Pyatcast

Response to Jay Dyer on Calvinism (Part 1 of 13)

I had never heard of Jay Dyer before, but he is a non-Calvinist, ex-Protestant. He has eleven claims (source) with respect to what a consistent Calvinist must be.

At first, I thought I’d give a quick answer to each and make this a single blog post. However, the more I looked at the issues, the more I realized that there are, for most of the criticisms, three issues to be addressed: (1) What is the actual error (or conversely, doctrine) at stake? (2) How does or doesn’t Calvinism correspond to the error (or doctrine)? and (3) Does this criticism fit Catholicism better? (Jay is apparently now a part of that religion, having turned away, practically at the last minute, from joining Eastern Orthodoxy last June, if my understanding is correct.) I’ll address each in order, in separate (hopefully brief) posts, in the upcoming days.

Obviously, Jay’s post is largely simply meant to mock and poke fun at Calvinism, rather than being a serious critique. Nevertheless, it provides an interesting platform for discussing the issues. The plan is to make this a thirteen part series in which I will consider each of his points in a separate post and then wrap up with some concluding thoughts.

To the glory of God,

-TurretinFan

Continue to Part 2

To God be the Glory!

TurretinFan

, ,

16 responses to “Response to Jay Dyer on Calvinism (Part 1 of 13)”

  1. Greetings. I would welcome an open discussion of this. Yes, that post was designed to be provacative. However, I have several articles that explain this more fully. I think we should definitely interact on this, if you are willing.Jay

  2. Greetings. I would welcome an open discussion of this. Yes, that post was designed to be provacative. However, I have several articles that explain this more fully. I think we should definitely interact on this, if you are willing.Jay

  7. The short term plan is simply for me to critique the 11 points, rather than a dialogue. Obviously, the initial response will take about two weeks if I post one per day (longer if I take a day off here or there).I’ll try to take a look at the other articles, but the initial series is mostly already written, focusing on the 11 points themselves, without more.Of course, you are welcome to respond – I should point out that the most effective place to respond may be through your own blog, since I moderate comments and generally don’t publish meaty controversial comments until I have time to reply to them.-TurretinFan

  8. The short term plan is simply for me to critique the 11 points, rather than a dialogue. Obviously, the initial response will take about two weeks if I post one per day (longer if I take a day off here or there).I’ll try to take a look at the other articles, but the initial series is mostly already written, focusing on the 11 points themselves, without more.Of course, you are welcome to respond – I should point out that the most effective place to respond may be through your own blog, since I moderate comments and generally don’t publish meaty controversial comments until I have time to reply to them.-TurretinFan

  11. Dear NatAmLLC,I appreciate your support. Mr. Dyer has been respectful in his comments here, and I don’t want to unnecessarily antagonize him. I’m sure he will be unhappy enough about the “part 3″s of my next eleven posts in this series, if he has decided that Rome is the place for him.-TurretinFan

  12. Dear NatAmLLC,I appreciate your support. Mr. Dyer has been respectful in his comments here, and I don’t want to unnecessarily antagonize him. I’m sure he will be unhappy enough about the “part 3″s of my next eleven posts in this series, if he has decided that Rome is the place for him.-TurretinFan