You wrote:

“Should God grant us a resurgence of the Great Commission, we should remember that the preventative measures that were taken in the Resurgence are the only reason we even care what the Great Commission says.”

Could we not also argue that without the Reformation there would be no CR? After all, the formal principle of the Reformation was Sola Scriptura.

Your response is appreciated and I understand your point. I think you are correct–in essence death does show our humanity and our limitations.

Tim,

Your comment is quite good. Certainly Paul is on a different level because what we have of his writings are, in fact, scripture and (though I am a 5-pointer) I would never suggest Calvin’s or Luther’s writings to be on that level.

But, Calvin’s theology didn’t occur in a vacuum. Calvin’s theology was essentially Augustinian and Augustine’s theology was essentially Pauline.

To Both,

What I was attempting to point-out, and thereby guard against, was a throw-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater mentality. Certainly Calvin made some huge mistakes–how he could stand by and watch as someone was executed for a different belief I will never understand.

However, though Calvin was a sinner (as Paul was too, I might add), it doesn’t disqualify or nullify the exceptional insight into scripture that he had.

All too often, I’m afraid, Calvin is viewed as a theological boogy man by those who are afraid of “Calvinism.” Just because he made mistakes (like the burning of the heretic) doesn’t automatically mean that he is persona non gratia in the realm of theology.

After all, there are “dirty” cops in many major cities–it is a well-known fact. However, if you live in one of these major cities you don’t call a plumber or an electrician if someone is breaking into your house just because there are a few bad apples in an otherwise heroic group.

Blessings,

The Archangel

I hear your point about Paul’s writings vs. Calvin and Luther’s, but it brings about a question that begs to be answered. What writings of Paul’s do we have that is not scripture? Maybe I missed that class when I went through seminary, but I do not think we have writings of Paul’s outside of Scripture. So, my point is that Paul’s writings are Scripture, thus his theology remains true (all of it) while Luther and Calvin’s theology is wide open for historical/critical debate.

Blessings,
Tim

Please read my discussion with Adam above, if you have not already done so. My intent is not to say that their theology “becomes” irrelevant at their death, rather, it is to say that their death is the evidence that their theology is human, and therefore should be examined with an objective eye. Portions of it are irrelevant because it may be erroneous.

Secondly, as you pointed out, I would not put Calvin’s theology on the same level as Paul’s.

Excellent analysis. I have wondered why some strain at CR leaders and yet swallow Luther and Calvin. Keep up the good work.

Unfortunately, this statement is a bit shortsighted. You seem to say we should discount the theology as those who have died (and I think you’re referring to Calvin). But if we applied your same argument all across the board, we’d have to throw out the Apostle Paul too. While Luther and Calvin’s writings in no way come up to the level of Paul, you are suggesting Paul’s writing are to be seen in the same light–because he was mortal.

Again, shortsighted. But, I enjoyed the post (though I didn’t agree with everything).

Blessings,

The Archangel

I am sure you are correct.

I agree.