The Importance of Calvinism vs Arminianism

Hi Southern;

I wonder if you would show scripture to support that idea. I believe this is mans idea and not God's.
Actually I didn't say that anything happens at the same time. I believe that we believe in Christ before the regeneration. I also believe that regeneration can't happen unless we believe it can.

This verse you refered to doesn't support individual election at all. Unless you can prove we are given to Christ before the foundation. There is a huge difference between given and chosen.
We have to make our election sure;
2Pe 1:10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
We make our election sure by believing that Christ is who He claimed He was. Then we confess Him
May God Bless You;
Mike

 

Hi Ray;

Thankyou; but it's all in scripture if we dig deep enough.
May God Bless You;
Mike

 

Hi Southern;

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike,
The giving to the Son precedes the coming to the Son in Faith. How can you say the giving happens at the same time?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wonder if you would show scripture to support that idea. I believe this is mans idea and not God's.
Actually I didn't say that anything happens at the same time. I believe that we believe in Christ before the regeneration. I also believe that regeneration can't happen unless we believe it can.

Me: This scripture (John 6:37) teaches that we are given to Christ prior to our coming to Him in faith. (See also Acts 13:48). I don't quiet understand why you mention regeneration. Election (John 6:37) is "unto" salvation, not salvation itself. Those given to the Son "will come" and be saved but the "giving" is not salvation and precedes the coming. Hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I noted, we are to show love to all individuals because God shows love to all individuals. But this is a long way from saying that God elects all, when the Bible teaches something different (John 6:37).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This verse you refered to doesn't support individual election at all.

Me:Then would you please tell us what it does mean. How can the giving precede the coming?

You said: Unless you can prove we are given to Christ before the foundation. There is a huge difference between given and chosen.
We have to make our election sure;
2Pe 1:10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
We make our election sure by believing that Christ is who He claimed He was. Then we confess Him

Me: I agree whole heartedly! Amen!
but... This has nothing to do with John 6:37. I believe we have to come to Christ and believe in Him for salvation.

Thanks

 

Hi Southern;
Quote;

.

This statement implies regeneration which is what I thought you were talking about. I've read John 6 many times and I have never seen anything there that would indicate that we are given before our coming to Him in faith.
If you would elaborate on the verse showing just where the Word said we are given first would be helpful.
To me being given first means prior to ownership. We belong to Satan until we are saved. We are not the Lords until we believe. We come to Him and become His through faith then we are given. If we are given before hand then why would He invite us to come to Him?
Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
There is no other way to The Father except through Christ.
Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
We first come to the Father through faith in Christ. This is when we become the Fathers to give.
Act 13:48 is merely saying that all came to the Lord. Everyone one of us since the Jews reject Christ is created for righteousness. Not one created for unrighteousness. How ever there are those who reject Christ just as the Jews did and are lost.

I agree we do have to come to Him but few there are who find the Path. If every Christian would only tell everyone they meet about Christ the whole world could be evangelized. I'm afraid I haven't done that. I've only told some.

May God Bless You;
Mike

 

Bob Ryan,

I agree with your above statement. The Calvinist believes that God created the world and universe, as we do, but then He begins, and I say it reverently before God, His puppet show of humans who either are moving toward Heaven at His beckon, or toward eternal destruction in Hell. And then they say, "To God be the glory."

Bob, am I wrong?

 

Bob Ryan,

I agree with your post.

The Calvinist believes that God made the world and universe, as we also understand this truth, but then He places all of us on the stage of life and calls some to life with Him and the remainer He sends to His place of eternal torment. He becomes the Divine Automaton with no feelings of remorse over the lost being sent there. [Luke 18:24a] This verse does not fortify their misconception.

Can I hear an Amen?

Regards,
Brother Berrian

 

I agree with your above statement. The Calvinist believes that God created the world and universe, as we do, but then He begins, and I say it reverently before God, His puppet show of humans who either are moving toward Heaven at His beckon, or toward eternal destruction in Hell. And then they say, "To God be the glory."

Bob, am I wrong? </font>[/QUOTE]Indeed you are right. They portray an arbitrary and pointless sin-dispensation of suffering agony and loss "for the glory of God" in demonstrating that He really can do anything He wants any time He wants to anyone He wants.

Hence the relevance of the Calvinist "future scenario" to this message board.

In Christ,

Bob

 

The Calvinist believes that God made the world and universe, as we also understand this truth, but then He places all of us on the stage of life and calls some to life with Him and the remainer He sends to His place of eternal torment. He becomes the Divine Automaton with no feelings of remorse over the lost being sent there. [Luke 18:24a] This verse does not fortify their misconception.

Can I hear an Amen?

Regards,
Brother Berrian </font>[/QUOTE]Amen and amen.

The Calvinist model insists that nothing ABOUT the person being saved - determines that he should be saved. Rather - God alone is Sovereign and selects the elect for His own good pleasure - not due to any value or quality in the lost sinner. Rather each lost sinner is fully lost, fully dead and totally depraved. They have no claim to be "better than their fellow lost sinner" and so "deserving of being selected as the elect".

Nothing about the lost recommends them or determines them to be selected as the elect -- according to 4 and 5 pt Calvinism.

The poster child for the term "arbitrary selection".

In Christ,

Bob

 

No, Bob, that's simply not true. To be arbitrary, by definition, the choice would be made without a purpose. It would be random. Calvinism of any stripe does not teach this. To be an arbitrary choice, a choice must have NO PURPOSE. Arbitrary means " existing or coming about seemingly at random or by chance or as a capricious and unreasonable act of will." Calvinists teach the opposite. We teach Ephesians 2:10. We teach Eph. 1:11 that "Also WE HAVE OBTAINED AN INHERITANCE, HAVING BEEN PREDESTINED ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE who works all things after the counsel of His will."

To say that Calvinism's views are "the poster child of arbitrary" is a flatout falsehood that reflects a caricature of what Calvinists believe and teach, not what they actually teach. If we taught that election was completely random, you'd have a point. We don't teach that. We teach that God chooses and that this choice has a purpose and that it is based on his intimate knowledge of us in His own Person and not in anything intrinsic in us, because if that was so, that would make any choice God made contingent on something grounded in us not Himself. That runs against the nature of a Being that is pure actuality without any contingency whatsoever in Him. Since God has no contingency in Him, then anything He does can not be contingent on something, e.g. grounded in man at all. To say that diminishes God and His attributes, and it gives man something about which he can boast, which runs contrary to the conclusion of Eph. 2:9.

 

Gene M. Bridges,

So the elect do nothing to inherit everlasting life. God merely has in eternity past decreed their salvation and they walk like 'blind goats' and through no nisus within their soul, nevertheless end up in Heaven. If they don't have a belief in Jesus they are deluded and have that which James says, is a ' . . . faith without works is dead.' [James 2:20]

[I Thessalonians 1:3a] it seems to intimate that faith is a work and effort, but clearly not a 'good work' exerted before knowing Jesus and that leads to salvation as Paul in writing to Titus emphasizes. 'Not by 'works of righteousness' which we have done, but according to His mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.' [3:5]

Faith in Jesus is a cognitive commitment and requires thought and a movement of the human soul and spirit. 'Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labor of love . . . ' [I Thessalonians 1:3a]

Also, your first sentence you used the word, 'resistence.' To resist something means that you had a cognitive movement within the 'free will.' [Revelation 22:17f] When the non-elect sinners 'resist' it is the Holy Spirit Who they have resisted.

Clearly, God never passes over sinners; He died for sinners. You said, 'So God continued to draw them . . . ' If He merely decreed their salvation He would not need to draw them. He draws sinners so they can make an individual commitment one way or the other. If the elect are from eternity in the fold of Christ, it would be superfluous for the Spirit of God to draw anyone.

Nice try at plugging the holes in the philosophy/theology of the hardened Roman Catholic Calvin who was converted in 1533 or 1534 who studied for the priesthood at the University of Paris at the age of fourteen, but through a conflict with the bishop eventually left to study law. 'At that point Calvin rejected (most of) the superstitions of the Papacy.' Dr. Paul Enns, "The Moody Handbook of Theology" Moody Press, p. 475.

Your great system of theology was handed to you straight from a sincere person who was in lockstep with the Vatican.

Berrian, Th.D.

 

So the elect do nothing to inherit everlasting life. God merely has in eternity past decreed their salvation and they walk like 'blind goats' and through no nisus within their soul, nevertheless end up in Heaven. If they don't have a belief in Jesus they are deluded and have that which James says, is a ' . . . faith without works is dead.' [James 2:20]

[I Thessalonians 1:3a] it seems to intimate that faith is a work and effort, but clearly not a 'good work' exerted before knowing Jesus and that leads to salvation as Paul in writing to Titus emphasizes. 'Not by 'works of righteousness' which we have done, but according to His mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.' [3:5]

Faith in Jesus is a cognitive commitment and requires thought and a movement of the human soul and spirit. 'Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labor of love . . . ' [I Thessalonians 1:3a]

Also, your first sentence you used the word, 'resistence.' To resist something means that you had a cognitive movement within the 'free will.' [Revelation 22:17f] When the non-elect sinners 'resist' it is the Holy Spirit Who they have resisted.

Clearly, God never passes over sinners; He died for sinners. You said, 'So God continued to draw them . . . ' If He merely decreed their salvation He would not need to draw them. He draws sinners so they can make an individual commitment one way or the other. If the elect are from eternity in the fold of Christ, it would be superfluous for the Spirit of God to draw anyone.

Nice try at plugging the holes in the philosophy/theology of the hardened Roman Catholic Calvin who was converted in 1533 or 1534 who studied for the priesthood at the University of Paris at the age of fourteen, but through a conflict with the bishop eventually left to study law. 'At that point Calvin rejected (most of) the superstitions of the Papacy.' Dr. Paul Enns, "The Moody Handbook of Theology" Moody Press, p. 475.

Your great system of theology was handed to you straight from a sincere person who was in lockstep with the Vatican.

Berrian, Th.D. </font>[/QUOTE]Sorry, Ray,

Not my quote, please get your sources correct and address the correct individual. In your haste and contempt for the theology of Paul, you have missed the simple fact that I did not write the above quote. It was a response from another member of this forum to something I had written regarding something written by Johnathan Edwards. ASK THE RIGHT PERSON, and you'll get the right response.

Oh, and the last two paragraphs are completely irrelevant. They only show your ability to use logical fallacies, not your ability to discuss the issues.

 

Gene,

I hope I get it right this time. If the quote was not from you, a sincerely apologize.

As to the last two paragraphs, some--not all Calvinists have a problem swallowing the fact that their theology came straight out of the handbook of Augustine and then Calvin. Are you denying that Calvin was brought up Catholic and studied for the priesthood?

Many of your Calvinists writers of theology acknowledge that many of the Protestant
Reformers were groomed in the European universities or were consorts of the Vatican. Study and you shall be illuminated by the truth. Denials do not shroud the truth of Christian history.

 

I deny nothing, but it is equally a fallacy of logic called the genetic fallacy to repudiate what persons's say or believe based on the past associations and it shows you dislike Catholicism so you are using it as guilt by association. I would have thought you'd be be acquainted with logical fallacies...but a quick refresher:

Genetic Fallacy - The attempt to endorse or disqualify a claim because of the origin or irrelevant history of the claim

Example: The Nazi regime developed the Volkswagen Beetle. Therefore, you should not by a VW Beetle because of who started it.

Example: Frank's just got out of jail last year and since it was his idea to start the hardware store, I can't trust him.

Guilt by Association - Rejecting an argument or claim because the person proposing it likes someone is disliked by another.

Example: Hitler liked dogs. Therefore dogs are bad.

Example: Your friend is a thief. Therefore, I cannot trust you.

I have a degree in European history as a matter of fact too. .

What's next, you going to repeat the Servetus myth?

 

It is most bothersome to me that our Arminian brother, Bob, seems to think that the sovereign good pleasure of God is "arbitrary." This says to me that Bob thinks that God is not good enough to make choices that are not arbitrary. By alleging that the Reformed tradition is arbitrary, not only does he fail to take into account that "randomness" is what is meant by the term "arbitrary," according to the dictionary itself, he criticizes Reformed theology with the criticism all the while understanding, it would seem that the Reformed position grounds election in God alone and not man. What could be LESS arbirtrary than this? Bob is correct in his understanding that Calvinism understands election is not grounded in anything in the person elected, but he fails to realize that the Person in whom the election is grounded is God. An arbitrary choice is, by definition, random. Since election is GROUNDED, it is not arbitrary. However, persons are capable of making random decisions. God is NOT capable of doing that. Therefore, election can not be random and thus arbitrary.

The entire objection is simply a straw man. If God is sovereign, then BY DEFINITION, He can not do anything arbitrary. It’s as if Arminians are unwilling to yield this one right to God. It is no different than if they were praying, “God what you want, for your own good purposes, is not a good enough reason for me. I demand that you give an answer for Yourself. I must understand. It would be arbitrary and unfair if you do the choosing and not us because you can’t possibly have reasons good enough since I can’t think of any.” It is to demand that God answer for why he made the sky blue or some people to be born in Africa and some in North America. God’s good pleasure is the crowning reason for all these things and we should rest content in that. Anything less is to doubt the character of God. (Hendryx)

Norman Geisler, an Arminian I would add, is the one that affords one of the best descriptions of God's character. God is absolute actuality with no potentiality whatsoever in Him." Therefore, He can not and will not base anything He does on anything "random." God is by definition, not capable of making random choices any more than He could create a rock He could not lift (because if He can create He can control it). To attack Calvinism as "arbitrary" is to display a GROSS misunderstanding of Reformed theology, an attack on God's own character, and a plain, old fashioned straw man argument.

Just because we don't know why God chooses some and passes over others is not sufficient grounds to reject it. It suggests God owes you an explanation for what He does. It says that you doubt the goodness of God. "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law." Deuteronomy 29: 29

 

Ray,

You were quoting me.

Ray, I'm amazed that a person with an alleged Th.D. cannot wrap his mind around the concept of the counsel of God's will.

It is discombopulating to think that you can't make the distinction between what took place in the Mind of God before the foundation of the world and what is actualized in real time and space. You make the same simple mistakes again and again.

God creates the universe, and if his plan requires the lifting up of Christ to draw all men to himself, it is not superfluous, if it is his method to draw the elect to himself in time and space.

You mentioned in the past that you haven't read the works of Arminius, but you endeavor to lecture us on reading history. Really.

 

Maybe this will help you, Ray,

Election takes place in the counsel of God's will before time began.

Salvation/regeneration takes place in time and space.

We are chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world.

We are saved in the here and now.

 

Mike,
The giving to the Son in John 6:37 is not salvation but is unto salvation. Notice that the ones given are the ones who come (believe) to Christ. Also, that the giving precedes their coming. What I am saying that this means is that God has given Jesus a people that will come to Him. The predestination of these is not justification itself (Rom. 8:28ff), that comes in time when they believe in Christ.

You stated the following:
This statement implies regeneration which is what I thought you were talking about. I've read John 6 many times and I have never seen anything there that would indicate that we are given before our coming to Him in faith.

ME: Then how do you explain John 6:37 that says that these people are given before they come?

You:If you would elaborate on the verse showing just where the Word said we are given first would be helpful.
To me being given first means prior to ownership. We belong to Satan until we are saved. We are not the Lords until we believe. We come to Him and become His through faith then we are given. If we are given before hand then why would He invite us to come to Him?
Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
There is no other way to The Father except through Christ.

Me: Hey brother, we both agree that a person must come to Jesus and believe to be saved. Let me say again that this is irrelevant. The question is, who are the ones that come to Christ in faith? Vs. 37 says it is those given to the Son by the Father (The elect).

You:Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
We first come to the Father through faith in Christ. This is when we become the Fathers to give.

Melease read my above post. We are "Predestined"(Rom. 8:28ff.) BEFORE we are justified. This giving to the Son precedes the actual coming to justification.

You:Act 13:48 is merely saying that all came to the Lord.

Me: This does not say that "all" came to the Lord, but that "as many as had been appointed" to eternal life. This was a particular group because obviously they did not all believe.

You:Everyone one of us since the Jews reject Christ is created for righteousness. Not one created for unrighteousness. How ever there are those who reject Christ just as the Jews did and are lost.

Me: We both agree that many reject Christ and are lost.

You:I agree we do have to come to Him but few there are who find the Path. If every Christian would only tell everyone they meet about Christ the whole world could be evangelized. I'm afraid I haven't done that. I've only told some.

Me: We both need to preach the gospel to every creature. Although me may disagree on specifics of doctrine, we both must carry out this command as brothers in Christ. Pray for me as I go out each day to tell others about the wonderful savior that we serve! God bless you and me!

 

Paul 33,

Thanks for your thoughts. You said,

Your word IF makes a immense difference, because His drawing is not restricted only the past elect and the future elect, His call is to all lost souls. [Revelation 22:17f] His call is to the ' . . . whosoever will let (that person) take of the water of life freely.' Can you wrap your biased mind around God's last words that He placed in the canon of Scripture?

My mind has traversed both the Calvinistic and the Arminian views in that I went to two seminaries that taught their view with conviction. The truth has set me free. I know the five points of Arminianism without reading straight from Jacob Arminius. The Bible is in concord with
the first four main points of Arminianism. I do believe that the truly saved person will never be lost.

A brother in the faith,
Ray

 

Ray,
Which call are you referring to?
The 'outward' call, that gos out to all who hear?
(Matt. 20:16)

or

The 'inward' call, that go's to God's elect?
(1 Cor. 1:24;Rom. 8:30)

Thanks for your time

 

Ray writes: God's love is unfettered and reaches to all sinners with no partiality at all.

Clearly, Bob, you do not believe this. If you did, you would believe in unconditional election. The stated position of Arminianism is that election is grounded in the individual person, in some intrinsic quality they already possess, namely faith in Christ. That is, by definition, favoritism. THAT is the very type of partiality that you repudiate in your objections to the Reformed position. I repeat, if election is grounded in something other than God Himself, that means that God is showing favoritism and partiality based on something in a person. That is true favoritism, as well as contingency. Neither favoritism nor contingency are part of God's character. Conditional election does not reflect the nature of God properly. Conditional election says that election is based on God's foreknowledge of who will believe and who will not believe. This goes beyond the text.


Bob wrote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GMB
Calvinism does affect ministry. Calvinism proclaims the gospel to believe and repent. It preaches it as a command, not a request or a plead.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In fact this is never the case.

Gene responds: See below

Bob: Calvinism never proclaims itself in evangelism.

Gene responds: True, Calvinists would never proclaim themselves. We proclaim what God says. Calvinists in evangelism preach the gospel the way it is presented in Scripture. Take a look at Evangelism Explosion, the sermons of Whitefield, Edwards, Spurgeon, and even Lewis Drummond. I continue to be amazed at the way Arminians caricature Calvinists with regard to evangelism. You act as if we don't do it, and when we do it, you say we do it incorrectly. Finney, an Arminian, wrote that revival "is the result of the rightly constituted means."

Bob wrote:
And as for Arminians ---
As Paul said "WE BEG you on behalf of Christ BE reconciled to God" 2Cor 5.


Calvinists never stand up and say "We are going to skip the message today - I will simply command you to be saved!".


Gene responds:

I beg to differ, Bob. First, 2 Corinthians 5:20 is very clearly addressed to Christians, and has nothing to do with how we are to evangelize. Regardless, Maybe you've not read this in awhile:

"This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ...”1 John 3:23

1 John 3:23 forms the basis of Calvinist's evangelism. Arminians ask and plead. Calvinists issue a command. You do a disservice to the gospel not to do evangelism in the same manner.