Bill wrote
> When you insinuate that I have diminished
faith or repentance, or the power of sin and death, or human
depravity, David, you simply misunderstand me. These things are all real,
profoundly real, in my thinking. I just do not draw
logico-causal connections between them. No one can reject Jesus Christ
and live for long without sin and death and depravity devouring them.
David replied
> But I thought you did not believe in cause and effect, so
how can this
be? Please be patient with me and try to explain.
be? Please be patient with me and try to explain.
David,
First of all, I do not know if you realize
this but you have taken a particular and made a universal out of it. Just
because I do not believe in cause and effect in some areas, does not mean by
inference that I refuse it in all areas. The one who rejects Jesus Christ
causes his own demise.
Let me tell you a couple of things I do not
accept as cause and effect and why.
- I do not believe that God causes me to believe: This, in my mind, is Calvinism. What about those who do not believe? If we are going to say that God caused me to believe, and if "cause" is actually going to mean that power or efficient agent which produces a thing or an event, then we must also be willing to say that those who do not believe are unbelievers because God did NOT cause the same event or effect in them that he did in me. This impugns the nature of God. It makes him culpable in their rejection.
- In the strict sense in which you use it, I do not believe my belief/faith has causal power: My faith does not save me. Jesus Christ saves me. If I believe that my faith is "that force which appropriates spiritual truth and makes it manifest" in my life, then I have introduced a subtle but vital element of co-redemption into my salvation. I now have two Saviors -- Jesus Christ and faith, my faith no less! And so Jesus does his part, I do mine. This is co-redemption. But it's even worse than that. You say, "Christ died for all of humanity, but only those who believe and put trust in Christ experience its effects." BUT if I have to do my part, for Jesus' part to be of effect, I become the cause of my own salvation, and NOT Jesus Christ, because he can do nothing until I assent in faith.
Now let me explain as best I can why it is that a
"reason" and a "reaction" is not necessarily cause/effect. And please
do not push this further than I take it, unless you are able to tell me an
analogy that does not break down at some point. A couple of years ago I was
driving down the road not long after a violent summer storm had streaked across
the plains. There was a creek ahead of me that had rushed out of its banks
and washed out the bridge. I was not expecting anything so dramatic and so I was
driving along not really paying attention until suddenly I was right
upon the spot where the bridge used to be. When I saw the problem I
immediately hit my brakes and skidded, finally coming to a stop only a few feet
from a major drop off.
Let's talk about relationships involved here.
- There was a relationship between the storm and my stopped car. There were relationships all throughout: Storm > rushing water > rising creek > breaking bridge > bridge gone > seeing the problem > hitting the brakes > brakes engage > car stops.
- Some of these are direct causal relationships,
- Some are not. These I consider to be simple reasons.
- Some of these relationships are direct effects,
- Some are indirect. These are simple reactions.
What are the simple reasons and what are
the direct causes? What are the direct effects and what are the simple
reactions?
- The rain caused the creek to rise and the creek caused the bridge to wash out.
- The force of the water against the bridge caused the bridge to collapse and wash away.
- There is a direct causal relationship here. The water is what washed out the bridge.
- The direct effect being the bridge was gone
- BUT the missing bridge did not cause me to stop. It is only the reason why I stopped
- There is no causal relationship between the running water or the missing bridge and my car stopping.
- The water itself did not stop my car.
- The missing bridge did not stop my car.
- My brakes are what caused the car to stop.
- The missing bridge is the reason I stopped.
- Just like the missing bridge is the reason why I stopped and not what caused me to stop, hitting my brakes was just a reaction to what I saw and not a direct result or effect of any of other causal forces.
- If I had not seen the problem, none the other causes involved would have made me hit the brakes.
- None of the other causes would have prevented me from plunging headlong into the wash.
- Hitting the brakes was an indirect result of some of these causes, but not a direct effect, just a simple reaction to what I saw in front of me.
Jesus is the reason I believe.
I would not choose to say that he causes me to believe.
Faith is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
Faith does not cause me to be saved.
Repentance is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
It does not cause me to be forgiven.
Obedience is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
It is not what causes my salvation to remain effective.
There is no cause and effect here.
Jesus Christ is the truth of the Gospel!
He is the simple reason I believe.
He is the reason I am obedient.
He is the reason that I love, that I repent, that I persevere.
He does not make me do these things.
These are my responses to his love.
David, I do not hold to the cause/effect scenario that you and others set
forth:
You confess your sins, then God forgives you.
You place your faith in Jesus Christ, then he saves you.
You believe in Jesus Christ, then you are in Jesus Christ.
You work out your salvation in fear and trembling, then God receives you.
Cause and effect. Cause and effect. Cause and effect.
I do not except this because implicit in each of
these statements is a condition which must be worked out on your end before it
can/will be reciprocated from God's end.
If you do not repent, then you will go to hell.
If you do not place your faith in Jesus Christ, he
cannot save you.
If you do not live in obedience, you will lose your
salvation.
Stated another way, you can be saved only if you
believe in Jesus Christ, repent of your sins, walk in obedience, and persevere
to the end. All these conditions must be met before you can actually be
saved.
I do not believe my response to Jesus Christ appropriates the truthfulness
of who he is, of what he has accomplished on my behalf, on our behalf, on behalf
of us all. My response does not change the truth already present and at
work in the Gospel. The Gospel tells me who Jesus Christ is; it tells me
who I am, and it calls me to repent accordingly.
Reason and reaction
I hope this is helpful. If I don't get too bombarded here I will try to get
something out on Calvin, and my affinity to him. I'm going to call it a
night.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 1:45 PM
Subject: RE: [TruthTalk]
Calvinism
> > When I say "us all" I mean us all -- all humanity,
> > not just all Christians.
>
> That's what I thought you meant! Wow!
>
> Bill wrote:
> > I'll tell you in a nutshell what has happened to me
> > that has yet to happen to you. I have apprehended the
> > effects of the Enlightenment upon my thoughts and have
> > since shifted my thinking away from the presuppositions
> > of that movement. You have yet to do either.
>
> What presuppositions are you talking about? I have rejected the
> Enlightenment, which looks to discount the miracles of the Bible and
> explain everything through natural means.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > ... you more than any of us are very much a product
> > of the Enlightenment project.
>
> I'm not sure that is true, but I'm listening.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > I see very clearly a cause/effect disposition coming
> > across in your posts.
>
> Yes! Guilty as charged.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > I have discovered a new hermeneutic. Not new in
> > that I'm the first to use it, but new in that it
> > is very old, much older than the Enlightenment.
> > Here's what I see: Jesus is the reason I believe.
>
> Yes, I believe that too.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > Truth is truth whether I believe it or not.
>
> Yes, I believe that too.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > My believing it does not cause it to be true.
>
> No, but I consider faith to be that force which appropriates spiritual
> truth and makes it manifest in your life. In other words, Christ died
> for all of humanity, but only those who believe and put trust in Christ
> experience its effects.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > Faith is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
> > Repentance is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
> > Obedience is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
> > Worship is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
> > Confession is my response to the truth of the Gospel.
> > My love for God and others is my response to the truth
> > of the Gospel. Jesus Christ is the truth of the Gospel!
>
> I agree with all of your statements here.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > There is no cause and effect here.
>
> No cause and effect? Yes there is. The gospel was declared to you, you
> heard the gospel, then you responded with faith, repentance, obedience,
> worship, confession, and love. Please explain how it is that you see no
> cause and effect here. You used the word "response." A response is a
> reaction, something done in reaction to something else. The word
> "response" implies cause and effect, does it not?
>
> Bill wrote:
> > He is the reason I believe.
> > He is the reason I am obedient.
> > He is the reason that I love,
> > that I repent, that I persevere.
>
> Right... cause and effect again. Jesus is the cause, your belief,
> obedience, love, and perseverance is the effect.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > My response to Jesus Christ does not change
> > the truthfulness of who he is, of what he
> > has accomplished on my behalf, on our behalf,
> > on behalf of us all. My response does not
> > change the truth of the Gospel. The Gospel
> > tells me who Jesus Christ is; it tells me who
> > I am, and it calls me to repent accordingly.
> > My response does not condition Jesus Christ,
> > it flows from who he is.
>
> Right. I agree with all of this. What do you think you are trying to
> tell me?
>
> Bill wrote:
> > When you insinuate that I have diminished faith
> > or repentance, or the power of sin and death, or
> > human depravity, David, you simply misunderstand
> > me. These things are all real, profoundly real,
> > in my thinking. I just do not draw logico-causal
> > connections between them. No one can reject Jesus
> > Christ and live for long without sin and death and
> > depravity devouring them.
>
> But I thought you did not believe in cause and effect, so how can this
> be? Please be patient with me and try to explain.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > These things are defeated in Christ: this is the truth.
> > BUT if we refuse him, we step right into their lies.
> > We empower their impoverishment. We become the substance
> > upon which they feed. We dare not believe the lie!
> > Repentance is absolutely in order here. But it is not
> > to gain God's forgiveness. It is to step back into the
> > truth of our existence in Jesus Christ!
>
> That is exactly how I see it too.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > These things will kill us if we choose to live
> > in their lies. Oh but there is such wonderful
> > news! When we humans place our faith in Jesus
> > Christ God sends his Spirit into our being and
> > secures us from within; this he does that we might
> > know that we are not without him. Never, ever again
> > will we be without him. Christ in us, the hope of Glory.
>
> I'm not sure we are that far apart, except that you make some strange
> statements about not having a cause and effect paradigm. Most of what
> you have shared I agree with and I'm not sure where our differences lie.
>
> Bill wrote:
> > Calvin remained remarkably unscathed by the early
> > stages of the Age of Reason. He lived prior to the
> > Enlightenment. The problem is we do not. In order
> > to read Calvin and actually find Calvin in the Calvin
> > we read, we have to shed ourselves the best we can
> > of Enlightenment predispositions. If we do not, we
> > will end up doing to him the same thing his successors
> > did. We will misunderstand him, then distort his views
> > beyond recognition.
>
> There is no doubt that Beza went much further than Calvin did, but
> Calvin laid the foundation for it. Your viewpoint that all men and
> women are born in Christ when they are physically born into this world
> is directly opposed to Calvin's viewpoint. You surely recognize this,
> do you not? I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with Calvin. I
> disagree with him on many matters. What I have a problem with is your
> support of him on the one hand, but then teaching something that Calvin
> would have considered anathema and would probably have sought to have
> you burned at the stake.
>
> Peace be with you.
> David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.
>
> ----------
> "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
>
> If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
>
>
