A Calvinist in an Arminian Congregation

[Walter Kovacs]

To me, the smart people you speak of, are false teachers. No offense.

Why? Because they interpret Scripture differently?

 

[McWilliams]

delete this post/duplicate

 

[McWilliams]

To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.Isaiah 8:20NKJV

 

[cygnusx1]

All men have theological blindspots -- we all see the Scriptures through the interpretive lenses of fallen men. There are basic truths that, if one departs from them, he has departed from the Faith once delivered to the saints. Predestination is not one of those items.

The Apostle Paul understood very well that predestination, as he discusses it in Romans 9, was going to bother the saints at Rome when they heard his letter read to them, this is very clear in the context of the letter.

If Paul had to explain the Doctrine to Christians that he knew would find it hard to swallow, it should be clear that these very same saints were saints and did not know/understand these views before Paul wrote them.

I will defend the Doctrines of Grace in any debate, but the idea that one has to hold to them to be saved, is a gross misunderstanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

Just a couple of points Kenith ,

If one is not even aware of the doctrines of grace that is a completely separate issue to one who is violently opposed to Gods Sovereignty , thus one may not "have" the Doctrines of grace and at the same time be not opposed to them .

Furthermore , if the D'O'Grace are much more than predestination (they are) then we are approaching the very Gospel of Grace which many do oppose . Those who oppose the Gospel are saved ?

 

[cygnusx1]

To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.Isaiah 8:20NKJV

Amen sister !

no room for a compromise there .

 

[itisdeliciouscake]

To be entirely honest I get sick and tired of Calvinists treating Arminians like second-class citizens.

I'm amazed at how people who emphasize the depravity and wickedness of man can come across as so haughty sometimes. More often than not I see the doctrines of grace not destroy pride, but bolster a pride of knowledge. They say that they are so humbled and in awe of God's grace (they say the right things), but by the way they carry themselves and speak of others who do not know what they know it's extremely hard to believe.

Don't people realize that if God is sovereign He is working with people who have a blindspot to the full implications of the sovereignty of God; He is still in control of their lives and is working with them? Don't we realize that just as other believers have a blindspot to the sovereignty of God, we may very well have a blindspot to the sin of the pride of knowing?

It just gets so wearisome sometimes hearing the same accusations of Calvinists again and again and seeing them come true....

We should be humbly correcting people, and patient with people, not trying to blast people with the truth and questioning the salvation/depth of relationship with God/commitment to the Scriptures/legitimacy of discipleship of every person who disagrees with us. NOT because we think 'we are so englightened and they are so blind,' but because we are amazed by God's sovereign grace and would like others to know. We need to have a legitimate affection for all we talk to, and be confident that he who began a good work in other believers will bring it through to completion.

 

[cygnusx1]

If Calvinism was a perfect interpretation of Scripture I might agree. But it's not. Calvinism is an imperfect system of interpreting Scripture developed by imperfect men; every theology is like this. Calvin would have been the first to tell you that. So no, opposition to Calvinism is not opposition to the Gospel, it is opposition to Calvins way of interpreting Scripture.

in so far as the Doctrines Of Grace (Salvation by undeserved Sovereign Grace by Unconditional Election through personal penal substitution which cannot be thwarted) are THE GOSPEL how are men who are opposed to this , who place a theory of man's independence from God at the very heart of their Gospel not at war with God and His Gospel ?

how can those who despise Gods grace , who deny Predestination (accepting only post-destination) who hate Gods election and think God elects on the basis of human decisions and maintain salvation being what men can do can be lost by what men decide not to do , how can these be believing the Gospel ?

common denominators are fine in maths , but not very helpful in theology ....

 

[Walter Kovacs]

who place a theory of man's independence from God at the very heart of their Gospel not at war with God and His Gospel ?

and think God elects on the basis of human decisions and maintain salvation being what men can do can be lost by what men decide not to do , how can these be believing the Gospel ?

common denominators are fine in maths , but not very helpful in theology ....

Huh? Who said anything about any of that? Arminians (which I am not one, btw) don't affirm any of those;

Taken from wiki:

Common misconceptions
Arminianism supports works-based salvation – No well-known system of Arminianism denies salvation "by faith alone" and "by faith first to last". This misconception is often directed at the Arminian possibility of apostasy, which critics maintain requires continual good works to achieve final salvation. To Arminians, however, both initial salvation and eternal security are "by faith alone"; hence "by faith first to last". Belief through faith is the condition for entrance into the Kingdom of God; unbelief is the condition for exit from the Kingdom of God – not a lack of good works.[39][40][41]

Arminianism is Pelagian (or Semi-Pelagian), denying original sin and total depravity – No system of Arminianism founded on Arminius or Wesley denies original sin or total depravity;[42] both Arminius and Wesley strongly affirmed that man's basic condition is one in which he cannot be righteous, understand God, or seek God.[43]

Many Calvinist critics of Arminianism, both historically and currently, claim that Arminianism condones, accepts, or even explicitly supports Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism. Arminius referred to Pelagianism as "the grand falsehood" and stated that he "must confess that I detest, from my heart, the consequences [of that theology]."[44] David Pawson, a British pastor, decries this association as "libelous" when attributed to Arminius' or Wesley's doctrine.[45] Indeed most Arminians reject all accusations of Pelagianism; nonetheless, primarily due to Calvinist opponents,[46][47] the two terms remain intertwined in popular usage.

Arminianism denies Jesus' substitutionary payment for sins – Both Arminius and Wesley believed in the necessity and sufficiency of Christ's atonement through penal substitution.[48] Arminius held that God's justice was satisfied individually,[49] while Hugo Grotius and many of Wesley's followers taught that it was satisfied governmentally.[50]

However, I personally reject all but the T in TULIP; but I'm in good company; the majority of historical Christianity has done the same. Like itisdeliciouscake said...people who aren't Calvinists aren't second-class citizens.

 

[McWilliams]

Why not just search the scripture for the truth and go with it. I did that and came across Acts 13:48 and then I stumbled across Ephesians 2 and knew there were more scriptures to validate those thoughts. I prayed to be directed to His truth and began to see it then on every page of scripture. It was consistent with the doctrines of grace which I'd never heard of before! I'm with Spurgeon who said 'Calvinism is just a nickname for biblical truth'. I believe if you drop your objections to 'Calvinism' you will then begin to see the scriptural truth and God will bless you!

 

[cygnusx1]

To be entirely honest I get sick and tired of Calvinists treating Arminians like second-class citizens.

I'm amazed at how people who emphasize the depravity and wickedness of man can come across as so haughty sometimes. More often than not I see the doctrines of grace not destroy pride, but bolster a pride of knowledge. They say that they are so humbled and in awe of God's grace (they say the right things), but by the way they carry themselves and speak of others who do not know what they know it's extremely hard to believe.

Don't people realize that if God is sovereign is working with people who have a blindspot to the full implications of the sovereignty of God, then He is still in control of their lives and is working with them? Don't we realize that just as other believers have a blindspot to the sovereignty of God, we may very well have a blindspot to the sin of the pride of knowing?

It just gets so wearisome sometimes hearing the same accusations of Calvinists again and again and seeing them come true....

We should be humbly correcting people, and patient with people, not trying to blast people with the truth and questioning the salvation/depth of relationship with God/commitment to the Scriptures/legitimacy of discipleship of every person who disagrees with us. NOT because we think 'we are so englightened and they are so blind,' but because we are amazed by God's sovereign grace and would like others to know. We need to have a legitimate affection for all we talk to, and be confident that he who began a good work in other believers will bring it through to completion.

with all due respect bro , I think you are missing the elephant in the room , just what or how much , how many doctrines must one deny before he or she is opposing the gospel , and can those who oppose the Gospel still be saved ?

Do you think salvation exists beyond the Gospel ?

at what point do Christians say "these doctrines are sacrosanct and if opposed they bring loss , but these other doctrines are optional " ?

risking pride ? there is a thing called inverted pride.

 

[McWilliams]

Remember the majority of historical Christianity will not be passing thru the narrow gate but have chosen the broad path. The small remnant are willing to sacrifice all of their own thoughts and ideas for His and to put their life on the line in living for Him. Historical Christianity has not and are not doing that. Look at what takes place in the huge mega churches and see if it is what Paul described to Timothy when he said to 'Preach the Word'. There will be few that pass the tests in 1 John 2 and will hear Him say, 'well done, my good and faithful servant'. Are you His servant or are you trying to live by the rules of the majority rather than to learn and know scripture!!

 

[cygnusx1]

Huh? Who said anything about any of that? Arminians (which I am not one, btw) don't affirm any of those;

Taken from wiki:



However, I personally reject all but the T in TULIP; but I'm in good company; the majority of historical Christianity has done the same. Like itisdeliciouscake said...people who aren't Calvinists aren't second-class citizens.

well ... Arminians in general are opposed to God's Sovereignty , they believe only in a grace which is common and prevenient for all men , their doctrine of personal substitutionary atonement is conditional and simply inadequate to save anyone ! how so ? any man may forfeit salvation because salvation is not God's work but a joint work of God and man ......In Arminianism election simply means men choose God , Predestination is reduced to foresight .

there are no classes within Christ , there are only those who oppose God and those who don't.

 

[cygnusx1]

[SIZE=+1][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]"The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again."—C. H. Spurgeon[/FONT][/SIZE]

 

[Walter Kovacs]

well ... Arminians in general are opposed to God's Sovereignty

That is absolutely not true. Learn the other side before attacking.

Beleive it or not, rejecting the TULIP does not mean you don't believe God sin't sovereign. God's big enough to stay soverign even if he chooses to give man the choice of cooperating with Him (synergism).

Titus 2:11: “For the grace of God which brings salvation has appeared to
all men…”

John 1:9: "There was the true light which, coming into the world,
enlightens every man."

From a firend of mine:

"As the classic text in 1 Jn 2:2 tells us of Jesus "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world" (1 John 2:2). When scripture speaks of the scope of redemption, usage of words like "all" are not only not infrequent, they are the norm. Passages which spring to mind include the following: "God our Savior... desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim 2:3b-4), and "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men [Paul is not speaking here of salvation (all men are not saved), but that the grace which brings salvation appears to all, not just to some], teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age" (Titus 2:11f.). The Corinthians were also told that Jesus "died for all" (2 Cor 5:14); Paul wrote Timothy of "Christ Jesus who gave Himself a ransom for all" (1 Tim 2:6), and to the Romans that "through one act of righteousness there resulted in justification of life to all men" (Rom 5:18: DNTT III, 365: "the justification of the individual springs entirely from that of all men (Rom 5:19), so that it is not we who possess righteousness but righteousness which possesses us; we are its servants..."). Peter wrote of God "not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). John wrote of Jesus "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world" (1 John 2:2), and that Jesus "came for a witness, that he might bear witness of the light that all might believe through Him (John 1:7). Jesus proclaimed: "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.” Old Testament: "...I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways..." (Ezek 33:11); "Ho! Everyone who thirsts, come to the waters..." (Is 55:1a). Cf. 1 Tim 4:10; 1 Jn 2:2-4; Titus 2:11f.; 2 Cor 5:14; 1 Tim 2:6; Rom 5:18-19; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 John 2:2; John 1:7; Ezek 33:11; Is 55:1a; 53:6; 2 Pet 2:4, etc. It is particularly significant that such language does not appear to occur rarely. It is the norm rather than the exception. Paul, Peter, John, Jesus, Luke, and a number of Old Testament authors all used this language. Especially because of this fact, efforts to relativize the meaning of some of the phrases (e. g. that John's "whole world" really only means "whole world of the elect" as A. Pink claimed) appear to this writer to be little more than special pleading"

That's just one of the reasons I see Calvinism as untenable from a Biblical view.

 

[cygnusx1]

Charles Spurgeon: "...there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism.... Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else."

is Spurgeon correct ?

 

[itisdeliciouscake]

It's simply not biblical to think of salvation in those terms. Scripture doesn't give us a checklist of doctrines that we must believe before we are no longer in the position of 'opposing the Gospel.' Scripture simply states that we must believe in Christ as the Son of God who died for our sins and was risen to give us new life. Furthermore that argument works against you unless you believe yourself to be absolutely correct on every facet of theology. Sure, maybe your soteriology is right but what if your ecclesiology is off? I absolutely believe the Gospel is the centerpiece of all theology and affects all other doctrines, so isn't our ecclesiology an outpouring of our beliefs about the Gospel? Does that mean that if you're ecclesiology is off you are in opposition to the Gospel? If there's some sort of minimal list of doctrines one must believe in order to not be 'in opposition to the Gospel' then what is it and where is it found in Scripture?

The fact is that we are all in opposition to the Gospel in ways. Every time I sin I am in opposition to the Gospel. Every slightly wrong belief I hold puts me in opposition to the Gospel. I fail Christ everyday. Every time I have a sinful though I fail Him. Everytime I do not think of God as He deserves, I fail Him. But isn't that THE VERY POINT of the Gospel? That though I fail and sin against God I am forgiven because God is infinitely patient, and merciful, and gracious with me? Though my soteriology is biblically-Calvinistic I still sin make God in my own image in hundreds of other ways. But the Gospel proves that I am accepted nonetheless. Why aren't we extending that same grace to people who are incorrect soteriologically?

Furthermore, it is almost a complete lie that Arminians do not believe in the doctrines of grace because they are full of pride, or because they don't take sin seriously, or because they think that they have earned their salvation, etc....

It is almost always because they really do understand the full implication of the idea of predestination. That is, they understand that predestination means that the only difference between a Christian and an unbeliever is the free-choice of God. They don't see this idea as we do; they understand this to mean that if Calvinism is true must mean that there is 'something special' about believers (though it's not true). They deny that there is anything special about them. It scares them to think that there would be. They see Calvinism and predestination as if it were some sort of elitism of God where He chooses His favorites and 'special people'. They see God as Calvinism teaches it to mean that God is a tyrant who indiscriminately and whimsically creates people for the sole purpose of torturing them.

Are we really going to hold it against people for being wary of a system that, as they understand it, teaches that there is 'something special' about believers or that God is a sadistic tyrant? If the only way people can understand the idea of Calvinism is that way, then I would NEVER want them to just try and swallow it down.

Until a person joyfully sees the extravagant grace that is found in TULIP, and they see the glorious truth of God's sovereignty over our salvation, and take joy in the fact that all people are created for God's glory alone, I would never want them to accept the truth of Calvinism.

 

[cygnusx1]

well ... Arminians in general are opposed to God's Sovereignty

That is absolutely not true. Learn the other side before attacking.

.

Learn from the other side ?

if you only knew ......

I have yet to see any Arminian accept God decides men's fate , that God has a unthwartable plan for everything .

as for the bit about God remaining Sovereign while sticking man on the throne ..... I don't buy it.

Does God plan man's steps or not ? is the way of man not in himself but in God's providence or not ? are we the clay and He the potter or not ? Does God's word always return to Him and fully accomplish what it set out to accomplish or not >

Is nothing able to separate us from the love of Christ or not ?

I see no way around these clear questions . Either God is ruling all things after the council of His own will or He isn't , either God works all things together for good or He does not. there is no middle ground .

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Learn from the other side ?

Do not alter what I said.

as for the bit about God remaining Sovereign while sticking man on the throne ..... I don't buy it.

Did I say that?

Does God plan man's steps or not ? is the way of man not in himself but in God's providence or not ? are we the clay and He the potter or not ? Does God's word always return to Him and fully accomplish what it set out to accomplish or not >

Did I say that?

Is nothing able to separate us from the love of Christ or not ?

Did I say that?

I see no way around these clear questions . Either God is ruling all things after the council of His own will or He isn't , either God works all things together for good or He does not. there is no middle ground

Did I deny any of this?

 

[cygnusx1]

if Arminians (those who oppose salvation by Sovereign grace) are saved , then why not Roman catholics ? why not Arians ? why not Mormons JW's and Spiritualists ?

who is it to say this line and not that line is the bounds of salvation ?

how much error \ heresy must one abide in before one is considered in need of salvation ?

I let others fight this one out ..... time for bed .

 

[Walter Kovacs]

if Arminians (those who oppose salvation by Sovereign grace) are saved , then why not Roman catholics ? why not Arians ? why not Mormons JW's and Spiritualists ?

First off, if God is truly sovereign, thhen He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy.

Secondly, as was stated before, there isn't a 'heresy-limit' in the Scriptures...no set of bullet points of doctrine...trust in Christ is all one has to do.