As I said in the disclaimer here, I am not a Calvinist, but a classic Wesleyan/Arminian, therefore I read this chapter expecting to be accused of being a Pelagian. I was pleasantly surprised. Not only did the authors not level the charge of Pelagian, they even said that semi-Pelagian is a misnomer. They called the classic Wesleyan/Arminian position "semi-Augustinian."
Without a context that can be taken several ways, but the context was that a semi-Augustinian sees that salvation is all by God's grace, from the first stirrings of the soul until the final glorification at death. Where they differ from Augustine's views is in their views on predestination. I can live with that definition. I find much about Augustine that I like. Total depravity is not a problem for me, I don't need to read much history to confirm it. The human soul is definitely bent on doing evil, to quote from another book I'm reading ( First, Break All the Rules), citing the parable of the frog and the scorpion. The scorpion convinces the frog to give him a ride across the pond by saying that it would not be in his best interest to sting the frog, since they both would die. He then proceeds to sting the frog anyway. The frog asks why he did it as they both begin to drown: "I know," relied the scorpion as he sank into the pond. "But I am a scorpion. I have to sting you. It's in my nature." It is the same with humans...
The next chapter is on predestination with a subtitle "Conditional or Unconditional." As I mentioned in a previous post, this book seems to be balanced and free from polemics. I doubt I will be convinced, since reading Calvin himself didn't convince me, but at least they aren't creating a straw man of the other viewpoint.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment