DashHouse.com

Some folks have "renamed" T4G, to "together4Calvinism". Valid? I don't know, I wasn't there. The inclusion (indeed, co-founding I think?) of unapologetically charismatic folks would be a point against that position. The branch of Reformed folks I'm familiar with would NOT be termed charismatic, in either of the common uses of the word. ; ) Just fyi, I'm a ruling elder in a conservative Pres. church and denom, so I are one of them.

Reformed fan boys are gonna sound like fan boys. Not saying you are one, but there are lots in the God-blogosphere so it seems like that's a problem, at least in perception.

Can I ask a question of those attended? Were the topics discussed/spoken about particular to the reformed end of the theological pool? Or were they more on the (mostly) agreed-on essentials of the Gospel message?

Seaton:

The conference seemed to focus on two main doctrinal areas: penal substitution, and total inability (the T in TULIP). There was also an interesting talk by Dever on adding to the Gospel. Marshall Shelley summarizes that one here:
http://blog.christianitytoday.com/outofur/archives/2008/04/t4gs_5001_theol.html

I think I could make a case that all three topics might be a bit skewed towards some reformed favorites that would reinforce the perceptions in the post.

By the way, I'm reformed myself, and I didn't get the memo about the change to inability from depravity (just a joke, really). But, you know, the fact that I feel the need to say that it was just a joke may speak volumes about our anger problem.

What would you say would be the Gospel message as presented by T4G? What I mean is this, if you were attending this conference and didn't know the gospel, what would be your understanding of it afterwards?

I know that presenting the gospel at the conference is not the purpose of T4G and I'm not trying to ask goofy questions, I'm trying to understand if the things you (and Bene and Rob) describe above would be the take away's.

Also do you feel like you're better equipped to live out the gospel this next week?

Interesting stuff Darryl, and interesting comments on your other post.

Here are my thoughts:

-"it looks like a bunch of mostly middle-class white men who agree with each other asserting our own theology,"

I looked around and it's true there sure were a lot of white men, I don't know if they were mostly middle class. But there were also people from other races and there were women. I think it is a huge problem though that in the Church of Jesus Christ at large there is such racial separation. But that's not just a white thing, it applies to all races and it's wrong. (another reason why I love my church and why my inspiration for downtown ministry is the Brooklyn Tabernacle where it's definitely all races, a church for all people.)

"it looks like doctrine is sometimes used as a club against others who don't hold the same doctrine (thumping, us vs. them, with us or against us rhetoric)"

I didn't get that. These guys are truth guys for sure and they believe the truth is very important. Considering everything I read on blogs about what is out there in Christendom, and different churches and conferences I've been at, there is so much false teaching going on. These guys are aware of that and are responding to that and telling us we need to be aware of it. False teaching can be so subtle, it sounds so good and thousands upon thousands are being duped. That is a huge issue and these guys know it and are addressing it and I am thankful for it. The truth is so important.

"it excludes those who are unlike them - those who are less intellectual, female, etc."

That's not true. We might like to see more of those who are unlike them, but they are not excluded, it's not like they had bouncers at the door turning certain people away.

"it focuses on a few stars of the conference circuit"

Whatever, if they are considered stars so be it. I sure don't get the impression they are wanting to be. They are men who are passionate about Jesus Christ and the glory of God. They are striving in their own lives to live for God's glory and His renown. They are very concerned that biblical truth is being attacked and not just from outside the church, it's happening right in the church.

"it can lead to a greater focus on theological nuances than Jesus"

That's not what I heard at the conference. They were all about the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That's what the focus was. They were definitely all about Jesus.

"some of the most theological people seem to be the most angry people"

I didn't hear any angry people, did you? It's easy to get angry though sometimes isn't it. When I watch some huckster on late night television asking people to send money in for his green hanky, I get so angry, in my flesh, I'd like to have a go at him. There are some things to get angry about for sure and to warn people about.

It's interesting to read people's opposition to these guys.

I'd like to respond to what Bene had to say on the other post when he said this: "Now George is thinking Calvinism is gospel, at least you have the education to point him back to Christ. We Armenians are just going to be more more misguided scum. as he processes what he learned or thinks he learned."

Bene, I never thought of the Gospel in terms of Calvinism. I haven't studied all that stuff yet. I just thought of the Gospel in terms of what the Bible says and what I know without a doubt has taken place in my life when God saved me. As I read the Bible, with the Holy Spirit guiding me, the truth becomes so clear when it comes to how salvation is all a work of God. I also know that from my own experience, I had absolutely nothing to do with coming to God. I came to Him only becasue He first began to draw me in. That's the only way we can come. What I would ask you, if you consider yourself Armenian what does that mean for you in terms of your own life and your relationship with God?

Seaton:

You didn't get that memo either? I heard three terms: total inability, pervasive depravity, and total depravity. I find that the term total depravity misleads a lot of people.

If I came knowing nothing about the Gospel, I think I would understand that I was completely unable to save myself and under the wrath of God due to sin, and that Christ had born that wrath on my behalf.

Am I better equipped to live out the implications of the gospel this week? Yes, I think so. I found some aspects of the conference a struggle, and I would do things differently, but we saw the gospel clearly, and it's hard not to be changed by that.

Darryl,
I'm glad to hear that you're better equipped than you were before. If you had said no, I might have come to the conclusion that it wasn't anything more than a bunch of guys who look alike, think alike, talk alike getting together to have their intellectual ears tickled. (one of my spiritual gifts is sarcasm, so read accordingly)

As for the memo, I get suspicious when I hear folks changing names. It reminds me of the apartment complexes, who after a few fires, change the name so they can technically say, "Oh no!, we've NEVER had a fire at 'New Name Apartments.'" , It makes it so much easier to sell. In this case, however, I agree, without a proper understanding of what is meant, it does mislead.

George it's great you enjoyed yourself, good you have an opportunity to do some complimentary/comparative religion study.

"What I would ask you, if you consider yourself Armenian what does that mean for you in terms of your own life and your relationship with God?"

I don't know what label is best for me, ask Darryl, he knows me. Since you are asking me to chose between Calvinism and Arminianism how about I be a calmenian or armvist?
I believe God is absolutely sovereign and knows all, we can't. I believe He is not the author of confusion but His kids sure are.

a) I believe in free will (This is where the depravity argument starts)
b) Salvation by Grace (where the election argument starts)
c) Redemption and reconciliation by Christ ( where the limited/unlimited atonement argument starts)
d) I believe the bible is infallible not inerrant (where WW 3 breaks out)

Arminianism doesn't hold any more personal meaning for me than Calvinism does so I don't think I'll be able to answer to your satisfaction George.
Neither one has saved me, kept me, compels me.
That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection. That is my deepest cry, something beyond words.
I'll never get a Doctorate of Divinity with this messy childish simplicity, will I and certainly won't make it to the cool Calvinist kids table.;^)

Oh and since you are so curious about what I believe George I'm not a complimentarian, that little doctrine seems to be dancing around the fringes.
I have pure TULIP friends by the way, personally I prefer lily of the valley.

Last night a 38 year old women died in this area, they found her in a creek, COD unknown. Most of the reporting centred on a female minister who sat beside the son, a 20 year old with cerebral palsy.
Mom had struggled with addictions and bad choices in her life and this church with a woman pastor came along side and earned their trust. This female minister was mom's voice and it was powerful. This female minister who most of my Calvinist friends would condemn, mock or refuse to listen to absolutely shone with compassion. I saw Jesus Christ.

I have huge respect for intellectually gifted Christians no matter what box they fit in. If you don't believe me look at the BDBO blogroll.

Those are Darryl's cliches not mine.

We're done.
Good luck with your studying.

Darryl,

You're a very precious brother and I want to thank you for just being you, the clay vessel with a great big Treasure inside. I have enjoyed very much seeing T4G through your Canadian eyes. I spent 12 years in Brazil and will never be able to see things like this in the same way my fellow americans do.

Enjoy the comments of your blogging friends. I invite you to visit my blog and comment on what I feel is my life work now: advocating for unity in the Church and, at the same time, advocating for a different kind of unity in the world community. I am finally being myself, who I am as God has made me and been molding me for a long time. My heavenly Father has been so patient, so kind and tender with me, I just hope in a small way I can stay hidden in Christ to a vessel of honor, promoting reconciliation and peace.

John Paul Todd
e4unity.wordpress.com

Thanks Bene,

You said the following:

a) I believe in free will (This is where the depravity argument starts)
b) Salvation by Grace (where the election argument starts)
c) Redemption and reconciliation by Christ ( where the limited/unlimited atonement argument starts)
d) I believe the bible is infallible not inerrant (where WW 3 breaks out)

I know you said you were done, so I'm not sure you will answer but I do have some more questions.

First of all I believe in free will also but I don't believe it ever trumps the sovereignty of God. I can't totally wrap my head around that but therein lies the mystery. God is sovereign, yet my life is all about choices. That speaks to the awesomeness of God, His ways are not our ways. In relation to that, my question is if you have been saved. If you are saved do you think that was your free will moving to God, God seeing that and responding to you or do you see it as God beginning the work in you and you responding to Him? Further to that, do you think that once you are saved you can loose your salvation? I'm not sure you will answer, so I will leave it at that for now.

I know there are a lot of people who claim to be followers of Christ and claim to have been saved (I'm not referring to you now, I don't know you well enough)who have no assurancce of their salvation. It seems as if they are always trying to be better in their own strength as if they have to continually work at keeping their salvation. I say that is very sad. The Bible clearly teaches that once we have been saved we will never loose that. That is the hope that spurs me on to want to reach out to others with the Good News of the Gospel. Once we turn from our sin and repent and are forgiven and receive this new life, that's it, we know we have become a child of God. His Spirit communicates to ours that has taken place and we have been forever changed. He then tasks us to deliver that message of reconciliation to others, so they too can receive new life as they turn to God. (2Cor 5)God uses His Word, that He wants His people to proclaim, the Good News, to reach into unbelievers hearts by the Spirit, to bring about conviction and salvation. Why some come and some do not I don't totally understand. They all have the opportunity and are without excuse.

If you do answer any of those questions and would consider another, what is the difference for you that the Bible is infallible but not inerrant?

Hi George,

I'd like to address your questions. I'm lousy at Grace and Humility especially in this form of communication, so please don't read anything more into this then you have to.

I've reviewed the conventional wisdom of Salvation and found it lacking...as in there's so much more in the Bible then 'Believe the right things and go to heaven, don't and go to hell.' It seems to me that the stories of the Bible aren't just about right belief, but about how right belief moves creation to reconcile with a Holy God here and now.

I really like the Great Divorce, because in an allegory it sums up my beliefs. For me, it starts with eschatology and we can work backwards. The world isn't meant to blow up, then we go to Heaven. God wants all of creation to reconcile with Him and Jesus offers the ability to reconcile. I think this view moves beyond the Social Gospel (what we do) and Calvinism (what we believe) into a more Biblical view of the Gospel.

Is right belief and doctrine important? Absolutely, because without right belief you'll never get to the right actions. Many Calvinists stop at the right belief and make this the deal breaker. They measure standards of Christianity on how you answer questions about God. Right doctrine leads us to right actions, but we can never just stop with doctrine.

Rob

Hey Rob

Some good points there about how we should live out our right doctrine. That is the whole point for sure.

You said: "It seems to me that the stories of the Bible aren't just about right belief, but about how right belief moves creation to reconcile with a Holy God here and now."

How do you see right belief moving creation to reconcile with a Holy God? What do you mean by moving creation?

You also said: "Right doctrine leads us to right actions, but we can never just stop with doctrine."

Would you agree it's good to start with right doctrine?

See, this together for the gospel conference was all about that. We got to start with the right doctrine and especially when it comes to what the Gospel actually is, what is of first importance. When we have that right, when we ourselves have been reconciled to God and have the Holy Spirit dwelling within us, it becomes so clear what it is we ought to be doing. Absolutely we reach out to people with our right doctrine but for what purpose? If we ourselves are truly redeemed we will want more than anything to see others also be reconciled to God. We meet them where they are but what's the goal? If I read the emerger/liberal views it's all about meeting their practical needs but they could care less about the spiritual. That's my impression because every time I ask them about that, they clam up. Why is that I keep asking myself. Makes absolutely no sense to me. It is my salvation in Christ that I value above all else in my life. I am so thankful for the forgiveness of sins that I have experienced in my own life. It's what everyone needs, it's the greatest need of every person, to be reconciled to God.

The reality is that there are so many who claim to be followers of Christ who have not been redeemed. It's because they have never got to that place in their life where they have been willing to abandon their sin, turn from it and receive the forgiveness that Christ offers. It really is all about that. But they have had a religious Christian upbringing, they know the truth, they realize they have to do soemthing with it, so they think that it's their works that will make them right with God. They are so deceived. You never will hear them encouraging sinners to repent, because they have never repented themselves and sin is not a big deal to them. Just listen to their language and their attitude towards holiness, and how linked to the world they are. They could care less. But tell them right doctrine is important and they are all over you.

But I keep asking them to show me some evidence of God at work in their ministries and I get no response. I don't know where you are from Rob but in the Greater Toronto area I am looking for evidence of transformed lives among the emerger/liberal folks. Where in those ministries are sinners coming to repentance and finding new life as a result of the Gospel being proclaimed and lived out. I'm still looking. If you are from our area maybe you can help me with that. I know of quite a few who talk a good game of how the traditional church needs to do more in reaching out and they have some great points about that. But where in their ministries are we seeing sinners getting saved? And if they are not getting saved, what's the point? Just help people out practically?

Hi George,

I think from your point of view it was a gathering for getting a solid foundation of what is the gospel. I think, from an outsider looking in, it's a conference for folks who basically agree with each other and generally use incendiary language to demonize the other. (The other, being defined as those who don't agree with 5 point Calvinism). This is probably and unfair caricature, but I'll bet all the money in my pockets this happened at the conference more then once. My evidence for this is Teampyro.blogspot.com.

My suggestion is that going around telling those who disagree why they're wrong is incredibly counter-productive. In fact, the post on there today is titled "Mouths must be Stopped." I disagree with Calvinists on pretty much everything, but I don't feel the need to start websites to demonize Calvinists or Fundamentalists. I don't feel the need to preach why everyone is wrong but me like John McArthur on a national radio programme. My only time commenting on this has been on this site in over 2 years, and the only reason I spend time here is because Darryl and his readers seem reasonable and intelligent.

I don't mean this to be hurtful and I respect everyone's right to free speech. But just because you can say something, doesn't mean you should. If Calvinists like Phil Johnson and John McArthur want any of my time, they'd take down sites like team pyro and move on from their 'False Teacher' obsession.

There are certainly verses that warn against false teachers, but there are many more verses about our responsiblity to the poor. Why can't we spend the next 2-years focusing on those?

Rob