This blog is my personal blog. All views and articles expressed and written here are solely my own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of my church or denomination or anyone else. Most posts are written for my own personal edification, and are not written in response to any external situation, unless otherwise and explicitly stated. Nobody should be reading into them anything other than what is explicitly stated, unless otherwise confirmed by me in writing.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Calvinism Debate: Steve Gregg vs. James White
Here are all of the mp3s of the radio debates between Steve Gregg (representing Synergism) and James White (representing Calvinism/Monergism):
I listened to all five sessions of this so-called debate, but I personally thought it fell rather flat.
At some point it occurred to me that it seemed that Dr. White must have felt that he had just wasted five days punching a giant balloon filled with theological Jell-O.
Well, I guess academically wise, it does fell rather flat, but I guess this is the representative view of quite a few anti-intellectual "biblicists" today, so I don't exactly see it as a waste of five days.
I didn't see it as a waste, either. Having heard for the past year that Steve Gregg was supposedly "the one to beat" in regards to a non-reformed view, his arguments only assured me of the reformed position. If subjective "Well, I don't feel...'s" and "I don't think that's the right interpretation...'s" without substantiation is the best of what the "best of the opposing view" has to offer, then it did nothing but strengthen my views. It certainly wasn't a waste of five days.
Lane, yes it definitely showed the weakness of the opposing side. That said, the sad thing is that for the postmodenists and those who think with their emotions, Gregg will seemed to have won.
Gregg voicing any amount of uncertainty on the subject only indicates to me that he is being honest. Although a Calvinist myself i don't think anyone can honestly say that Calvinism is clear cut within the scriptures. And that there is not a reasonable biblical argument for the non-Calvinist perspective. The mere fact that the topic is so strongly debated by evangelical Christians is a testament to this.
I find that it is common for Calvinists to appear extremely resolute in their beliefs. In these cases it is hard not to feel that their reformed doctrine has been strongly influenced by institution rather than personal bible reading.
although i don't agree with everything Gregg has to say he will always present the scripture and leave you space to form your own opinion. I greatly appreciate his integrity. May God continue to bless his ministry.
>The mere fact that the topic is so strongly debated by evangelical Christians is a testament to this.
Actually, if you look at church history, you will know why this is the case. It certainly was not due to the issue being strongly debated from the Reformation onwards, and therefore both issues are legitimate choices. Rather, to put it bluntly, before Wesley, there was no such thing as an Evangelical Arminian; all Arminians were heretics before that.
6 comments:
I listened to all five sessions of this so-called debate, but I personally thought it fell rather flat.
At some point it occurred to me that it seemed that Dr. White must have felt that he had just wasted five days punching a giant balloon filled with theological Jell-O.
Coram Deo:
Well, I guess academically wise, it does fell rather flat, but I guess this is the representative view of quite a few anti-intellectual "biblicists" today, so I don't exactly see it as a waste of five days.
I didn't see it as a waste, either. Having heard for the past year that Steve Gregg was supposedly "the one to beat" in regards to a non-reformed view, his arguments only assured me of the reformed position. If subjective "Well, I don't feel...'s" and "I don't think that's the right interpretation...'s" without substantiation is the best of what the "best of the opposing view" has to offer, then it did nothing but strengthen my views. It certainly wasn't a waste of five days.
Lane, yes it definitely showed the weakness of the opposing side. That said, the sad thing is that for the postmodenists and those who think with their emotions, Gregg will seemed to have won.
In response to Lane
Gregg voicing any amount of uncertainty on the subject only indicates to me that he is being honest.
Although a Calvinist myself i don't think anyone can honestly say that Calvinism is clear cut within the scriptures. And that there is not a reasonable biblical argument for the non-Calvinist perspective. The mere fact that the topic is so strongly debated by evangelical Christians is a testament to this.
I find that it is common for Calvinists to appear extremely resolute in their beliefs. In these cases it is hard not to feel that their reformed doctrine has been strongly influenced by institution rather than personal bible reading.
although i don't agree with everything Gregg has to say he will always present the scripture and leave you space to form your own opinion. I greatly appreciate his integrity. May God continue to bless his ministry.
Marcus:
>The mere fact that the topic is so strongly debated by evangelical Christians is a testament to this.
Actually, if you look at church history, you will know why this is the case. It certainly was not due to the issue being strongly debated from the Reformation onwards, and therefore both issues are legitimate choices. Rather, to put it bluntly, before Wesley, there was no such thing as an Evangelical Arminian; all Arminians were heretics before that.
Post a Comment