This might be off-topic for this thread but I just have to chime in here!
Steve wrote:One may argue that I don't "understand" some of the specific assertions of the Calvinists. Perhaps I do not, but in most cases, it is not a problem of my not understanding them, but of my rejecting them as extrabiblical philosophical notions. If you are willing to accept such notions without demanding scriptural support for them, well enough for you. For my part, I do not regard myself to be bound by man's philosophical speculations, especially when the scriptures have spoken clearly enough.
Steve, I agree that the Bible is "Non-Calvinist." Its authors were Jewish and there's no way they could have held the views of guys 15 centuries after them!!! That would be literally impossible, as it is so obvious. I mean, if they had held to these views, they surely didn't elaborate on them!
I'm reminded of one of your lectures about the Trinity as an example of what I'm saying. As you said in a lecture; the Apostles, and even Jesus could have been "trinitarians" in the sense that they weren't strict Jewish monotheists, etc. But Jesus never said, that we know of: "I am the way, the truth, the life, and the Second Person of the Trinity, of the same -- not similar -- substance of the Father" (the latter part of this sentence is "post-biblical, philosophical, and Gentile" [and NOT Jewish!] as are Trinitarianism, Calvinism, and Arminianism. Similarly, the Bible does not say, with the Apostle John, e.g., that "Jesus...died for the sins of the whole world, meaning for the sins of all the people 'from' the world whom God 'sovereignly decreed' to elect from before the foundation of the world" (the last clause is "post-biblical, non-Jewish (Gentile), philosophical" and.......really really bad eisegesis!!! The words of the latter part of the sentence aren't even IN the Bible!
But back to my sidebar:
If it could be demonstrated that the Apostles were Neo-Platonists? Nope, that doesn't work as Neo-Platonism hadn't been invented yet!
Platonists? (from which Neo-Platonism stemmed)? The NT authors potentially could have been that. But, again, this doesn't work either, as history clearly demonstrates: Biblical authors were Jewish and held to a Jewish worldview...which wasn't "philosophical." (Btw, I have heard some (few) Calvinists actually teach that the Apostles were Platonists), lol, they really believe this!
My view is: The Bible authors, being Jewish and, therefore, "theological" in worldview; they couldn't have been Arminians or Calvinists (Platonic). They were what, and who, they were on the questions Calvinism and Arminianism raises; questions that were asked
after the Apostles died...by Gentiles.
The Jews could embrace paradox and have no problems with it, while we Westerners, from biblical times up to now, have problems with it!
The debates centered around Augustianianism (stemming from Neo-Platonism, leading up to Calvinism) are post-biblical. Arminianism, in this sense, is "philosophical" and post-biblical just as Calvinism is. Since it was a reaction to Calvin's ideas, Arminianism doesn't accurately reprepresent the views of the Apostles. It may be if one had-to-choose between the two; Arminianism would be "closer" to the Jewish views of Bible writers. But who says I have to make any such choice? Calvinists might, Arminians could...but well, I'll just stick to the paradoxical, non-philosophical approach of the Apostles! I could call myself a "Non-Calvinist" for sure. And "Non-Arminain" (beyond a doubt) as well!
Not to throw the thread way off topic. But these are my basic ideas on all this stuff.
But Steve, I like how you use the Bible alone to refute Calvinism. You don't really go into the worldview of the Bible and/or NT writers themselves in your presentations but you clearly demonstrate that, and how, the "Calvinistic system" could not have been held by them! The text itself is a sufficient indicator of this (For example, the Bible says Jesus died "for the sins of the whole world" while Calvinists strangely re-arrange these words into something like "for the sins of the whole ELECT"...Huh? Isn't this sort of like really far from the English, leave alone the Greek)?
Anyway, I really like your approach though I'm also very interested in the details of the Jewish worldview of biblical times (which can be found in extra-biblical materials. Bible writers were "Non-Calvinists and Non-Arminians" beyond any doubt, imnsho)....Sorry if this went too far off-topic but I feel more Christians need to start looking at the actual worldview of the Bible's authors. Frankly, I don't understand why they don't. This would solve many, if not most or all, of the current "debates!"
Am I making any sense (to anyone)? Just curious....
