Thursday, February 19, 2009

Jay Dyer Index

This is an index post for my interactions with Mr. Jay Dyer. So far, we have only one set of interactions (based on a single initial post of his), thus there are no categories yet, except those that fall out naturally from the nature of the discussion.

Jay Dyer's Initial Post.

My Initial Responses to Jay Dyer's Post
Intro to My Response to Jay's Post
My Response to Part 1 of Jay's Post (Nestorian Accusation)
My Response to Part 2 of Jay's Post (Manichean Accusation)
My Response to Part 3 of Jay's Post (Monothelitism Accusation)
My Response to Part 4 of Jay's Post (Tri-Theism Accusation)
My Response to Part 5 of Jay's Post (Gnosticism/Iconoclasm Accusation)
My Response to Part 6 of Jay's Post (Paganism Accusation)
My Response to Part 7 of Jay's Post (Pelagianism Accusation)
My Response to Part 8 of Jay's Post (Ecclesiastical Relativism Accusation)
My Response to Part 9 of Jay's Post (Un-deification Accusation)
My Response to Part 10 of Jay's Post (Liberal Higher Critic Accusation)
My Response to Part 11 of Jay's Post (Agnosticism Accusation)
Conclusion to My Response to Jay's Post

Jay Dyer's Video Responses
Jay's Video Remarks Part 1
Jay's Video Remarks Part 2
Jay's Video Remarks Part 3

Jay Dyer's Written Responses
Jay's Rebuttal With Respect to Nestorianism Accusation
(Related Post by Dyer, Identified as relevant)
Jay's Posting of Athanasius against the "Nestorian-Calvinists"
Jay's Rebuttal With Respect to Manichean Accusation
"Replies to the Calvinists on Fallen Nature"
Jay's Rebuttal With Respect to Monothelitism Accusation
Jay's Rebuttal With Respect to Tritheism Accusation
Jay's Rebuttal With Respect to Gnostiticism/Iconoclasm Accusation
Jay's Rebuttal With Respect to Arianism/Paganism Accusation

Peanut Gallery (meant in the kindest way)
Comments from Michael Burgess on the Monothelite Accusation
Remarks on the Discussion - and a loaded question - from Perry Robinson
Piling On the Accusation of Pelagianism - from Perry Robinson
(Response to Perry from Nathanael Taylor)
(Initial Response to Perry from Steve Hays)
(Full Response to Perry from Steve Hays)
(Mark at the Bellarmine Theological Forum asks Mr. Robert Sungenis to Give the Dialog Coverage)
(Matthew Bellisario Claims that Dyer has Refuted me, referencing the audio from Mr. Dyer below)

General Response to Jay Dyer's Rebuttals
Follow-Up Response of February 21, 2009

Further Informal Dialog
Hodge and Alleged Reformed Denial of Nature/Grace Distinction (already addressed both in my original series (which included a quotation from Hodge on the very issue) and in my General Response at point 6a, where we discuss Mr. Dyer's treatment of nature as a thing)

Further Audio Response (around 51 minutes long) from Jay Dyer (link to post)(direct link to audio).

My Response to Mr. Dyer's Audio commentary (link).

-TurretinFan

17 comments:

Jay Dyer said...

I removed the post about you not linking. You know my comments are clearly related, not "appraently related." I will post a complete links page as well.

Jay

Anonymous said...

Hey Turretin.

I'm a fan, a friend, not a foe, but are you going to respond to Dyer? It would be a worthwhile interaction.

Turretinfan said...

I haven't decided. As I informed Mr. Dyer from the start, the short term plan is simply for me to critique his eleven points in the three-point format that I've been using.

One reason that I created this index is that I can envision responding to at least some of the additional points he has been raising. Given the way he is writing his posts (for example, his most recent response that I have seen starts "It's a shame Turretinfan, who has posted his latest here, continues to completely miss the arguments." and his immediately preceding post begins "I will respond to his Honorius issue later. Turretinfan, just as with the single subject issue, doesn't understand the argument.") I am concerned about whether I will be treated with respect in our interaction.

I don't mind discussing theology, but I don't like discussing TurretinFan.

-TurretinFan

Anonymous said...

I can understand that. To a large degree though, that is your choice - you can choose to discuss his theological claims and only that. To take the 'higher path', so to speak, and not discuss the rather ostentatious nature of his posts, the paragraphs that simply assert (an error that is unfortunately voluminous), or the fact that the vast majority of contemporary academia would disagree with the logical necessity of his accusations (and yes, Mr. Dyer, to match your regular boasts, I *am* talking from experience: i'm a doctoral researcher of reformed dogmatics attending a secular UK university).

But you turretin, you can choose to rise above that and demonstrate that there is no such thing as this necessary inconsistency within the reformed systematic. That would be your choice. You should go for it, and you would have my prayerful support in doing so and I dare say, I wouldn't be your sole supporter :)

Turretinfan said...

The good news is that I have some time to decide. I am not even half way through his list of accusations, and at this rate it might be another few weeks before I would be done with the planned initial critique.

natamllc said...

having measured you well already, you know my support will not wain as you are a measured man, 'found', not wanting!

Either way, there does seem to me that there will be a gentle wisdom descending our way:::>

Jas 3:11 Does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and salt water?
Jas 3:12 Can a fig tree, my brothers, bear olives, or a grapevine produce figs? Neither can a salt pond yield fresh water.
Jas 3:13 Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.
Jas 3:14 But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth.
Jas 3:15 This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic.
Jas 3:16 For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice.
Jas 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.
Jas 3:18 And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.

Shalom my friend!

Anonymous said...

This question is addressed to natamllc:

You've posted nothing critical of Turretinfan or his "theology". You seem to get your posts past moderation when no one else can. Are you a stooge or a sycophant, or are you Turretinfan himself?

Turretinfan said...

a) It's not particularly "my" theology. I claim no rights to it, and I don't want anyone accepting it on my say-so or because it is connected to me.

b) Plenty of natamllc's comments have been moderated (not published) and while natamllc is mostly positive or tangential in his published comments, it's inappropriate to infer that consequently he must be a "sycophant."

-TurretinFan

natamllc said...

Anonymous,

I would take a mild bit of exception to your question. I certainly am not TurrentinFan. I admire his acumen immensely and the deliberate scholarly approach he takes with us commenters in here.

With his God given gifts and talents available free of charge with this blog, you would do yourself a service to sit at his feet and learn some things from him too!

Did you have an occasion to listen to "TF" do a question and answer on the DividingLine with Dr. White last year? Personally, Dr. White should have him on more often. I hope Dr. White sees this comment and takes that idea to heart?

If you did, you would certainly understand that there is a vast difference between TF and me.

No, to answer your question; but as bold as I am, I have to take some pride in it, that is, that you would think I am one such as he is! Sadly for me though, I am not TurrentinFan. :)

And for the record, if TF keeps a reject file, and you were privy to it, you would see a lot of my comments in there, or, at least a fair amount of off topic, unsubstantiated or just goofy comments that do nothing to move the debate in the right direction, or maybe, some, geesh, I don't know how many are in there, but there are some of my comments that he has for cause rejected and chosen to not see the light of day.

In fact, because I noticed some of the comments I made were not being published, I started a rule of doing a Word document first before going into his comment section just so I could read what he rejected so that I could learn a thing or two. He doesn't owe me an apology. He is an accomplished Apologist with a fair amount of study and training under his belt. You should be glad to be involved in here however much you are and are able?

You would have to ask TF, though, why or why not, he rejects one comment and lets another go through? It doesn't offend me one bit when my comment is rejected; with some exception though, especially when I know I know I know I am right and he is wrong!!! :)

Oh, as for the "nothing" critical coment, well, I don't know as that is correct either. There have been some times when I brought an opposing view or felt like TF was a bit sharper than a Gentleman should be. He is man enough to receive correction and reproof and instruction.

That is what iron does, it sharpens iron and in our field of endeavor, Apologetics, with "words", we are the iron that sharpens a friend's iron/words.

Open rebuke is better than secret love the wisest man wrote.

So, I would be happy to adjourn to a cloak room if you want anon? Click on my name, "natamllc" and you can email me if this wasn't a satisfactory answer to your inquiry?

Anonymous said...

Turretinfan/natamllc:

Know that you have been caught! I now know from your response that you are one and the same person!

The correct response was for Turretinfan to post my previous comment with no more comment than to say that natamllc would speak for himself and defend his own honor, followed by a scalding rebuke in detail from natamllc.

Instead, you posted an unnecessarily long rebutal in your persona as Turretinefan followed by a lengthy twelve paragraph rebuttal from your persona as natamllc, eighteen minutes later. Ninety seconds per paragraph is a pretty rapid typing speed, don't you think, natamllc?

"Sycophant" is a sufficiently strong word as to require the minimum of a scold in response, though not bannable like profanity.Had John Calvin or Theodore de Beza had been called such a thing, there would have been an execution. There was no scold, only a denial.

Thanks for prroving my point.

Turretinfan said...

Anonymous,

Thanks for confirming for those reading, just what sort of person you are.

I will permit natamllc to add his two cents, but I don't intend to waste much time with your silliness.

-TurretinFan

natamllc said...

grrrr, I hate this present state of technology! I just prepare my best response and went and blew it!

Well I will try again.

Anonymous, first I have to ask, are you serious?

Why would you suppose TF is me and I am him? That is indeed silliness as TF has said now.

Ok, as to being caught, huh? What is there to catch and what value does it lend to this debate for duplicity on TF or my part when standing up to Jay Dyer's claims about what Calvinism is?

If you know anything about the periods, Calvin and Beza and beyond through the seventeeth century to date, when it was in an incipient stage, Calvinism and the Reformed dogma as inchoate, your claim above:

"....Had John Calvin or Theodore de Beza had been called such a thing, there would have been an execution. There was no scold, only a denial."

Do we not have a right to move on and take to heart the council from the Canons of Dort?:::>

"....Finally, this Synod exhorts all their brethren in the gospel of Christ to conduct themselves piously and religiously in handling this doctrine, both in the universities and churches; to direct it, as well in discourse as in writing, to the glory of the Divine Name, to holiness of life, and to the consolation of afflicted souls;....".

I would say that admonition applies here with us handling your absurd assertion and extend a bit of consolation to your afflicted soul!

As for me being TF and he I, I have a couple of verses that come to mind, one as a compliment to TF and the other as a mild rebuke to you.

Before dispensing with those let me address that silly charge of how fast I type. I owned and operated for several years as a ministry work project a small advertiser such that guys like me had to be able to type really fast. So what if I could type over 100 words a minute or have a rapid typing ability even still? How does that play into this debate with Jay Dyer?

Ok for two verses. First, to reiterate it as a compliment as to me being anywhere as astute as TF, I so cite:

Mat 10:24 "A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master.

I count it a priviledge to come in here daily to read the topics and the responses made to them, the debates and the insights gained so if you are alluding to the fact that I am as astute as TF then that verse above cited would be a compliment to both of us in proper respect.

Now as for a mild rebute toward you silliness, I speak now for myself but count TF of this magnitude of caliber, of "spiritual" man, consider what is being said one to the other and consider yourself the "other":

Act 14:15 "Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men, of like nature with you, and we bring you good news, that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them.

What you have demonstrated here today is that you have been caught in a vain imagination not trained by the Living God nor able to hear what the Spirit is speaking to those who have "ears" to hear!

Drake Shelton said...

Does anyone know why Dyer's website has been down for like 2 weeks now? I was halfway through reading and diagramming his 44 articles and for 2 weeks now I have no access to them. what's up with that?

Turretinfan said...

I have no clue. He converted from Roman Catholicism to Eastern Orthodoxy recently, I think, but I'm not sure if that's the reason.

Drake Shelton said...

http://olivianus.thekingsparlor.com/concerning-roman-catholicism/jay-dyer-s-if-you-re-a-serious-calvinist-to-be-consistent-you-must-also-be-refuted-by-drake-shelton

Turretinfan said...

Drake Shelton:

Your responses begin: "I was ashamed of Turretinfan's responses to this so I decided to devote the past year and a half to these issues."

Ah well.

- TurretinFan

Coram Deo said...

Feelin' that Christ-like love, eh TF?

It veritably oozes out of certain folks...like warm soothing sunlight!

But others, well, maybe not so much.

In Him,
CD