Tell the Truth by Will Metzger DISCUSSION

[evangelist6589]

John C wanna come back to this? Just started reading the book again. Finished my John Piper book that was pending so back to Metzger. I left off on page 168. This is a book to read SLOWLY and more than once.

 

[Van]

I would not think reading yet another rendition of Calvinist screed would benefit even a devoted Calvinist. Why not study God's word instead.

1) Is the message that God has authority over us, as creator more important than God sacrificially loves us?

2) Are the attributes of holiness and love more important than God's other attributes such as providing justice and mercy?

3) Is God's capacity to compel an outcome more important than God's capacity to allow an outcome?

 

[evangelist6589]

I would not think reading yet another rendition of Calvinist screed would benefit even a devoted Calvinist. Why not study God's word instead.

1) Is the message that God has authority over us, as creator more important than God sacrificially loves us?

2) Are the attributes of holiness and love more important than God's other attributes such as providing justice and mercy?

3) Is God's capacity to compel an outcome more important than God's capacity to allow an outcome?

Why go to church then? Every Calvinist book well saturated in scripture so stop accusing us of not using the Bible.

If you have not read Metzger then you need to be silent. If you wanna read him then buy the book.

 

[JonC]

John C wanna come back to this? Just started reading the book again. Finished my John Piper book that was pending so back to Metzger. I left off on page 168. This is a book to read SLOWLY and more than once.

That's fine with me, although right now I don't have much time so it may be a slow process.

 

[evangelist6589]

That's fine with me, although right now I don't have much time so it may be a slow process.

Thanks will do

 

[Van]

Why go to church then? Every Calvinist book well saturated in scripture so stop accusing us of not using the Bible.

If you have not read Metzger then you need to be silent. If you wanna read him then buy the book.

As you can see, not one of my three questions was addressed.
The claim was made that scripture supports the TULI of the Tulip, but that claim cannot be supported rationally or logically.
BTW, if you had studied the book, you would know each of my questions was based on mistaken assertions contained in the book.

I would not think reading yet another rendition of Calvinist screed would benefit even a devoted Calvinist. Why not study God's word instead.

1) Is the message that God has authority over us, as creator more important than God sacrificially loves us?

2) Are the attributes of holiness and love more important than God's other attributes such as providing justice and mercy?

3) Is God's capacity to compel an outcome more important than God's capacity to allow an outcome?

 

[JonC]

The claim was made that scripture supports the TULI of the Tulip, but that claim cannot be supported rationally or logically.

Van the Man! (I am, BTW, a Van Morrison fan...so that's definitely a complement :wavey.

What are we talking about here? I thought it was the Metzger book...but now I'm thinking I missed something.

 

[Van]

Van the Man! (I am, BTW, a Van Morrison fan...so that's definitely a complement :wavey.

What are we talking about here? I thought it was the Metzger book...but now I'm thinking I missed something.

Yes, my three questions stem from Metzger's book. The statement about the TULI addressed the claim, "Every Calvinist book well saturated in scripture...."

If you would like to address the questions based on the book's assertions, that would be helpful.

 

[Yeshua1]

As you can see, not one of my three questions was addressed.
The claim was made that scripture supports the TULI of the Tulip, but that claim cannot be supported rationally or logically.
BTW, if you had studied the book, you would know each of my questions was based on mistaken assertions contained in the book.

I would not think reading yet another rendition of Calvinist screed would benefit even a devoted Calvinist. Why not study God's word instead.

1) Is the message that God has authority over us, as creator more important than God sacrificially loves us?

2) Are the attributes of holiness and love more important than God's other attributes such as providing justice and mercy?

3) Is God's capacity to compel an outcome more important than God's capacity to allow an outcome?

So van, when have you been able to read thru the writtings of say calvin and spurgeon on the issues of salvation, and be able to fully refute them?

 

[JonC]

If you would like to address the questions based on the book's assertions, that would be helpful.

Well...I can try. But I don't know how "helpful" it'll be.

1) Is the message that God has authority over us, as creator more important than God sacrificially loves us?

This is an unanswerable question as we do not have the right to pick and choose which part of God’s revelation to us takes precedence. I will say that I believe that God’s fullest and complete revelation to man is in the person of Jesus Christ. But a significant doctrine of God’s sacrificial love is God as Creator.

2) Are the attributes of holiness and love more important than God's other attributes such as providing justice and mercy?

No, they are not more important. I think that they are all related (justice and mercy are a integral part of God’s holiness and love). The mistake that many, IMHO…or at least IMO….make is that they pick and choose which attributes of God appeals to them (or their idea of God) and they go with it. But God is who He is, and we can only know Him through His self-revelation.

3) Is God's capacity to compel an outcome more important than God's capacity to allow an outcome?

My answer is "of course not!"…but as I’ve stated before (I guess it’s been a long time ago) , I am a bit of a compatibilist. I believe that God does allow outcomes to unfold, but that this is also under His absolute control. In terms of salvation (where this always goes) I believe that God works within the wills of man, normally through the persuasion of another, towards faith. God is in control, but men are not unwillingly saved. I believe a problem is that many seem to view God as an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, eternal and perfect man. Then they go on and figure out how this superman would go about this business of being God. What they forget is all we know of God is what Has revealed of Himself...and I am pretty sure that there is more about God than we can know. Anyway, that's my two cents. Kinda crazy…huh.

While I find this discussion much more interesting, I do not see how it is related to the Metzger book. It is a book on evangelism.

 

[Van]

So van, when have you been able to read thru the writtings of say calvin and spurgeon on the issues of salvation, and be able to fully refute them?

Why not answer my questions? My bet is not one poster has the integrity to actually answer the questions, with the possible exception of JonC.

 

[evangelist6589]

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT THE BOOK TELL THE TRUTH SO PLEASE KEEP POSTS ON THE BOOK THANKS.

YOU DISAGREE? Then do two things.

Get out of here as you are disruptive

Go chase a rabbit

You wanna be disruptive? Then I will find you a rabbit for you to look at after your every post.

 

[Van]

My three questions are based on mistaken views presented in the book. You have failed to answer them, disrupting my efforts to discuss the book.

 

[Van]

Thanks JonC, you did a fine job answering the questions.
The book says the message that God has authority over us is more important than the message than God sacrificially loves us. You said the whole revelation of God is important and we should not say one part is more important than another part, such as the revelation of Christ Jesus.

Again, you correctly answered question 2, refuting the mistaken assertion of the book that some attributes are more important than others.

And once more, you answered question 3 correctly, saying "of course not" to the mistaken premise (which also was found in the book.)

You seem not to recognize the premises, take a gander at Table 1.

Tell the Truth is just as important for the author of the book as for the readers.

Is the Arminian gospel man centered and the Calvinist gospel God centered? Nope. Both are man-made doctrines presenting differing interpretations of the Gospel of Christ. In Table 1 you will find that the Arminian view has been misrepresented, violating Christ's command to tell the truth. A non-Calvinist could make just as specious an argument that Calvinism's gospel is election centered whereas the Arminian view is Christ centered. Telling the truth requires, drum roll please, telling the truth.

 

[Yeshua1]

Thanks JonC, you did a fine job answering the questions.
The book says the message that God has authority over us is more important than the message than God sacrificially loves us. You said the whole revelation of God is important and we should not say one part is more important than another part, such as the revelation of Christ Jesus.

Again, you correctly answered question 2, refuting the mistaken assertion of the book that some attributes are more important than others.

And once more, you answered question 3 correctly, saying "of course not" to the mistaken premise (which also was found in the book.)

You seem not to recognize the premises, take a gander at Table 1.

Tell the Truth is just as important for the author of the book as for the readers.

Is the Arminian gospel man centered and the Calvinist gospel God centered? Nope. Both are man-made doctrines presenting differing interpretations of the Gospel of Christ. In Table 1 you will find that the Arminian view has been misrepresented, violating Christ's command to tell the truth. A non-Calvinist could make just as specious an argument that Calvinism's gospel is election centered whereas the Arminian view is Christ centered. Telling the truth requires, drum roll please, telling the truth.

BOTH views are trying to center in on God as the priamry Agent in role of salvations, but the calvinistic model more closely foolows what the Bible actually teaches!

 

[evangelist6589]

My three questions are based on mistaken views presented in the book. You have failed to answer them, disrupting my efforts to discuss the book.

My error. I will look at your questions home on my Mac. I must have misread you.

 

[JonC]

Thanks JonC, you did a fine job answering the questions.
The book says the message that God has authority over us is more important than the message than God sacrificially loves us. You said the whole revelation of God is important and we should not say one part is more important than another part, such as the revelation of Christ Jesus.

Again, you correctly answered question 2, refuting the mistaken assertion of the book that some attributes are more important than others.

And once more, you answered question 3 correctly, saying "of course not" to the mistaken premise (which also was found in the book.)

You seem not to recognize the premises, take a gander at Table 1.

Tell the Truth is just as important for the author of the book as for the readers.

Is the Arminian gospel man centered and the Calvinist gospel God centered? Nope. Both are man-made doctrines presenting differing interpretations of the Gospel of Christ. In Table 1 you will find that the Arminian view has been misrepresented, violating Christ's command to tell the truth. A non-Calvinist could make just as specious an argument that Calvinism's gospel is election centered whereas the Arminian view is Christ centered. Telling the truth requires, drum roll please, telling the truth.

I didn’t understand the author to be speaking of Arminianism as being the “man centered” category. If this is what he was implying, then certainly he is in error. Looking down the columns, Arminian doctrine would fit well in the “God centered” section. I just took the author (although he is certainly a Calvinist) as cautioning against a partial gospel.

It is rare that one side represents the other accurately. John MacArthur (a Calvinist) certainly fails in honestly dealing with Arminianism (he often misrepresents the views of his opponents). I’d say that Robert Picirilli (an Arminian) did an outstanding job in presenting the theology of his opponent (Calvinism), but even here I think he missed the mark on a few issues. Metzger is speaking of evangelism and taking for granted a common theology which is secondary to this topic. I doubt he and I’d agree on everything…but that’s fine. I do see what he means in regards to the dangers of presenting a partial gospel (and I really do not think that this is a Calvinism vs. Arminianism issue).

 

[evangelist6589]

Just finished a book on Heaven and hell and will be back here soon. I am struggling with some works based salvation comments that this Reformed author wrote and if he truly meant them for they are heresy. Its not a theme in the book praise the Lord or the book would be in the trash. Yes I do toss books that are not Biblical.

 

[Yeshua1]

Just finished a book on Heaven and hell and will be back here soon. I am struggling with some works based salvation comments that this Reformed author wrote and if he truly meant them for they are heresy. Its not a theme in the book praise the Lord or the book would be in the trash. Yes I do toss books that are not Biblical.

You must understand that to Reformed, the concept of one being now really saved and yet not living a holy life cannot happen, as they do se the importance of one speaking and living for Jesus as both happening at same time...

 

[Yeshua1]

I didn’t understand the author to be speaking of Arminianism as being the “man centered” category. If this is what he was implying, then certainly he is in error. Looking down the columns, Arminian doctrine would fit well in the “God centered” section. I just took the author (although he is certainly a Calvinist) as cautioning against a partial gospel.

It is rare that one side represents the other accurately. John MacArthur (a Calvinist) certainly fails in honestly dealing with Arminianism (he often misrepresents the views of his opponents). I’d say that Robert Picirilli (an Arminian) did an outstanding job in presenting the theology of his opponent (Calvinism), but even here I think he missed the mark on a few issues. Metzger is speaking of evangelism and taking for granted a common theology which is secondary to this topic. I doubt he and I’d agree on everything…but that’s fine. I do see what he means in regards to the dangers of presenting a partial gospel (and I really do not think that this is a Calvinism vs. Arminianism issue).

We neiew on soed to realise that both sides want to honor and glorify God by how they view salvation, but would also have to say that the viewpoints of calvinism in strictly the area of Sotierology seems to better fit the teacxhings of the scriptures...