Monday’s Ministry Musing: The Danger of Not Letting the Text Speak

Sometimes we are told that we cannot come to Christ unless the Father draws us, that without Christ we can do nothing, and that if we live, it is not we, but Christ who lives in us.  Now these views tend to hide pride from man, to create a diffidence of ourselves, and to center our hopes and dependence on Christ; but lest the slothful and wicked servant should make his impotence his excuse, we are called upon to turn and make ourselves new hearts; we are exhorted to ask and we shall receive; and we are assured that God will give the Spirit to them who ask Him…(John Jennings, Christian Pastor’s Manual, 53)

I have seen men of various stripes (myself included) totally blow this one.  I have seen those of a more Calvinistic understanding of the text come to a place that sounds really “Arminian” not let the text speak for itself but simply explain it away.  I have also heard those of a non-Calvinistic understanding of the text come to those places in Scripture that sure sound Calvinistic spend their time explaining why this cannot mean what it sounds like and do not let the text speak for itself. 

What inevitably happens is that when we are guilty of not letting the text speak for itself we have very unbalanced Christians.  I am amazed that whenever my heart and mind wants to attach myself to a narrow view the Scriptures pull me back.  There are so many times that I have ridden a verse for too long only to run smack into another verse that cries out to me, “yeah but”. 

Perhaps one thing that it means to “rightly divide the Word of truth” is to let the Scriptures speak for themselves.  When we come to a text like John 6:44 we should realize that many of these Calvinistic passages are given to us for the purpose of killing our pride, inspiring us to rest solely on Christ, motivating us to have unity, and encouraging us with the power and sovereignty of a faithful God.  Preach the text for those results, don’t go about explaining it away but use the text for what it’s intended to accomplish. 

The same thing goes for passages like Luke 13:24 or Ezekiel 18:23.  Rather than trying to explain them away or make them fit a Calvinistic grid just preach them as they are.  As John Piper rightly says,

“Don't ride hobbyhorses that aren't in the text. Preach exegetically, explaining and applying what is in the text. If it sounds Arminian, let it sound Arminian. Trust the text and the people will trust you to be faithful to the text.”

These text are here to help us have a full understanding of the heart of God.  It motivates us to missions and causes us to love our “enemies”.  When we are tempted to ride a text like John 6:44 into the errors of Hyper-Calvinism these verses a reigns that pull us in to a more balanced and biblical understanding of salvation.  Yes, we must strive to enter this rest.  There is no room for complacency. 

So, if you want to be the pastor of balanced Christians then one way to bring that about is to be faithful in preaching the text as it is.  Let the text speak for itself.  Yes, that’s hard…but that is part of the reason that you are “set apart” for the teaching and preaching of the Word.  You and I are given a charge by God to rightly divide the Word—let us do it, by His grace and for His glory.

Young, Restless, and Newtonian

One of the reasons why posting has been a little slow (at least as far as original material is concerned) is because I have been blocking off a little more time to work on a book I hope to write on John Newton.  I believe Newton to be a great model of a pastor-theologian that provides a wonderful pattern of effective soul-care and evangelical Calvinism. 

One particular area that I feel we “Young, Restless, and Reformed” can learn from Newton is in the way he held his Calvinism, and how he debate it—or rather how he did not debate it. 

In June of 1772 he published a letter On the Doctrines of Election and Final Perseverance (you can read that here).  Shortly thereafter a Methodist preacher by the name of Nicholas Manners published a detailed line by line response to Newton.  (I can’t find it online but you can buy it here). 

Let’s imagine that this took place in 2011.  Newton wrote an article on a popular blog (let’s say The Gospel Coalition).  To this another brother strongly disagreed and posted a lengthy series on his personal blog, going through Newton’s article line by line and disputing it. 

What would be the typical response in 2011? 

Pop your knuckles, get your Mountain Dew, sit at your swivel chair, and slam out a response.  Line by line.  Defending your argument and your dearly loved doctrine, under the guise of gospel fidelity. 

You know what Newton did? 

Nothing.

That’s right.  Nothing. “He let the dispute die in silence” (Hindmarsh, 162)

Why?  As Bruce Hindmarsh has rightly noted, “He [Newton] was increasingly convinced that a person became a Calvinist through personal experience, not by argument” (162). 

Newton to Ryland: Be Helpful, Not Displeasing

His advice to a young John Ryland is worth heading.  After a young and seemingly arrogant Ryland wrote in his book of poetry that he “aimed to displease the Arminians”, Newton responded thus:

You say, I aimed to displease the Arminians, I had rather you had aimed to be useful to them, than to displease them.  There are many Arminians who are so only for want of clearer light.  They fear the Lord, and walk humbly before him.  And as they go on, by an increasing acquaintance with their own hearts and the word of God, their objections and difficulties gradually subside.  And in the Lord’s time (for he is the only effectual teacher) they receive the doctrines of grace which they were once afraid of. 

Now these should not be displeased, by our endeavoring to declare the truth in terms the most offensive to them which we can find, but we should rather seek out the softest and most winning way of encountering their prejudices.  Otherwise we make a parade, and grow big with a sense of our own wisdom and importance, but we shall do little good. 

Our Lord you know taught his disciples that they were able to bear it, he did not aim to displease them though it is pretty plain they had a good deal of the Arminian spirit in them for some time after they began to follow him.  You will perhaps say, ‘An humble Arminian, Surely that is impossible!’ I believe it not more impossible to find a humble Arminian, than a proud and self-sufficient Calvinist.  The doctrines of grace are humbling, that is in their power and experience, but a man may hold them all in the notion, and be very proud.  He certainly is so, if he thinks his assenting to them is a proof of his humility, and despises others are proud and ignorant in comparison of himself.  (Wise Counsel, 15)

If we Calvinist long for our brothers and sisters to savor the doctrines of grace that we so treasure, perhaps the best way to see that happen would be for us to relish them ourselves, to trust the Lord’s sovereignty in this matter as well, and go about our days enjoying God’s grace and extending His glory. 

Hump Day Humor: Debating Calvinism

(HT: Sacred Sandwich)

Obviously, this could have been turned to the Calvinist making a silly panicked argument.  All of us at time proof text, get backed in a corner and then get desperate. 

Secondly, in case you aren’t aware Servetus is one great blemish on the legacy of John Calvin.  Here is one perspective on what went down.  Here is another viewpoint.

Hump Day Humor: Top 10 Signs Your Pastor is an Arminian

I sure hope this is funny.  This is my attempt at a humorous response to the papers being disseminated throughout Tennessee.  See here for the full story.  One of those papers is a list of things that are Reformed Red Flags.  I find quite a few of them funny because they are not only true of Calvinist but Christians of various theological persuasions.  If you want to find the full humor then make sure you read this alongside my Top 10. 

Again please know, this is not meant to offend.  If anyone is offended (unless you are just being a pansy) I will take it down quickly.  Without further ado here is the Top 10 signs your pastor is an Arminian:

1.  Sometimes his invitation lasts for hours because he knows that someone is still refusing to make that decision for Christ.

2. Use of the Life in the Spirit Study Bible

3. Refusing to add any other statements or confessions to what their church believes.  Insisting that God got it right when He wrote the Baptist Faith and Message.  (Debate still lingers as to what edition was “inspired”).

4. Focused on making sure the church does not attempt to be the “true” church.  He’s not sure yet what this means but he just knows that we should not like Jeff Noblitt.

5. Look for the men they quote in their sermons: Adrian Rogers, Charles Stanley, John Wesley, and Jacobus Arminius.

6. They will call other Arminians to join them on their church staff as they purge their churches and associations of anyone that even smells like a Calvinist, e.g. wears CALVIN Klein cologne.

7. They will methodically employ a strategy of "convincing” members that the doctrines of grace are evil, against evangelism, and follow a man instead of Jesus.

8. Tendency toward a highly illogical and unsystematic theology.  He knows all of the answers except for when He doesn’t.  And then when he doesn’t know the answer he will confront you for putting God in a box. 

9. They love to use the older methods of passing out information.  Like setting up booths at annual meetings or passing around papers to your associations.  Arminians are not predestined to be good bloggers.

10. Tendency to be evasive about their theology during the pastor search process.  He just believes the Bible.  He’s not sure what he means by that, because he refuses to have any sort of systematic theology.  But he teaches the Bible as it is.

Now obviously these are ridiculous.  I know many Arminians that are great theologians.  I know some Arminians that do not like to “give an invitation”.  I know some that have a desire for biblical church discipline.  I know Arminians that use the ESV Study Bible.  I know Arminians that love John Piper and John Wesley.  I know Arminians that are great bloggers, and I know some that are passionate about stamping out Calvinism in their blogs. 

These little letters are just horrible and divisive.  What is sad is that those who pass these out may cause several unaware and uninformed people to go on a quest to stamp out really good, solid, and loving pastors that love Jesus and bleed for their congregation.  Then at the end of the day they will stand up and say, “see Calvinism divides churches”. 

Yes, Calvinists can be jerks.  And yes, Calvinists can divide churches.  But so can Arminians and all those in between. 

Who Said It?

"...the saving acceptance of Christ is not forced, but voluntary. None are forced to come to Christ; it is a 'free choice'." And then in closing the preacher proclaims: "God has sent me to you to make you the offer. Christ has sent me to give you an invitation".

Who said it? Do you agree?

This man's doctrine could be summed up this way:

"So, then, the invitation is given to all, and no one who gets Christ gets him any other way than by a 'free choice'".

Job for the Non-Calvinist

That's the book of Job, not a job that pays you. Quick question. I am certain that I have a few readers that are not necessarily persuaded by the the arguments for Calvinism. Here is my question, and it is legit. I am not trying to trap anyone, I am trying to learn. If someone were coming from a Semi-Pelagian or Arminian perspective how do you understand the book of Job?

The basic gist of my question is that Arminians and Semi-Pelagians have a wonderful answer for the problem of evil...the fall of man, our sinfulness, our choices, etc. The book of Job does not allow for such an answer. In fact those answers are rebuked by God. The Calvinist is able to sit back read the book of Job, and say "let God do what He will". So, for my Arminian/Semi-Pelagian readers, how do you address the book of Job as a whole?