In this episode, Paul Maxwell and I talk about his work on trauma and reformed theology. He argues that reformed theology conceptually teaches good and true dogma but that the individual experience of this theology among those who have experienced trauma needs to be considered. Maximal control and overly negative views of human nature can affect some people in unhelpful ways.
One of the most exciting parts about hosting a podcast like this is that I can learn from those with whom I disagree. Here, that is partially the case. But I learned more about reformed thinking and trauma and was challenged to think self-reflectively. I hope the same thing is true for you too when you hear Paul speak.
Make sure to subscribe to the podcast on Spotify and/or Apple Podcasts. Also, see the host page at Anchor. And bookmark this page to see every episode.
Paul Maxwell is a theologian from Hyde Park, New York. He has his BA in biblical languages from Moody Bible Institute, his M Div from Westminster Theological Seminary, and his PhD from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, where he studied under Kevin Vanhoozer. Paul is currently a marketing coordinator for a SaaS company in the financial technology sector.
Thanks Wyatt, Having been a Calvinist and having been through some personal tragedy I found the discussion interesting.
Calvin’s disdain for the idea of “permitting” evil has not been helpful. It dug a hole that Reformed people have struggled to get out of for a long time. Job 1 is simply too clear on the question.
I still hold out hope that more in the Reformed camp will take a thorough and objective look at their doctrine of the imputation of Adam’s guilt to his posterity and have the courage to recant. It is a biblical impossibility and plays a huge role in a sound biblical theodicy.
The question of the possibility of those who never hear about Jesus being saved, post incarnation, is definitely related.
Q: If a newborn baby is born guilty of Adam’s sin and dies before demonstrating any signs of the new birth, what would justify the assumption that he/she went to heaven?
See Adam Harwood (NOBTS) Perhaps you could have a discussion with him sometime. He has shown the kind of outside the box / yet inside orthodoxy courage that Paul was pleading for.
Q: Why would Jesus indiscriminately use the faith of children as examples for adults if they had no common grace capacity for faith?
Lewis was right:
“Humanity is already saved, in principle; we individuals have to appropriate that salvation.” Mere Christianity, CH 5,
Thanks again,
DS
Thanks Wyatt and Paul — Wyatt I will say that I tended to agree with your leaning in this conversation, and I did not begin agreeing with most Paul’s line of thinking until the last quarter of the conversation — the practical human reality…
I firmly believe heterodoxy is unnessary with the submissive faithful attitude toward God which would constitute an exegetical linear submission to the word of God through the submission to Jesus through the direct guidance of the Spirit, John 16. Obviously that’s impossible to do but to be on that path (Matthew 7:13-14) in faith eventually covers all that we shoiuld be conscious of as we journey onward unto the kingdom. Not every disciple experienced the same amount of inspiration at the same time.
My first mentor was a theologian who seemed to know every philosopher, and theologian that ever lived. Theology at its best emerges from a conscientious study of Scripture and it is automatically grounded in the same, after all theology is the study of God with Whom the Scripture is laden. Rarely do I hear Biblical references from theologians — they usually get lost in spirited thought without an anchor.
Yes Jesus lays out moral continuity from His past to our present, and we can evaluate ourselves and God by it, albeit comprehension, more or less, comes as God sees fit — it takes time according to the individual development, for one…
John 16:12:
“I still have much to tell you, but you cannot yet bear to hear it. However, when the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth…” So, I am content to travel that path patiently while being energized by the enthusiam of the indwelling Spirit.
Since ‘Grace through Faith’ is simply not enough for everyone, it stands to reason that Protestantism and Catholicism must believe that sacramentalism initially and incrementally saves souls — I am comfortably disowning any relationship with either ideology. I am content to adhere as closely as possible to Judeo-Christianity as humanly possible, which will undoubtedly fall far short but the one thing a person can do is study. fast, pray, follow. and emulate…
I don’t see much practical value in Theology ungrounded in Scripture. So, my semantic continuity is very practically optimized as we walk in the Spirit…Galatians 5:16.
We know much about God. We know, for example. how He feels about children.
In Matthew 19:13-14, Jesus compared children to those are in heaven, yet ‘people’ argued for centuries about baptismig them for their ‘spiritual’ safety which I found to be very peculiar. Thus some believe they are going to heaven by grace through sacriments through faith; some believe they will go to heaven by grace through faith.
We know Jesus went through a perfunctory water rite to attract the constituents of His launch point (Matthew 3:14-15), the only ones who could have recognized any impoirtance in John’s activity at the Jordan that day — the children of Israel — but partially through replacement theology perhaps the church has been committed to doing anciet water rites, for one… OK, fine.
But I have seen no such established norm in Holy writ.