Comments on: Book Review: Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport by Richard Mouw

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Tue, 11 Oct 2005 00:51:19 +0000

Does not some of the confusion result from the fact that we often direct the lost to Jesus via Calvin?
Paul cringed when some were attributing their faith to others: 1Corinthians 1:12-13 What I mean is this: One of you says,

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 19 Sep 2005 22:06:09 +0000

There is a helpful, developing article on Calvinism on Theopedia:
http://theopedia.com/Calvinism

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 14 Sep 2005 05:27:48 +0000

thanks -i will look out for the book

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 04:22:25 +0000

Hello Murdock,
“C.L. Wynn, what exactly do you disagree with about the particular atonement position? Unless you're a universalist, you do limit the effect of the atonement in some way.”
Your statement is correct, and no, I am not in any sense a universalist (and in fact have argued quite vigorously against that position). But neither do I hold to the position of particular atonement as adequately expressed by such respected men as James White, R.C. Sproul, John Piper, and other Reformed brethren.
The limiting of the effect of the atonement upon an individual by their unbelief is not the issue that's been contended; the question “for whom did Christ die for–everybody, or the elect only?” is. I've interacted with Arminians (of which I am not of that theological persuasion) who are clearly not universalists, yet do not hold to the limited atonement doctrine. As do many “Four-Point” Calvinists.
As to my own view, I do not hold to the “Christ's death was for the elect only” though I strongly affirm the application of the Atonement is to the elect alone.
The purpose of my comment was to offer the view that one can faithfully communicate the gospel of grace through faith in Christ alone, while not adhering to the particular atonement doctrine. The Gospel is not compromised by this. I appreciated your review and saw it as insightful, yet felt that your one comment on this issue was worth commenting on.
Best,
C.L. Wynn

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 05:30:50 +0000

C.L. Wynn, what exactly do you disagree with about the particular atonement position? Unless you're a universalist, you do limit the effect of the atonement in some way.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 09 Sep 2005 20:02:04 +0000

Gotcha. Complaining to God is strange ground for me too. This little side discussion has spurred my interest. I have a post in the works.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 09 Sep 2005 18:04:18 +0000

“I do take exception with the idea that we should shelve limited/particular atonement. Perhaps we should shelf some of our terminology, but the doctrine itself is so key to the Gospel that I cannot imagine shelving it without feeling that I

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 09 Sep 2005 16:34:00 +0000

Complaining to God in general makes me nervous. Dr. Mouw cites some of the Psalms where David complained to God. I have no problem admitting that it is to some degree biblical, but there are at least a few biblical ideas that don't sit well with me. However, Dr. Mouw also cites a rabbi who suggests that God should ask him forgiveness for what He's done. That seems to me to be taking it too far.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 09 Sep 2005 16:23:19 +0000

I like Mouw. He's consistently been one of the most interesting speakers I've heard this last year.
Just one question, what was it about making complaints before God that made you nervous? Was it making a complaint to God in general, the content of the complaint, the way in which one was called to complain?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 09 Sep 2005 15:49:42 +0000

Micah Watson recommended this book to me, too. I hope to get it on my bookshelf.