Are all objections to the Christian Faith based on reason?

-
Christianity Today says "no" at this link.

Comments

Steve Martin said…
Interesting article.

I don't agree with much said in it. It states a pemise which is false from the git-go, that man has a "free will" when it comes to choosing God.

Our wills are bound in sin. We are dead in our sins and trespasses and no one is able to size God up and choose Him.

When Jesus asked Peter, "who do you say that I am?" Peter answered correctly and Jesus replied "blessed are you Simon Peter for flesh and blood have not evealed this to you but my Father in Heaven."

God calls and chooses His own through the gospel. "No man CAN come to Him." (Gospel of John)

If someone becomes a believer it is because God willed him to be one. That's what the Bible says, anyway.
February 13, 2011
J. K. Jones said…
Steve,

Glad you commented. I hope you are doing well.

You know that, as a Calvinist, I agree with much of what you say. But I do affirm "free will" of a sort. This free will, or free agency, as my tradition calls it, means that a person is responsible for the things they choose.

I see nothing in the article that contradicts the idea of free agency.

It is important to remember that the reason that a person cannot come to God is that they will not come to God. They will not come to God because they do not want to, nor will they ever want to unless God changes their hearts.

But they are responsible for their lack of faith because they are doing exactly what they want to do. God is not forcing them to turn their backs on Him. They are doing what they want.

I pray that God would change their hearts, but I also know that the gospel we share and the reasons we provide for belief in God may be just the things He chooses to use to change their hearts.

JK
February 16, 2011
Steve Martin said…
J.K.,

We do have a will, but it is certainly not free. When it comes to the things of God, our wills are bound...to sin.

That is why the Bible tells us that God calls, and chooses us. No one becomes a Christian by sizing anything up about God and making a "decision" for Him.


When we become believers, God gets all the credit. When we reject Him, we get all the blame.
This is Biblical, and we believe it to be the truth.
February 16, 2011
ejes said…
how do you possibly believe any of this bs?
February 17, 2011
Steve Martin said…
ejes,

Because of Christ Jesus.

Without Him, no one could believe in God.
February 17, 2011
J. K. Jones said…
ejes,

I have given allot of evidence on this blog.

Feel free to look around.

JK
February 17, 2011
J. K. Jones said…
Steve,

Part of the reason we get all the blame is that we have great evidence for God's existence and the central truths of the Christian faith. It's 'as true as the nose on our faces' (Romans 1).

But you are completely correct in saying that we are dependent on God for a change to our hearts that would make us willing to accept the gospel.

JK
February 17, 2011
Vic said…
"But you are completely correct in saying that we are dependent on God for a change to our hearts that would make us willing to accept the gospel."

It's what I've been saying all along. God's responsible for sin.
February 21, 2011
Steve Martin said…
God is not responsible for sin.
How in the world do you come up with that one?

He forgives sin! He died for sin!

He hates sin, but He loves the sinner.
February 21, 2011
J. K. Jones said…
Vic,

I am with Steve.

Please explain to us why God is responsbile for sin.

JK
February 21, 2011
J. K. Jones said…
Vic,

Since you have not answered our question, I wanted to assume your argument and then respond to it.
I assume that you are saying that God forces us in some way to sin. I think you are saying that God forces us to do the things we do.
He does not. There is nothing outside the sinner that forces him / her to sin. We sin because we want to. We want to because that is the kind of person we are. We are sinners by nature and by choice. We are responsible for the things we do because we always do what we want to do.

JK
February 23, 2011
Steve Martin said…
"There is nothing outside the sinner that forces him / her to sin. We sin because we want to. We want to because that is the kind of person we are. We are sinners by nature and by choice. We are responsible for the things we do because we always do what we want to do."

Spot on, J.K..
February 23, 2011
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Face of Terror

-
Osama Bin laden is dead. Since the rest of the internet is buzzing with opinions on that death, I thought I would weigh in. First, this is not the end of global terrorism. Like the Hydra of old, when one head is chopped off, two more take its place. We still need diligence in our fight against global terror. U. S. and allied Armed Forces still need our prayers. We still need a strong military and intelligence community. We have not yet cut off the Hydra’s immortal head. Second, the way to get to the ‘heart of the matter’ is with Christian missionary efforts. We must reach the people who make up those societies and population segments that produce terrorists . To tell a story I have told here before : Early in the twentieth century, Baptist evangelists preached through rural Mississippi and Alabama with such effectiveness that moonshiners could no longer sell their whiskey: All their customers were getting converted! In desperation, the whiskey sellers hired two men to murder on...
Read more

The Canons of Dort

-
I believe that the Canons of Dort are true. This is a statement that came out the Synod of Dort, held from 1618-1619. The Canons of Dort outline the system of theology known today as the “five points of Calvinism.” The problem I have with most “five-point Calvinists” is that the Canons of Dort contain much more than five points. Many explanations of the TULIP (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints) are gross simplifications of the Canons of Dort. [This is especially true of explanations given by those who oppose Calvinism. It is easier to knock down a straw man than it is to knock down a real man, and so it is easier to criticize an oversimplified Calvinism that the more robust form.] Some of those who teach the “five points” leave out some of the quotes below: This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than ...
Read more

Intelligent Design

-
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement makes much of the argument from irreducible complexity. Dr. Michael Behe has become famous for a simple example, the mousetrap. He points out that the mousetrap will not perform its function without all of its parts. The wooden base, the metal hammer, a spring, a catch and a metal bar to hold back the hammer are all necessary parts. One component by itself will not catch a mouse. Mainstream evolutionary science has a counter-argument. To paraphrase Dr. Kenneth Miller, if you disassemble the mousetrap, each component can serve as something useful on its own. If we take away the catch and metal bar, we have something left that can serve as a paper clip. The spring could make a simple two-section key chain. The wooden base makes a paperweight. Evolutionary processes like random mutation and natural selection can combine and retain the useful parts as the complicated evolves to perform the complex function. The useful parts are combined into the mousetr...
Read more