About The Reformed Mind
Welcome to The Reformed Mind. This blog is administrated by Jon Norman. It is a site dedicated to engaging the culture from a Biblical perspective. This includes all topics within academia (i.e. science, philosophy, history, art, sociology, etc.), media, politics, and theology. This is all with a primary focus on U.S. culture, but is by no means limited to the U.S.
Apart from discussion this site also includes reviews of movies, books, and music both secular and religious. In brief: It is a site subject to the whims and impulse of the author(s). Anything deemed important, interesting, or just funny that comes to my attention could be addressed. Before commenting on the blog I would encourage you to read the Stipulations for Blog Comments. Thanks.
About the Blogger:
I am the husband of a wonderful lady, and we have 2 sons (Justus and Abel). I am a mere layperson, I hold no credentials or experience that would impress you, only the hope that you might treat the arguments and not the degrees I paid for. That said, I have an M.A. in Early American History from Oklahoma State University, which helped to foster my interest in American Evangelicalism from 1621, through the Enlightenment, and into the “founding period.” I am a 5-point Calvinist, a fairly strict confessional Presbyterian (take minor exceptions to the confesdsion; i.e. I’m not sure the Pope is “THE” Antichrist–stuff like that), member of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (RPCNA), sabbath keeping, baby sprinkling, psalm singing, radical conservative type.
My interests include: church history (Reformation to American Puritanism), theology, reading, writing, movie watching, coffee shops, and my beautiful wife and children.
The Reformed Mind 
Wow I see we have somethings in common
My dear brother
I have tried on three different occasions to read your “critique” of my book, Reflections of a Disenchanted Calvinist. Unfortunately, you have either elided or missed the point of my statements and therefore misrepresented my positions in each and every response you have made—at least the ones I read. This is not to mention that you have misrepresented me, and the seriousness with which I seek to struggle with the biblical perplexities and texts, inapt as you may deem me to be.
It appears to me, that your mischaracterizations of my engagement with the Scripture are sophomoric. While they may impress some and fuel arguments about the truth, I do not believe they add one whit to arguing toward the truth. In my opinion, you have simply demonstrated once again why it is excruciatingly difficult for brothers to disagree without using obfuscating maneuvers, which holds our mutual growth in abeyance. I am assuming that you have done so unintentionally and without malice. I sense that you love God and His Word. Nevertheless, you have done damage to Calvinism, Scripture, Truth and the spiritual growth of those who read your mishandling of some very seriously nuanced positions.
I do pray that in years to come, you will grow in your understanding of these matters, which is not to say that you are not a dedicated student of the Scripture. It is to say that we ought to be able to disagree without seeking to trivialize distinctions with a difference and/or summarily dismiss what one does not understand as being merely unnecessary philosophizing, jejune biblical knowledge or arguing emotively. I believe that a sense of our very limited knowledge (in comparison to what there is to be known about it) concerning whatever we speak about can afford us all some well needed and Christ honoring humility.
Regretfully
Ronnie W Rogers
[…] Recently I received a comment from Pastor Rogers regarding that review that I wanted to repost here and briefly respond to, because there have been some who’ve asked if Pastor Rogers has responded to these blog posts and it may be difficult to actually find the comment (which can be found: here). […]
Jon,
Hi, I hope you are doing well. Thank you for engaging with my story. You are very insightful and clear in your responses.
A listener sent me a link to your blog and asked that I reply, but I have made it a rule not to respond to anonymous bloggers. I notice you do not include your last name (at least I could not find it). I’m sure you may have a very good reason for doing so, but I just wanted you to know that if I am going to engage with you in a discussion we need to know each other. I have found that lends itself to a more cordial, Christlike discourse.
If that is not something you are willing to reveal, I understand. No harm done, but I hope you understand why I cannot engage. Thanks and have a wonderful day!
Hello, Mr. Flowers. I apologize, I guess I did remove my last name. Felt it best if I didn’t give as much info as I was giving before. Last name is Norman (I’ll put that back).
Thanks for commenting. I appreciate you taking the time; and for taking the time to write what you did about your experience. I do hope I was as cordial as possible. By the way, I noticed your blog included a little more extended version of your 5 points, hopefully that won’t be held against me (I only saw the SBCToday one).
I just recorded a podcast in attempt to respond to your points, and its not really working… trying to read your points myself and then respond to them is difficult to follow, tedious and probably not fun for my listeners. I’ve never done this on my podcast before, but would you be open to discussing the issues over the phone and allowing me to record it for the podcast? Not sure exactly how to do that be may be worth giving it a try if youre game?
I’d be fine with that. We’d have to work out some obstacles though, like work schedules, and what you’ll/we’ll want to talk about. Maybe you could email me (jon.norman@okstate.edu) and we can talk about it a little more.
Hi Jon, I have started to read Disenchanted Calvinist and am going through your comments as I go through that book. My overall assessment is that PR is an advocate of free will by his constant reference to “real choice.” While I think I will agree in general with your assessment of the book, I need to start out with a negative point. In your comments on Chap 1 – Sovereignty, you write, “I would argue that the only way one comes to a conclusion such as this [that people have real choice] is to have a misunderstanding of man’s true nature prior to God’s work in him.” I think you misunderstood PR on this point. I read PR to side with the Calvinists on the issue of Total Depravity, PR uses the term, “grace-enabled,” (around 80 times) as a prerequisite for “real choice.” PR defines the term in his Chapter – Glossary of Authorial Terms where he writes, “…without such redemptive grace, no one seeks or comes to God.” While some people have problems with Total Depravity, PR is not one of them. While PR labels himself a “disenchanted Calvinist,” I see him a a very confused Pastor who can’t quite free himself from Calvinism despite his desire to do so. Sorry for commenting here but you closed the comment section in your review of the book. Perhaps we can interact on the book is some other fashion – to help me prepare a review of the book on Amazon
Hey rhutchin,
Sorry I haven’t responded until now. Been a long time since I’ve been on here, but was recently looking over some stuff and saw your comment. Not sure if you finished the book, but hopefully some of my responses to it were helpful. I agree, I do think he can’t quite free himself from Calvinism; usually when a pastor/blogger makes repeated sermons and blog posts about something it speaks to a level of insecurity or a bone to pick. I’ve also noticed that many of these guys really wouldn’t have a sound, or systematic soteriology if they didn’t have Calvinism to object to. Their case is not a positive one, but simply a negative one. They can tell you all that predestination, sovereignty, election, etc. “isn’t,” but rarely what it “is.”
Jon