Behe's Boy said:
Thanks all - now I am really confused - I suppose my biggest hang up here is the term "human responsibility" - which the posted article says hyper-calvanism denies. I thought that was what Calvanism denied. Human responsibility implies works-based salvation to me - hence it would be another form of Arminianism. What specifically is meant by the term "human responsibility"?
Firstly, in case no one else has gotten on your case about it... it is CalVINism.
Now, to your questions. God commands, man rebels. Man is responsible for his sin, God is still Sovereign. Just because Total Depravity (inability) is true in no way negates man from his responsibility to 1) obey God or 2) believe in the Son. Remember, man is sinful not because God forces him to sin, but because he is a slave to sin through Adam's transgression.
My pastor even used it in church in his sermon last week. Surely the implication is not that we play any role in our salvation - is it?
Consider the following pattern:
"There is none righteous, no not one."
"God commands men everywhere to repent."
"It is by grace you are saved."
Salvation is totally by grace, man plays no role in salvation until he's been regenerated and then he
produces the
fruit of God's working in him. Salvation is not synergistic, but monergistic.
I mean wouldn't Luther be considered a hyper-calvanist in light of his book "The Bondage of the Will?"
Could somebody help me out here - because I am bit confused now....
No... Luther wouldn't even be considered a hypo-Calvinist.
Luther's classic "Bondage of the Will" is a treaty against the synergism of Erasmus and the Roman system. It in no way states that man is not responsible for sin. What is expressed in the book is the clear Biblical teaching that because of the fall, man is depravied and unable to do anything that pleases God apart from God sovereignly working in him.