Nov 10, 2008

A Hardshell Contradiction

I have cited from Elder Michael Gowens of the Lexington, Kentucky "Primitive Baptist Church" in my book on the Hardshells. I also have plans to cite him further in upcoming chapters and in an extensive review of his treastise "Born Again - The Doctrine of Effectual Calling." But, for now, I wish to simply cite a few statements of his as an example of the kind of gross inconsistency of the Hardshells when they write on this topic.

Gowens wrote:

"Faith is the gift of God in regeneration (Eph. 2:8). What does that mean? It means that the sinner responds to the life giving voice of the Lord Jesus Christ (Jno. 5:25) like Lazarus responded to the command of Jesus in John 11. It is an involuntary response, below the level of consciousness, a perfect obedience to the Divine imperative of Jesus."

"Gospel regeneration leads to the conclusion that salvation, because it depends on man 's faith, is an act of man 's will since faith is by definition volitional, i.e. an act of the will."

Do you see how he defines faith two different ways? Yea, in exactly opposite ways?

When he wants to get infants and idiots "regenerated," then "faith" is NOT volitional, or an act of the will, or obedience proper, nor a "conscious" act of the mind. But, when he argues against the idea that one must believe in Jesus to be saved, what he thinks is "Arminianism," then "faith" becomes what IS volitional, an act of the will, and an act of obedience, and a conscious act!

But, more of this kind of "hermenuetics" when I get to sections on "Paradigm Problems" and on "Hardshell Hermenuetics."



1 comment:

Mark said...

Lemke equates regeneration with eternal life On Lemke’s interpretation of key passages which suggest faith precedes regeneration (John 3:16, 36; 6:51, 53-54, 57; 11:25; 20:31), Lemke gets it wrong by assuming he equates regeneration with eternal life. Quoting Schreiner and Caneday, Barrett suggests “eternal life” is not only a present reality but an eschatological reality and “by definition is life of the age to come.” Therefore, Lemke cannot be right. Barrett goes on to suggest some passages would simply not make sense if regeneration were equated with eternal life.

The point is made clear when one examines other passages (which Lemke does not mention) that use the phrase eternal life to refer to a gift to be received in the age to come (Mark 10:17, 29-30; Romans 2:6-7, 23; Galatians 6:8; 1 Timothy 6:19; Titus 1:2; 3:7; James 1:12; Revelation 2:10).Notice how it sounds if we equate, as Lemke does, eternal life in these passages with regeneration. For example, Jesus, responding to the rich young ruler states, ‘Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers…for my sake and the gospel, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time…and in the age to come regeneration (eternal life)” (Mark 10:29-30).