Originally Posted by Tom
As I indicated in another post...he uses the words "illumination and calling" as the work of grace that irresistibly draws the elect to Christ.

This as far as I can see is not in any way similar to Arminianism; in fact from what I gather (I e-mailed him for clarification on this) the major difference is the words he uses for the grace that enables the sinner to come to Christ. He does not believe in Arminian prevenient grace, because what he seems to be saying in more in line with Reformed thought, in that it is irresistible. His understanding of the word “regeneration” seems to be his main problem.
And that is where I am having great difficulty reconciling his "illumination and calling" with the doctrine of Total Depravity. How can one be "illuminated" (given understanding of spiritual things?) if the intellect is utterly opposed to it because it is spiritually dead, i.e., a natural dominating rejection of it; the gospel)? And/or how can a spiritually dead sinner hear the "call" (that inward call of the Holy Spirit, aka: drawing due to the first work of the Spirit, i.e., conviction of sin) if the affections are predisposed to hating God and Christ? Thus, in either case, the will is in bondage in itself and without it being delivered from that bondage, no movement toward God can happen. Thus again, regeneration is absolutely necessary, as has been consistently maintained and taught by all Calvinists and which is what stands as the Confessional teaching of the Reformed Faith. Sorry, but his "illumination and calling" are much too similar to Arminianism's "prevenient grace" which somehow overcomes man's depravity without the actual imparting of new life (regeneration), which they too maintain follows faith. nope


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]