TMH said: I was going to write something about Calvinism and spiritual formation and depravity and praying for enemies….but just read it… Then I’d like some of the Calvinists in the bar to help me understand how you relate to this.

I am appalled.  As I read it this passage came to mind.

The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men [are], extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.  Lk 18:11 

 

Chemists have no sense of humor.  If they did, they’d be physicists.

I started to get my dander up, because I am a chemist and I have a great sense of humor. Then I realized that, as is usually the case, Josh is absolutely right. I would rather have been a physicist or a mathematician or an astronomer, but I remained in the chemistry program out of wanting to be able to make a living when I left college.

Josh, where do you come up with this stuff? You’re good, man.

One of the downsides of being a chemist is that people you are a detail-oriented anal retentive drub, which I am not. I’m a big picture guy, but no one believes it. I never even thought about whether that name for water was appropriate or not, although I certainly did immediately realize that it was water we were talking about. That’s no way for a real chemist to think.

The things I can’t say around other Christians I wouldn’t post on a Christian blog.

Chemists have no sense of humor.  If they did, they’d be physicists.

In memory of Maria Chapman…and millions more.

Here’s the best proposal I’ve ever come across to resolve the Israel/Palestine deadlock: getting one side to draw the border and the other side to choose which half they want. (sw)

Perhaps someone could lob Ehud Olmert $150,000 or so to persuade him to take up the idea. (jn)

wishing that your life came with screen options to choose from every morning?

I think B16 should go all St. Francis on this guy and go right to Tehran himself. That would give your media something to talk about. Ask Shane Claiborne for details, Benedict. He’d be happy to be your travel planner.

I don’t know about that, John.  I mean, it’s not like I’ve heard anyone say that a Christian got what he deserved for not following a particular theological camp.

Oh, wait.  Kyle Lake.

Sharon Stone wonders aloud if the recent Chinese earthquake was caused by “karma”.

However, looking at the BBC’s headline – “Anger over star’s quake remarks” – do we really need to dignify Stone’s musings with an emotion as serious as anger? Whatever happened to good old-fashioned derision? (jn)

And a question: Sharon Stone’s understanding of karma as an explanation for earthquakes – “When you are not nice, bad things happen to you” – differs from certain Calvinists’ explanations for similar events how, precisely?

An unusual angle on the new Billy Graham biopic. I like the idea.

I’ll bite. Here’s what I can’t say around other christians:

-I don’t believe that tithing 10% is biblically mandated.

-I homeschool my children because I really value the quality of their education, but I worry that they are missing out on some things that I can’t provide at home.

-Sometimes I think that our Sunday morning services are more show than worship.

-If you feel led to give me personal prophecy…please don’t.

-Name It and Claim It, in the context of human suffering, is the twin of denial.

-I desperately need a spiritual father…

-I’m no longer Republican.

-It is not really a praise report if the new members of our church are formerly of the church down the street…that’s not “growing the Kingdom”.

-No, I’m not excited about the (fill in the blank) conference that’s coming to town.

-My prayer language is rusty…

-I nominate John Eldredge for the, “Most in need of a good editor because he is absolutely enthralled with conversational run on sentences that never seem to end and rarely complete a thought and are poorly punctuated.”...breathe…

-I haven’t seen The Passion of Christ and probabaly never will.

I showed the link to a chemist friend of mine who didn’t think it was very funny, and noted that while the term is technically correct it is almost never used.

From Wikipedia:

“Water has a regular scientific or systematic name of hydrogen oxide, as well as an alkali name of hydrogen hydroxide and several acid names such as hydroxic acid, hydroxylic acid, and hydroxilic acid.”

So how do you make a chemist laugh? I wonder.

Wouldn’t be surprised to see Foxy news run a serious story about it though. They’re always telling us what we need to fear – except of course things that are truly scary.

“Later on in our newscast: How a 35 year old man tragically died from eating cotton balls. Apparently he thought they were cotton candy. In the interest of your safety, should both cotton candy and cotton balls be outlawed? One lawmaker thinks so. Our exclusive interview in a few moments.” (JN)

I have it on good authority that Thomas Merton uses the NLT

Is that the “Not Living Translation”?

I have it on good authority that Thomas Merton uses the NLT.

John, if only we could determine that the NRSV is the favorite translation of Richard Foster, Thomas Merton, and Dallas Willard…

That’s what I would call a “death knell”.

John: For much of the year, particularly up here in Canada where we have so much of it, the blasted stuff comes down in flakes and accumulates, covering everything sometimes to a depth of several feet. Yuck

Richard: that dihydrogen monoxide (DHMO) is lethal stuff. There’s a whole lot more information about it on this website, which blows the whistle on DHMO and the FACTS which Big Hydration doesn’t want you to know about.

Don’t listen to Penn & Teller, who are known DHMO addicts (I understand they’ve said they couldn’t live without it) and thus have a vested interest in ridiculing anti-DHMO campaigners.

(JN, in case anyone needed me to point that out…)

John: Petitions are practically useless and lots of joiners will sign anything as long as the cause is presented with a touch of hysteria. I don’t sign them, ever. The clip you posted reminds me of this classic Penn & Teller piece in which committed environmentalists sheepishly sign a petition to ban the dreaded dihydrogen monoxide (H20).

Thanks for the BBB clarification.

“Please, my Calvinist friends, tell me how this is not evidence that a theological system can blind a person to the most simple and obvious applications of the words and example of Jesus?”

If anything, this is a glaring example of how too much brain-analysis and too little soul-searching can lead someone to strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.

“Does someone believe Jesus reads this post and says, “Yes, yes, yes. THAT’s where my heart is towards great sinners.””

A paraphrase of how Tim Keller puts it, “If my god never offends my sensibilities then he probably isn’t God.” It sounds like this fellow thinks he agrees with God about not praying for Kennedy, but I’m not too sure that God agrees with him. While I can’t possible know exactly what Jesus would say about this situation, I am 99.9% sure that it wouldn’t read like that.

Strawfoot: BBB = Big-Brained Blog = Triablogue, in deference to their stupendous intellectual firepower compared with snarky lightweights like us. (jn)

I was disappointed to note that TMH hasn’t used the big-brained alien picture in this discussion, so I am correcting that now. (Edit: it seems though that what I can’t correct is the alignment of the image. Sorry. Perhaps a moderator can go in and add a style=”float:left;” bit to the img tag.)

Matthew: Well, if you’re going to go reading the NRSV, you’re going to come across all sorts of liberal nonsense. You do realise it’s N.T. Wright’s favourite translation? (jn)

...the aural bleeing should stop in a day or two (JN).  I’m traveling to West Virginia today, which puts me in the car for about 8 hours.  I spent 2 hours listening to the iMonk podcasts I kept meaning to get around to.  In one of the podcasts iMonk poses the question:  How is CS Lewis’ allegorical treatment of the Trinity and eschatology given a pass while ‘The Shack’ is scritunized for specks, given that both are alegorical fiction  The short answer: its a slow news day in some circles of blogdom, and anything emergents like must be bad.  TMH also talks about the JSSpirtuality lauch, which I’m anticipating more each day.  Although I’m at a different point in my journey than TMH, I need no more convincing that the Evangelicalism I’m familiar with has been badly handled if not broken.

Page 2: 

In my continuing effort to make an appearance in a Ken Silva post, I’d like to discuss mysticism as it exists in Christianity.  I just finished listening to an excellent podcast over at the Kindling’s Muse on CS Lewis’ view of  mysticism.  Most of the material discussed was from Lewis’ Letters to Malcom.  It appears that Lewis own views were very charitable and even optimistic towards Christian mysticism.  I’ve often wondered where the dividing line is between orthodox exercise of spiritual gifts and christian mysticism.  More precisely, if I believe in the continuance and exercise some charismata, doesn’t this also fall under the umbrella of mysticism?   I can think of nothing more mystical than a prayer language that originates from a spiritual state….soemthing that crosses over the line of transcendant otherness into the physical world of sensation. 

So in speaking of mysticism are we talking of charismata, charismata+’experiences’, or experiences only.

 

Strawfoot: BBB = “Big Brain Blog”, aka Steve Hays and Co.

showing my newbie status here: What is BBB?

Better Blogger’s Bureau?

Big Bouffant Bridle?

Here are my proof texts for the morning.

Matt 5:43-45 (NRSV)   “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’  44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,  45 so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous.”

Rom 12:14-21 (NRSV)   Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them.  15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep.  16 Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; do not claim to be wiser than you are.  17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all.  18 If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.  19 Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”  20 No, “if your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by doing this you will heap burning coals on their heads.”  21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

If a Christian can’t pray for his “enemies” or even struggle with the difficulty of praying for one’s enemies, I’m not sure he knows the Jesus in Scripture.  (Yes, I am fully aware of the ironic juxtaposition of this sentence and the Romans passage.)

Thanks Bob and Strawfoot. Hopefully someone will read the difference and note it. I’m sure that the BBB will give us the usual 15 minutes of attention for daring to differ, so your responses won’t be wasted. There are people for whom being right and being like Jesus aren’t two entirely different universes.

TMH: The blog you linked to is case and point for why I am a lowercase ‘calvinist’ rather than ‘Calvinist’ or even worse ‘CALVINIST.’

I’ve never read that blogger before, but after reading that I won’t likely be going back to his site either. It almost seemed like he was advocating a weird civil disobedience against Kennedy by not praying for him. If that is the case, it is a pretty weird thing indeed.

Echoes of, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” and “Who is my neighbor?” kept popping into my mind’s eye as I read through it.

We should pray for our leaders, period. This being whether we love ‘em or loathe ‘em for what they do. Of course, you can’t rightly pray for a person you don’t like, so that is why we need the Holy Spirit to change our hearts and make us able to do such things. I confess that I don’t spend much time at all praying for politicians on either side of the increasingly irrelevant metaphorical aisle – I need the Holy Spirit to help me repent of this.

Bottom line: Intentionally withholding prayers for someone is weird and isn’t Christ-like. While I probably would not think to pray for Sen. Kennedy on my own; if someone asked me to, I would be willing. We should pray that God would prepare our hearts to be ready and willing to pray for anyone at any time – with sincerity. God can do amazing things, and when I think of what He had to overcome in me, (to save me!) it puts things in perspective immediately and I shut up and start listening again.

That’s basically what this calvinist thinks about the situation.

Nice vid, TMH. I think I recall something similar, a while back. I even posted that one with you in mind. ;)

I wonder if the TR blogosphere is gonna touch the Kennedy post over at BBB. My guess is that we’ll hear a deafening silence.

Bob: Didn’t you promise us some thoughts on your complementarianism?

Then I’d like some of the Calvinists in the bar to help me understand how you relate to this.

it makes me want to throw up. 

In one sense, I don’t blame it on Calvinism at all.  I completely repudiate such sentiments.  God does not wish for any to perish  2 Peter 3:9 and our God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked Ezekiel 18:23 .    I fail to see this as any logical or scriptural extension of Calvinism.  I see it as a complete distortion, a Jonah like antipathy towards God’s boundary breaking mercy towards all.  “There’s a wideness in God’s mercy, like the wideness of the sea”.   I trace the entire blame for  this Triabologue blogger’s mean spirited, void of compassion, dry-eyed vision of other’s suffering, to sin and our soul’s aversion to grace.  I do believe that lots of these types of people wind up being Calvinists.  They love the logic of the system, the rationality of it all, and because of this they find comfort in Calvinism and then they further distort Calvinism to their own ends. 

My Calvinist heroes have been historically Whitefield, Spurgeon, and my modern influences have been those who revel in the sweetness and grace found in the sovereign mercy of God.  Sinclair Ferguson, (my kind of Calvinist by the way, and a giant among contemporary Calvinists)  is quoted somewhere expressing the sentiment  that preachers find it easier to preach against sin rather than exalt and extol the grace and mercy of Christ.    I regularly listen to his preaching, and you will not find any of this narrow constriction of God’s grace. 

Anyone who wants to argue that Calvinism leads to the kind of viewpoints in that embarassing blog on Kennedy is completely refuted by any of the single names following:  Steve Brown, Tim Keller, Bryan Chapel, John Stott, J.I. Packer, Sinclair Ferguson. 

So, TMH, have I defended my team well enough?  I admit that I have  indulged in Pauline-like,  1 Corinthian  foolishness. 

he’s right up there with Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, an Mao Tse-tung as one of the all-time enemies of all that’s good, decent, defenseless and innocent.

That right there discredits the entire post from serious conversation. If you see TK on the same level as Hitler it is easy to wish for his destruction. Of course, such a supposition is absurd.

HT to Joe Carter

Wow. That post on Sen. Kennedy is just so, so… wrong. John Armstrong (and the late Jerry Falwell) show us a better way.

I just saw that you delivered your draft to the publisher, with even a few days to spare…bravo!  Hope everything goes well, and I’m looking forward to seeing the book (since I never got to read Chapter 3…ahem)

Not too impressed yet with Calvinism. To paraphrase Ghandi, ‘I like your Calvin. I do not like your Calvinists. Your Calvinists are so unlike your Calvin.’

The comment section is a one way ticket to tinfoil hat land. I particularly like the thread about alternate time lines via impreccatory prayer.

To be perfectly honest, I know very little about the doctrines of Calvinism apart from TULIP. I have what you might call a bullet-point knowledge of limited atonement and perseverance. However, I have enough sense to see that when the author points out what “scripture says” about evil doers, he never quotes Jesus….or the Gospels…So much for Jesus being the bible God. (sw)

UPDATE:   Looks like Alex and TMH both beat me to my thought….That if ‘Jesus had a Blog’ he probably would not have written that piece.