New Calvinism in Holy Hip Hop Facebook Group!

2 Responses to New Calvinism in Holy Hip Hop Facebook Group!

1. James Williamson says:

   July 21, 2009 at 1:29 pm

   “Calvinism: When Thinking You’re Better Than Everyone Else Just Isn’t Enough.”
   It’s polemic like that promotes discord and strife rather than love and humility. Not to mention it is a strawman. And ad hominem. And…
   Come on, guys, if you’re wanting to get a leg up in this whole resurgence of the “New Calvinism,” how about you stop acting like childish brats who can’t treat another person with respect and dignity, and spend your time on better pursuits (perhaps the doctrines themselves). Ultimately, this feeds into what a lot of Calvinists claim is the Arminian fear of approaching the doctrines exegetically (note: not that I am advancing that as the case), and in my opinion, many more facebook groups and blog posts could be devoted to the damage the emergent church is doing than Calvinism…

   Reply
2. James Williamson says:

   July 21, 2009 at 8:12 pm

   Just for clarification, I have responded to one of T.C.’s notes in his Facebook group. Specifically, I have noted how his concerns over the potential harms of a “deterministic” Calvinism thwarting evangelistic fervor or other obligations of the believer are insufficient. Indeed, even we Calvinists are concerned with such misunderstandings! Unless, though, these perversions can be shown to be the norm in Holy Hip Hop (and believe me, if they were, I’d be right there with you in telling these men to get their act together, though even this would not discredit the system itself) I do not see how one can use such distorted belief’s consequences (and indeed, I agree there would be bad consequences) as a condemnation of Calvinism in Holy Hip Hop.
   With that said, I do understand the frustration with the prevalence of a competing view that one finds a distortion of Scripture. Then, though, let us keep our dialogues exegetical in nature, never forgetting to be gentle and loving with one another. On that note, I’ll apologize in advance if my above statement concerning being “brats.” Truthfully, I was speaking more to how that could be perceived on the basis of a weaker believer and used to ignore the claims of the argument. Also honestly, I do think they are somewhat childish, though, and are of little profit unless (as I have used my rhetorical name-calling) they are meant to sharpen or correct a fellow believer. Still, I should at least disclaim them if I use them, for it is far too easy for these online conversations (lacking inflection and all) to be spoiled because of our own limited perceptions.
   Grace and Peace,
   James
   P.S. Just throwing this out there, again, but I really think our energies could best be spent (having given one another the benefit of the doubt, knowing that Christ’s imputed righteousness is sufficient to bring us along) in attacking what is becoming an emerging monster in American Christianity (I speak more of the more liberal strains of the “emergent” church, not the broader “emerging” movement- the latter I find largely useful to wake a complacent Bride).

   Reply