Dusman

If it’s about Calvinism, I can guarantee it would get ugly. I’ve debated it many times, and even with the best of intentions it never ends well. And with Matt, I can guarantee you’d be charged at the very least with misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting the teachings of Calvinism.

Even though theologically, I would be classified as a Calvinist, I agree with Teknomom. Most of these types of discussions are a real waste of time and generally end up creating more heat than light . . . especially given Matt’s history of being unkind and rude in his previous radio interactions with Cheryl. Matt strikes me as the kind of guy who comes off as “My interpretation of Scripture in the area of women in ministry is plain for any and all to see, and if you don’t agree with it, then by default, you’re a heretic.” I would imagine that sadly, he might take a similar tact in the area of the doctrines of grace. I truly hope I’m wrong.

In our church, we *joyfully* have members who are non-Calvinists and more importantly, our elders teach a two-parts series titled “How To Discuss Theology Like Incurable God-Lovers”. We encourage discussion in areas of disagreement for the purpose of sharpening and encouraging one another vs. killing the unity of the body of Christ through parading our pet doctrines, thereby creating disunity and factiousness (Titus 3:10-11). We love our fellow brothers and sisters in the Lord too much to separate from them and create disunity in the body because of our differing positions on secondary doctrinal issues.

If any of you are appalled at Matt’s behavior, rest assured, I am as well. I’d avoid him since he emits and air of factiousness. He will not be taught by Cheryl (or any other biblical egalitarian) and those who will not be taught, *cannot* be taught. So, for what it’s worth, I’d exhort you to avoid wasting your time arguing with someone who isn’t going to listen in the first place. Spend that time with your children, your church, and your family.