"God hates me because of something I didn't do"???--Huh?

A little while back I encountered the quote above on a blog.

The quote is not my belief, nor was it the blogger's. It was his representation of Calvinism, which he called, "Diabolism." The rest of the post was just as bad. It was one of worst and most willful misrepresentations of Calvinism I have ever seen.

I call it a "willful misrepresentation" because he admitted others have brought forth the same objections I did in the comments section. He has been told that is not what Calvinism teaches or is about, yet he doesn't care. The comments went back and forth for a bit, but as he has comment moderation enabled he didn't post my last one.

So how could somebody define Calvinism as the quote above? Simply misrepresent Total Depravity--which is the teaching that we can not and will not choose God on our own. He expanded that to teach that Calvinism teaches there is no good in Matter--meaning it was Manicheanism. Manicheanism is an ancient heresy that taught a separation of matter and spirit. Matter is evil and spirit good, so it is a form of dualism. This is perhaps an oversimplification, but that was the approach he took.

Anyway, while I posted comments on what Calvinists did and didn't believe, he mostly ignored the main points and made light of the minor ones. My last comment explained why I was no longer going to comment, and I rebuked him for the misrepresentation. I understood he had no desire to become a Calvinist, and he could have posted something explaining why he disagreed with what Calvinism really teaches. I'm sure he does disagree with that as well. That comment never appeared on his blog.

Why do people feel they need to misrepresent something they disagree with? I try to be fair to views I disagree with. I shake my head at some of the shameful material put out by professing Christians against various cults and other religions. They don't stick to the straight forward facts, but engage in fanciful interpretations and manufactered theories to shoot down the other group's unbiblical beliefs & practices. They could stick to the truth and still make their case, but they go overboard and wreck it. It happens on our side, it happens on others. This other blogger, (who I won't identify--at least for now, the more unknown he is the better.), did point out a way he felt misrepresnted by my comments--so I took that into consideration, asked him questions, and proceeded from there. Most of my questions were not really answered, but for the ones he did answer I thanked him.

So what is this allabout?
It's two things, actually.
1-Letting you know about an odd misrepresentation of Calvinism; and
2-A roundabout way to say please don't misrepresent those you disagree with, and if I do that to you, please let me know.

Book Recommendation-On Being Presbyterian by Sean Michael Lucas

That I was reading a book called, “On Being a Presbyterian” amused a newer attendee of our congregation. Certainly I should know what it means to be a Presbyterian-after all I have been one for many years. I advised the book was on loan from our pastor, and I was interested in seeing how the author stated things. It would also be a good review, and in the history portion it could provide new information. I would also know if it was a book I could recommend, and I highly recommend it.

The subtitle of the book also indicates the sections in it, “Our beliefs, practices, and stories.” Lucas is dean of faculty and assistant professor of church history at Covenant Theological Seminary, so he is no stranger or outsider to Presbyterianism, or the PCA.

In Part 1 he looks at Presbyterian Beliefs. He does look at what we would have in common with other Christians, but the bulk is looking at the distinctives. This section has 5 chapters, but it is not one for each of the letter of TULIP, as some might assume. The five points of Calvinism do appear, but in Chapter 2 where he explains the Presbyterian beliefs on grace. This is where they belong. They are part of the picture, but not the whole picture. The chapter subjects are God’s sovereignty, grace, covenant and kingdom, the Church and sacraments. The chapters are well done looks at these beliefs. He doesn’t merely state what the beliefs are, but looks at how they affect the others, and us.

Part 2 is on Presbyterian practices. These do involve beliefs, and so this section flows out of the last one. In the first chapter of this section Lucas explains why he uses the word piety, and what he means by it. It’s on how we practice our beliefs, but also who we base them on. It’s a well done look at how God is connected to them.

In Part 2 he also writes on worship and church government. The chapter on worship is refreshing in that he looks at all worship, not just music and singing. Too often we use worship too narrowly. This short look at worship is instructive in how worship is more. The chapter on church government is also instructive as some feel this distinctive is a bigger difference between Presbyterians and Baptists than sacraments.

Part 3 is on Presbyterian stories. He presents an interesting historical look at how we got from the Reformers to what we have in North America today. Calvin and Knox loom large n the first part. He looks at the divisions, reunions, and new denominations as well. It gives a clear picture at how we got where we are today.

I highly recommend this book for all Christians, not just Presbyterians. I would also recommend it to any who are interested in church history. Its more obvious benefits would be for those who are new to Presbyterianism, or those who are considering attending or joining a Presbyterian church. But Christians with no intention of being Presbyterian could also benefit by better understanding of their brothers and sisters. I would read the same sort of book written by non-Presbyterian Christians if they were available. (This one is published by P&R Publishing.)

Blog Link-a-rama

Here are some recent blog postings, (from other blogs), I would like to share with
you.

Calvinist Gadfly has this video on 2 Peter 3:9, and how it's often misused. It's not a short clip, but it's not too long either.

There's always something thought provoking on Challies.com. This one is now in the archives, but it's on hymns.

I am chief has an excerpt and comments on "The Glory of Christ" by John Owen

On the Knight of the Living God blog, Aspiring Theologian Albert Shepherd, has this post on Free Will, and this one on The Five Points of humility, where he advises us not to forget the word "Grace" in the Doctrines of Grace.

Kim Riddlebarger's Riddleblog has this Eschatology Q & A on the word "deceive" as used in reference to Satan.

David at Rotundus has a short post and two links on the topic of Christians and tipping.

"For Whom Did Christ Die?" by Charles Hodge

From Reformation Ink,here's a look at the question, "For Whom Did Christ Die?"
It's answered from the writings of Charles Hodge. (1823-1886)