Sunday, October 21, 2007

Open Apolegetic Challenge to T.J. Pennock

Dear T.J. Pennock,

I had the pleasure of reading through many, though I confess not all, of the posts on your blog (Liver and Onions) - an enormous percentage of which relate to Calvinism, apparently from a less-than-favorable George Bryson-esque perspective.

I notice that in your most recent post you go after Calvinist apologists. As a Calvinist apologist, I didn't find the portrait particularly compelling - but then I'm clearly biased. I'd like the chance to demonstrate which of those characterizations are true, which are meaningless, and which are incorrect.

So, if you have interest, perhaps we could explore one issue that you believe particularly highlights the weakness/heresy/what-have-you of Calvinism.

If it is hard for you to pick something, perhaps we could focus on your June 30, 2007, post in which you suggest that the great Reformer Jerome Zanchius was a child of the devil because of his comments on election and reprobation.

You would take the affirmative position that Zanchius' following statement contains heresy:

As the future faith and good works of the Elect were not the cause of their being chosen, so neither were the future sins of the reprobate the cause of their being passed by, but both the choice of the former and the decretive omission of the latter were owing, merely and entirely, to the sovereign will and determinating pleasure of God.

But perhaps you have a better suggestion.

I have a debate blog set up where we could conduct this debate in a formalized manner. At the moment I'm wrapping up a debate on Sola Scriptura with an Eastern Orthodox opponent, but I'd be happy to find time to accommodate an edifying debate with you on a Calvinism topic of your choosing.

Please don't leave me hanging.

-Turretinfan
to the Glory of God, at

8 comments:

  1. CarrieMonday, October 22, 2007 11:23:00 AM

    Hopefully he will take you up on the offer. It would be an interesting debate.

    In the meantime, I am way behind on your debate with Orthodox, I need to catch up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. TurretinfanMonday, October 22, 2007 1:05:00 PM

    A backchannel from T.J.P. suggests that he is interested. We'll see how it goes forward.

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete
  3. TheoJunkieMonday, October 22, 2007 8:42:00 PM

    1) It is my understanding that "Calamites" was an ancient horse-tail like plant... I can't find any references to the use of the word in reference to Calvinists except on that blog.

    2) I'm not quite able to imagine how it is possible for one to exist willfully somewhere between "point A" and "point B" and yet have a strong aversion to point B.

    3) The debate might be an interesting curiosity, but I wonder how fruitful it will be considering your opponent seems to want to limit the debate to a "couple of exchanges", and seems to think that Fred Phelps is "possessed by the retarded ghost of John Calvin."

    But you never know.. you might have as much success in this as you would trying to use scripture to apologize for God to an atheist. (Irony intended...)

    ReplyDelete
  4. TurretinfanMonday, October 22, 2007 8:53:00 PM

    I'm willing to give TJP the benefit of the doubt that he will comport himself properly - despite the rather extreme comments that TJP has made on his blog.

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete
  5. kangaroodortThursday, October 25, 2007 3:43:00 PM

    Please don't leave me hanging.

    That phrase reminds me of something. Does it remind you of anything?

    ReplyDelete
  6. TurretinfanThursday, October 25, 2007 4:50:00 PM

    Dear KoD:

    Sure does! The oldest item on my list of blog comments to respond to is a post of yours from quite a while ago.

    It's only partially complete, and keeps getting bumped by other more immediately pressing items.

    Thanks for your patience!

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete
  7. kangaroodortMonday, October 29, 2007 8:38:00 PM

    The oldest item on my list of blog comments to respond to is a post of yours from quite a while ago.

    It's only partially complete, and keeps getting bumped by other more immediately pressing items.

    I am looking forward to it. Take your time...just let me know when you do finish it. Are you going to post it here?

    Till then...

    Ben

    ReplyDelete
  8. TurretinfanMonday, October 29, 2007 9:09:00 PM

    Dear Ben,

    God willing, I will post it here in the not to distant future.

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete

Comment Guidelines:

1. Thanks for posting a comment. Without you, this blog would not be interactive.

2. Please be polite. That doesn't mean you have to use kid gloves, but please try not to flame others, even if they are heretics, infidels, or worse.

3. If you insult me, I'm more likely to delete your comment than if you butter me up. After all, I'm human. I prefer praise to insults. If you prefer insults, there's something wrong with you.

4. Please be concise. The comment box is not your blog. Your blog is your blog. If you have a really long comment, post it on your blog and post a short summary of it here.

5. Please don't just spam. It's one thing to be concise, it's another thing to simply use the comment box to advertise.

6. Please note, by commenting here, you are relinquishing your (C) in your comments to me.

7. Remember that you will give an account on judgment day for your words, including those typed in comment boxes. Try to write so you will not be ashamed if it is read back before the entire world.

8. Stay on topic. If your comment has nothing to do with the post, email it to me (my email can be obtained through my blogger profile), or simply don't post it.

9. Don't post as "Anonymous." If you are going to post anonymously, at least use some kind of recognizable "handle," so we can tell you apart from all the other anonymous folks. (This is moot at the moment, since recent abuse has forced me to turn off "anonymous" commenting.)

10. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; and abstain from doing to others what you would not wish upon yourself.