My email correspondence with a Calvinist tunred into podcast

[steve]

Hi Chris,

Feel free to give out your email address for people to write to you, if you wish.

Also, feel free to call The Narrow Path to discuss these matters. You will find that I generally do not turn discussions into on-air debates. In fact, even when I have a scheduled "debate" (as with James White) I tend to want it to be more like a discussion. If you call on air to discuss any issue or any passages of scripture, you are welcome to mention your website or blog over the air, so that my listeners can become familiar with you.

[chrisdate]

My email address is part of my profile, and is available at my website, http://theopologetics.podbean.com. I'll make people do that tiny bit of digging if they want to contact me

[chrisdate]

Holy cow! I had no idea you were the author of Revelation: Four Views! I feel so much more intimidated now I didn't realize with whom I was speaking! I'm definitely going to check your radio show out!

That book was a big part of my conversion to preterism, and I've been really frustrated because I can't find my copy anymore I've got to pick myself up another copy!!!

[steve]

I'll send you one. Nothing to be intimidated about here, Bro. We're all still learners.

[chrisdate]

You're way too kind! You really don't have to do that, but thanks so much! There's a very remote chance that my pastor, who has told me he's going to be asking a proponent of each of the four views to explain his view in an upcoming Revelation series, may ask me to present the preterist view, and your book will be a big help. And even if he doesn't call on me to do that, it'll be a blessing to have that book in my library once again.

And you're right that we're all learners; nevertheless, I think it's healthy to feel a bit of intimidation when challenging the views of someone with such experience and study under their belt. I'm sure you've got people whom you look up to, and have probably felt the same thing, no? In any case, as I said, knowing that you are the host of this show, I'll be checking it out for sure.

[darinhouston]

Just received your personal email -- traveling this week but gladly receive and accept your apology and the spirit of your communication. Looking forward to dialogue here. Welcome.

[darinhouston]

Hi Chris,

Feel free to give out your email address for people to write to you, if you wish.

Also, feel free to call The Narrow Path to discuss these matters. You will find that I generally do not turn discussions into on-air debates. In fact, even when I have a scheduled "debate" (as with James White) I tend to want it to be more like a discussion. If you call on air to discuss any issue or any passages of scripture, you are welcome to mention your website or blog over the air, so that my listeners can become familiar with you.

Absolutely - listen to the show for a bit and you'll see how un-intimidating it is.

[darinhouston]

You might also give Steve's in-depth lectures a try:

at http://thenarrowpath.com/topical_lectures.html

God’s Sovereignty and Man’s Salvation

01. The Case for Calvinism
02. The Case for Calvinism Critiqued - Part 1
03. The Case for Calvinism Critiqued - Part 2
04. The Sovereignty of God - Part 1
05. The Sovereignty of God - Part 2
06. The Sovereignty of God - Part 3
07. Reasoning from Scripture
08. Calvinist Challenges Answered - Part 1
09. Calvinist Challenges Answered - Part 2

Debates:

Is Calvinism Biblical? - Part 1 / Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson
Is Calvinism Biblical? - Part 2 / Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson
Is Calvinism Biblical? - Part 3 / Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson
Is Calvinism Biblical? - Part 4 / Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson
Is Calvinism Biblical? - Part 5 / Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson
Is Calvinism Biblical? - Part 6 / Steve Gregg and Douglas Wilson

Eternal Security Debate - Part 1 / Steve Gregg and Tom Bertoli
Eternal Security Debate - Part 2 / Steve Gregg and Tom Bertoli

Matt Slick Debate Broadcast - Day 1
Matt Slick Debate Broadcast - Day 2

Eternal Security Debate / Steve Gregg and Tom Morris - May 2001


At http://digitalministries.us/page10.html

Calvinism Debate
Steve vs. James White
Debate-1
Debate-2
Debate-3
Debate-4
Debate-5


Calvinism-1
Calvinism-2
Calvinism-3
Calvinism-4
Calvinism-5
Calvinism-6
Calvinism-7
Calvinism-8
Calvinism-9

[darinhouston]

Oh, one more thing: while I haven't the discipline to debate Calvinism here on this forum right now, I would be interested in any evidence that the historic doctrine of Total Depravity has ever predominantly been something which asserts that unregenerate man will tend toward atheism specifically, and not additionally (or perhaps primarily) toward false faiths. Understand, I'm not asking for an argument against Total Depravity; for that, contact me via email. Rather, I'm interested in historical declarations from Reformed theologians which support Sean's understanding of the doctrine.

The precursor to the TULIP acronym, the Canons of Dort, say this: "without the grace of the regenerating Holy Spirit they are neither willing nor able to return to God, to reform their distorted nature, or even to dispose themselves to such reform...There is, to be sure, a certain light of nature remaining in man after the fall, by virtue of which he retains some notions about God, natural things, and the difference between what is moral and immoral, and demonstrates a certain eagerness for virtue and for good outward behavior. But this light of nature is far from enabling man to come to a saving knowledge of God and conversion to him - so far, in fact, that man does not use it rightly even in matters of nature and society. Instead, in various ways he completely distorts this light, whatever its precise character, and suppresses it in unrighteousness. In doing so he renders himself without excuse before God." So Dort did not say man does not seek after God at all, but that man does not seek after God as He truly is. Dort said man retains some notions about God, but distorts that light willfully.

Neither in the 7 years or so I've been a Calvinist, nor in the 2 years or so prior to that during which time I was a non-Calvinist, have I ever heard Reformed theologians describe Total Depravity as being the belief that man will tend toward atheism. I'm open to proof that this is now, or has ever been, the predominant view, but as I mentioned to Darin, I won't be holding my breath

I'm not that familiar with Dort but Calvin himself sure seems to go further than you seem to -- as I understand your view, you believe that man can seek after God, yet non-elect are merely incapable of responding to the precise doctrines about God. I think that's so far from most historic Calvinists I've read that it just seems to be a qualification and convenience to hold onto something one just can't quite give up.

Example -

John Calvin: "For our nature is not only utterly devoid of goodness, but so prolific in all kinds of evil, that it can never be idle. Those who term it concupiscence use a word not very inappropriate, provided it were added, (this, however, many will by no means concede,) that everything which is in man, from the intellect to the will, from the soul even to the flesh, is defiled and pervaded with this concupiscence; or, to express it more briefly, that the whole man is in himself nothing else than concupiscence."

I have also heard White and others many times go on and on about how the very idea of God is repugnant to the non-elect, and they want nothing of God, and would sit in Hell and spit at God even if they saw him face to face while they burned.

[look2jesus]

Chris,

I'd also like to add my welcome to you brother. Also looking forward to becoming more familier with your work/ministry. Thanks for posting.

l2j