Sunday, June 22, 2008

Prayers for the Family of David Shawn Blanton, Jr.

We had a tragedy in Haywood County, NC this past week. His victim's name was David Shawn Blanton, Jr. and he was a North Carolina State Trooper in our area. The tragedy was a man named Edwardo Wong II whose fallen and wicked heart brought him to kill Mr. Blanton with cold blooded calculation. Granted, he is only charged with this horrible crime and I am sure the details of this tragedy will come out in trial. Nonetheless, a young husband and father of a two week old baby died doing his duty for the citizens of our state. There was an amazing funeral service yesterday and after returning from bringing my wife her lunch at her workplace I decided to drive through the Lake Junaluska retreat on the way back to our home. I had forgotten about the funeral and when I came upon the auditorium by the lake, I was amazed. There were thousands of people there. There were hundreds of cars along Highway 19 with people milling about to pay respects when Mr. Blanton's body would be carried back to Cherokee, the place of his family's home. … and now, a new baby will go through this world never having known it's father and needlessly so.

The story of this young man is here.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

The 91st Psalm

This is one of my personal favorites in all of the Bible and I meditate upon it here with the thoughts of my grandchildren fresh in mind …


 

1 ¶ He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.

2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.

3 Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence.

4 He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.

5 Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day;

6 Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday.

7 A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee.

8 Only with thine eyes shalt thou behold and see the reward of the wicked.

9 ¶ Because thou hast made the LORD, which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation;

10 There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling.

11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.

12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.

13 Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.

14 Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name.

15 He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will deliver him, and honour him.

16 With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.


 

Take time out of this hectic day and praise the LORD with every fibre of our being.

Are You Christocentric?

I was thinking of something I wrote on another forum a while ago and it continues to tug at me. In examining the Calvinist view of election, I am drawn to the notion that if one's focus and center of their soteriology is that of predestined election, from before the foundations of the world, can such a view truly be considered Christocentric? I realize that my perception of the beliefs expressed by Calvinists may be weighed down by an objection to their premise, yet if coming to save only the elect, chosen before Christ (not speaking of the Logos, but of the Messiah), then how can a Calvinist claim to be Christocentric at all? Christ serves the purpose of the Elect under such a scheme. It seems that Calvinism, rather than centered upon Christ, is focused instead on Election. The LORD's election of souls provides the purpose of Christ if the Calvinist view is to be believed. This strikes me as completely backwards. From the Arminian view (and the right Christian view in my opinion) Christ is The Elect and His purpose was to bring a provision for salvation to the world, not an elect world as our Calvinist friends assert, but to a fallen world in need of a savior. Our election is predicated upon being one in Him and we look to Him as the savior, the redeemer who provides a way for all men who hear the Gospel of His life, death, burial and resurrection to find salvation and eternal life.

The question I must ask is "Are you focused upon the predestined election of souls for whom you must believe is the purpose of Christ or is the focus and object of your faith upon the One who is The Elect of God and the purpose is your Christ centered service to Him"?

Sunday, June 15, 2008

A Newborn Arminian


I cannot be a Calvinist with any measure of conscience. As I peered into this newborn's eyes I came to the stark realization that contrary to the Calvinist assertion that the LORD purposefully creates souls as fodder for hell, He brings souls in this world for the purpose of Love. I bring a bias here. This is my newborn grandson born on June 5, 2008 at 10 o'clock in the evening. His name is Benjamin Riley Mallett and I hold him daily bonding and letting him know his grandfather (Papa to him and my other three grandchildren) by sight and voice. I have fed him with breast milk (not mine obviously), burped him, changed him and talked to him of the LORD. He will be raised up in the LORD and taught the doctrines of Christ.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Why Am I An Arminian?

Having been away from this task for a while, I want to return to a quest of sorts. Who am I as an Arminian? This is not a question of what kind of Christian I am for there is only one kind of Christian, one who abides in Christ. Of course, we attach a myriad of labels, thoughts, outlooks, paradigms, viewpoints etc. to how we define our soteriology and hermeneutic. We are Arminian, Free-will Baptist, Particular Baptist, Calvinist, Presbyterian, Methodist, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Orthodox, synergistic, monergistic and a host of other descriptives. Yet, for those among the labels who abide in Christ and He in us, we are Christians. Simply put, we are one body. Even still, I am an Arminian within that body and that defines how I approach theological issues. Putting aside the vitriolic expression of sectarian theology that pervades many discussions of Arminian vs. them or Calvinist vs. us, I desire to fully understand why I call myself an Arminian.

There is an undisputable truth among this One body, that being God is Love. It is Agape, a kind of love that is an expression of the LORD and unattainable by His fleshly creation of our own merit. Naturally, we love our own kind, we love our children, our friends and our personal interests but lacking agape we have no love for our enemies. Such a love is not natural to the flesh except perhaps in an outward fashion yet strip the façade off the worldly purveyors of "brotherly love" and enmity will always show it's ugly face. Fallen man is fallen throughout his entire being and as such agape has no place. Now enter Love or God in the lives of fallen men. We become new creations, not just imputed with righteousness but imparted with the Love of God, that agape love that can only be comprehended with the mind of Christ. Only then can we love our enemies and it is because of that truth that I call myself an Arminian. God loves his enemies.

"For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Ro 5:6-8 AV)

As sinners we were at war with the LORD. We hated him. We were His enemy at every turn yet the LORD so loves the world that we have Christ in our midst. I am Arminian because God is Love and that love knows no bounds with regard to this fallen world. There is no man that God hates and cannot love. I am Arminian because I know that any man hearing the Gospel of Jesus Christ, having been freed by the grace of God, can turn to Him for salvation

Friday, May 23, 2008


A Great New Calvinist Dictionary

Kevin Jackson at Seekadoo has put together a great Calvinist dictionary to help us understand the "truths of Calvinism" better when we interact with our esteemed brethren. This should help us know our place when we engage in the debate.





Calvinist Dictionary

Tuesday, May 20, 2008


Rising In A Newness Of Life - Regeneration

"Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." (Ro 6:4 AV)

That perpetual battle popped up again today. This is one of those struggles between Calvinists and the rest of the Body of Christ that will never cease until the sound of the Trump. When are men regenerated? Before faith or after? Before rising in newness of life or after the old man and his foul deeds is buried? I cannot understand the mind that states the old man is regenerated before faith is evidenced and a new creation (which is what being regenerated refers to) rises in Christ. It makes faith of absolutely no consequence to being born again or saved. Of course our Calvinist friends attempt to separate being born again from being saved but they do so out of a philosophical construct rather than clear scripture. In effect, Calvinists must defend the unscriptural notion of two separate regenerations, one creating a "new old man" and a second regeneration, a new creation, rising out the death of the old man. In a discussion earlier today, a Calvinist fellow suggested that this rising as a new creation, this walking in newness of life following the death and burial of the old man was not being created new or regenerated but was a process of sanctification. While I do not doubt an on-going sanctification as a work of the Holy Spirit in every believer's life, at some point one has to acknowledge there is a newness of life following a death. To regenerate is not to kill but to make new, to recreate.

Paul uses the expression "walk in newness of life" to proclaim the Christian expectation in opposition to the charge of antinomianism. We are to be who we are, new creatures in Christ, born again with the Spirit of God as our guiding light. The passage noted above is not suggesting we will become something new at some point down the road. No, it is an admonishment to become what we are, to bring our condition in Christ at par with our position in Christ. We are already new creations in Christ and God Forbid, as the Apostle put it, that sin should be our norm, our desire or what gives cause to our thoughts and actions. Sinful is not who we are. We are the Righteousness of God by being in Christ and submissive to the desires of the Holy Spirit. We became new creations when that old man of ours, full of sin and deeds uncountable, was put to death through our faith in the LORD Jesus Christ and we rose out of that grave as something new, something not held by our sinful past and one with the LORD instead of enslaved to sinful desire.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Are Calvinists Open Theists?

Richard Coords of Examining Calvinism raised a fascinating question for our Calvinist brethren over on the CARM discussion boards. He asks “Are Calvinists Open Theists who believe that God MUST decree everything in order to know anything?”. The question seeks to examine whether Calvinists constrict the LORD’s omniscience to a pattern of decrees and I for one look forward to the replies IF there is a sound Calvinist willing to step up to the task.

Saturday, May 17, 2008

What Is The Sovereignty Of The LORD?


There is no soul in Christ who does not believe it. There is no soul within orthodoxy who demeans it. There are plenty who misapply it. It means, in it's simplest terms, that the LORD is LORD over all. As LORD, He has determined how the order of all things shall be and in the case of mankind, made in His image and endued with rights and privileges shared by no other creation, He has, in His sovereign will, freed men to believe through the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ without regard to a partiality of any sort. That is the witness of scripture and is wholly within His sovereign authority.

“But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” (Ro 10:8-11 AV)

Sunday, May 11, 2008


While not Arminian specifically, Jerry Vines Ministries is hosting a two day conference on November 6th and 7th, 2008 to discuss and examine Calvinism's TULIP acronym. Rather than conduct a campaign against Calvinism, the conference desires, in its organizers words, "to be a biblical and theological assessment of and response to 5-point Calvinism". The noted speakers will examine each of the points of TULIP over the course of the conference.

John 3:16 - Dr. Jerry Vines

Total Depravity - Dr. Paige Patterson

Unconditional Election - Dr. Richard Land

Limited Atonement - Dr. David Allen

Irresistible Grace - Dr. Steve Lemke

Perseverance of the Saints - Dr. Ken Keathley

John 3:16 to the entire world - Dr. Charles Stanley

For those interested the link below will take you to the info site for this conference.

John 3:16 Conference

Friday, May 09, 2008

Arminius and the Will of Man

On October 30th 1608, the esteemed James Arminius of the University of Leyden appeared before the gathered representatives of the states of Holland at the Hague to deliver an address concerning his sentiments regarding several issues of contention among certain Calvinist sectarians. Much accusation had been made against Arminius by Franciscus Gomarus who had attributed several false beliefs to Arminius and many like-minded followers. Standing an examination by ministers called to consider these charges, Arminius successfully defended his beliefs and teachings and it was following this defense that he offered these sentiments to make clear his positions. One of these positions is a response to a charge still improperly leveled at much of the body of Christ today, the free will of man, or a semi-Pelagian viewpoint not born out by the actual teachings targeted by strict Calvinists such as Gomarus. Arminius made clear his sentiments regarding free will in the following statement that should leave no doubt in the minds of sensible men that Arminians, each reformation minded, do not subscribe to Pelagian ideals nor trust in the good inclinations of natural man. Strict Calvinists continue to broadcast such charges today but as the direct statements of Arminius attest, there is no ground for such accusations.

From A Declaration of the Sentiments of Arminius

III. THE FREE-WILL OF MAN
This is my opinion concerning the free-will of man: In his primitive condition as he came out of the hands of his creator, man was endowed with such a portion of knowledge, holiness and power, as enabled him to understand, esteem, consider, will, and to perform the true good, according to the commandment delivered to him. Yet none of these acts could he do, except through the assistance of Divine Grace. But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by himself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good; but it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed in his intellect, affections or will, and in all his powers, by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit, that he may be qualified rightly to understand, esteem, consider, will, and perform whatever is truly good. When he is made a partaker of this regeneration or renovation, I consider that, since he is delivered from sin, he is capable of thinking, willing and doing that which is good, but yet not without the continued aids of Divine Grace.


Arminius on the Free Will of Man

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Made In the Image of God

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. - Genesis 1:27 AV

What does it mean for us to have been made in the image of a Holy LORD God? There have been some who contend it is a past state, lost to the fall of man in the garden. Others have suggested it is an image reserved for those redeemed souls who abide in Christ. Others still have staked a claim in promoting an image formed only in the elect of God from before the foundations of the world. Most of Christianity seems to accept the idea that all of mankind was formed in the image of God and scripture appears to bear this out. When establishing the covenant with Noah, the LORD provided an injunction against murder and its penalty with the following:

"And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man." (Ge 9:5-6 AV)

The Apostle Paul also provides insight to our image when he instructs the body in his first letter to the church at Corinth.

"For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man." (1Co 11:7 AV)

So if we agree that we are, as a creation, made in the image of God, what does this entail for us? Certainly we are fashioned or rendered to reflect who God is. This does not mean that God has a body such as we nor does it mean that our physical existence is that of God although we could point to Christ as our physical LORD yet He became flesh rather than we being made in the image of His flesh. In any event there is some substance or reality that should be expressed when we state we were made in the image of God.

We are a fallen creation, a nature that is corrupted yet that nature or our spirit is one thing that distinguishes us from the rest of creation. Our LORD God is a spirit and we worship Him in spirit and in that sense, being spiritual, we are made in the image of God. Drawing this from John Wesley and again, we also see that the LORD created us with an endued authority, a dominion over the rest of creation that distinguishes us from that same creation. Thirdly, there is what I deem morality and like Wesley, I see this as the principle characteristic of God's image. Righteousness, Holiness, being upright or honest and the ability to see, understand and posit the spiritual things of God are those abilities and characteristics of God Himself. No other creation has in their possession such an image. In that sense, we see ourselves created in the image of God as spiritual creatures having dominion over the rest of creation and doing so with the spiritual attributes of God.

Tuesday, April 15, 2008


Oh Woe Is Me .. It's Tax Day


I always put this off until today because I usually owe more than get back but it's time to buckle up and take care of business ... April 15 is here!

I found this out on the net somewhere and thought it was great ...

I Joined a Mailing List
I joined a Calvinist mailing list I was predestined to join;
an Arminian mailing list because I could;
a dispensationalist mailing list because the time had come;
a Torah-observant mailing list because I should;
an Anabaptist mailing list because I could not fight it;
a Creationist mailing list, and it was good;
an intercessory mailing list after I prayed about it;
and a prophetic mailing list. I knew I would!
I joined a Sabbatarian mailing list on Friday night,Saturday night, and Sunday night, to cover every base;
got caught up in a pre-tribulation Rapture mailing list
and in a post-tribulation mailing list, just in case.
I joined a Catholic mailing list that was a piece of work;
an evangelical mailing list by God’s grace alone;
a contemporary mailing list to see what was happening;
a traditional mailing list of which I had known;
a fivefold ministry mailing list so I would be equippedto open up and operate a mailing list of my own;
an interdenominational mailing list if I missed anything else;
and a cessationist mailing list. Then I was done.
~ by Michael Rew

Friday, April 11, 2008


Wide As The Waters: The Story of the English Bible and the Revolution It Inspired, Benson Bobrick, Simon & Shuster, 2001, ISBN 0-684-84747-7


This is one of those experiences that lasted a long time for me. I purchased this book in 2001 and it has sat on various shelves over these years waiting for me to make up my mind as to when I would actually read the entire thing. Now, I have picked it up perhaps a hundred times yet could never seem to get past a few pages at a time and this is certainly no fault of the author for this is a great story.

I am not going to write a lengthy review of the book since there are already several reviews of this publication available from numerous sources. However, it is important to point out to layman such as myself seeking a good overview narrative of the history of the English Bible that Mr. Bobrick has presented a wonderful resource. Beginning with the birth of Christianity in the British Isles and taking the reader through the histories of John Wycliffe and the Lollards, the author sets the stage for the development of various translations of the Holy Scriptures into our common English tongue. Leading the reader through the social and political climates of this age, we see an interactive fabric being woven into an amazing as well as sorrowful story resulting in the bible we hold in our hands today. The background, resources and dedication of each of the principles are explored and presented with well researched documentation. While there are more in depth resources for academic study, Bobrick's excellent narrative serves as a near perfect introduction to the history of our English scriptures.

Purchase the book from Amazon

NY Times Review

Thursday, April 10, 2008


Society of Evangelical Arminians

A new resource for Christian doctrine and apologetics is being developed to provide a source of information for those who encounter misrepresentations regarding the beliefs and teachings of most of the body of Christ. Consisting of both noted scholars and laypersons committed to preaching and teaching the Word of God and the Doctrines of the LORD Jesus Christ, SEA has dedicated itself to building a growing body of established resources and contributions. Please keep this endeavor in your prayers that the Body will be edified and grow in grace.

Blessings in Christ

A.M. Mallett

Wednesday, April 09, 2008


Bataan Sixty Six Years Ago


For a different flavor of posting and in memory of an incredibly brave and forgotten army of patriots that so many have either never heard of or have let slip from our collective history.


From the San Diego Union-Tribune today ...


ON THIS DAY
66 years ago: The Tragedy of Bataan, a forgotten battle

A Carlsbad veteran remembers America's greatest military defeat

By Lester Tenney
April 9, 2008

On April 9, 1942, Gen. Douglas MacArthur's Armed Forces in the Far East was forced to surrender Bataan to the Japanese, this in spite of his orders of April 3 demanding that no surrender be considered and, if ultimately necessary, to “charge the enemy. Make one last stand.” He likened the situation to Gen. George Custer's last stand at Little Bighorn in 1876, except MacArthur was not there for the onslaught that followed.

On that memorable day 66 years ago on Bataan, 12,000 American service men and women, along with 57,500 Filipino troops, were ordered by Major Gen. Edward King, the commander of all fighting forces on Bataan, to surrender to the Japanese Imperial Army. This was the largest military defeat in the history of the United States, yet it has gone largely unnoticed and forgotten all these years.

Yes, the date has been all but lost. Few remember it or the circumstances that led to the defeat of a once-proud army – except the survivors of this catastrophic event.

Let's retrace a few of the events of that period.

Military records show that on Jan. 15, 1942, MacArthur was quoted as saying to his men, “Help is on the way from the United States ... Thousands of troops and hundreds of planes are being dispatched.” He added, “Our supplies are ample,” and he told his men on Bataan to hold out until aid came. “Any day now,” he said. And, like a faithful dog, all of the fighting men and women on Bataan believed him.

Only days later, on Jan. 24, MacArthur realized the fall of Bataan was inevitable and ordered all stocks of food and ammunition on Bataan be transferred to the island fortress known as Corregidor. It was decided that when Bataan fell, the surviving troops would be transferred to Corregidor, which military leaders believed could not be penetrated. (On May 6, Corregidor fell to the Japanese and 4,000 of our troops were taken by boat to Manila and then on to their first prison camp, Cabanatuan.)

But no troops were transferred from Bataan because they had managed to prevent Japan from breaking through the last line of defense. All well and good, except all the food and ammunition had already been transferred to Corregidor. So as time marched on, the meager supply of food was quickly devoured, which left only horses, mules, monkeys, iguanas, snakes, bananas and pineapples for the daily diet. By this time, the average ration for the troops dropped to just 1,700 calories a day, not enough to sustain a rigorous soldier.

On April 3, the Japanese launched a full attack against the forces on Bataan. But despite the critical situation, MacArthur, in Australia, sent orders to Gen. Jonathan Wainwright, in command of all forces in the Philippines: “I am utterly opposed under any circumstances or conditions to the ultimate capitulation of this command. If food fails, you will prepare and execute an attack upon the enemy.” President Franklin Roosevelt agreed with MacArthur and issued his own “no surrender” orders. On April 4, Wainwright forwarded the orders to Gen. King.

April 8, the Americans and Filipinos could fight no longer. As the Japanese approached, King sadly concluded he had no alternative but to surrender. He had to do the unthinkable, disobey his commander's orders. But without food, ammunition and medical supplies, King felt that the troops on Bataan were going to be slaughtered like pigs in a pen if something was not done, and done quickly.

King ordered all forces on Bataan to surrender to the Japanese Imperial Army the next day.

Thus 69,500 men, the largest military force in American history to surrender to an enemy, were ordered to put down their arms. About 2,300 military and civilians would escape from Bataan to Corregidor. The scores of thousands remaining became the victims of the infamous Bataan Death March. Most of those lucky enough to survive the barbaric march were then taken by “hell ships” to Japan and became slaves of some of Japan's largest industrial companies.

Of the 12,000 Americans captured on Bataan that fateful day, about 2,000 ultimately came home, and today we can count about 200 still alive and doing as well as can be expected considering our age and the health background we carry around with us. The worst military defeat of the United States military occurred on Bataan, yet most Americans know little if anything about the events that led up to the final hours. Maybe it was because when we survivors were finally released from our prison camp in Japan, prior to receiving our four years' back pay, some were required to sign a document that forbade them to talk to reporters, newscasters or anyone else about the events of our capture, our trip to Japan and our imprisonment for the three-and-a-half years that followed.

Now, after all these years, let them come after me. I guess that was why I was destined to come home, to keep the memory alive and the story accurate.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tenney, a resident of Carlsbad, is a survivor of the Bataan Death March and three-and-a-half years as a Japanese prisoner of war.

Saturday, April 05, 2008


God Choosing God

During a discussion of the meaning and implications of Christ with regard to election, the Calvinist fellow with whom I was engaged made an interesting albeit uniformed statement. He declared without equivocation that "the Creator was not chosen" being much in line with a previous rhetorical question he had asked "How can God be chosen?" Now I replied with an equally rhetorical question of "How can God be both Father and Son?". In any event, we left off at that point and I am not sure if the discussion will be picked up again. The topic of election and Christ being The Elect in whom we trust goes to the heart of the dispute between Calvinists and most of the body of Christ. There should be no dispute in stating that Jesus of Nazareth, Christ, Messiah and Redeemer was chosen of God. The scriptures declare it so in no uncertain terms.

"Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles." (Mt 12:18 AV)

This is referencing the following passage from the prophets.

"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, [in whom] my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles." (Isa 42:1 AV)

Jesus Christ is The Elect of God. That is a fundamental belief within Christianity and can only foolishly be denied. I must admit I do not understand the mind that denies such clear doctrine of the church yet it is denied in some circles if only to inappropriately buttress Calvinist election. Now, it is my hope that this is not a widely held view among Calvinists yet if Calvinists can look to the raising of Lazarus as an example of the Calvinist paradigm regarding spiritual death, then I should not be surprised when little thought is employed in other circumstances. Let's explore the evidence of Christ's election further.

"To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded." (1Pe 2:4-6 AV)

Can there be any doubt in any Christian's mind that Jesus is our Elect of God and by inference we are elect in Him?

Sunday, March 30, 2008

A Premised Question Easily Addressed


While readying myself this morning I was browsing through a couple of blogs and a discussion board and came across an inquiry of sorts that seems to beg an entire issue rather than just a question. "Can anything come to pass that God has not first ordained and predestined"? There were not many answers to choose from in this Calvinist "poll with those who respond choosing between yes and no. Of course in replying, an answer can be provided but it is the mindset fueling such inquiries that captures my interest. In replying no, one is forced to marry ordain and predestination in an inseparable union that is inappropriate to any context of the two terms. By replying yes, one becomes subject to frivolous charges of open theism or a libertine excess. Even with an example provided there is a certainty of neophyte responses that become as absurd as ill-thought. One respondent pointing to Jeremiah 19:5 is met with what was intended as derision but upon reflection was actually a confirmation of his point. I do not believe the poor soul who replied with derision has a clue that he essentially declared Jeremiah to be stating precisely what the example was intended to present, that the LORD does not ordain every single event of human activity in the sense of commanding or ordering it, setting it's stage. It seems an innocuous question at first glance until it is realized that a denial serves as the foundation of the Calvinist paradigm. Replying with yes when substantiated drives a splitting wedge into that foundation.

The Calvinist mind or rather his theological premise fascinates me to some degree. Some of these souls cling to a supralapsarian position (the premise of the question itself) while others hold to infra or sublapsarian viewpoints. With the case of the Calvinist who posits the original question, he has claimed in the past to be infralapsarian which brings even greater perplexity if not outright humor to the discussion. How can all things have been ordained and predestined if the LORD did not ordain and predestine the fall of man (opposed to the supralapsarian view holding the fall was ordained and predetermined)? Yes, it is a confusing soup, a Bouillabaisse ladled with dangerous bones (see here for a brief discussion of lapsarian views).

Now, back to the question "Can anything come to pass that God has not first ordained and predestined?". The answer is easily yes. The bible speaks of predestination in a very limited sense applying the term only to those in Christ and in addressing the conforming of our minds and image to Christ. It is a predestining to Glory for those who abide in Him and He in us. We are in a very real sense predestined to becoming truly one in Him. It would be scripturally inappropriate to state that the LORD predestined the wearing of my brown shoes rather than the black wingtips this morning. It would be equally out of place from a Biblicist perspective to state that the LORD did predestinate the selection of my breakfast cereals opposed to the eggs and bacon I can only wish to enjoy at this point in my life. Let's keep this in perspective. The LORD does order my steps (Psalm 119:133). He does know the number of hairs upon my head. He does have a plan for my life. The ordering of my steps is a Hebrew idiom, the expectation of one who is faithful to the calling of the LORD. It also does not remove a straying from that ordering, a disobedience to the call of the LORD and willful and sinful removal from what the LORD desires of His saints.

Let's consider the following example provided in the discussion thread.

"And say, Hear ye the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle. Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind: Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that this place shall no more be called Tophet, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of slaughter." (Jer 19:3-6 AV)

Clearly, the LORD did not ordain nor predestine the people to do what He Himself states clearly He did not command nor even form in His mind. This is not an attack upon His omniscience. Instead it is an affirmation of His foreknowledge. Yet it is a scriptural refutation of the premised question. The LORD has not ordained and predestined every action of man in this world. In fact it is irrefutable by the very word of God Himself, "…I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind". The object of this statement by the LORD is the burning of children as offerings to Baal meaning that the LORD never purposed or ordained these actions to occur (even though being omniscient He was fully aware of every transgression they did as well as our own here today).

"Can anything come to pass that God has not first ordained and predestined"? When asked this question directly, the scripturally consistent Christian can only answer affirmatively rather than step into the error of the Determinist.