Well this past week has been interesting for two reasons.
1. Baseball is winding down and getting crazy. We played a really nasty team the week before and even their fans were rude. So that wasn't as fun of a baseball time as I usually like. Then this past week Joe was faced with something new -- hitting a batter. As part of baseball, if they throw at your guys, you're supposed to throw at theirs. Now as humans, we're all about getting even, but it doesn't always work the way we want it. And in baseball, yeah, so it's part of the game, but do you have to do it? Why is it part of the game? Something the O'Brien household is figuring out.
2. Big Debates - As part of baseball, Joe has gotten to share his testimony and bit o' knowledge about God with his teammates. It has really been a blessing and just crazy how God can take the simplest things and direct it to Him. And with that, comes in one of his Christian teammates who believes in Calvinism - or where there are those "elected" or already chosen who will go to heaven. This has caused quite a debate between the to guys, and has also spilled into our family/friend discussions.
It's a tricky topic as how do we know God's ways? If those who are going to be saved are already predetermined, why are we charged with spreading the gospel? And on and on and on...
Would love to hear your thoughts!
5 comments:
1. So you're saying if the pitcher accidentally hits the guy up to bat, then it's expected for the other pitcher to do it on purpose? Is the assumption that the first hit wasn't really accidental? That doesn't seem like very good form.
2. There's a healthy mix of Calvinists and non among the seminary guys in our SS, but they don't talk about it much, I think because they realize it can bring division pretty quickly. Still, I wish that one day we could have an out-an-out debate about it, because I'd like to hear both sides! Being married to a Calvinist, I hear that side pretty often, though Jon does admit the holes to his arguments.
Oh, and you already know my thoughts, but I'll put them up here for discussion purposes:
I think there are points to Calvinism that are valid, but I disagree with Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement. I think that Christ died for everyone, which is clearly Biblical (unless "For God so loved the world" means something else). He stands at everyone's hearts' door and knocks. What prompts the person to open the door or keep it shut is where I get fuddled. Still, I think the person is presented with a choice, not a predetermined fate.
As for the pitching thing -
1. They may retaliate if it was accidental, but usually they do it if the other pitcher repeatedly hits our guys, or it was clearly intentional.
As for the Calvinism thing - I would be up for a debate, but I don't always know about guys. They seem to get quite flustered and really angry about it. My stance is the great analogy I developed.
Most Calvinists say that accepting is equated to a "work" and that grace is not grace if it requires a "work." BUT as the way God developed the UNIVERSE, there is an equal and opposite reaction to everything.
SO, if God offers you salvation, then by universal law something must take place - you must either accept or reject. It is not a "work," it is a necessary action.
Yeah, the debate would have to be pretty well-structured, with a moderator to keep things civil. I may look into seeing if it could happen. If it does, I'll let you know!
I like your analogy. That makes sense to me. I think a Calvinist would argue that the reaction is not a choice, but automatic acceptance--the Irresistible Grace part of TULIP. If He offers (and He doesn't offer to everyone), you can't do anything but accept.
The hard part is that Calvinism is very convincing to me, but I get hung up on the "He doesn't offer to everyone" part. I just can't accept that! However, it's equally hard to accept that someone could say no when truly called by God.
I'm working on a blog post about Free Will. I'll try to post it in the next few days.
John 3:16--oh my husband has spent a great deal of time blogging on this on MySpace and he doesn't hold back in talking about it. He's a great one to talk about these things with. I think many people like to find a happy medium, but it's kind of difficult (and usually a cop-out). I would say that I lean toward Calvinism and I've heard both sides plenty. There's security in knowing that God knows what's best for me and has given me a brain to use for Him. But He's not surprised by the "choices" I make, because He knew them all along.
Post a Comment