|
Post by tbxi on Dec 15, 2006 13:31:36 GMT -5
For all who are interested, Dan Corner will be on the Unchained Radio broadcast, on December 26 and 29. It is a Christian internet radio show. The host is a staunch Calvinist. Should be interesting, to say the least. www.unchainedradio.comThe show can be listened to live, or the mp3s for the broadcasts can be downloaded for free up to 7 days after their origination date (after this, they are $.98 per show, and each is an hour long).
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Dec 15, 2006 13:55:33 GMT -5
And they are debating "Conditional/Unconditional Security"?
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 15, 2006 13:58:46 GMT -5
Yes. Obviously. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Dec 15, 2006 14:01:23 GMT -5
Do me a favor and bump this thread up right before it happens. Thanks...
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 15, 2006 14:13:22 GMT -5
Gladly. I am looking forward to this.
Edit: spelling
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 23, 2006 23:40:21 GMT -5
Bump for RevK and anybody else... the broadcast is this Tuesday, 9 AM PST, 10 AM MST, 11 AM CST, 12 PM EST... www.unchainedradio.comI sent Gene my copy of The Believer's Conditional Security so he could use it to prepare. I had no use for the book anymore, so hey... Edit: The reason I bumped this now is because I figured maybe you wouldn't be around on Monday, since it'll be Christmas, RevK.
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 26, 2006 1:24:25 GMT -5
Bump again for RevK...
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 26, 2006 14:54:09 GMT -5
tnma.blogspot.com/ Here is the show for free download. I am surprised that Gene pulled out the H-word on Dan - I think I disagree with him there, but the points over which we disagree are subtle. The interview didn't go as well as I had hoped, but what can you expect when one side is just throwing out prooftexts nonstop and not actually going into an in-depth exegesis on any of them? Little actual progress into the meaning of the text was made. The inevitable "INFANT DAAAMMMMNATION" appeal to emotion was made. Anyway, it was a pretty good interview. Will be continued on Friday.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Dec 26, 2006 16:30:32 GMT -5
What a jumbled up mess! I just listened to it.
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 26, 2006 16:31:58 GMT -5
No kidding. I still enjoyed the program, but hopefully Friday will be better and less chaotic.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Dec 26, 2006 16:32:17 GMT -5
I thought it was crazy Gene said that a man hooked on porn was better off than Dan... I also thought it was crazy Dan believes all Calvinist are damned.
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 26, 2006 16:55:56 GMT -5
I thought it was crazy Gene said that a man hooked on porn was better off than Dan... I also thought it was crazy Dan believes all Calvinist are d**ned. Hoo boy. That one statement could get a whole 15-page thread on this going again. I think the reason Gene said that was because he believes Corner is teaching a false gospel, and that someone who has genuinely believed the true gospel and yet stumbles into sin is still going to, in the end, be saved (as he's a Calvinist). Whereas he believes Corner's theology won't get anybody saved. I never actually heard Corner say before that "worry is sin" and that he worries, and that it's okay. A written debate would really be the best way to handle all of this - one in which ALL the aspects of Calvinism and Arminianism can be touched, and one where the details of each view can really be examined carefully without this "throw out lots of passages really fast" tactic... Corner can't reasonably deny that the P is inherently connected to all the other points of Calvinism and that in order to really cover it, we have to look at all of it - I wonder how many people actually buy the idea that it's unfair to let the debate go anywhere else. This is important because the Calvinist view of election/predestination is logically and scripturally prior to the Calvinist view on perseverance. EDIT: Wondering what RevK's thoughts are when he gets a chance to listen... or Darc... or anybody else
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Dec 26, 2006 22:34:15 GMT -5
I will take the time to listen to this at the beginning of next week...not sure if it will be worth my time from the sound of it though...thanks for the bumps...
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 26, 2006 23:01:55 GMT -5
I will take the time to listen to this at the beginning of next week...not sure if it will be worth my time from the sound of it though...thanks for the bumps... In all honesty, Corner doesn't say anything I haven't heard him say before. The host has to defend himself from false accusations over and over. It might be a waste of your time. Might still be interesting, though. I have a feeling Friday will be better.
|
|
|
Post by sjn on Dec 27, 2006 16:49:08 GMT -5
I listened and thought it was a useless hour of nonsense. Dan Corner refuses to work through a passage. It reminds me of the cults who come at you with a thousand "proof texts", but they won't let you stop and examine their text in context. It's sad because I think he can be more convincing if he would take the context into consideration. On the other hand I do think he drew out some license from the host.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Dec 29, 2006 19:24:12 GMT -5
The second hour (actually about 1 hr 40 minutes... wow) is online. The show went way over for some... interesting reasons. About 50 minutes into it, I could not believe what I was hearing. Check out the comments on the blog if you want - the last hour of the show was edifying, but the first part was more intense/heated than Tuesday from the very start, and more surface-level back and forth, quote-passages-really-fast stuff on Dan's part. The last 40-50 minutes were really good, though.
Of course, my theological views have to do with my appraisal of the show, but hey, just letting you know so that I am not guilty of causing you to waste your time (as RevK implied it might be).
|
|