Discussing OBJECTIONS to Calvinism - Dr. Victor Lee & Samuel Nesan (ft. Brandon Ho) | Pt. 2/4

For more information about Explain International or to request a speaker, kindly visit our pages:

Follow us on Facebook and Instagram: @ExplainInternational

[stephentanws]

Well explained Sam! Particularly appreciated your use of Psalm 136. Will keep that in my back pocket for future use. 🙂

[YKWmsia]

A preface before my little essay of a comment - I've read the book, I'm theologically Reformed, I'm not a member of CERC, I even disagree to some extent with how CERC does things though I know people in the church and respect them. However, I did find the book quite lacking. I say this as someone who *really* wanted the book to be better, in order that I might have better disagreements with my Arminian friends, rather than mis-informed ones (which unfortunately I feel this book encourages).

Fundamentally, I think the authors misdiagnose the issue at hand. They believe that CERC's 'hardline'-ness (I'm not saying I agree with the choice of wording) is a direct result of their theological beliefs. And the problem with this diagnosis is evident even from this progression of videos, and from the book.

In this video, we are at 2/4 but have hardly delved into discussing the 'hardline' church being addressed (not the fault of the panelists or Brandon though). It originates from the book - the authors couldn't seem to decide whether they objected to 'Calvinism' or 'hardline' Calvinism, and end up conflating the two. This is where Dr. Victor's admission in video 1/4 about making generalisations about Calvinism while not being particularly well-read in the topic is revealing. If you can't provide a baseline definition of what 'conventional' Calvinism is, you will definitely not be able to define and critique 'hardline' Calvinism.

At the end of the day, I think the issue is not Reformed doctrinal convictions per se. The core issue which should be discussed is *ministry philosophy* (whether explicit and acknowledged, or implicit and unsaid). There are plenty of churches who hold similar theological beliefs to CERC but look different. For example, why would 2 Presbyterian churches (who would both hold to the Westminster Confession of Faith) look different? Because every church has a different idea of how theological convictions should be brought to life in the church.

E.g. a person from CERC might say that "being transformed by the renewing of your mind" (Rom. 12:2) is to grow in theological understanding and accuracy, and that looks like starting off studying Romans rigorously, verse by verse. A person from HTBB would agree with Romans 12:2 just as well, but that might look like starting with Alpha Course and working your way onward. Same conviction, different outworking.

I think if we bear this difference in mind (between doctrinal beliefs and ministry philosophy), we'd have a better idea of how to navigate discussions around church differences and those discussions would be much more fruitful.

To those curious, look up the concept of "Theological Vision" by Tim Keller in his book, Center Church.

[jamessheffield]

Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?