# Your favorite non-Calvinist to read/listen to



## J. Dean (Mar 23, 2012)

Do you have anybody outside of the Calvinist school that (5 points aside) you have benefitted from via reading or hearing?

I have a few:
C.F.W. Walther
Hank Hannegraff (who says he holds a "middle position" between Calvinism and Arminianism, but I don't think he's Lutheran)
A.W. Tozer

Name yours.


----------



## moral necessity (Mar 23, 2012)

Luther, Walther, Pieper, and Calvin(?)  (not meant to de-rail thread, so let's not go there) 

Blessings!


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Mar 23, 2012)

William Lane Craig. He's honestly not very orthodox on many issues, but I do enjoy watching him make atheists squirm in debates.


----------



## Constantlyreforming (Mar 23, 2012)

Bruce Ware


----------



## A5pointer (Mar 23, 2012)

Hank Hennegraff many years ago


----------



## Miss Marple (Mar 23, 2012)

I find J Vernon McGee sincere and endearing.


----------



## Christoffer (Mar 23, 2012)

C S Lewis


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Mar 23, 2012)

Francis Schaeffer would be another favorite. Even though he was a presbyterian, he was not particularily Calvinistic.


----------



## Rufus (Mar 23, 2012)

Lewis and Luther.


----------



## Constantlyreforming (Mar 23, 2012)

Allistair Begg is excellent as well.


----------



## gordo (Mar 23, 2012)

Kallistos Ware


----------



## christiana (Mar 23, 2012)

Constantlyreforming said:


> Bruce Ware



Bruce Ware has come to our church from Southern Seminary where he is a professor to hold our spring Conference and is so very sound in the doctrines of grace that I'm wondering why you mentioned him as a non-calvinist? His writing is very calvinistic and along with Tom Schreiner are most favorite speakers of mine.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Mar 23, 2012)

I like John Piper quite a bit.


----------



## bookslover (Mar 23, 2012)

John MacArthur. He has a Calvinist soteriology, but otherwise is a "leaky" (his word) dispensationalist.


----------



## Unoriginalname (Mar 23, 2012)

Only good none calvinist is a dead none calvinist 
Seriously though I enjoy reading Augustine and I recently started reading Anselm and have really enjoyed him as well.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Mar 23, 2012)

I would be interested to know, Bill, why you think that Francis Schaeffer was not a Calvinist. I've never heard anyone allege that about him and I've not seen otherwise in his writings.

Peace,
Alan


----------



## raekwon (Mar 23, 2012)

Andy Stanley


----------



## N. Eshelman (Mar 23, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> I would be interested to know, Bill, why you think that Francis Schaeffer was not a Calvinist. I've never heard anyone allege that about him and I've not seen otherwise in his writings.
> 
> Peace,
> Alan



I agree. Schaeffer was thoroughly Calvinistic and even confessional (in a Bible Presbyterian way). Of course, he came around more and more after being in Europe and getting out of St. Louis..... moral of the story... getting out of St. Louis will aid in your personal reformation....


----------



## Rich Koster (Mar 23, 2012)

Some place John Stott outside the camp (most likely for espousing annihilation). I have benefitted from reading some of his works.


----------



## deleteduser99 (Mar 23, 2012)

John Wesley and Leonard Ravenhill - both were strong influences at the beginning of my walk.


----------



## py3ak (Mar 23, 2012)

Leo the Great
Theodoret
Augustine
Thomas Aquinas
Bernard of Clairvaux
Martin Luther
Francis de Sales
Sir Thomas Browne
Samuel Johnson
G. Campbell Morgan
Dorothy Sayers
Charles Williams
C.S. Lewis


----------



## christiana (Mar 23, 2012)

John Stott didnt just believe annilhilation but he also advocated us crossing ourselves for safety and protection and such. This is discussed early in his book, The Cross.


----------



## FedByRavens (Mar 23, 2012)

I thought that Augustine, Martin Luther, and Leonard Ravenhill were Calvinists. Am I mistaken?


----------



## earl40 (Mar 23, 2012)

A5pointer said:


> Hank Hennegraff many years ago



If you ever get to hear Walter Martin you are in for a treat. He was the fellow that started CRI. I agree about Hank Hennegraff in that for some reason I find Him so domineering I can't listen to him for any length of time now a days. His work on the WOF is still good In my most humble opinion. 

Ron Rhodes I enjoyed a lot also.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Mar 23, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> I would be interested to know, Bill, why you think that Francis Schaeffer was not a Calvinist. I've never heard anyone allege that about him and I've not seen otherwise in his writings.
> 
> Peace,
> Alan



Read his book 25 Basic Bible Studies and you will have a better insight into his theology. He also left Westminster because he rejected determinism and amillenialism.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Mar 23, 2012)

Bill The Baptist said:


> c Bible Studies and you will have a better insight into his theology. He also left Westminster because he rejected determinism and amillenialism.



He left Westminster because he was a Fundamentalist as well as a Calvinist. He later repented of all that nonsense.


----------



## Pilgrim72 (Mar 23, 2012)

J.R.R. Tolkien


----------



## Miss Marple (Mar 23, 2012)

Constantlyreforming said:


> Allistair Begg is excellent as well.



Meaning no disrespect to Begg, but since he is a public figure, preaching recorded, public things:

Do you find him to have a sort of anti-American bent?

I just started listening to him a few weeks ago, on a new early morning drive, and heard more statements against America as a nation than I was comfortable with. I can't be more specific and I'm not bringing charges (!), but, I kept picking up on a sort of disdainful attitude towards the U.S. in general. 

For instance, if I were a preacher ministering in Scotland, I don't think I'd keep saying things that generally criticize Scotland. I think I'd best keep my criticisms of sin and sinning in general and not pick at Scotland as a nation.

Anyone else pick up on this or am I wrong?


----------



## moral necessity (Mar 23, 2012)

FedByRavens said:


> I thought that Augustine, Martin Luther, and Leonard Ravenhill were Calvinists. Am I mistaken?



Yeah, Luther was definitely not a Calvinist. There is much in agreement, but there are also very distinct differences.

This link is from a Lutheran perspective of the differences, and may or may not be entirely accurate, but can give a general understanding of some differences: Calvinistic Theology

This link is from a Calvinist perspective out of the OPC, may or may not be entirely accurate, but can also be helpful in sorting this out: Q and A

Blessings!


----------



## FedByRavens (Mar 23, 2012)

moral necessity said:


> FedByRavens said:
> 
> 
> > I thought that Augustine, Martin Luther, and Leonard Ravenhill were Calvinists. Am I mistaken?
> ...



Thanks for the link Charles. Very considerate brother. God bless!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Mar 24, 2012)

Bill:

Dr Schaeffer was indeed a part of the Bible Presbyterian movement earlier on and, among other things, was a premillenialist as part of his fundamentalism. As Nathan notes, Dr. Schaeffer did later retract some of his earlier stances. There were a number of factors involved in the break with the OPC and Westminster Theological Seminary.

I will look, when I have opportunity, at what you suggest. I do not know, however, what you mean by "he rejected determinism" with respect to his having left Westminster. I would be interested to know what your evidence is for this as I am unaware of anything of this sort.

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Handsomegeneralstabbyeyes (Mar 24, 2012)

That's like asking me what my favorite dental operation is (root canal by the way).


----------



## Rich Koster (Mar 24, 2012)

christiana said:


> John Stott didnt just believe annilhilation but he also advocated us crossing ourselves for safety and protection and such. This is discussed early in his book, The Cross.



OK. I'll avoid reading that one  In my often foggy recollection, the best one that I read was The Gospel & The End Of Time (1&2 Thes). Sometimes I'm biased about a book because someone recommended it to me, or gave it as a gift thinking it was useful. This one I snagged out of a box of books someone was going to dump off at the library, that was left in the basement of a house they were moving into. I avoided taking "Good Morning Holy Spirit" by Benny Hinn. 

---------- Post added at 08:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:33 AM ----------




christiana said:


> John Stott didnt just believe annilhilation but he also advocated us crossing ourselves for safety and protection and such. This is discussed early in his book, The Cross.



OK. I'll avoid reading that one  In my often foggy recollection, the best one that I read was The Gospel & The End Of Time (1&2 Thes). Sometimes I'm biased about a book because someone recommended it to me, or gave it as a gift thinking it was useful. This one I snagged out of a box of books someone was going to dump off at the library, that was left in the basement of a house they were moving into. Therefore, no bias or assumptions on it. I avoided taking "Good Morning Holy Spirit" by Benny Hinn, which was on top of it.  Thinking back, I should have, to get it out of circulation.


----------



## 21st Century Calvinist (Mar 24, 2012)

N.Eshelman posted:
I agree. Schaeffer was thoroughly Calvinistic and even confessional (in a Bible Presbyterian way). Of course, he came around more and more after being in Europe and getting out of St. Louis..... moral of the story... getting out of St. Louis will aid in your personal reformation.... 


[/QUOTE]


Oh the impudence coming at us from the left coast! When Wayne and I catch up with you - and we will- we will feast you with vast quantities of St Louis style pizza, toasted ravioli and St Louis' finest- none other then Joyce Meyer! Then you will know why we are the third most dangerous city in the world. You will be doing a liturgical dance all the way back to tofu-laden California.


----------



## RobertPGH1981 (Mar 24, 2012)

christiana said:


> Originally Posted by Constantlyreforming
> Bruce Ware



Bruce Ware was in a debate pro-Calvanist. He also came to my church and was for the doctrines of Grace.


----------



## Bald_Brother (Mar 24, 2012)

*Dead for a long while:*
Anselm of Canterbury
Eusebius of Caesarea
Jerome, Saint - Doctor of the Church (who, BTW, is my hero of mean rhetoric)

*Dead for a short while:*
John Wesley
C.S. Lewis
John Stott
J. Vernon McGee
F.F. Bruce

*Not dead yet:*
Wm. Lane Craig (honestly, one of the reasons I listen and read is to know how _not_ to think, and to try wrapping my head around how a Molinist thinks)
Michael Brown (especially in his apologetic work with Jews and Homosexuality)
Frank Turek (Cross Examined radio program)
Justin Brierly (theological liberal British guy that hosts the Unbelievable! radio program)
Oh, Sleeper // The Chariot // Training for Utopia // MewithoutYou // _and more_... (Christian Bands that aren't Reformed folk)

*Honorable mentions *(of no benefit other than learning other's errors):
T.D. Jakes (who is actually impressive as a communicator - though he communicates poison. A friend calls Jakes her "favorite heretic.")
Benny Hinn (my favorite heretic)
Sam Gipp (KJVO nut)

---------- Post added at 12:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 AM ----------

The wife asked that I add her favorite heretic to the honorable mentions:
Jesse Duplantis

---------- Post added at 12:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 PM ----------

Also, I should add Martin Luther, but I figured that would be a bit obvious.

Oh! Also Thomas Aquinas and G.K. Chesterton.

Man, I'm sure there's more.


----------



## Pilgrim72 (Mar 24, 2012)

After looking through everyone's answers, I just realized that maybe I misunderstood the original request. I answered Tolkien, as I love his books. But, was this request just for religious or Christian lit? Or any genre?

Thanks.


----------



## Rufus (Mar 24, 2012)

Pilgrim72 said:


> After looking through everyone's answers, I just realized that maybe I misunderstood the original request. I answered Tolkien, as I love his books. But, was this request just for religious or Christian lit? Or any genre?
> 
> Thanks.



Actually you bring up a good point. I'll throw in the Russian Orthodox Fyodor Dostoyevsky.


----------



## DMcFadden (Mar 24, 2012)

Rod Rosenbladt, Lutheran with iconoclastic sarcasm and one of my college theology profs 38 years ago. He rages against liberalism, revivalism, broad evangelicalism, and any form of works righteousness. He is almost venerational of his White Horse Inn co-host, Mike Horton, but has fun skewering just about everyone else with his ascerbic wit. When dealing with people in the mainline ELCA who deny inerrrancy and think that they still have a basis for using the Bible he dismisses them as "lame-a*s Lutherans." Reflecting his Two Kingdom view, he observes that the one includes the Word and the Sacraments . . . period. The other realm denotes the sphere of power run by Richard Daley's backroom political machine and all denominational bureaucrats and judicatory executives.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Mar 24, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> Bill:
> 
> Dr Schaeffer was indeed a part of the Bible Presbyterian movement earlier on and, among other things, was a premillenialist as part of his fundamentalism. As Nathan notes, Dr. Schaeffer did later retract some of his earlier stances. There were a number of factors involved in the break with the OPC and Westminster Theological Seminary.
> 
> ...



Please don't misunderstand, I love Dr. Schaeffer and have thoroughly enjoyed many of his books. I am simply pointing out that he is not really a Calvinist in the classical sense. Here is a good article on the subject. Two Christian Warriors: Cornelius Van Til and Francis A. Schaeffer Compared by William Edgar


----------



## reaganmarsh (Mar 24, 2012)

Augustine, despite his sacramentalism. 
John Stott, despite his annihilationism. (And, if you can ignore the part about crossing yourself, The Cross of Christ is one of the best books I've ever read.)
John MacArthur, despite his "leaky" dispensationalism mentioned above. 
C.S. Lewis is growing on me. Slowly. He's brilliant but somehow Lewis and I have never "clicked."
Mark Twain and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for fiction. 
And pretty much anything historical non-fiction...


----------



## Miss Marple (Mar 24, 2012)

If we are going non-doctrinal, I'll add Agatha Christie, Stuart Kaminsky, Jane Austen, Tolkien (I'm not worthy!!), Kazuo Ishiguro, and I'll include Alexander McCall Smith if I can limit myself to his #1 Ladies Detective Agency bundles of joy.


----------



## Rufus (Mar 24, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> If we are going non-doctrinal, I'll add Agatha Christie, Stuart Kaminsky, Jane Austen, Tolkien (I'm not worthy!!), Kazuo Ishiguro, and I'll include Alexander McCall Smith if I can limit myself to his #1 Ladies Detective Agency bundles of joy.



How do you know those people have an affiliation with Christianity? Wikipedia (I know I should look further) is silent on the issue a lot of the time, and I'm always looking to look into more people who have Christian faith of some sort.



Also, Jonathan Fisk from Worldview Everlasting (Confessional Lutheran).


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Mar 24, 2012)

Bill:

I am not questioning your fondness for Francis Schaeffer. Rather, I am questioning your assertion that he is a deficient Calvinist. 

I still have not seen anything that would demonstrate such. Bill Edgar's article is great and though I did not take the time completely to re-read it (I scanned it), I agree with and appreciate his article a great deal. It does not, however, demonstrate your point, in my reading, but rather makes clear that he was a Calvinist (whatever differences he may have had with CVT, which is not the touchstone of Calvinism, and I say that as an ardent Van Tilian).

Perhaps I should clarify my concern. The reason that I have taken this time is that as a student and teacher of American Presbyterian History, I am quite concerned with these things. Whatever deficiencies Schaeffer may be perceived to have due to his particular brand of apologetics, it is not the case that he is alleged not to be a Calvinist. Edgar, in fact, in the very piece that you cite says this: "_n common with Van Til, Schaeffer was a Presbyterian and believed the Reformed Confessions to be the best expression of biblical truth."

To be sure, Schaeffer differed with Van Til, but so have a myriad of other Calvinists. I am concerned here for historical accuracy and am unwilling that Schaeffer be painted as not a real Calvinist and be listed among those who answer to the OP: "who is your favorite non-Calvinist to read?" Schaeffer was a Calvinist and is not an appropriate answer to this question.

Peace,
Alan_


----------



## N. Eshelman (Mar 24, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> Bill:
> 
> I am not questioning your fondness for Francis Schaeffer. Rather, I am questioning your assertion that he is a deficient Calvinist.
> 
> ...


_

I guess Gordon Clark is not a Calvinist either since he differed with VT.  

I would recommend Duriez' short biography on Schaeffer. It helped to show some of his downfalls as well as some of the personal reformations that he had. I am with Dr. Strange (you are doctor, right?), Schaeffer, despite his issues, was a Calvinist.

---------- Post added at 06:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:52 PM ----------




Alan D. Strange said:



Bill:

I am not questioning your fondness for Francis Schaeffer. Rather, I am questioning your assertion that he is a deficient Calvinist. 

I still have not seen anything that would demonstrate such. Bill Edgar's article is great and though I did not take the time completely to re-read it (I scanned it), I agree with and appreciate his article a great deal. It does not, however, demonstrate your point, in my reading, but rather makes clear that he was a Calvinist (whatever differences he may have had with CVT, which is not the touchstone of Calvinism, and I say that as an ardent Van Tilian).

Perhaps I should clarify my concern. The reason that I have taken this time is that as a student and teacher of American Presbyterian History, I am quite concerned with these things. Whatever deficiencies Schaeffer may be perceived to have due to his particular brand of apologetics, it is not the case that he is alleged not to be a Calvinist. Edgar, in fact, in the very piece that you cite says this: "n common with Van Til, Schaeffer was a Presbyterian and believed the Reformed Confessions to be the best expression of biblical truth."

To be sure, Schaeffer differed with Van Til, but so have a myriad of other Calvinists. I am concerned here for historical accuracy and am unwilling that Schaeffer be painted as not a real Calvinist and be listed among those who answer to the OP: "who is your favorite non-Calvinist to read?" Schaeffer was a Calvinist and is not an appropriate answer to this question.

Peace,
Alan

Click to expand...



I guess Gordon Clark is not a Calvinist either since he differed with VT.  

I would recommend Duriez' short biography on Schaeffer. It helped to show some of his downfalls as well as some of the personal reformations that he had. I am with Dr. Strange (you are doctor, right?), Schaeffer, despite his issues, was a Calvinist._


----------



## Peairtach (Mar 24, 2012)

Next someone will be saying Schaeffer wasn't a Calvinist because he was premil!

He also grew his hair too long, grew a funny beard and probably wore sandals.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Mar 24, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> Bill:
> 
> I am not questioning your fondness for Francis Schaeffer. Rather, I am questioning your assertion that he is a deficient Calvinist.
> 
> ...


_

Let us cease this fruitless discussion. I think we can all agree that Dr. Schaeffer was a great Christian who made a tremendous impact on the world for Christ. Regardless of his exact beliefs, he was a visionary who saw the impact that naturalism would have on society well before most others did. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Dr. Schaeffer for his impact on evangelism and apologetics. Let us leave it at that._


----------



## Marrow Man (Mar 24, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> If we are going non-doctrinal, I'll add Agatha Christie, Stuart Kaminsky, Jane Austen, Tolkien (I'm not worthy!!), Kazuo Ishiguro, and I'll include Alexander McCall Smith if I can limit myself to his #1 Ladies Detective Agency bundles of joy.



How about G.K. Chesterton? "The Blast of the Book" is one of my favorite detective stories ever!


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Mar 24, 2012)

Bill:

I sincerely did not intend to upset you, brother. My interest in this was to set the record straight. I don't think it unimportant as to who may be denominated as "non-Calvinist" on this thread. The whole thread is about non-Calvinists that members might like to read. You identified Schaeffer as such. As a historian of American Presbyterianism, I questioned that. I still do. I will forbear from saying more as it is not my place to do so on this board. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Mar 24, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> Bill:
> 
> I sincerely did not intend to upset you, brother. My interest in this was to set the record straight. I don't think it unimportant as to who may be denominated as "non-Calvinist" on this thread. The whole thread is about non-Calvinists that members might like to read. You identified Schaeffer as such. As a historian of American Presbyterianism, I questioned that. I still do. I will forbear from saying more as it is not my place to do so on this board.
> 
> ...



Alan,

I am not upset with you in the least. Clearly you are very knowledgable on the subject and indeed you are probably correct that he was a Calvinist, even if he perhaps was not one in the classical sense. Regardless, I don't think being a Calvinist or not is the only measure of whether someone is a strong Christian. I love Dr. Schaeffer and I just don't think this is a debate that is helpful, especially since he is long dead and can't defend himself. If I have offended you by my inference that he was not a Calvinist, then I apologize and will retract my earlier statement. Perhaps a better way to put it is that he was a Presbyterian whose theology was a little different from what most conservative, reformed Presbyterians would believe today, at least in some areas.


----------



## py3ak (Mar 24, 2012)

[Moderator]
Bill, I think you should retract your statement whether Dr. Strange was offended or not. Did Dr. Schaeffer affirm all of the points of the TULIP? If so, according to the terms set out in the OP, he was a Calvinist. If you believe he denied one or more of them, it's really your responsibility to substantiate that.

The same thing is true, Ethan, for Bruce Ware.

Richard is off the hook for John MacArthur because he clarified his meaning in his post.
[/Moderator]


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Mar 24, 2012)

Bill:

I am glad to read that you are not upset. Perhaps I misread your previous post.

I am by no means a Schaeffer scholar (my particular interest is a bit earlier) and am eager to learn. I have always appreciated him, even when and where I may have differed. I have not read all his writings but have read a few, particularly in earlier years. I cut my teeth on him before discovering Van Til. I'll never forget reading _The God Who Is There_ in a sitting and the role that it played in my life as a young twenty-year-old Christian. I have not read him lately.

You say that you "don't think being a Calvinist...is the only measure of whether someone is a strong Christian." I never made such a claim nor have I even remotely addressed it. The thread is on good non-Calvinist reading. I do not believe that Schaeffer is such because he is a Calvinist, so that would make him good Calvinist reading.

I certainly think that there are those who are not self-identified as Calvinists who are faithful servants, though I also think that all faithful servants trust Him and Him alone, having no hope but His blood and righteousness, which I take to be a quintessentially Calvinist conviction, let the parties that hold it call it what they will. I agree with Warfield that every man on his knees is, in some sense, a Calvinist. None but those who trust Him alone have any good hope. I agree with Spurgeon that Calvinism is but a "nickname for the gospel."

As for my votes for such (good non-Calvinist reading), I think that Lenski and some other Lutherans of that ilk (including Luther!) can be most edifying. I also would find many before Calvin (some of whom have been herein mentioned--Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas) quite good and would add to that--Irenaeus, Athanasius (on the Incarnation), Chrysostom, the Cappadocians (Basil on the Holy Spirit), Ambrose, Leo, and Gregory--to name a few of my favorites in the earlier church. I could name other edifying folk in the later medieval church up through the modern but I've said more than enough.

Thanks, Bill, for your good spirit in this exchange

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Bill The Baptist (Mar 24, 2012)

py3ak said:


> [Moderator]
> Bill, I think you should retract your statement whether Dr. Strange was offended or not. Did Dr. Schaeffer affirm all of the points of the TULIP? If so, according to the terms set out in the OP, he was a Calvinist. If you believe he denied one or more of them, it's really your responsibility to substantiate that.
> 
> The same thing is true, Ethan, for Bruce Ware.
> ...



Agreed. I retract my earlier statement for lack of evidence.


----------



## dudley (Mar 24, 2012)

moral necessity said:


> FedByRavens said:
> 
> 
> > I thought that Augustine, Martin Luther, and Leonard Ravenhill were Calvinists. Am I mistaken?
> ...



I agree and Martin Luther is my favorite non Calvinist protestant that I like to read. After Calvin and Knox , I admire Luther greatly. Calvin remains my favorite protestant theologian and I read as much as I can about him and his teachings.


----------



## Goodcheer68 (Mar 25, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> Do you find Alistair Begg to have a sort of anti-American bent?



I have never picked up on his disdain for America only an irritation towards politicalism wrapped in a Christian veneer. And I tend to agree with him on those points.


----------



## Curt (Mar 25, 2012)

Peairtach said:


> Next someone will be saying Schaeffer wasn't a Calvinist because he was premil!
> 
> He also grew his hair too long, grew a funny beard and probably wore sandals.



This would preclude most members of the former RPC,ES.

BTW, boots with the (non-British) knickers.


----------



## thbslawson (Mar 25, 2012)

I've never actually noticed. He's lived in America for decades now, so I would say it's totally appropriate for him to address sinful trends in our culture.


----------



## Constantlyreforming (Mar 26, 2012)

RobertPGH1981 said:


> christiana said:
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted by Constantlyreforming
> ...



He'd be a solid 4 pointer. He's not a fan of Particular redemption.

---------- Post added at 08:17 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 AM ----------




py3ak said:


> [Moderator]
> Bill, I think you should retract your statement whether Dr. Strange was offended or not. Did Dr. Schaeffer affirm all of the points of the TULIP? If so, according to the terms set out in the OP, he was a Calvinist. If you believe he denied one or more of them, it's really your responsibility to substantiate that.
> 
> The same thing is true, Ethan, for Bruce Ware.
> ...




I have known Bruce Ware for 20 years. He and I would disagree on a few things, specifically the range of the atonement. See here:

http://evangelicalarminians.org/files/Ware. Extent of the Atonement.pdf


----------



## Damon Rambo (Mar 26, 2012)

Constantlyreforming said:


> Allistair Begg is excellent as well.



Alistair Begg is a Calvinist...
?


----------



## Constantlyreforming (Mar 26, 2012)

Damon Rambo said:


> Constantlyreforming said:
> 
> 
> > Allistair Begg is excellent as well.
> ...



I wasn't aware of that.


----------



## py3ak (Mar 26, 2012)

Constantlyreforming said:


> RobertPGH1981 said:
> 
> 
> > christiana said:
> ...



Thanks, Ethan.


----------



## thbslawson (Mar 26, 2012)

I suppose Lewis would have to be on that list for me. If we can stretch this into the realm of music, John and Charles Wesley wrote some of the deepest and richest hymns out there.


----------



## christiana (Mar 26, 2012)

I printed the article from Brue Ware and must admit to being quite shocked! I so hope I wont read of such an opinion on Tom Schreiner. I really do have a hard time reconciling such a variety of doctrinal opinions and also I've always been of the opinion that there is no such thing as a 4 pointer, that one is either calvinist and believes the Tulip or they dont. The Tulip's points are mutually supportive and one cannot eliminate one without negating the whole Tulip!!


----------



## Constantlyreforming (Mar 26, 2012)

christiana said:


> I printed the article from Brue Ware and must admit to being quite shocked! I so hope I wont read of such an opinion on Tom Schreiner. I really do have a hard time reconciling such a variety of doctrinal opinions and also I've always been of the opinion that there is no such thing as a 4 pointer, that one is either calvinist and believes the Tulip or they dont. The Tulip's points are mutually supportive and one cannot eliminate one without negating the whole Tulip!!



I agree. Ware has been a big help to me when it comes to debating OPEN THEISM. I do think he is off with his view on who Christ paid the price for. I am sure he'd say the same about me. 

---------- Post added at 10:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:56 AM ----------




christiana said:


> I printed the article from Brue Ware and must admit to being quite shocked! I so hope I wont read of such an opinion on Tom Schreiner. I really do have a hard time reconciling such a variety of doctrinal opinions and also I've always been of the opinion that there is no such thing as a 4 pointer, that one is either calvinist and believes the Tulip or they dont. The Tulip's points are mutually supportive and one cannot eliminate one without negating the whole Tulip!!




By the way, in his debate with Jim Wallis, Ware I believe points out that he is a 4 pointer, differing with his friend Schriener.


----------



## Miss Marple (Mar 26, 2012)

Rufus said:


> Miss Marple said:
> 
> 
> > If we are going non-doctrinal, I'll add Agatha Christie, Stuart Kaminsky, Jane Austen, Tolkien (I'm not worthy!!), Kazuo Ishiguro, and I'll include Alexander McCall Smith if I can limit myself to his #1 Ladies Detective Agency bundles of joy.
> ...



Sean, I don't at all know if they are/were Christians. I didn't think the question, "your favorite non-Calvinist to read. . ." meant that the authors were still to be Christians.

I think Tolkien and Christie were members of a Christian church, but don't know much detail about it.


----------



## Rufus (Mar 26, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> I didn't think the question, "your favorite non-Calvinist to read. . ." meant that the authors were still to be Christians.



I presumed it was, sorry.


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 26, 2012)

I haven't listened to Alistair Begg in years, but I always was of the understanding that he was a 5 pointer. If I recall correctly he has spoken at Ligonier events. When I used to listen to him I recall him arguing strongly for the Puritan view of the 4th Commandment as well. 

With regard to Schaeffer, I will readily admit that I am no expert and do not know what his view of the TULIP was. I don't know that he ever addressed that in any detail. In his day it was not unheard of for a broadly evangelical Presbyterian to basically be an Amryaldian, although I'd think this was less likely in one that had attended WTS, even if for only a year. Having no explicit evidence to the contrary, I would certainly not put him in the "non-Calvinist" category. As far as I know, whatever other departures they made from confessionalism, Bible Presbyterians (as well as the RPCES) have generally affirmed all five points. Everything I've ever read about him has him in the Calvinist camp. 

I do recall reading recently that some think that, based on Schaeffer's apologetic writings, that he affirmed libertarian free will and that this was one of the causes of the disagreement between him and CVT. (This was in the book about him and C.S. Lewis.) If I recall correctly his response was that he was merely opposing the humanistic determinism that students were being exposed to at college/university. (EDIT: See here for criticism of the aforementioned book, which was penned by Wesleyan/Arminian authors, for its assertion that Schaeffer affirmed libertarian free will.) 

With regard to other issues that those of us here would be concerned with but others in conservative Presbyterianism who are more broadly evangelical wouldn't necessarily have a big problem with, in _The Church at the End of the 20th Century_ he pointedly rejects the RPW and affirms its opposite. This is stated in maybe a sentence or two, but his argument indicates that he either didn't understand or else simply rejected the distinction between elements and circumstances in worship. In _No Little People_ there is a sermon on Revelation in which, to my recollection, he states without qualification that Ch. 4ff is future, which is often (right or wrong) taken to be a dispensational view. At any rate it is an idea that I would think that historic premils who are not of the futurist school would tend to disagree with. These and perhaps some other issues would lead some who take a very restrictive view of what "Reformed" or "Calvinist" is to perhaps say that he was not really a Calvinist. 

In Gary North's _Crossed Fingers_ (a historical book on the slide of the PCUSA into liberalism which is available online) there is an appendix on Schaeffer. Aside from North's criticism of Schaeffer's premillennialism, (which meant that to his thinking that Schaeffer had "no plan for victory") he argued that Schaeffer did not emphasize his Calvinism and his Presbyterianism in his works. Among other things, North points out that Schaeffer's little book in which he defended infant baptism is conspicuous by its absence from his _Collected Works. _(However, in what is a rather minimalistic chapter on ecclesiology, Presbyterian church government is affirmed in _The Church at the End of the 20th Century_ and perhaps is also affirmed elsewhere.) But if North was privy to any evidence that Schaeffer disagreed with Calvinistic soteriology, I'm sure that he would have noted it. (I would think that whether or not the theonomist/reconstructionist Gary North is "not Reformed" on this or that issue would be out of line in this thread. It seems pretty clear that the OP was getting at those who reject TULIP. I only brought it up because he addressed Schaeffer in that book. The books on Schaeffer with which I am familiar are not written by Reformed authors. However, I don't know what Duriez's affiliation is. My understanding is that it is considered to be the best work available now and that some of Schaeffer's family cooperated with him.) 

No doubt Schaeffer's lack of emphasis on Calvinism accounts for his popularity among non-Calvinist evangelicals, particularly in the 1960's-80's when his books were being published. I'm guessing that some may have read some of his books and not even known that he was a Presbyterian or a Calvinist. But that wasn't the point of them, of course.


----------



## Constantlyreforming (Mar 26, 2012)

I suppose it was the lack of his emphasis on the doctrines of Grace in his sermons and talks that led me to believe that regarding Begg. My apologies.


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 26, 2012)

With regard to non-Calvinist favorites of mine, I am compelled to give a shout out to the pre _What Love Is This_ Dave Hunt since a couple of his books were instrumental in my conversion from a sort of mystical new agey blasphemer who denied the deity of Christ and rejected the authority of the Bible. Any of a number of other books (and better ones) probably would have likewise convinced me, as I was slowly rejecting the views I had held for several years. But that's what God used.


----------



## Pilgrim72 (Mar 26, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> I think Tolkien and Christie were members of a Christian church, but don't know much detail about it.



I'd also like to add that I love reading mystery books as well. Christie being my favorite. But, I honestly don't know the spiritual state of any of these authors...


----------



## Gage Browning (Mar 26, 2012)

Constantlyreforming said:


> Damon Rambo said:
> 
> 
> > Constantlyreforming said:
> ...



I saw Begg preach in person once, at a Arminian at worst, and at best an Amaraldyan SBC Church. He preached on Zaccheus, and the question, or homoletical question he asked was "Who is choosing who here?" Then he explained, I was told not to ask such a Calvinistic question, but since the text says God chose...etc... In his debate with RC on baptism, he said, he was with RC on most points in Systematics and if it wasn't for baptism, he would probably seek ordination in the PCA...So I've always thought him a Calvinistic baptist.


----------



## SRoper (Mar 26, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> Constantlyreforming said:
> 
> 
> > Allistair Begg is excellent as well.
> ...



I sat under his preaching for over ten years. I always found him to be Calvinist on the doctrines of grace. He frequently quotes from the WSC. Now Parkside Church is not Calvinist, and some of the other pastors there are opposed to Calvinism.

I haven't detected an anti-American angle in his preaching, but he may have changed over the years. I know he was negative towards celebrating the Fourth of July in the church, but that is hardly an anti-American position. He is a naturalized American citizen.


----------



## Jash Comstock (Mar 26, 2012)

I would say Luther, Brother Lawrence, and Richard Foster.


----------



## Mark Walter (Mar 26, 2012)

J. Vernon McGee
Jack Hudson
Vance Havner
C.I. Scofield
W.A. Criswell


----------



## Wayne (Mar 26, 2012)

Late to the party, as usual, but noted the discussion of whether Francis Schaeffer can appropriately be termed a Calvinist. 
Here is a quote from his address before the General Assembly of the PCA in 1982 on the occasion of the reception of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod into the PCA. The message is a classic and is titled "A Day of Sober Rejoicing" [the full message can be found here, A Day of Sober Rejoicing, by Dr. Francis Schaeffer, 16 June 1982 , though I apologize for the formatting, which I see now needs some improvement]. Remember that this message represents Schaeffer's mature thought and that he is giving this address just about two years before his death.



> ...This is not our common heritage. As Presbyterians our heritage is with a Calvin who dared to stand against the Dukes of Savoy regardless of what it cost. Our heritage is with a John Knox who taught us, as I’ve stressed in A Christian Manifesto, a great theology of standing against tyranny. Our heritage is with a Samuel Rutherford who wrote those flaming words, Lex Rex—only the law is king and “king” under any name must never be allowed to arbitrary law. Are you Presbyterians? Have we a Presbyterian body? These men are the men who give us our heritage—Calvin and his position, John Knox and his, Samuel Rutherford his, and no less than these in our own country, a John Witherspoon who understood that tyranny must be met and must be met squarely because tyranny is wrong. These who understood that true love in this fallen world often meant the acceptance of the tears which go with confrontation. None of us like confrontation, or I hope none of us do. But in a fallen world there is confrontation, there is confrontation concerning truth, there must be confrontation against evil and that which is wrong. The love must be there but so must the hard thing of acting upon differentiation, the differentiation God gives between truth and falsehood, between what is just, based on God’s existence and His justice, and injustice.
> 
> We are Presbyterian; we are Reformed. But our being together and our responsibility and opportunity does not stop merely with being Presbyterian and Reformed. As one as we now are, we can in some measure speak with the balance of love and holiness to help to provide help for the poor church of the Lord Jesus Christ as a whole in this country; and then beyond into the world to provide help for the church of the Lord Jesus Christ in helping stop this awful slide. This slide in regard to the church, this slide in regard to Scripture, this slide in regard to human life, this slide regarding the oppression of our brothers and sisters in Christ, this slide in regard to tyranny toward others in the world. It is forgotten that a part of the Good News is to take a stand; that is a part of the Good News in a broken, as well as lost, world. The very preaching of the Good News is taking a stand, but it’s forgotten that just as we heard from the former moderator that there isn’t a dichotomy between the proclamation of the Word and caring for people’s material needs with compassion and love, so also it must be emphasized that there is no dichotomy between preaching the Good News and taking a stand—and in fact, if there is nothing to take a stand upon there is no reason for preaching the Good News.
> 
> ...


----------



## travstar (Mar 27, 2012)

I'm sure sure of his soteriological bent, but I know Robert S. Paul was Congregationalist in his ecclesiology. His book "The Assembly of the Lord," was a great political history of the Westminster Assembly. On the auditory side, I'm sorry he preached against Calvinism in a sermon or two, but Adrian Rogers could have read me the phone book and I'd have listened.


----------



## Philip (Mar 27, 2012)

Miss Marple said:


> I think Tolkien and Christie were members of a Christian church, but don't know much detail about it.



Tolkien was a Roman Catholic. Lewis was a conservative middle-of-the-road Anglican.

I have benefited from:

Anselm of Canterbury
Augustine of Hippo
Thomas Aquinas
John Donne (question mark here: not sure if he was Calvinist or not. George Herbert certainly was, but I'm not sure with Donne).
G.K. Chesterton
Walker Percy
Fyodor Dostoevsky
Lesslie Newbigin
C.S. Lewis
J.R.R. Tolkien
Alvin Plantinga
Richard Swinburne
Karl Barth (yeah, I know)
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Jacques Ellul
Soren Kierkegaard


----------



## Pilgrim (Mar 27, 2012)

Wayne,

Thanks for posting that. I forgot about that message at the 1982 PCA GA. 

Arguably this is starting to morph into another thread, but I'd like to get your opinion (as well as that of others who may wish to opine) on the following: 

My understanding is that Schaeffer opposed the proposed 1975 merger of the OPC and the RPCES and that his opposition to it was a major factor in the RPCES vote to reject the merger. (This is based on the aforementioned appendix in North's book as well as some discussion I had with John Muether several years ago.) This may be addressed in more detail in one or more of the Schaeffer biographies. My guess is that what he advocates in the message you posted with regard to a wider circle of influence and going beyond an emphasis on merely being Presbyterian and Reformed was a big factor. 

The "Christian America" idea (or what would later be called engaging in the culture war or "transformationalism") was one of the differences with the OPC and BPC as well. While the RPCES repudiated the separatism of the Bible Presbyterians (and Mcintire in particular), a merger between the RPCES and OPC might well have led to re-fighting some of the battles of the 30's and 40's. As I understand it that basically ended in the OPC with the departure of Gordon Clark and his supporters, at least some of whom were more of the culture warrior mindset than others in the OPC at that time. (I think that Clark himself was later identified with "New Evangelicalism" for a time, and Carl F.H. Henry was strongly influenced by him.) One could argue that it reemerged later on in a different form with theonomy/reconstructionism. Bahnsen was OPC. Rushdoony left (in the 60's?) and in one of his books took a very thinly veiled swipe at the largely amillennial OPC by referring to an Orthodox Pharisees Church!


----------



## NB3K (Mar 29, 2012)

The Apostle Paul!

Augustine of Hippo

Thomas Aquinas

Martin Luther


I believe all these would be considered 5-pointers!


----------

