If you are not a Calvinist or an Arminian ...

after rereading my last post my heart got a little heavy about perhaps having a less then loving attitude in the ongoing discussion...one of the last things i ever want to see in myself is a less then humble and loving spirit...people can disagree and still love each other especially as believers who all share in the same saving faith...im sorry....

 

I agree that no one should follow the teachings of John Calvin or any man. We look upon Bible expositors as tools to help us understand God's Word better while realizing that they are just as fallible as anyone else. I consider Charles Haddon Spurgeon to be the greatest preacher this side of the New Testament era but even he wasn't perfect.

I try to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and Him alone.

Ken
A Happy Spurgeonite
www.spurgeon.org

 

Who's putting a limit on the sovereignty of God ?
Not Calvinists. We state that God's sovereignty is such that He can choose to have mercy on whom He will, and compassion on whom He will, and who can stay His hand ?
He can choose to destroy all fallen mankind and if He does, mankind deserves it anyway. And He can instead raise up the stones and rocks and mountains to be children of faith. But instead He chose to bestow mercy on many of fallen humankind.
On the other hand, you define His sovereignty according to your understanding and your interpretation and have no scriptures in context to support your statements.

 

let it rest already...dont you read my other threads addressing your previous post elsewhere? the discussion is redundant at this point...

 

A more Biblical approach portrays God's sovereignty not as a dictatorship. If He sends most to Hell, He is a cruel and unloving God.

Dr. Norman Geisler calls this view Monergism and Extreme Calvinism.

 

Salvation is monergistic - it is entirely the work of God.

Damnation is monergistic - it is entirely the work of man.

Ken
A Happy Spurgeonite
www.spurgeon.org

 

Okay, Doug. We'll let it rest. No offense.

 

I've just read all five pages of this thread. My wife says that there are other more enlightening things I could do with my life other that what I just did.

Here's the "Skinny" from my perch! Back in '87 while I was at NOBTS--I was tricked into attending a little "get-together" Bible study. Sort of like being tricked into one of thos Amway meetings! "My wife and I are having a little get-together this Tuesday nite . . . refreshments . . . good time . . . new business . . . (Warning! Warning! Will Robinson! Danger! Extreme danger, Will Robinson!) . . . !"

Anyway, I went with Bible in hand. Turns out it was one of those "Calvin" meetings I had heard campus rumor about!

Looking back to that day--I wonder now(2002AD)--exactly why we were meeting in a back campus dormroom--I mean, if it were that important why were we not meeting over in Dr. Leavell's Living Room? And why, oh why, did the dorm room door have to be locked? Were Hitler's StormTroopers lurking about? Stalin's KGB? After about 10 minutes I had heard enough. Seminary Presidents were being comdemned. Evangelism profs were damned! Theology profs didn't have a chance! I didn't go to my second meeting! All of this from a bunch of "Know-it-all" seminary students.

I've learned this about folks who give their study time in limits to Calvin--they all have a desire to be as sovereign as God Almighty Himself. And God rest the poor souls on this thread like Helen from page 1! The Calvinists will get on their little spiritual bulldozers and push her to the side just like they do those seminary profs!

I was able to convince one guy there that we have to be careful in studying Calvin--being as to how he is a little less than infallible and inerrant! He agreed and we are the best of friends since that seminary day way back in '87!

I have better things to do with my study time than to be reading 5 pages of nothing--God's word teaches me to get off of this thread and let the "know-it-alls" keep thinking they know it all! (1 Timothy 6:3-5)

 

blackbird,

Does this mean that you are one of those WIDE LOAD Arminian, Christians like me?

We probably still need to hear what you have learned through your rough and tumble with other reflective believers. Will you reconsider?

Your brother in the faith.

Ray Berrian, Th.D.

 

So have I.

Yea, but what do wives know! [Don't tell her I said that. ]

After forcing myself through five pages of this stuff, I have the following observations:
1. Calvinism and Arminianism, while convenient labels, are not sufficient to cover the broad diversity of beliefs among Christians. Just because some may think these are the only two consistent positions doesn't make them the only two positions. Why should someone who holds two or three points of Calvinism be called a Calvinist? Why should someone who holds two or three points of Arminianism be called a Arminian? If we water down the labels thusly, doesn't it make them meaningless?
2. It is easier to label someone and then argue against what they are supposed to believe, rather than deal with what they actually believe. The labels may be a rough starting point, but there is a greater need to deal with specific points of belief.
3. People in the Calvinism/Arminianism debate have a tendency to charge one another with denying the sovereignty of God. Debate the sovereignty of God rather than accusing those who believe differently of denying God's sovereignty. Maybe even define it! For example, the "Calvinists" say if you believe all can be saved, you're denying God's sovereignty. The "Arminians" say if you don't believe God can save all men, you're denying God's sovereignty. And around and around we go. Does God's sovereignty mean more than that He can and will do as He pleases, and who are we to question it?

Finally, as someone who comes down on the Calvinistic side (total inability, unconditional election, specific atonement, effectual call, and eternal salvation), I have found offensive over the years a tendency among Calvinists that says, "If you studied the Bible more and knew more, you would be a Calvinist." Yes, total inability to do anything about one's salvation and complete dependence on God for that salvation is humbling; but, for some reason, some Calvinists are not humble. Sorry, brethren, that's the way I've experienced it out here in the real world (and sometimes in the internet world). I don't mean to say there aren't arrogant Arminians. But, hey, they deserve to be - they've worked for it.

 

If people would just think, the Bible was not written by Arminius or Calvin. Isn't there something in the Bible that tells us that the Holy Spirit guided the ready writers? [II Timothy 3:16a] That's why is is not good to simply accept one position or the other or the teaching you first have been taught. Studying the Word takes time and will not allow you to bow at the shrine of either of these men. Bowing to God the Spirit would be a good first step.

 

I should get browie points for this cut n paste...This is a real good one, Ken. It can be found in Real Audio at the Mount Zion page.

There was a young man, who is now a student for the ministry, so extraordinarily ignorant was he of his own Bible, that upon hearing a young minister mention the story of Nebuchadnezzar's being driven out from men, until his nails did grow like birds' claws, and his hair like eagles' feathers, he said to the minister at the close of the sermon, "Well, that was a queer story you told the people, certainly: where did you fish that up?" "Why," said the minister, "have you never read your Bible? Can you not find it in the Book of Daniel?"

The young man had read a great many other things, but never read his Bible through, and yet was going to be a teacher of it! Now, I fear that the same ignorance is very current in many persons. They do not know what is in the Bible: they could tell you what is in the Churchman's Penny, or the Christian's Penny, or the Churchman's Magazine, or the Wesleyan Magazine, or the Baptist Magazine, or the Evangelical Magazine, and all that; but there is one old magazine, a magazine of arms, a magazine of wealth, that they forget to read—that old-fashioned book called the Bible.

CH Spurgeon, Search the scriptures, January 17, 1858 at the Music Hall, Royal Surrey Gardens

[ August 01, 2002, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: absturzen ]

 

"What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy." (Rom. 9:14-16)

"Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" (Rom. 9:18-21)

Ray, why do you have such a problem with God and His sovereignty? Christians must be balanced in their interpretations of the word of God, and I am sure you agree with that. Being balanced means teaching the love of God as well as the hatred of God. Some Arminians teach love and not hate just like some Calvinists teach hate and no love, but that is not being balanced. To teach God does not hate anyone is to deny the clear teaching of the Holy Scriptures which teach He does. Do you mean to tell me God is going to throw those in His left hand into hell whom He loves as much as those on His right whom He will take with Him to heaven? Do you believe Romans 8 teaches that nothing can separate anyone from the love of God? Who is the "us" who cannot be separated from the love of God?

 

Yes, I believe that God gave man free will. And every one of us chose to go the other way! All we like sheep have gone astray. Romans 3:10-19 aptly describes the result of our free will. But we don’t come back to God by free will. We come back by His mercy and grace..... and some of us come back with great reluctance, kicking and screaming. Had God not pulled some of us out of our tailspin.... we would still be headed for that certain destruction.
The first choice was man’s and he chose wrong. The final choice was God’s and He has never failed to save a single soul He has purposed to save. I was recently asked how I arrived at my views on the Sovereignty of God... and it is simple, I read the book.
I, for one, don’t believe that we choose what we believe. I believe that we are given what
we believe. Just as with my diet.... I didn’t chose what would taste good and what would
taste bad. It just does. And trying to believe something tastes good makes it no more palatable than before.
The Gospel is unpalatable to the unsaved. I make a destinction between the unsaved and the lost.... that most people don’t make. The unsaved are eternally damned and will never recieve the Gospel. The lost are saved and don’t know it yet.
Jesus plainly states, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:”
Yet he plainly tell another group, “Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.” They couldn’t hear his word because they were not his sheep.”
The very next verse states, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye
will do.”
Was it their choice not to hear??? Was it their choice not to believe???
John 12:39-40 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.

THEREFORE THEY COULD NOT BELIEVE..........

Maybe we need to review some old lessons.....
Dan 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?

By the way I don't follow Calvin. I follow the Word of God!

 

Brother Tom I believe you took the words right out of my mouth and left me speechless. This Primitive Baptist can't find any fault in what you said and the way you said it. Are you sure deep down you are not one of us?... Brother Glen

 

Amen. A great quote to begin a new month with.

Ken
A Spurgeonite
www.spurgeon.org

 

The first teaching I've been taught was that of Arminians. I went to an Arminian Bible School.
What is not good is to stay in a teaching when the Spirit of God clearly shows you it is not correct.
The Roman Catholics in my country put it this way:
born a Catholic, lived a Catholic, will die a
Catholic/

No Calvinist or Arminian in this board bowed down to Arminius or to Calvin. The Arminians sincerely believe their doctrine, and it just happened to be well-constructed doctrinally by the Remonstrance, and the Calvinists sincerely believe their doctrines and it so happened Calvin so eloquently expounded the Doctrines of Grace.

 

Here again is the problem. People are bouncing back and forth between saying that God chooses who is damned out of His sovereign will, and that it is only the damned's own choice. But this "choice" is "given" them by God (which once again has Him electing people to Hell. But then that phrase is vehemently denied).
For one thing, if "blinding" necessarily means the reprobation if individuals, but people really "blinded" themselves by their own wrong choice, then God would not have to "blind" them.
The people on Christ's right hand may have once been on His left hand, and those who are now not His sheep can become His sheep. (A lot of people Christ was speaking to, who even went on to have part in having Him crucified, would later repent at the preaching of the apostles in Acts. Not all, of course, but at least some). So these passages cannot be used to delineate eternal reprobates.
Also, "lost" does seem to refer to those bound for Hell in passages like 1 Cor.1:18, 2 Cor.2:15, 16, 4:3

 

Show me in Romans chapter nine where God sovereignly and autocratically elects some to Heaven and Hell. We have already explained that Esau was in a covenant relationship with the Lord at least a relationship that was strong enough to get him named among the heroes of the Christian faith. [Heb. 11:20] Pharaoh also was elbow to elbow with Moses and could have inquired about the Hebrew God. He missed his opportunity because of pride of race, position in government and his own pagan religion. Enough said.

The problem with Calvinism is they are way top-heavy on sovereignty and neglect the other attributes of the living God. The makes for theological error and of the deepest dye. Some Christian theologies do not even include sovereignty as an attribute of God, but merely the way in which the Godhead works providentially in His world.

Respectfully to my Calvinistic brothers/sisters,

Berrian, Th.D.

 

Esau is mentioned there by not as any hero of faith. His character is described here:

(Heb 12:15-16 NKJV) looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled; {16} lest there be any fornicator or profane person like Esau, who for one morsel of food sold his birthright.

Regards,
Ken