Congregation, listen carefully

Click on Picture to Enlarge

The picture above needs to be explained. It is not as tongue in cheek as you might think. It certainly isn't tongue in cheek when I get posthumously get Calvin to agree 100% with Dr Monte's quote.  I listened to Dr Monte recently on my mp3 player. He is easy to listen to, when some other men require greater concentration. I knew before we started that he was going to get unto Calvinism, (Clue: Sovereignty of God in the title) but I decided to listen anyway. If nothing else, I get another post for my blog. Which you are reading now.

Let's cut to the chase. As indicated by the nod of approval from Calvin, Calvinists do not believe two things here. Dr Monte thinks they do, but he hasn't done his homework properly and it shows. He dropped a real blooper a while ago on Protestants and the Rapture (I did his homework for him here) and now here is another one. (Note to Calvinists: Don't be afraid to take these men on. The bigger they are, then the harder they fall. Do your homework and steal a march.) 

Two things which Calvinists do not believe.

[1] Calvinists do not believe that God decrees or determines any one to sin. He determines to take their sin and use it for His own glory - like He did in the subject of Dr Monte's sermon above (Genesis 50:20) but He certainly did not put it in the heart of Joseph's brethren to hate Joseph and try to kill him. No Calvinist would teach that. If you are serious about this subject, then take the time to see the Reformed position here from many leading Reformed sources. And Calvin's own carefully argued position here.

Dr. Simeon points out something worth noting in his comments on Acts 4:27-28 where God decreed that the wicked would crucify Christ. (Yes, He did. Peter said so.) 

"If we mark only the expressions of my text, we shall be ready to draw from them very erroneous inferences and deductions. We shall be ready to say, 'If these people did only "what God's hand and counsel had determined before to be done." we must condemn them, they were only instruments in the hand of a superior power: and if there be any evil in what they did, it must be traced to Jehovah Himself, whose counsel had decreed it and who, by His power, stimulated them to the commission of them."  But all this is quite erroneous.  Though God had ordained these things, he never instigated any man to the commission of them; He only elevated men to situations, where, if they were so disposed, they might execute the evil that was in their hearts, and left them at liberty to follow their own will. ... "As for God, He cannot be tempted of evil; neither tempeth He any man." (James 1:13)."

Even the Arminian, John Wesley, commenting on Acts 4:27-28 acknowledged that the Cross was determined by God. I quote:

"The sense is, but they could do no more than thou wast pleased to permit, according to thy determinate counsel, to save mankind by the sufferings of thy Son. And what was needful for this end, thou didst before determine to permit to be done." (NT notes) 

If this is semantics (Dr Monte's favourite throw away line on this issue) then the Spirit of God is guilty of it, because it is He who says that what the wicked did was according to God's decree. Dr Simeon rightly points out that God merely directs their sin which they were disposed of themselves to do. God did not commission them to do so, but took their own free decision and made good and holy use of it. 

[2] Calvinists deny that God programmes any to sin. Dr Monte falls by his own standard here. In one of his recent workshops, he spoke about the need to be able to use your opponent's own words. Failure to do so means that you are misrepresenting him. Dr Monte did not give any quotes in the above message. Sometimes I wonder does any one sit in the pew and say; "This is bad. We need proof." Does everyone just drink it in without even thinking to ask for verifiable proof? If so, then Dr Monte has one of the most enviable pastorates in the world. 

In the above message, Dr Monte said other things that were blatantly untrue. His illustration about Calvinists portraying God as being like a father who would force his children to burn their hand on a hot oven door and then scold them for doing so was particularly sickening (and I dare say it) vile.

 An application of the above is needed here. If what Dr Monte says about Calvinism is indeed true, then how can he ever fellowship with Calvinists at all? Yet he does. In one of his Question and Answer sessions, I listened to him recommending John McArthur's material as a help in studying the Bible. Yes, he did say that McArthur was a Calvinist but still ploughed ahead to recommend his works anyway. Here's an easy question for you: Would you recommend a man who you tell the world believed that God was like a father who would force his children to burn their hand on a hot oven door and then scold them for doing so? I certainly wouldn't and I suspect, neither would you. During his recent workshops, Dr Monte used Calvinist James Boice as a good example of a Christian "passionate about theology." Really? A theology that teaches that God is like to an abusive father making his child burn itself at an oven door? Doesn't anyone even blink when these things are said?  Join the dots, people.

Anyway, I've said enough here.  FTR: I had said a bit more, but edited it down.

THE END

 

* CALVINIST INDEX
* PROTESTANT INDEX
* CH SPURGEON INDEX
* EVANGELISM INDEX
* HERE AND THERE INDEX
* YOUTUBE VIDEO INDEX
* 3 MINUTE AUDIOBOO INDEX

Under the Belt

OK, I am somewhat conscious of a couple of things here as I type this blog article. First: that my last post was another comment on another sermon I heard on SermonAudio. However, I have no intention of turning this blog into a virtual catalogue of sermons-I-have-heard-and-feel-I-must-comment-upon. Secondly: That I have already commented on some of Dr Monte's sermons. On the plus side to the last thought: At least I am listening to some of them and also, my last comments were largely positive.  I generally enjoy listening to Pastor Monte, which is why I download his sermons.

Now the downside: I listened today enroute to some door to door evangelism in Co. Monaghan to the above message. He got on to A Millennialism and we got his usual comments on how he is a Biblicist (So am I, BTW) and that lead him to pre Millennialism. OK, this strict Biblicist disagrees with his conclusion but that is neither here or there in the grand scheme of things. I am prepared to sit it out at the moment, unless someone can convince me otherwise. 

Then came to killer punch. The one under the belt. I am not an expert on the Kingsberry Rules of Boxing, but isn't the dig under the belt illegal? 

What saith Dr Monte? I transcribe from the relevant part from around the 25th minute mark:

"If you believe A-Millennialism, you are taking away the Blessed Hope of the church. There is no rapture of the church per se in the A-Millenial scheme. The literal fulfillment of the rapture passage [Quotes 1 thessalonians 4:13ff] in the A-Millennial scheme doesn't happen. You say, 'Pastor Monte, how do they interpret that?' As already happened! Most Evangelicals - let me put it this way - most Protestant Evangelicals, most mainline Protestant Evangelicals believe that there is no future rapture of the church, but that it already took place. How many know that? Did you know RC Sproul believes the rapture has already happened? How many know that? According to him, it hapened in AD70". {Funny whistle}.  

Excuse me!  but that's not right. It is blatantly untrue.  FTR: A-Millennialists believe that the literal and second coming of Jesus Christ, foretold by Himself in John 14:3, reaffirmed by the angels in Acts 1:11 and spoken of by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 is yet future. It did NOT take place in AD 70. It has yet to take place. It will take place at the end of time.

John Calvin was an A-Millennialist. This is how he interpreted John 14:3

"This return must not be understood as referring to the Holy Spirit, as if Christ had manifested to the disciples some new presence of himself by the Spirit. It is unquestionably true, that Christ dwells with us and in us by his Spirit; but here he speaks of THE LAST DAY of judgment, when he will, at length, come to assemble his followers.

On Acts 1:11, Calvin commented:

The other is straightway added as a consolation concerning his second coming. ... For this purpose was it that they said that he should not come again until he came to judge the world. ... But we are not here to dispute of his form; only the apostles are taught that Christ must abide in heaven until such time as he appear at THE LATTER DAY."

On 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 Calvin observed concerning the Lord's return: 

"As to the circumstance, however, that by speaking in the first person he makes himself, as it were, one of the number of those who will live until THE LAST DAY, he means by this to arouse the Thessalonians to wait for it, nay more, to hold all believers in suspense, that they may not promise themselves some particular time: for, granting that it was by a special revelation that he knew that Christ would come at a somewhat later time, it was nevertheless necessary that this doctrine should be delivered to the Church in common, that believers might be prepared at all times." 

I forbear to quote other A-Mills. Dr Monte made a vague reference to Dr RC Sproule. What he attributed to Dr Sproul doesn't sound right and it wont do to say it without giving us actual and verifiable proof. It is a very serious allegation to make. Do you know what I did? I clicked my Bookmarked Google page and then I typed (I'm cutting and pasting here) rc sproul Lord's Return into Google and up came this page from RC Sproul's website just 4 entries down. Click number two and a quick scroll down gave me this: 

"The King’s glorious return still lies ahead of us. Many New Testament passages teach this doctrine with clarity, and even the a.d. 70 judgment of the Olivet Discourse probably finds another, consummate fulfillment in the second coming of Jesus.

Coram Deo

The sure hope of the Lord’s return has provided strength to many a suffering Christian. Knowing that Jesus will come again to consummate God’s kingdom helps us see the trials of life in their proper perspective and endure them for the sake of Jesus. When we are weighed down with illness or are suffering tribulation simply for being a follower of Christ, let us not focus on the pain of the suffering now but on the return of our Lord who will destroy death forever." (RC Sproul)

In less than 60 seconds, I could disprove with verifiable proof that RC Sproul believes that the King's glorious return, which he calls the sure hope of the Lord's return still lies ahead of us. Compare with Dr Monte's allegation:

"Did you know RC Sproul believes the rapture has already happened? How many know that? According to him, it hapened in AD70".

What can I say?  To be honest, I am very surprised and disappointed that Dr Monte said these things and that from a pulpit to his people. I thought better of Dr Monte than that. I dare say that his good people, of whom he speaks fondly in his messages, deserve better than that. Such a tactic can never be said to be Biblicism in any shape or form. 


INDEXES:
* CALVINIST INDEX
* PROTESTANT INDEX
* CH SPURGEON INDEX
* EVANGELISM INDEX
* HERE AND THERE INDEX
* YOUTUBE VIDEO INDEX
* 3 MINUTE AUDIOBOO INDEX

monte's workshop

OK, my somewhat judicial friend Ryan Hayden recommended the above contribution ("well worth your time") by our mutual friend's Dr Monte to the Outreach Conference which he had this week.  So I downloaded it and listened to it via my mobile phone mp3 player en route to some door to door evangelism in Co. Monaghan. 

I enjoyed it. In fact, it finished about 15 minutes shorter than my journey, so I started to listen to it again. A few thoughts:

I only know Dr Monte through Twitter. He attacked Calvinism a while ago with some pretty strong stuff so I did what I tend to do in such provocative circumstances - I just trained the big guns on him and sent a couple of salvos in his direction. Then I learned something. When you seriously challenge Marc as to why he thinks Calvinists are heretics, but quotes Spurgeon and reads the Puritans, he grins (as much as you can grin on Twitter) and draws in the horns. IOW: IMHO he is a benign bluffer! So I like him. I had a wee go at him during the week over his recommendation of John McArthur the 5 point Calvinist's book. And he favourited it.

In the above workshop, he had another pop at Calvinism. Just a one liner about having his deacons know when he passes on that they should not have a Calvinist in the pulpit. That's alright. The #IFB's are gloriously riddled with Calvinism and according to this lament from David Cloud, we are nearly winning the war. So you might as well surrender now ;o)  

Having made arrangements to keep the dread Calvinists out of his pulpit, Marc then, in the course of his workshop, used two Calvinists as examples of passionate preaching and solid Bible teaching. The first was John Piper and the second was James Kennedy. True, there was the usual "While I would have theological differences..." but still, he knew where to turn to give classic examples. The lack of depth that characterises some #IFB preaching is being made up by the hungry sheep in the pew (especially among the young people) turning to the likes of Piper. While many #IFB's might not like our Calvinism - or (to be more precise) what they perceive our Calvinism to be - they know where to turn when they need examples of how to do it right. 

My friend Ryan (an ex-Calvinist) actually runs a series of articles on what #IFB pastors can learn from the Calvinists and it is all the right things. 

I am going to download some of the other messages from Pastor Monte's contributions. Whether they match the above message remains to be seen. The one entitled Pastoral Awareness of Theological Trends is potentially gritty, but if he has another pop at Calvinism, then just read again the third paragraph. It works every time.

By the same standard, someone might say of this post: "The Calvinists know where to turn when they need help with this and that." Of course, we do. Even diluted Calvinism tastes good in any palate. 

Update: Listened to Dr Monte yesterday en route to preach in a church 40 miles away.  His Pastoral Awareness of Theological Trends session had its usual take on Calvinism with the emphasis more on how it stands in the way of Dr Monte's somewhat novel Dispensational theories. For all that, the Teaching your people through preaching session (with the usual health warnings) gave us several quotes from various people about effective preaching. Approximately 75% of these quotes were from die hard Calvinists e.g. Spurgeon, Bunyan and John McArthur while at least two others were from Calvinist sympathisers i.e. Richard Baxter and AW Tozer. I must say, that I really enjoyed these sessions though. They were relaxed in style and very listenable and overall instructive. 

* CALVINIST INDEX
* PROTESTANT INDEX
* CH SPURGEON INDEX
* EVANGELISM INDEX
* HERE AND THERE INDEX
* YOUTUBE VIDEO INDEX
* 3 MINUTE AUDIOBOO INDEX