1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why the vitriol?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by doulous, Apr 24, 2006.

  1. epistemaniac

    epistemaniac New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    spyhunter, the vitriolic responses you may see are perhaps the result of saying things like
    a statement like this does little to remedy the situation, plus, it is so easy to disprove it...

    "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence. He draws this conclusion, that it is one proof that we have been really elected, and not in vain called by the Lord, if a good conscience and integrity of life correspond with our profession of faith. And he infers, that there ought to be more labor and diligence, because he had said before, that faith ought not to be barren.

    Some copies have, "by good works;" but these words make no change in the sense, for they are to be understood though not expressed. 1

    He mentions calling first, though the last in order. The reason is, because election is of greater weight or importance; and it is a right arrangement of a sentence to subjoin what preponderates. The meaning then is, labor that you may have it really proved that you have not been called nor elected in vain. At the same time he speaks here of calling as the effect and evidence of election. If any one prefers to regard the two words as meaning the same thing, I do not object; for the Scripture sometimes merges the difference which exists between two terms. I have, however, stated what seems to me more probable. 2

    Now a question arises, Whether the stability of our calling and election depends on good works, for if it be so, it follows that it depends on us. But the whole Scripture teaches us, first, that God's election is founded on his eternal purpose; and secondly, that calling begins and is completed through his gratuitous goodness. The Sophists, in order to transfer what is peculiar to God's grace, to ourselves usually pervert this evidence. But their evasions may be easily refuted. For if any one thinks that calling is rendered sure by men, there is nothing absurd in that; we may however, go still farther, that every one confirms his calling by leading a holy and pious life. But it is very foolish to infer from this what the Sophists contend for; for this is a proof not taken from the cause, but on the contrary from the sign or the effect. Moreover, this does not prevent election from being gratuitous, nor does it shew that it is in our own hand or power to confirm election. For the matter stands thus, -- God effectually calls whom he has preordained to life in his secret counsel before the foundation of the world; and he also carries on the perpetual course of calling through grace alone. But as he has chosen us, and calls us for this end, that we may be pure and spotless in his presence; purity of life is not improperly called the evidence and proof of election, by which the faithful may not only testify to others that they are the children of God, but also confirm themselves in this confidence, in such n manner, however that they fix their solid foundation on something else.

    At the same time, this certainty, mentioned by Peter, ought, I think, to be referred to the conscience, as though the faithful acknowledged themselves before God to be chosen and called. But I take it simply of the fact itself, that calling appears as confirmed by this very holiness of life. It may, indeed, be rendered, Labor that your calling may become certain; for the verb poiei~sqai is transitive or intransitive. Still, however you may render it, the meaning is nearly the same.

    The import of what is said is, that the children of God are distinguished from the reprobate by this mark, that they live a godly and a holy life, because this is the design and end of election. Hence it is evident how wickedly some vile unprincipled men prattle, when they seek to make gratuitous election an excuse for all licentiousness; as though, forsooth! we may sin with impunity, because we have been predestinated to righteousness and holiness!

    For if ye do these things. Peter seems again to ascribe to the merits of works, that God furthers our salvation, and also that we continually persevere in his grace. But the explanation is obvious; for his purpose was only to shew that hypocrites have in them nothing real or solid, and that, on the contrary, they who prove their calling sure by good works, are free from the danger of falling, because sure and sufficient is the grace of God by which they are supported. Thus the certainty of our salvation by no means depends on us, as doubtless the cause of it is beyond our limits. But with regard to those who feel in themselves the efficacious working of the Spirit, Peter bids them to take courage as to the future, because the Lord has laid in them the solid foundation of a true and sure calling.

    He explains the way or means of persevering, when he says, an entrance shall be ministered to you. The import of the words is this: "God, by ever supplying you abundantly with new graces, will lead you to his own kingdom." And this was added, that we may know, that though we have already passed from death into life, yet it is a passage of hope; and as to the fruition of life, there remains for us yet a long journey. In the meantime we are not destitute of necessary helps. Hence Peter obviates a doubt by these words, "The Lord will abundantly supply your need, until you shall enter into his eternal kingdom." He calls it the kingdom of Christ, because we cannot ascend to heaven except under his banner and guidance." (John Calvin)

    There... now you know Calvin did not forget to read this verse... happy? [​IMG]

    2Pe 1:10 esv Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall.

    ... and now you know that this particular Calvinist did not forget to read it either... [​IMG]

    blessings,
    Ken
     
  2. rsr

    rsr <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    11,850
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am sorry you found it so offensive. I was indeed simply turning nepetreley's argument on its head. He calls it "mocking"; I simply wanted to point out that predestinarians are not immune from pride and that his sweeping opinion that all free-willers want to take some credit for their salvation is just that — an opinion.
     
  3. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  4. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    No, predestinarians are not immune from pride. No one is immune to pride. But the Biblical view of election leaves no room for pride or boasting. If a predestinarian is prideful, he errs as to his interpretation of scripture.

    Free willism, on the other hand, cannot escape pride and boasting, because by definition it attributes the turning point of salvation to one's own decision.
     
  5. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think what npetreley points out is that when a Calvinist is prideful it is inconsistent with his doctrine, but when a non-Calvinist is prideful it is consistent (whether conscious or not on behalf of the individual) with his doctrine.
     
  6. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    Thank you. That's indeed what I am saying. I wish I put it as simply as you did. ;)
     
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you. That's indeed what I am saying. I wish I put it as simply as you did. ;) </font>[/QUOTE]For any and all:
    Arminian, Baptist, Calvinist, Disciple, Episcopalian, to whatever and beyond, from Aaron to Zwingli- any questions??

    In His grace,
    Ed
     
  8. All about Grace

    All about Grace New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually this is not entirely true. Many of the Calvinists with whom I interact tend to view life with a "boys club" mentality -- I am in - you are not. This mentality naturally lends itself to pride. Some of the most arrogant Christians of my experience have been Calvinists (as evidenced by the posts in this very thread regarding fleshly non-Calvinists). There is also an innate danger within Calvinism to advance theological dogma into other areas such as methodology. Although my beliefs regarding salvation are extremely God-centered, I am often criticized sharply by Calvinists for methods they deem inappropriate.

    And regarding the "pride" of a non-Calvinists who boasts in their own decision, another misconception. Calvinists and non-Calvinists should both recognize salvation was ultimately provided by God through the death of Christ. Even in a non-Calvinistic system God still made the first move. There is no self-pride in that fundamental truth. Pride enters the picture one step removed from this basic truth upon which sides must agree.

    You do not have to move beyond the Baptist Board to experience what can be perceived as pride from both Calvinists and non-Calvinists, and yes I'll even throw in myself -- after all I am more right than anyone :D
     
  9. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    You are right. I think so often a person who resorts to personal attacks is weak in their faith and finds it hard to deal with disagreement and be patient with those who are different. They are threatened by someone who may rock their boat a little. Often they may feel insecure and that their world may be rocked and coause them the pain of not having answers.

    We will win many more when we listen more and pray. By listening we are better able to intellignetly answer questions people have. When we listen they will open up more.
     
  10. epistemaniac

    epistemaniac New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    0
    some more thoughts on boasting....

    Eph 2:8-9 LITV For by grace you are saved, through faith, and this not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; (9) not of works, that not anyone should boast;"

    it seems that Paul is saying that the very faith that we exercise is, itself, a gift from God.... and that this is precisely what prevents anyone from boasting...

    saving faith is not the mere "acceptance" of a gift, and that is why it ought to be excluded from boasting from the Arminian perspective... because in the end, in the Arminian scheme, you had to be wise enough to take the gift, you had to know that it was a gift and that it was something you wanted... but this willingness is the very thing that Calvinism feels the Bible says is not present in fallen man.

    Joh 5:38-40 LITV And you do not have His Word abiding in you, for the One whom that One sent, this One you do not believe. (39) You search the Scriptures, for you think in them you have everlasting life. And they are the ones witnessing concerning Me. (40) And you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.


    from the Calvinistic point of view, saving faith is the result a fundamental change in the will, caused by God which, in turn causes saving faith to spring forth from what was previously a dead heart, ie God's taking out the heart of stone and placing in it's stead, a heart of flesh... causing new life, indeed, bringing to the fore the full meaning of what it means to be born again, quite apart from themselves, being born from above by the Spirit and not their own flesh...

    and so to return to the gift analogy, the offering of a gift would mean very little to a person who was dead, the dead don't recieve gifts, they do not have the ability to...

    whereas Arminianism teaches that the faith that one exercises is something that they themselves decided to do, it was their decision... yes... grace is there... it is involved... but ultimately the faith that one exercises is the final and ultimate result of what they themselves did, and that is why (in the opinion of some Calvinists) that there is the possibility of boasting... because hey... at least they had the common sense, or the depth of spirituality, or whatever else "it" was that was within them that caused them to believe, and it is this (whatever it was inside of them that made them decide to believe) that separates them from their fellow man who does not believe.....

    for the Calvinist, when we look inside to see why it is that we believed and why it is that our fellow man, who might be smarter, more spiritual, more whatever then we are... did not believe... we have to say, it (saving faith) must have come as the result of some outside objective activity done on our behalf, something or rather, Someone outside of us that caused us to believe, because in and of ourselves, we are nothing and less than nothing, we would have never come to savingly believe if it had been left up to us.. we are hopeless lost sinners without God....

    Eph 2:12 LITV that at that time you were without Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers of the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world."

    so it is God who gives the granting of repentance to whom He will...2Ti 2:25 LITV in meekness teaching those who have opposed, if perhaps God may give them repentance for a full knowledge of the truth,"

    and His choice is not based on anything inherent, anything inside of the sinner themselves, not even their choosing Him, rather He chooses according to His good pleasure and inscrutable will, again... not based on anything inside of us... not our running, not even our willing to believe...

    Rom 9:15-16 ESV For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." (16) So then it (the granting of God's mercy) depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy."

    I realize that the Arminian disagrees with this assessment, but this is why, from our perspective anyway, we think that the Arminian would have a reason to boast whereas there is no such room in the Calvinistic perspective. Salvation is, from first to last, of the Lord.

    blessings,
    Ken
     
  11. genesis12

    genesis12 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    799
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ne'er the twain shall meet. It is an exercise in futility, both extremes failing to understand that all scripture is spiritually discerned. How is it possible for debate to exist in the presence of that Truth?

    I answer my own question: Most of us are operating in the flesh in these forums. Few are operating from the imparted spirit.

    One can [​IMG] about that, or
    One can [​IMG] simply turn it off, or

    start a non-debate forum elsewhere, where God is Supreme; in the Person of Jesus King of Kings and Lord of Lords; and in the Person of the Holy Spirit, the Divine arbiter of all that is precious.
     
  12. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don't know anyone like that but I'll take your word for it. The problem is that prideful attitude you speak of is not based in the soteriology of Calvinism. If anyone is "in" it is because they were chosen by God, chosen not because of anything they had within themselves or had to offer, nor because of anything they did. This is doctrinal. Any pride in a Calvinist that surfaces as a "we're in and you're not" would go against his doctrine, because he can't take credit for having anything whatsoever to do with the fact that he is in.

    And nobody said there was. The pride comes in when you believe that you make the difference by your own free will decision to accept what Christ has done. This is doctrinal. The pride is right there in the doctrine (and I believe is actually responsible for the doctrine, but that's another story). He can, according to his own doctrine, take credit for having made the right decision.
     
  13. All about Grace

    All about Grace New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Messages:
    1,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    Go to any Calvinistic forum on the web (or just stick around BB). Re-read this very thread. Calvinists have a tendency to display a spirit that suggests they have figured it all out theologically.

    The more I have learned the more I recognize how much bigger God is than any human system we try to pin on Him.

    Calvinism is a box. Like it or not, Calvinism is a box that puts God within a human system (just like Arminianism or any other system is). Theology is always one step removed from revelation (and even experience at times), therefore it will always be limited by human interpretation. Therefore theological systems will always fall short in the sense they are finite explanations of an infinite God.

    I agree with this assessment. Quick question: at the moment of your salvation, did you believe you were turning from your sins to God? Did you believe you were committing your life to Jesus Christ in faith?

    And again I ask ... at the moment you placed your faith in Christ, did you believe you were making the "right decision"?
     
  14. Calvibaptist

    Calvibaptist New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    0
    doulos,

    By vitriol, do you mean "sulfuric acid?" Or are you speaking of the secondary definition of vitriol?

    I am not sure that I have seen a lot of "bitter abusiveness" which is the secondary definition, in these threads. There has been a lot of pride (myself included) and a lot of sarcasm. I would say that sarcasm is inherent in a debate.

    Pride should be left out of any Christian, but we are all susceptible to it and need to repent. For that reminder, this thread is appreciated.
     
  15. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Calvinism or the Doctrines of Grace are nothing more than a series of truth claims regarding sotierology. Everyone makes truth claims about sotierology or any other aspect of theology. Your quote above is a truth claim, one that I generally agree with. No human can exhaustively understand the depths and the riches of God. I doubt if we will even comprehend it all when we get to heaven. There will always be a Creator-creature distinction that is too big for us to ever completely apprehend. Bottom line, everyone has a system of theology, everyone makes truth claims about the Bible and what it means.

    Regarding your question of what I thought when I was saved - yes, it did feel like I made a decision to trust Christ...because I actually did make that decision. But after I read the Scriptures more and more and grew in Christ, I began to see that my decision was not caused by my own good will...but that I was saved by grace. That's all. I don't get mad at people if they don't agree with my views on the matter. I understand why someone would reject the Doctrines, since I used to be among them. And I also realize that this is just one part of the Christian life. I know there are other areas in my Christian growth that many Arminians would put me to shame on, because they are far ahead of me in those areas. So the C/A debate is not the end all be all test of Christian maturity. I think it is fun to debate and interact with the differing ideas, but I do not resent or look down on others who disagree with me, even though I still think they're wrong (otherwise, I would believe differently).
     
  16. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    One other thing to add. What probably bothers me the most in these debates and causes me to stumble sometimes in my love for the other person, is when he does not even lend credence to the Doctrines of Grace or when he ascribes evil, ill-will or stupidity to believing the Doctrines. Like I said, I understand the non-Calvinist position. I even think it is reasonable. But even when I was a non-Calvinist for years, I usually lended credence to the Calvinist position. I never laughed it off or thought it was from the pit of hell. I always thought that here are two competing, reasonable interpretations of Scripture, and both sides are represented by godly men and women. I guess that's what can get my ire in these debates - that and when someone creates a strawman of Hyper-Calvinism and starts bashing it.

    [ April 26, 2006, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: Andy T. ]
     
  17. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    When I saw "why the vitriol", I thought we were discussing the benefits and cons of synthetic motor oil. Oh well... :D
     
  18. doulous

    doulous New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    0
    Webdog, I sell lubricants for a living and I can tell you that the "vitriol" in in here would corrode even the best engine. [​IMG]
     
  19. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    What does that have to do with "I'm in and you're not"? I thought we were talking about the saved vs. the unsaved. The free willer's pride extends from the fact that he attributes his salvation to his own choice. Either you were unclear about what you meant by "I'm in and you're not", or I suspect you're backpedaling now because you don't really know of Calvinists who have an elitist "I was chosen and you weren't" attitude.

    Of course.

    Yes.

    At the time, I didn't even give any thought to whether or not I made a decision of my own free will, or whether God had changed my heart.

    Here's how the whole free will thing played out for me.

    I had read Mere Christianity, which taught free will. Then I started going to church, and the preachers taught free will. Being a babe in Christ, and not knowing the Bible very well, I just bought into that doctrine.

    The funny thing is that anyone who knew me before and after could have told you that there had to be something more to this than free will. It was practically overnight that I went from being an evangelical atheist with outspoken hatred for God and Christians -- to a Bible-believing Jesus freak. When it happened, I honestly didn't know what brought about this radical change. I just bought into what people told me. They said I reached out and took the offer of salvation, so I figured that's what I did. It made me feel good to think that I did that of my own free will, which made the doctrine that much easier to swallow.

    I've told the rest of this story before: I'm a writer. So I decided to write an apologetics piece, and the foundation of it was based on free will. I couldn't finish it because at every turn scripture refused to backup the point I was trying to make.

    To make a long story short, I either had to ignore what the Bible said, or face the fact that the Bible taught election. I had to give up my notion of salvation by free will choice and abandon the apologetics piece. Later, I read Martin Luther's Bondage of the Will, and it simply reaffirmed everything I had learned from the Bible.

    Now - in retrospect - given that I've learned how election works, I can tell you that it is obvious to me from what I experienced that God had opened my eyes and ears and changed my heart, and that my decision -- though it was a very real decision -- did not amount to God offering me a free will choice to accept Him or not.
     
  20. genesis12

    genesis12 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    799
    Likes Received:
    1
    If I follow this correctly, those who believe that they decided to accept the call of the Holy Spirit to receive Jesus as Savior are "way ahead" in some areas of Christianity , but not this one, in that they are wrong .

    Continuing: One does not look down upon those who are wrong, who are, on the other hand, mature in Christ .

    Now......

    That being the case, what difference does it make if Calvinists believe, Andy T., that you were saved all along, just simply became aware of it, or as non-Calvinists, we believe we answered YES when we were called, and it was by the grace of God through faith in His promise that we were saved?

    It seems that you've indicated that all who become aware of grace, who were "the elect", and all who say YES to God's grace, are saved, since you label the Arminians as "way ahead" and "mature," even though they are wrong in how they were saved. If that's correct, then the debate is over, as it certainly should be, in this or any other forum.

    I remember the time when I made the decision to commit my life to Jesus Christ, not out of the blue (it is NEVER an intellectual decision; NEVER a product of "good will"), but in response to His call, His continuing to call me, even though I continued to resist. When I finally submitted , He, remaining true to His promise, imparted the Holy Spirit. A spirit of righteousness was implanted, to do battle with the flesh, the world, the pre-conceived notions and ideas of one who was without Christ. I became the righteousness of God in Christ, not based upon what I did, but solely upon His grace. I could have said NO, but I didn't, eventually. It was His calling and His response to me that saved me. It was all because of His amazing grace. I was a wretch, without Christ, lost, blind, but now I see.
    ;)
     
Loading...