Calvinism vs Arminian is a worldview debate

[ladodgers6]

So stop responding if you don't wish to engaged. In fact like i said your so called point are opinions which I don't care about I care about truth. You can find almost any book on the web That is a lie. I know for a fact. and lets be clear I am speaking of a web search and not going to a library online. Which you have to be part of the school to go into college libraries.

Wow! Anyways!

 

[Bluelion]

You know About this thread i don't know about the other group but every person I have had an issue with or has insulted me called me names or mocked me is a Calvinist on here. I think that speaks volumes about that group on here.

 

[mikedsjr]

mikedsjr in Post #5:

Actually, I would suggest that the dishonest techniques I have been pointing out, employed by supporters of Calvinism in this forum, and bolstered by childish, derogatory pictures, actually display a level of puerile emotionalism the like of which I have seldom if ever come across in “Arminian” posts and discussions.

It would therefore appear that accusing “Arminians” of emotionalism (however it is termed), is itself emotionalism.

We aren't in church. I apologize I wasn't clear. My emotionalism remark dealt specifically with how churches are run. Arminian churches are more likely to be far more emotionally charged, while Calvinistic church will be rather dry. Both sides certainly show emotions outside of church and Calvinist probably more.

Arminian churches tend to follow a more mystical tone of Romanticism, while Calvinist are more cutting everything down until life is cold in Enlightened churches.

Now there is a mix in many churches. We can argue over Weslyan and Arminianism, but for the sake of this thread, they are twin brothers. Overall most churches have an Arminian direction. Evangelicalism isn't a Calvinist idea. Even Lutheran theology, which I lean towards, isn't evangelical. However, evangelicalism/Arminianism is seductive. It will do bait and switch tactics. Why would this be? Because they believe man has free will and just getting them into the door is all they care about. Let the bait bring them in, then switch to a mystical form that appeals to man's nature, and throw in a gospel nugget here and there just enough to have spiritual thoughts. Don't worry about context. Context never matters until debate come. Teach them how to have better sex lives, marriages and help people, then put on the pressure to give to their bait and switch ministries.

I'm not saying all Arminian churches follow this pattern. It's a majority of the power players who do.

 

[ladodgers6]

You know About this thread i don't know about the other group but every person I have had an issue with or has insulted me called me names or mocked me is a Calvinist on here. I think that speaks volumes about that group on here.

And being accused of stuff that I did not do. Or being called almost every name under the sun,or having the other person avoid the issues to make false claims against me,has come from varies camps.

 

[Bluelion]

We aren't in church. I apologize I wasn't clear. My emotionalism remark dealt specifically with how churches are run. Arminian churches are more likely to be far more emotionally charged, while Calvinistic church will be rather dry. Both sides certainly show emotions outside of church and Calvinist probably more.

Arminian churches tend to follow a more mystical tone of Romanticism, while Calvinist are more cutting everything down until life is cold in Enlightened churches.

Now there is a mix in many churches. We can argue over Weslyan and Arminianism, but for the sake of this thread, they are twin brothers. Overall most churches have an Arminian direction. Evangelicalism isn't a Calvinist idea. Even Lutheran theology, which I lean towards, isn't evangelical. However, evangelicalism/Arminianism is seductive. It will do bait and switch tactics. Why would this be? Because they believe man has free will and just getting them into the door is all they care about. Let the bait bring them in, then switch to a mystical form that appeals to man's nature, and throw in a gospel nugget here and there just enough to have spiritual thoughts. Don't worry about context. Context never matters until debate come. Teach them how to have better sex lives, marriages and help people, then put on the pressure to give to their bait and switch ministries.

I'm not saying all Arminian churches follow this pattern. It's a majority of the power players who do.

What ever happen to the true church The Body of Christ. What happen to just being called a child of God?

I know Evangelical preachers and have called them out on some things a couple times. Like my brother said He saved thousand to night, I said why are you not dead? I said Jesus saved thousand every time he spoke and they murder Him in 3 years. So He no longer says it. I believe He is saved and a Brother in Christ, He just doesn't realize there is more to being saved then praying a prayer. In fact in John we find He says those who Believe and Receive, so here we find the first condition that there is more than John 3:16, we find we also have to receive Jesus. How do you do that? You surrender your will and take up God's will. It is God's will be done. That means your life is no longer yours to do as you please but you belong to God. Many People don't understand that fact. I Believe In limited free will to the point to say who will be my God, but once the choice is made you don't have free will to do as you please any longer.

 

[Bluelion]

And being accused of stuff that I did not do. Or being called almost every name under the sun,or having the other person avoid the issues to make false claims against me,has come from varies camps.

why are you still posting to me you said you did not want to engage, fine so move on. WOW!

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

Look Bluelion,you are accusing me of something I did not do.I gave you advice,and challenged you to research it for yourself,that's all.And I will not engage in a silly nasty name calling with you.Either lets debate the topics or not.
Well I do care about the truth.I responded to your Free-Will topic and all you can talk about is your college.Speak to the topics and make a argument,instead of accusing me of something I did not do! Can you do that or not?
Look you are upset,settle down and focus on the topics at hand.I did not insult your school or you BTW.You for whatever reason want to take this out of context.If I insult you you would know it.And I would admit it.So again I was giving you advice,to research what ANYONE says for yourself,that's all.Now do you want to discuss theology?

Blue, ladodgers say lets discuss theology, I think hes trying to forget about the silly talk and continue to discuss theology, which is what we all are here to do.

why are you still posting to me you said you did not want to engage, fine so move on. WOW!

Don't forget in all things we must be conformed to the Image of Christ, and in all things glorify him, try not to deviate from this.

 

[mikedsjr]

What ever happen to the true church The Body of Christ. What happen to just being called a child of God?

I know Evangelical preachers and have called them out on some things a couple times. Like my brother said He saved thousand to night, I said why are you not dead? I said Jesus saved thousand every time he spoke and they murder Him in 3 years. So He no longer says it. I believe He is saved and a Brother in Christ, He just doesn't realize there is more to being saved then praying a prayer. In fact in John we find He says those who Believe and Receive, so here we find the first condition that there is more than John 3:16, we find we also have to receive Jesus. How do you do that? You surrender your will and take up God's will. It is God's will be done. That means your life is no longer yours to do as you please but you belong to God. Many People don't understand that fact. I Believe In limited free will to the point to say who will be my God, but once the choice is made you don't have free will to do as you please any longer.

No one thinks, "my worldview is ______, so I must interpret or believe like this". That isn't how it works. But the impact is real. Only as time passes can we really see historically the worldview of the day and it's impact. Evangelicalism isn't evolving because Scripture has changed. Typical Worldviews don't have a good or bad motive. The millennials have brought community to church. They like to come together and share ideas. They want everyone to be seen as equals. In church,Sunday school/team groups has shifted a bit to a millennial format of ideas to what the bible says, at least in my experience. When the only qualification is "loving Jesus" type of belief, it is inevitable people begin to explain Scripture from their purely experiences in their own lives. I don't have issues with allegorical interpretations, but what occurs today goes beyond this. I'm not aware of any other time in history where David and Goliath story is viewed with the question,"What is the Goliath in your Life", instead of David being a Christ-figure conquering his people's enemy.

So whatever happened to the body of Christ? I'm not in any way speaking as if it's here or there but not in this group or that. That's not my place. Discussing the worldviews, imo, has nothing to do with saved and unsaved, but does impact doctrine. Women pastors acceptance is a worldview modification to Scripture. The non-discussable issue is a worldview modification to Scripture.

 

[ladodgers6]

Blue, ladodgers say lets discuss theology, I think hes trying to forget about the silly talk and continue to discuss theology, which is what we all are here to do.



Don't forget in all things we must be conformed to the Image of Christ, and in all things glorify him, try not to deviate from this.

Thanks Prettyboyandy. I did not insult this person or want to insult this person. Just trying to give some advice,and people get insulted???

 

[mikedsjr]

Here is a great podcast to compliment this topic i brought up.

"Responding to Evangelical Cliches': Denominations are Just a Label"
http://issuesetc.org/2016/01/18/3-r...-are-just-a-label-pr-bryan-wolfmueller-11816/

This can be downloaded through podcast form finding Issues Etc.

 

[Bluelion]

Blue, ladodgers say lets discuss theology, I think hes trying to forget about the silly talk and continue to discuss theology, which is what we all are here to do.



Don't forget in all things we must be conformed to the Image of Christ, and in all things glorify him, try not to deviate from this.

well i wish he would have just said so, because to me it looks like just someone who wants to argue not debate.

 

[Bluelion]

No one thinks, "my worldview is ______, so I must interpret or believe like this". That isn't how it works. But the impact is real. Only as time passes can we really see historically the worldview of the day and it's impact. Evangelicalism isn't evolving because Scripture has changed. Typical Worldviews don't have a good or bad motive. The millennials have brought community to church. They like to come together and share ideas. They want everyone to be seen as equals. In church,Sunday school/team groups has shifted a bit to a millennial format of ideas to what the bible says, at least in my experience. When the only qualification is "loving Jesus" type of belief, it is inevitable people begin to explain Scripture from their purely experiences in their own lives. I don't have issues with allegorical interpretations, but what occurs today goes beyond this. I'm not aware of any other time in history where David and Goliath story is viewed with the question,"What is the Goliath in your Life", instead of David being a Christ-figure conquering his people's enemy.

So whatever happened to the body of Christ? I'm not in any way speaking as if it's here or there but not in this group or that. That's not my place. Discussing the worldviews, imo, has nothing to do with saved and unsaved, but does impact doctrine. Women pastors acceptance is a worldview modification to Scripture. The non-discussable issue is a worldview modification to Scripture.

Well this helps. I thought people are doing something wrong and realized so do I. The Bible says we are to be servants to each other not equals that we should look at other people as better than our self. Paul said they last part. That is the issue and I am just a guilty we are not living by God how he told us to but our still wrestling with our sinful nature and the old ways of doing things.

I know you say world view does not matter, however my philosophy teacher argued, if your world view was wrong your whole theology was wrong. So in that case it is a matter of salvation.

 

[Bluelion]

Thanks Prettyboyandy. I did not insult this person or want to insult this person. Just trying to give some advice,and people get insulted???

fine, can we move on?

 

[Pedrito]

JM in Post #9:

The debate is between the believer and the humanist, a Christian worldview and an unbelieving worldview. The debate is between the church and the world. Contra mundum!

Well put!

The dishonest techniques and childish diagrams employed by Calvinists in this forum are indeed symptoms of humanistic worldliness. JM has thus defined the debate as being between believers and Calvinists.

He presented that thought again as “The debate is between the church and the world.”.

Contra mundum! = Against the world. Against worldliness.

And therefore, against Calvinism as it has revealed itself through the worldly techniques it has employed in this forum.

--------------------------------------------------------

By the way, are “Arminians” really part of an “unbelieving worldview”? What does that term actually mean? Is it a veiled way of calling them unbelievers?

 

[Pedrito]

Twin1954 in Post #11:

JM is correct. There is only one God and who He is is paramount to understanding the Gospel. No one can be saved believing in a figment of their imagination, which the god of Arminainism is. It isn't a matter of what you know but of Who you know.

I would ask twin1954:

1. Who is the God acknowledged by “Arminians”, and what are His characteristics?
2. Who is the God acknowledged by Calvinists, and what are His characteristics?

And with respect to:

(Joh 17:3) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

I ask: Who is the only true God acknowledged (and spoken to) by Jesus, and what are His characteristics?


Which of those three Gods most closely resembles the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

(And of Moses and of David and of the prophets, etc.?)

 

[mikedsjr]

Twin1954 in Post #11:

I would ask twin1954:

1. Who is the God acknowledged by “Arminians”, and what are His characteristics?
2. Who is the God acknowledged by Calvinists, and what are His characteristics?

And with respect to:

I ask: Who is the only true God acknowledged (and spoken to) by Jesus, and what are His characteristics?


Which of those three Gods most closely resembles the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

(And of Moses and of David and of the prophets, etc.?)

Good question to twin's reply. I don't support twin's stance, but I also find your question illustrative of the issue as well. What interpretive method is the most proper form?

 

[twin1954]

Twin1954 in Post #11:

I would ask twin1954:

1. Who is the God acknowledged by “Arminians”, and what are His characteristics?

He is a god that is carved from the forest of man's imagination. His characteristics are that he wants what he cannot have, wishes for what he cannot get, desires what he knows is not going to happen. He is subject to the will of men and only has a plan. He sent his son to die but not actually accomplish what he died for. He is defined by love but his love is a useless emotion that does those he loves no real good unless they allow it to. He is the most frustrated being to ever exist and is worthy of pity more than worship.

1. Who is the God acknowledged by Calvinists, and what are His characteristics?

1. He is Sovereign in all things and supreme in His infinite majesty. He is singularly solitary in His being as there is no equal to Him. He is sufficient in Himself and needs nothing and no one. He is infinite in power, wisdom, holiness and goodness. He is omniscient and omnipresent. He is immutable and cannot learn. He knows all things, controls all things and rules among the armies of Heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth and none can stay His hand or say to Him what are you doing. He has no plan but He does have a purpose. That purpose is to glorify Himself in sovereign mercy. He is full of compassion and delights in mercy. He sent His Son to live, die and be resurrected accomplishing all that He intended to do. He actually saved His people from their sins and now sits on the throne of all creation ruling as King. He waits on no man and is working His purpose with sovereign power and wisdom. His love actually does something for the objects of His love and is backed by His infinite power and wisdom. He is righteous and cannot go against His righteousness. He is full of wrath against sinners and will, in absolute righteousness and justice, pour out His wrath on all on whom He finds sin. He alone is worthy of worship, praise, glory and dominion. He fills His people with awe and adoration for He is gracious and merciful, forgiving iniquity, transgression and sin. He is the one true God whom all creation shall bow to, some in fear and others in worship.

And with respect to:

I ask: Who is the only true God acknowledged (and spoken to) by Jesus, and what are His characteristics?


Which of those three Gods most closely resembles the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

(And of Moses and of David and of the prophets, etc.?)

There is only one God all others are nothing but man's imagination. As to the answer to your question I think you can judge for yourself.

 

[Pedrito]

Royal priest in Post #15:

When a Christian who adheres to the Arminian worldview prays, their prayers often reflect the Calvinist worldview. For instance, "Please God, don't let my loved ones perish in Hell" does not seem like a prayer consistent with free will theology.

Actually, that sort of prayer does not reflect a Calvinist worldview at all.

A Calvinist does not know whom God has fore-chosen for salvation. Therefore, a Calvinist praying such a prayer could well be praying against God's will, and probably is.

I wonder what God might think of that?

 

[Pedrito]

Mikedsjr in Post #20:

the impact worldviews have on interpreting Scripture is real. It's the very reason so many today attend churches with charismatic style worship band churches: modernism & postmodernism. It the reason so many false churches started during the heart of the Romantic period: JW, Mormonism, etc.

mikdsjr in using the term “Romantic period” seems to be referring to the c1800's. Yet in Post #1 mikedsjr placed “Arminians” into the Romanticist camp, even though they appear to have been the original Baptists in England, around the 1600's.

“Assign to your opposition a label that somehow diminishes their credibility. Then if possible, use that label to lump them in with people or organisations that have negative connotations associated with them.”


Clever. Very clever.


It tricks most people.


But only as long as nobody points out to them how they are being dishonestly manipulated.

 

[Pedrito]

Twin1954 in Post #22:

Boiled down the debate between the Calvinist and the Arminian comes to where you start from. The Arminian starts with man and works up to God. The Calvinist starts with God and works down to man.

A clever, significant-sounding, superficial proposition.

I doubt anyone but a Calvinist would give it any credence.

Oh. Of course not. The “Arminians”, being the only other perspective that exists according to this forum, know that is not so, at least not in their eyes.


But could it be that someone, reading the Scriptures afresh, has found a third perspective after all – one that renders this whole Calvinist-Arminian debate in its current form meaningless?

If so, what could it be?