Skip to main content

God Did Act First, But R.C Sproul Is Still Wrong

We agree that man is not able to save himself. Were he not affected by the Fall, he'd still need grace to attain communion with God. Don't miss that part. But it's not some fantastic insight that God must move, or no one would be saved. Sorry. It's just not.

It's a big jump from this to "God does everything" and "God only saves some people". What's the point of the gospel, then? No, seriously. Why are you a minister in the first place? You could just sit back and watch it happen. That's what "monergism" is, you know. Only one working. If you have the guts to bite the bullet, then bite it. But I don't blame anyone for not buying what you're selling.

This emotional blackmail of, "Oh, that's just your pride talking" is precisely what it is. If God alone works in salvation, then God alone is morally responsible for the bad outcome. No, he doesn't owe salvation to any man, but Christ has come as Savior. We don't need play-acts of "mercy" for a special few; we need grace and salvation.

I'm willing to look into the eyes of every single person and say, "Jesus Christ died for you." It's not a hypothetical; it's real. Before we embrace what isn't true good news anyway, maybe we should ask, "Who asked Luther and Calvin, anyway?" I'd like to believe that this question would occur to the inquisitive person, but then, I was in the bubble once, too.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...
17 comments
Read more

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...
Post a Comment
Read more

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...
Post a Comment
Read more