Confessions of a non calvinist.

Sorry, I must respectfully disagree. (Not about you going to bed - please go get some rest.)

The one who is deep in the Word is also wise in the ways of the Lord. One cannot be wise in the ways of the Lord without also being deep in the Word. There are pseudo-intellectuals who are deep in something else, but I don't think that's what Tim was talking about in the OP, so I wish you had made that distinction clearer.

Good night.

 

I really do not want to participate in another C vs A debate (what, about 100 this month? ), but this kind of statement always hits me the wrong way. It is as if only Calvinists knew about God's grace, and no one else had a doctrine of God's grace.

Tell you what, meet me over in the Missions/Evangelism thread and put your money where your mouth is. Calvinists, stop talking about salvation and tell me what you have actually done about it!! I never see any BB Calvinists over in that delightful thread. </font>[/QUOTE]1. I haven't done anything about other peoples', or even my own salvation. This was all done by the power of God (1 Corinthians 2:1-5).

2. God has used me, however, by his own sovereign will, to preach the Biblical, non-seeker sensitive, non-relevant Gospel to the lost of this world (1 Corinthians 1:18-31). Some have been saved by God's amazing grace which reaches beyond their total depravity and changes their free will to want to choose Jesus.

3. Your problem is that you put the cart before the horse, as I believe most Arminians do. You believe missions is more important than doctrine, and therefore turn to a pragmatic win 'em at any cost plan of evangelism regardless of what Scripture teaches. As a Calvinist, I believe we should start with good doctrine which should lead is into Biblical evangelism. We are not to do this on our own power, but in the power of God. I don't see many free-willers who do that because they are too busy striving on their own and in their own power to win them at any cost, including compromising the message of the Bible because it is not seeker sensitive, relevant to the culture, or it doesn't make them feel good about the God they worship or the fate of mankind. If we start with sound doctrine, we will be led out of obedience to Christ, who is our master, to share the Gospel and then rely on the Holy Spirit to convict them of their sin and not allow his Word to return empty. He will save all whom he wills to save.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I really do not want to participate in another C vs A debate (what, about 100 this month? ), but this kind of statement always hits me the wrong way. It is as if only Calvinists knew about God's grace, and no one else had a doctrine of God's grace.

Tell you what, meet me over in the Missions/Evangelism thread and put your money where your mouth is. Calvinists, stop talking about salvation and tell me what you have actually done about it!! I never see any BB Calvinists over in that delightful thread. </font>[/QUOTE]1. I haven't done anything about other peoples', or even my own salvation. This was all done by the power of God (1 Corinthians 2:1-5).

2. God has used me, however, by his own sovereign will, to preach the Biblical, non-seeker sensitive, non-relevant Gospel to the lost of this world (1 Corinthians 1:18-31). Some have been saved by God's amazing grace which reaches beyond their total depravity and changes their free will to want to choose Jesus.

3. Your problem is that you put the cart before the horse, as I believe most Arminians do. You believe missions is more important than doctrine, and therefore turn to a pragmatic win 'em at any cost plan of evangelism regardless of what Scripture teaches. As a Calvinist, I believe we should start with good doctrine which should lead is into Biblical evangelism. We are not to do this on our own power, but in the power of God. I don't see many free-willers who do that because they are too busy striving on their own and in their own power to win them at any cost, including compromising the message of the Bible because it is not seeker sensitive, relevant to the culture, or it doesn't make them feel good about the God they worship or the fate of mankind. If we start with sound doctrine, we will be led out of obedience to Christ, who is our master, to share the Gospel and then rely on the Holy Spirit to convict them of their sin and not allow his Word to return empty. He will save all whom he wills to save.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]You, sir, are making some huge assumptions about me, and I resent it.

(1) I am not an Arminian.
(2) I absolutely do not believe missions is more important than doctrine.
(3) I absolutely do not believe in a "pragmatic win 'em at any cost plan of evangelism."
(4) I absolutely do believe in the power of the Holy Spirit to do His work, and do not strive to do it in my own power.
(5) I absolutely do NOT try to make the Gospel relevant to the Japanese culture.

In the future, try not to attribute positions to those you disagree with before you discover whether or not you actually disagree with them.

 

Does this also apply to non-Calvinists who insist that Calvinists don't do evangelism well enough, and who challenge Calvinists to "stop talking about salvation and tell me what you have actually done about it!!"

 

That is quite a telling statement. Hint: I don't think that helps the non-calvinist position.

You reckon Calvinist might resent this statement?

I find calvinism to be without love. Not just the message but the people as a whole. They seem to worship intellectalism which is so major in their lives that they try to out intellectalise, (word, I don't know) each other to the extend they come up with such stupid statements that lack all common sense.

Apparently that statement didn’t bother you enough to rant against it.

What, hypocrisy among non-calvinist? Never!

 

Does this also apply to non-Calvinists who insist that Calvinists don't do evangelism well enough, and who challenge Calvinists to "stop talking about salvation and tell me what you have actually done about it!!" </font>[/QUOTE]Why are you getting on me about this? I have not "insisted that Calvinists do not do evangelism well enough. I actually mentioned at one point on the BB my best friend, a Calvinist who is doing a wonderful job of evangelism.

 

John,

Did you read what you wrote earlier, or do you just not want to be held accountable for it?

Joseph Botwinick

 

Joseph, I think you are painting an inaccurate picture of non-Calvinists. I am not a Calvinist (nor an Arminian but I am not going there) but I believe sound doctrine is essential. In fact, I've been studying apologetics and one of my points is that Christians need to use their mind in Bible study, doctrine, missions, etc. I know many, many other non-Calvinists like this as well.

You seem to have something against the seeker senstive people and are putting all non-Calvinists over there. It seems you are making false assumptions about a lot of non-Calvinists.

 

Just my experience and observation in general. BTW, I notice that you had nothing to say about the ugly generalizations about Calvinists made in this thread. I wonder why.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I don't mean to get on you, I was just asking. It looked like a double standard to me. So what was behind your challenging Calvinists to prove to you what they have done evangelistically?

 

Okay, J. D., that's fine. Now tell me what God used to lead you to obey the Great Commission. Do you ever actually talk about salvation to sinners as well as lost people? Meet me in the Missions/Evangelism thread. </font>[/QUOTE]John, the problem with a forum is anonymity. You don't know me. You've attacked a calvinist boogy-man. I could easily fill all the other forums with my opinions and experiences. I readily admit that since my conversion to 5 points I have been obssessed with calvinist soteriology. And I don't see that changing any time soon.

And BTW I certainly don't speak for any other calvinist in this forum on that issue. Most of them post on a variety of subjects. I will occasionally post on a different subject myself.

If the Lord should grant be a pastorate or wider teaching ministry some day, then I will certainly broaden my focus to meet the need. But for now, the only thing I can think of is how the doctrine of synergism, and what's more, the ignorant pelagian words of people who have the gall to give themselves the title of "biblicist", smears the omnipotence of almighty God.

John, if I wrote a book similar to Hyles' "Great Soul-Winning Experiences", a book I happen to love, I guess that would make me o.k. in your eyes. As far as I'm concerned, this makes you about the same as Bob Gray, who exercises no shame in glorying in his own works, exalting himself to popedom, and roundly condemning anyone that does not join in his boasting behavior. Now you might not be as prone to it as he is, nevertheless, you hold the same root philosophy. You are thoroughly arminian though you deny it, excepting the fifth point of the remonstransts. My fear is that you, as many of today's arminians, are at least in part Pelagian in your views. How is that? You make the work of God, that is, salvation and more specifically regeneration, the work of man; even a natural process rather than supernatural.

I would like to find a forum where I can engage in debate with someone that (1)knows what their own church or confession teaches and (2) would like to engage in serious thought over these issues, not just sling pejoratives over their opponent during a theological drive-by shooting. John, I know that you know what you believe, but some here do not. And I think you try to avoid drive-by's, but you come pretty close to that sometimes.


J.D.
God' Puppet/Robot

 

Joseph, I will say that I am against any ugly generalizations about anyone. That is one reason I don't like the Calvinist-non-Calvinist threads - they seem to play to stereotypes and generalizations and it just goes on and on. But I guess I am more sensitive to the statements of Calvinists about those who disagree with them because I am not a Calvinist.

I read these threads occasionally anyway to give myself the chance to change my mind, but so far, if anything, the Calvinists have only convinced me to not be a Calvinist.

Well, tomorrow is Sunday and so I quit earlier on Saturday nights. Good night!

 

I'm convinced that no one blinded by human sentimentality will ever accept God's absolute sovereignty (even his eternal power and Godhead). May God remove the scales from your eyes.


J.D.
God's Puppet/Robot

 

I don't mean to get on you, I was just asking. It looked like a double standard to me. So what was behind your challenging Calvinists to prove to you what they have done evangelistically? </font>[/QUOTE]If you had gone and looked at the Missionary/Witnessing/Evangelism thread, you would know. It was a simple request for fellowship. I was not trying to attack Calvinists, I was simply making the point that I don't see you guys there.

Seems like this would be a perfect chance for Calvinists to prove that yes, they do evangelism and yes, God uses them at it! So I urge you, whatever, meet me there and share how God uses you!

 

I didn't attack you. I invited you. Go to the thread I have set up for Calvinists, and fellowship with me.

 

I am perfectly willing to held accountable for anything I've written. Just don't invent positions for me I don't hold.

 

Originally posted by 4His_glory:

Amen, brother--and you posted a good one there!

 

I find calvinism to be without love. You know why this is true? Because you expect it. This is what you are looking for. You find Calvinism to be without love because you expect it to be without love.

 

Forgive me, I'm trying not to be offensive, but this sounds all mixed up to me. First you talk about how this forum is anonymous, then you claim to know what I believe, comparing me to Bob Gray, who I've never met and know little about. (I assume you mean the upstart in Texas rather than the grand old Fundamentalist from Florida who became a wonderful missionary after retiring from the pastorate as an old man.) The Bible forbids such comparisons, so frankly I don't compare myself to anyone but my Lord Jesus Christ, and of course I fall far short there, as we all do.

You claim I am completely Arminian. Huh? Where in the world did you get that? This forum is anonymous, remember? I've never posted my beliefs either way on the Internet, and I don't feel I have to to please some anonymous Calvinist. My Lord Jesus Christ, my mission board, my supporters and the church I shepherd know what I am, and I am content with that.

For all you know I could be a 4 point Calvinist, though I freely admit I am not a 5-pointer, and I am certainly not an Arminian by any definition, though you have basically called me a liar on that. I don't remember ever interacting with you on this or any other forum, or ever seeing you in my Bible institute classes here in Japan. So where did you learn about my beliefs?

I have called myself a Biblicist on the BB, I admit that. And you say one who has "the gall to give themselves the title of 'biblicist,' smears the omnipotence of almighty God." Huh? What in the world does that mean? I don't have a clue what you are talking about here. I guess then that "Bible-believer," the favorite term of Machen (a Calvinist), would be out, too, huh?

Would you force me to be either a 5-point Arminian or a 5-point Calvinist? Forget it! I believe in the priesthood of the believer, and I will call myself whatever I want and I will believe what I think is right.

 

What is your concise definition of God's "absolute sovereignty" as it relates to the will God has given man?