Last night (July 24th) I met with about 20 people, some of whom are pastors and church planters who had raised the question with me several months ago, so I began to do some research and found some fascinating work being done by David who possibly has the most extensive collection of quotations from pre-reformers, first generation reformers and post-reformers that exist anywhere on the web or in print. He doesn't write much of his own stuff per se, but just categorizes these quotes according to topics such as "The Sincere Offer", "Double Jeopardy". He is breaking new ground, and I will be unashamedly riding his coat-tails, so to speak.
I 'met' David on the web years ago. He and I were members of a theology discussion email list. At the time he was a convinced High Calvinist. The action on that discussion list got pretty hot at times. John MacArthur's right hand man, Phil Johnson was a contributor at that time, and of course they are all convinced 'five pointers'. I think I held my own, but I tired of the endless discussions and arguments. I was told by one strict Calvinist that if I did not accept Limited Atonement, I was likely not even saved. To be fair, I should add that THAT particular participant was banned from the list. I stopped following the discussions at that time. That was years ago. There are some email list members who are able to disagree rigorously and yet be affirming as a brother. David was one of those types. There are others who cannot disagree without making use of the well known ad hominem.
Recently, I started tracking discussions there again, and there was David, once an ardent High Calvinist, now arguing for a form of unlimited atonement. He had changed his viewpoint. He has since started a blog where he almost daily puts up new material. So I have taken up correspondence with him again (now that we are on the same side).
A lot of those quotations on his blog are written centuries ago in language that may be difficult to decipher, so over time I would like to mine his blog for the jewels (or precious metals, if you will) and present them in a simpler style. He has said in am email to me,
The blog is meant to be a raw-materials ammo-dump for folk to come and use.
Some might ask, "Why focus on such a narrow issue? Aren't there more important issues to deal with?"
My answer:
1. It becomes an important issue once it affects the area of evangelism (is the offer of salvation a sincere offer if Christ did not die for all?)
2. It is a huge area of interest, but can also become a point of fellowship/division. I have an email from a pastor who extends a general kind of fellowship to me, but would withhold "church fellowship" because I do not believe in particular atonement. I suppose that means he would have a coffee with me at Tim Horton's as a brother in Christ, but I would not be able to break bread with him around the Lord's Table. Perhaps someone can clarify what "church fellowship" means. The so-called doctrines of Grace can be held so ungraciously at times.
3. The question has been a theological area of interest for me for a long time now. Since I first heard of the controversy, I have wanted to get to the bottom of it. So finally I would like to put it all down in a structured manner. Hopefully it will be of help to some of you.
4. I am not aware of any other Canadian Christian who is digging deeply into this issue. If you know of any work being done by a Canadian in this area, please let me know.
5. Lastly, my work is not a reflection of any official position taken by the Associated Gospel Churches of Canada, my involvement in the Doctrine and Credentials Committee notwithstanding. Our denomination takes no position on either side of this question.
Feel free to leave your comments as I get the topic fired up. We are going to be here for awhile.
Werner
4 comments:
Hey Werner,
I hope I was not one of the ones acting ungraciously. If I was I sincerely apologize. I recall ever thinking badly of you.
Thanks and take care,
David
David, I am sorry that I left the impression that everyone on that list became nasty. You were always gracious in your comments. I will edit my post more carefully to reflect that the nastiness only came from a few persistent ones.. you probably know the ones I mean.. they shall remain nameless here. In fact, the one who questioned my salvation got the boot from the moderators at the time.
Even Phil Johnson and Jim Beale were always civil. The three of you posed the toughest arguments though :)
Hey Werner,
Yeah, Jim Phil and me were often like a tag team. Those were very good times for real learning and engagement. What often passes itself off as engagement and conversation is really now is fairly disappointing.
Thanks,
David
Great topic! I'm gonna track with you.
Post a Comment