Reformed Reformed: My Reformation
For the few of you who read this blog I owe it to you to respond when you ask me. Clint has asked how I "reformed my views." So let me begin.
In College I was challenged by some "intellectuals" (or at least I thought they were) who had grasped a concept of God which was foreign to me. As you should discern, this concept (or logic construct) is called Calvinsim. At first I hated it and then I was told to read Romans 9 and so I did, it is the Word of God! Upon reading I came across a conundrum. The language Paul used spoke of God's choice and showed pharaoh being hardened and I was at a crossroad looking for answers. I found them from some eager friends and soon I was preaching the gospel of Grace (and I use that now sarcastically). I gathered books and began to read the logical and historical nature of the doctrines of Calvinsim and Arminianism. I became closer friends with Presbyterians and joined the RUF (Reformed University Fellowship) and delved deeper into those doctrines that seemed to reveal so much of God to me.
Let me point out that during this time I was enriched. Joey, the RUF director, did not have a Calvinist agenda. He wanted to faithfully exposit the Word and taught me much. I especially hold him high for keeping me from the poison Brian McLaren was and is spewing.
In the world I became caught up in the pseudo-intellectual groups who had figured God out. Salvation now made logical sense. I must see God as being sovereign or else I would open the door to Open Theism. I read all the arguments on Calvinsim and argued it well, especially Limited Atonement and Irresistable Grace. However, what I lacked was a true biblical foundation for such arguments. I would preach that all does not mean all and that the term world or Cosmos could fall into many different categories (some of these arguments are true, but I used them for my own needs).
So well did I know the doctrines that I taught that section of Western Civilization to my class. The professor lauded me for my knowledge, yet I had students staring at me and asking if I believed in that God (a moment that has always haunted me). I found my system. I found my place to stand theologically and intellectually. I found myself.
Then I went to seminary, and not Southern to boot. My friends were perplexed as to why I would go to a place where the "doctrines" were not taught. They thought that RTS or Southern Seminary would be a much better choice. They were wrong. I arrived at a school in transition in administration, not in doctrine. What met me at seminary was a high view of scripture. I found 5 point calvinists and 1 point calvinists, but soon realized they were not consumed with the doctrine but with God and understanding his word.
You might ask, "Where was it that you fell apart?" And I answer, "In Greek." As I read and learned the New Testament in the original language I came across ideas that were hard and did not fit into my Calvinist box. Then I came across 2 Peter 2 and limited atonement fell apart. Since then I have found no evidence, other than logical, for irresistible grace.
If the Bible is our source of revelation from God then it supersedes reason, experience and tradition. Did God choose me? Yes! Did I choose God? Yes! How does that work? I don't know. It is a good question, but one that has risen far beyond its proper place. It should not consume our Theology Proper (the doctrine of the Godhead) and it should consume our soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). It is a mystery, and I am fine with that.
In College I was challenged by some "intellectuals" (or at least I thought they were) who had grasped a concept of God which was foreign to me. As you should discern, this concept (or logic construct) is called Calvinsim. At first I hated it and then I was told to read Romans 9 and so I did, it is the Word of God! Upon reading I came across a conundrum. The language Paul used spoke of God's choice and showed pharaoh being hardened and I was at a crossroad looking for answers. I found them from some eager friends and soon I was preaching the gospel of Grace (and I use that now sarcastically). I gathered books and began to read the logical and historical nature of the doctrines of Calvinsim and Arminianism. I became closer friends with Presbyterians and joined the RUF (Reformed University Fellowship) and delved deeper into those doctrines that seemed to reveal so much of God to me.
Let me point out that during this time I was enriched. Joey, the RUF director, did not have a Calvinist agenda. He wanted to faithfully exposit the Word and taught me much. I especially hold him high for keeping me from the poison Brian McLaren was and is spewing.
In the world I became caught up in the pseudo-intellectual groups who had figured God out. Salvation now made logical sense. I must see God as being sovereign or else I would open the door to Open Theism. I read all the arguments on Calvinsim and argued it well, especially Limited Atonement and Irresistable Grace. However, what I lacked was a true biblical foundation for such arguments. I would preach that all does not mean all and that the term world or Cosmos could fall into many different categories (some of these arguments are true, but I used them for my own needs).
So well did I know the doctrines that I taught that section of Western Civilization to my class. The professor lauded me for my knowledge, yet I had students staring at me and asking if I believed in that God (a moment that has always haunted me). I found my system. I found my place to stand theologically and intellectually. I found myself.
Then I went to seminary, and not Southern to boot. My friends were perplexed as to why I would go to a place where the "doctrines" were not taught. They thought that RTS or Southern Seminary would be a much better choice. They were wrong. I arrived at a school in transition in administration, not in doctrine. What met me at seminary was a high view of scripture. I found 5 point calvinists and 1 point calvinists, but soon realized they were not consumed with the doctrine but with God and understanding his word.
You might ask, "Where was it that you fell apart?" And I answer, "In Greek." As I read and learned the New Testament in the original language I came across ideas that were hard and did not fit into my Calvinist box. Then I came across 2 Peter 2 and limited atonement fell apart. Since then I have found no evidence, other than logical, for irresistible grace.
If the Bible is our source of revelation from God then it supersedes reason, experience and tradition. Did God choose me? Yes! Did I choose God? Yes! How does that work? I don't know. It is a good question, but one that has risen far beyond its proper place. It should not consume our Theology Proper (the doctrine of the Godhead) and it should consume our soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). It is a mystery, and I am fine with that.
posted by Madison | 10:12 AM
8 Comments:
Allow me to play SBTS’s advocate:
“How can you put your own interpretation of Scripture above the traditional interpretation of Scripture?
2 Peter 1:20: ‘Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.’
Isn’t that what you have done? You’ve said, ‘I’ve read and interpreted the Scriptures and have arrived at a particular conclusion.’ But your conclusion is at odds with the conclusions reached by other believers in your denominational body who have read and interpreted the Scriptures differently. Why not just not rely on your own reasoning when interpreting Scriptures but rely on the traditions of your denominational body and their reason when interpreting Scripture?
Sounds eerily like a conversation that you and Kyle had with me many moons ago. I appreciate your openness and honesty. By the way, what is circ trying to say?
I think Circ is just arguing the opposite because he likes to play the devil's advocate, right circ? :-)
Madison: I like your honesty and transparent attitude about your journey on this. Many of us struggle with several of the things you have shown to us that you struggled with...I don't know if I will ever NOT struggle with them, but I do know, as you have said nicely, that my reason must submit to the authority of the Scriptures. This is what I do.
I don't like to preach "the doctrines," but I do LOVE to preach the Word of God. Tonight I preached on a passage in Ephesians 1 and it addressed God's choosing us in Christ. How that all adds up in my total systematic theology, I am not sure...But what I do know is that God chose us in Christ, and I can stop there. It is as simple as God chose me, you, and all Christians. People understand that without me having to go through the Calvinist debate...the Word speaks truth. We just need to preach it! Preach on brother! :-)
I preached 1 John 2:15-17 tonight.
I am posing the age-old problem of what a person is to do when they come to Scriptural conclusions that are at odds with the rest of their fellow believers. This has happened to Paul, More, Luther, Kierkegaard, Kung and many many others. Is the lone individual supposed to submit to the majority against his own conscience? Or is the individual to persevere in his convictions defying the majority and possible disciplinary action by that majority. It’s an issue of soul competency.
Thank you for your comments. Circenses has made a point about soul competency. SOmething we should all be familiar with and I will write on it soon. However, it must be noted that my conclusions are not at odds with my convention. Soon I will show that to you as well.
There is a tension here. Tradition and the Bible are important, but the Bible is more important. Dr. Garret calls it Suprema Scriptura. I did not come to these conclusions on my own, nor apart from the body of my denomination. Shall I list those who agree with me, now and throughout Baptist History?
semper reformanda right Madison??? You haven’t arrived in your Soteriology yet have you? I know you'll answer, "No, I have not yet arrived." So, this is where you are now, at this moment, until...?
I know you and don't think that you would be one to claim to have somehow risen above the Cal-Arm debate (many do, and have) to an understanding somewhere beyond the two.
I will say though, your stance at this time seems to lean heavily, and be highly influenced by those in your close proximity--I'll not name names.
I don't think you are one to give a cease and desist order to your soteriological studies, so, it will be interesting to follow your journey from here as I has been to here.
D
Dusty, you are right. My journey continues. I am teachable and submit to the scriptures.
As to those in my proximity, well his influence is no secret to anyone. But he can be wrong too.
The debate will continue. What we all must determine is how and why the debate should continue.
Please let me know.
Post a Comment
<< Home