees trying to see the light of day. Sunlight is lasting longer into the evening and temperatures are doing their best to get and stay above the 50 degree mark. The last vestige of snow is gone except for those deep shaded areas. The ground is gray with the remains of last years foliage and it is at this point I can only imagine how beautiful it will all be in another month or so. For me, spring is a time for hope. It is a time to reflect back on some difficult times and look ahead to a new beginning, a new season as it were. The old has past away and a fresh newness has arrived. Perhaps this ties in with Easter. Jesus was dead, cold, and gray while he lay in that tomb. And tomorrow He arises in the bright radiant freshness of new life reaching out His arms drawing us in to the warmth of His love. Two old hymns come to mind; The Old Rugged Cross and Just As I Am. I’ve never really thought these songs had a commonality until I started thinking about spring and the meaning of Easter. Jesus died on that cross and we have to bring ourselves, just as we are, to Him who is on that cross in order to take on the new life He has promised.

Show’n-off our new grandson

Please allow me to post a picture of our new grandson Jedidiah John Martin – born 2.1.09. All the usual suspects (mother, father, & child) are doing just fine. The new grandma (my wife) can’t wait until we travel to Nashville to meet the little tyke. The new grandpa (me) is dealing with issues of denial – I can’t believe that I’m now a grandfather! And more than that, I can’t believe that I’m married to a grandmother!!!

Grandpa, is there any difference between Calvinism & Arminianism?

Yes, I’ve been delinquent. It’s time to get going again!

It’s been over four months since I’ve posted anything on this blog. Most of the reason for not writing, I believe, has to do with being somewhat “burned out”. Readers of this blog know that my dear friend Colleen and I were going back and forth on a whole host of issues (over several posts and many comments) more or less centered around the sovereignty of God and what some of that entails within the life of the believer. Even though I haven’t written anything, I have collected bits of information, statements, in addition to my own thoughts with the intent of writing. Perhaps I’ll get around to posting on some of those things. Still, I feel like I’m coming out of a “faith depression”. Through all of the studying and writing over the past many months, it was my hope that I would better understand (1) who God is and (2) the nature of a relationship I have to my heavenly father through faith. To date I don’t think I’ve succeeded in that endeavor and for some time now I think I’ve been feeling bad about that. I appreciate the freedom I have in this blog to explore aspects of my faith that indeed trouble me. I especially appreciate those who respond with a kind word or even a pointed challenge. I look forward to getting this blog started up again and, with a bit of excitement, fear and trepidation (okay, maybe that’s a bit of an overstatement); we’ll see where things end up.

Biblical Translation Castigation

Granted, this post isn’t addressing the main emphasis of this blog. Still, a good title or phrase certainly catches my attention. As such, when Jose commented in my “Sovereign Election – More Than Salvation?” post about “NIV perversion”, I was immediately interested. Before going further, let me state that my preference for the NIV isn’t based upon any eschatological analysis. On the contrary, it’s probably more of a “herd mentality” given that many pastors and knowledgeable believers I know like and use the NIV. If the NIV translation is good enough for them, then it’s good enough for me.

Jose prefers the King James Version and offers the following sites as to why:

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/NIV/why.htm

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/new_international_perversion.htm

On a personal note, I find these sites to be devoid of the love and compassion that I see exhibited in Jesus (as I read in the NIV). Rather these sites remind me of people who walk around carrying signs saying repent or you will spend eternity in Hell. I don’t doubt the truth of their message. However, I think there are better ways to communicate that truth.

In response, Jose, the preface of the NIV Bible I use (copyright 1989) states, “The New International Version is a completely new translation of the Holy Bible made by over a hundred scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts.” Perhaps I’m being naïve and foolish, but I’m trusting that the hundred-plus scholars who put the NIV translation together did so with a sharp understanding of the original manuscripts and a keen awareness regarding the nuance of language. Simply put, I believe the NIV team put forth a credible effort to make the NIV translation of the original manuscripts and texts into English as accurate as possible.

In my own “linguistic” experience – working with janitors to PhDs where I’m employed, being married for thirty years and having survived three teenagers, I know that English words sometimes have different meanings for different people. It seems to me, therefore, that we’ll always end up with translation problems because of variances in translators understanding of the structure of the original languages (i.e. Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic) the historical context and implied meaning of the words used, in addition to the nuance of English word definitions.

To that end, the author of one site I found – http://www.dyeager.org/articles/bibletranslations.php indicates that his preferred translation is the NKJV. However, he also states that, “We need to understand that all translations have problems and that no translation is 100% perfect” (emphasis mine). As such, Jose, some of the concerns raised regarding the NIV in the two listed web sites appear to have some validity. However, I findeth not necessary to leaveth mine NIV and clingeth to thou’st KJV.

Happy anniversary, my love

The card from my bride as we celebrate our 30th anniversary today reads:

Hold on to me, and I will hold on to you through anything and everything life brings our way.

Bring me your worries, and I’ll listen with my heart.

Tell me what you need, and I’ll do my best to give it to you.

Love me even when it isn’t easy, and I promise to do the same for you.

After all, isn’t that what love, true love, is all about?

Happy Anniversary

I am a truly blessed and lucky guy. Happy anniversary, my love.

Sovereign Election – More Than Salvation?

Below is a letter that Colleen had posted elsewhere on this blog that I think lends itself to its own post. I will have a response to Colleen’s letter in the next day or two. As always, I welcome people’s thoughts and viewpoints.

Sincerely,

Bob

Setting aside God’s sovereign election of individuals to eternal life, let us agree on three other types of election. First, what we could call a “national” election. Wouldn’t you agree that some nations and communities have been given more exposure to a knowledge of true religion and the gospel than others? God undoubtedly does choose some nations to receive much greater spiritual and temporal blessings than others (i.e., America). The contrast is very striking when we compare these to third-world nations such as Africa, India and China. Did these people choose their fate? I don’t think anyone would say they did. The diversities of religious privileges in the different nations can be ascribed to nothing but the good pleasure of God.

Another form of election taught in scripture is that of individuals to the external means of grace, such as hearing and reading the gospel, association with other people of God, and sharing the benefits of the civilization which has arisen where the gospel has gone. None of us has had a chance to say at a particular time in world history or in what country we would be born–or whether we would be a member of the white race or some other. One child is born into health and wealth in a favored land, while another is born into poverty or neglectful parents. Have these things not been sovereignly decided for them? Furthermore, was it not of God’s own choosing that He created us as human beings, in His own image, when He might just as easily have created us as frogs or mosquitos or cats? These things, too, are due to God’s overruling providence, and not to human choice.

Lastly, I offer yet another kind of election, that of individuals to certain vocations. Some are given to amazing gifts for classical guitar, and others have gifts of painting or singing or speaking. Some people have been given personal beauty, some intelligence, some a kind disposition. Did we choose these gifts? I’m here to tell you, Bob, no matter how many guitar lessons I might take, I will never play in the beautiful way you do.

In each of these “types” of election, God gives to some what He withholds from others. We can easily see from conditions in the world and from our own everyday experiences that these blessings are bestowed sovereignly and unconditionally, irrespective of any previous merit or action on the part of those so chosen.

If we are highly favored, we can only be thankful for His blessings; if not highly favored, we have no grounds for complaint. Why, precisely, this or that person is placed in circumstances which lead to saving faith can only rest in the providence of the God Himself.

In Christ Alone,

Colleen