The 1 Point of Calvinism

Two men are drowning and someone throws a lifeline to both of them. One decides of his own free will to grab it. One decides of his own free will NOT to grab it. Which of the two could boast that he was wiser/smarter/better than the other one? Which of the two would be alive to boast at all?

Or let me put it another way. A man is drowning, and someone throws out a life-line. The drowning man understands the situation and the consequences, and is able to grab the lifeline of his own free will. Why would he "decide" of his own free will NOT to grab it?

 

I would dare say the one who has been saved would not boast of anything. That would be arrogant. He would be grateful to the one who threw the life-line and sad that the other did not grab it.

That's the big question isn't it. Why would someone refuse to be saved in that situation, or in the situation where the Gospel is shared, the Spirit is working and that person resists the Spirit of God. Why would he decide--I don't know, but it happens all the time.

I would dare say if everyone was totally honest on this board very few responded to the Spirit of God the first time they heard the Gospel. The Spirit for most of us continued to drawn us and convict us and convince us until the day we humbled ourselve and responded to His call. And when we did we did not boast of how spiritual, smart, superior to those who did not respond. We were and are eternally grateful for the free gift of salvation brought to us completely by God. My salvation is 100% a result of His work and His gift of grace offered to me. I just accepted what He freely offered. Praise Him----No credit to me. If that cannot be understood, I don't think my vocabulary can explain it any clearer.

Bro Tony

 

quote;
Either you were saved by a process that involves 200%, or you have to share the glory 50/50 with God. Far be it from me to prevent you from claiming 50% of the glory. I know where to place my bets, though, as to whether you get it.

Your statements all come with such a slant to calvinism I find myself leaning in my chair to answer them.

Salvation involves a Saviour and a soul in need of salvation.

Thus we have a transaction. The Saviour offers and the souls accepts the offer or rejects the offer.
Salvation paid for 100% ny the Saviour.
Choosing to be saved 100% my choice.

I pity a person who is so caught up in himself that he or she considers them selves one of the elect and others not.
Then the same pitiful person accuses others of boasting.

Your problem sir or mam is PRIDE.
Coupled together with a very minimal understanding of the scripture PRIDE is a two headed snake that devours the hearts of the simple.

Now if you feel equipped (scriptually) to leave your little corner of the world here and go somewhere else to discuss some real scripture then consider this a challenge.

Feel free to lead the way to another portion of the board and I'll let you choose the scripture.
Nothing dealing with calvinism (I trust you know something other than calvinism). If you prefer I will select a passage and we can go head to head. Invite your friends. It should be a gas.

 

npetreley's posts contain a consistent strawman: that those that are saved are worthy of some some of "credit", or that they boast about their "achievement". Niether are consistent with reality. Nobody's trying to paint the one who accepts Jesus Christ as some sort of hero.

Plus, you utterly ignored Skandelon's post. Why would Jesus rebuke man for not having faith? And why would Paul credit Abraham for his faith?

 

That's the big question isn't it. Why would someone refuse to be saved in that situation, or in the situation where the Gospel is shared, the Spirit is working and that person resists the Spirit of God. Why would he decide--I don't know, but it happens all the time.</font>[/QUOTE]When you can figure out why it happens all the time, I think you'll see one very big reason why the Arminian position has no merit.

I do agree with the other person who said you're asking the wrong question, but I thought it important to illustrate that the "grabbing of the lifeline" requires action on our part, and that means we participate in our own salvation, and can take credit for that participation. Whether or not the person WOULD boast is irrelevant. The person has the RIGHT to boast vs. the person who was too stupid, stubborn, or whatever, to grab the lifeline.

 

There is no "thus". You assume that salvation is an "offer", rendering the rest of your post circular reasoning and untenable.

 

Oh, but it is relevant Nick!

Why? Because you want to apply passages that speak of boasting in salvation by works to those who hold to an Arminian theology as if they are one in the same when clearly they are not. Yes, works based salvation is wrong. Yes, boasting of anything in your salvation is wrong.

Key points to remember:
1. Arminians don't believe we are saved by works because we don't believe faith is a work. (neither did Paul)

2. Arminians believe it is wrong to boast for any part you played in your salvation.

Therefore, your accusations are straw men and completely unfounded.

 

It might be closer to the truth that neither are consistent with outward practice. But it is certainly a reality, even if only a private one. As one who once believed in free will, I know that I felt superior to those who made the wrong choice, and felt there was something different about me that I was smart/wise/something enough to choose rightly when others chose wrongly.

Arminians may not admit it without applying sodium pentathol, but I would bet that most, if not all Arminians feel the same way I did. They get away with nothing if they simply don't express that opinion openly, because it doesn't matter a bit if they boast before men. What matters is that they are boasting before God within their own heart.

I ignore all of Skandelong's posts for reasons of which he is perfectly aware. He is also perfectly aware of his error in claiming God credited Abraham in the way I'm speaking, and there's no sense pretending to have a legitimate debate about it.

 

Monergist are you basing your belief on one word of one passage? Why not look at the whole chapter?
Rom. 11
11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,

Elias wanted God to.

3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

Stay with it now.Don't stop here.

8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.
9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them:
10 Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

Ah so it's not so they fall but God has turned to the gentile dogs for a while to provoke Israel His chosen people.

12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.

Might? Might? But Paul if they are elect what is the might all about? Oh calvins election is a pipe dream huh?

15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.

So a few branches broken off and some branches able to be grafted in like a gentile dog perhaps.
Don't boast as a calvinist does about election!

19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:

Broken off because of unbelief? But according to calvin if they were not elect they could not believe. Hmm What kind of a birds nest is this? I'll tell you it's a bird nest built by someone who knows nothing about how to rightly divide scripture.
"Be not highminded but fear" Highminded as in we are the ELECT!

21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

Gentile dog.

22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.

Hmm if thou continue not in his goodness thou also shalt be cut off.
But what about the precious calvinistic elect?
Please, give me a break with all of this junk!

23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

"if".."if" What kind of calvinistic doctrine is "if" If they abide not still in unbelief God is able to graft them in again.
Well what do you know about that? They can of there own "freewill" abide in belief after not abiding in belief and God said he would graft them in again.

Now what kind of God would say that if they could not choose? A fairy tale god made up out of confusion and pride.

24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?
25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Don't be ignorant! Did you see what Paul said under the direction of the Holy Spirit? "Blindness in part has happened to Israel,until the fullness of the gentiles be come in."

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.
29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
So we once were in unbelief but we obtained mercy through their unbelief.

31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

You better study to shew thyself approved unto God.
34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

 

This is more of a testimony of your own pride Nick. Just as you once used to boast in your faith as an Arminian you now can boast in your surperior understanding of doctrine which is quite evident in the way you treat those who happen to disagree with you.

I have never once met anyone who has struggled with boasting in salvation by grace through faith, from the Arminian or the Calvinistic camp. I have however seen those who become quite prideful in their dogma. I think you are dealing with personal issue of pride and taking it out on us.

Yes, Brett I am aware of his reasons. He says I use "deceptive debate tactics." He can't list examples nor can he explain what he means by this but that is his reason. Truth be told its because I'm one of the few on this board who can see through his smoke screens and I am consistant in calling him on it. He just doesn't know how to respond to truth which is evident in the fact that he continues to avoid my posts. I challenge you to hold his feet to fire for a while, but beware if your at all knowledgable about the scripture and able to undermine his posts he will accuse and attack you personally and then ignore you.

So, apparently now there are differing ways of "crediting" men for their faith??? This is new to me. Sounds like a very legitimate question and its apparent that Nick is trying desperately to avoid the obvious contradiction with his dogma.

Brett, you may want to press him on this one yourself and then sit back and watch how he avoids it.

 

Faith is not a work. Placing faith, however, is a work. The Armininian view can't help but being legalistic in that it requires one to do something in order to be right with God. So then we have a 'New Law' that a man must keep; a 'New Law' that leads multitudes into the bondage of legalism and antinomianism.

Why is it that the common perception is today is that one must do something else even besides "having faith in Christ?" We feel we must walk aisles, sign cards, raise hands, repeat prayers, and on and on and on with man-made ideas that have absolutely no support from scripture. It's because we are in bondage to the wretched idea that man must do something in order to be saved. </font>[/QUOTE]I know Calvinists believe in unconditional election, but they don't believe in unconditional salvation, do they?

The condition is faith, regardless of who causes it. Man must do something to be saved regardless of whether you are a Calvinist or an Arminian. I think you are confused.

 

Someone actually thought there may be some fur flying over this. It's amazing hpw quickly a little shot of scripture cools the jets of some "cats"
Haven't heard even so much as a meow since I posted the scripture, kiddies.

 

Hey guys, its been along day. I have just sit down and read the posts. I still maintain that there is no credit given to the one who chooses to receive that offer of salvation. And that there is no room to boast. At least in my experience, I would have to agree with Skandelon that it has been the 5 point calvinist who tend to boast and see themselves as something special. I had one lady who said that she never realized how special she was until she relized she was one of the elect.

An addition thought: When a gift is given there is no credit or merit given to the one who receives the gift. All credit and glory is given to the giver.

"For God so loved the world that He gave..." Jn3:16

"The free gift of God is eternal life..." Rm 6:23

A gift has to have a giver and someone willing to receive. I choose whether I will receive or reject a gift. Either way it is no merit to me.

Bro Tony

 

You're right Tony.

Calvinists try to link our belief that men have the ultimate responsiblity to have faith in order to recieve grace to a works based soteriology thus trying to discredit it. The condition of faith is not equavelant to the condition of works. Paul never addresses Arminian theology when speaking of boasting, he is addressing those who think salvation is by the works of the law. Faith is not just another work of the law as Calvinists seem to believe. The law is not possible for us to fulfill, faith in the one who fulfilled for us is, thus its good news.

Our problem was that we fall short in fulfilling the law and the good news is that Christ did it for us and we only have to believe upon him. Calvinists turn that good news into bad news by trying to teach that even faith in Christ is not possible eventhough scripture never teaches such a doctrine.

They make the huge mistake of taking passages that prove we are unable to submit ourselves to God law (ie Romans 8:7) and apply that to their belief that we are also unable to believe upon Him who fulfilled that law for us. It ridiculous really!

 

I hear people say this constantly, yet it is not at all true. Monergist explained this very well, and I have demonstrated the falsity of this logic elsewhere using various examples. (I like Monergist's example of being born better than mine, though.)