What Value has Evangelism in Reformed Theology

TibiasDad said:

I have just begun reading the book Deconstructing Calvinism, by Hudson Smelley, and in the prologue found this statement:

Calvinism completely compasses God's redemptive plan and teaches that God saves a small percentage of humanity based on His elective determination before creation and passes over the rest. Since God's redemptive plan excludes most people, there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things. Indeed, it is difficult to see how we could make any honest gospel presentation knowing most people are by God's purposes not savable. Not only that, since salvation hangs on God's elective determination before creation and not on a present decision for Christ, we must make this TULIP reality personal. We must come to grips with the fact that many of those we know, and perhaps some of those closest to us, have no possibility of being reconciled to God because they are not elect.

What caught my eye is the idea that "there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things."

I had always thought the Calvinistic evangelism was like searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack,, the rare Elect person in the mass of reprobates, but had never thought of the effect of the presentation of the gospel to those who would never be able to experience it. Smelley terms it "misleading" them to think that they might be savable, when in fact, there isn't a sliver of hope that this would happen.

What are your thoughts, either pro or con to Smelley's thought?


Doug

Click to expand...

Calvinists focus is entirely on the sovereignty of God ... and in the process dismiss God's abundant love. He is indeed sovereign ... but He chose to give all His intelligent beings freedom of choice. Without choice TRUE love can not exist .... we know that ... God knows that.

Love is not a forced issue nor can it be.

The greatest of these is LOVE. God IS Love.

royal priest said:

What you should say is that you will be saved if you trust in Jesus for eternal life.

Click to expand...

But John 3:16 specifically says that God so loved the WORLD that He gave His only Son that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.

The verse does NOT say "world of the elect". In fact, the Bible uses "world" for the human race.

How do you explain Titus 2:11?

For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.

royal priest said:

Yes, the offer is to all, but not all will receive it.

Click to expand...

Calvinist theology doesn't agree with this. Or shouldn't. If Christ didn't die for everyone then the offer CAN'T be for all. That's contradictory, but most Calvinists either don't see it or just ignore it.

How can the offer of salvation be for anyone that Christ didn't die for? That would be an impossible situation.

Many of the most persuasive preachers were Calvinist. Although they believed salvation would occur only if the Spirit opened the hearts of their audience, they also knew that God used their message to do so.

Click to expand...

Their theology is STILL contradictory to Titus 2:11. Their theology is exclusive of all people. But the gospel is inclusive of all people. That's the difference.

Although we believe that faith is a gift of God, we also believe that faith comes by hearing the Word of God. That is why, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade men.

Click to expand...

If you believe that God elects unconditionally to salvation, then you are conflicted.

royal priest said:

You can say Jesus was sent to save every sinner that turns to Him.

Click to expand...

That's not what the Bible says, so why would anyone say that?

For whom did Jesus come to save? The sick, the lost, the poor, the unrighteous, the ungodly, and sinners.

Matt 9:12 On hearing this, Jesus said, it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. Are just the elect “sick”?

Luke 19:10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost. Are just the elect “lost”?

Luke 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach good news to the poor. Are just the elect poor?

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ died for sins once FOR ALL, the righteous (Christ) for the unrighteous (humanity, all of them), to bring you to God. Are just the elect unrighteous?

Rom 5:6 You see, just at the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Are just the elect ungodly?

Mark 2:17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners. Are just the elect sinners?

Isa 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

The entire human race is described as sick, lost, poor, unrighteous, ungodly, and sinners. Every single one of us.

If Christ died for just the elect, then reformed theology leads to universalism, because of these verses. That means the non elect are neither sick, lost, poor, unrighteous, ungodly, or sinners. So they don’t need salvation. And Christ wouldn’t need to die for any of them. And everyone would be saved.

This doesn't rob anyone of hope of salvation because the terms are same whether you are elect or not; Turn to Him and He will save you.

Click to expand...

You are not understanding the issue here. If Christ didn't die for someone, then turning to Him WON'T save him. Christ CANNOT save anyone He didn't die for.

Believe in Him, then your calling and election will be sure.

Click to expand...

Telling someone for whom Christ didn't die to believe in Him for salvation is meaningless.

FreeGrace2 said:

That's not what the Bible says, so why would anyone say that?

For whom did Jesus come to save? The sick, the lost, the poor, the unrighteous, the ungodly, and sinners.

Matt 9:12 On hearing this, Jesus said, it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. Are just the elect “sick”?

Luke 19:10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost. Are just the elect “lost”?

Luke 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to preach good news to the poor. Are just the elect poor?

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ died for sins once FOR ALL, the righteous (Christ) for the unrighteous (humanity, all of them), to bring you to God. Are just the elect unrighteous?

Rom 5:6 You see, just at the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Are just the elect ungodly?

Mark 2:17 On hearing this, Jesus said to them, it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners. Are just the elect sinners?

Isa 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

The entire human race is described as sick, lost, poor, unrighteous, ungodly, and sinners. Every single one of us.

If Christ died for just the elect, then reformed theology leads to universalism, because of these verses. That means the non elect are neither sick, lost, poor, unrighteous, ungodly, or sinners. So they don’t need salvation. And Christ wouldn’t need to die for any of them. And everyone would be saved.


You are not understanding the issue here. If Christ didn't die for someone, then turning to Him WON'T save him. Christ CANNOT save anyone He didn't die for.


Telling someone for whom Christ didn't die to believe in Him for salvation is meaningless.

Click to expand...

FreeGrace2 said:

If Christ died for just the elect, then reformed theology leads to universalism,

Click to expand...

I agree .... the other thing the predestined elect as put forth by Calvinism does is it relieves mankind of any individual accountability of what they say, do and think at all .... That is ... makes God responsible for everything.

And the Lord does indeed say each of us are accountable.

Romans 14:12
So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

FreeGrace2 said: ↑
If Christ died for just the elect, then reformed theology leads to universalism,

eleos1954 said:

I agree .... the other thing the predestined elect as put forth by Calvinism does is it relieves mankind of any individual accountability of what they say, do and think at all .... That is ... makes God responsible for everything.

Click to expand...

True!

And the Lord does indeed say each of us are accountable.

Romans 14:12
So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

Click to expand...

Amen!

TibiasDad said:

I have just begun reading the book Deconstructing Calvinism, by Hudson Smelley, and in the prologue found this statement:

Calvinism completely compasses God's redemptive plan and teaches that God saves a small percentage of humanity based on His elective determination before creation and passes over the rest. Since God's redemptive plan excludes most people, there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things. Indeed, it is difficult to see how we could make any honest gospel presentation knowing most people are by God's purposes not savable. Not only that, since salvation hangs on God's elective determination before creation and not on a present decision for Christ, we must make this TULIP reality personal. We must come to grips with the fact that many of those we know, and perhaps some of those closest to us, have no possibility of being reconciled to God because they are not elect.

What caught my eye is the idea that "there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things."

I had always thought the Calvinistic evangelism was like searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack,, the rare Elect person in the mass of reprobates, but had never thought of the effect of the presentation of the gospel to those who would never be able to experience it. Smelley terms it "misleading" them to think that they might be savable, when in fact, there isn't a sliver of hope that this would happen.

What are your thoughts, either pro or con to Smelley's thought?


Doug

Click to expand...

I've often wondered the same thing. If, as they say the elect will come to Christ no matter what, what need is there to tell them? It will happen either way.

TibiasDad said:

But that is not really accurate if Calvinism is true, because for me to trust, I must first be irresistibly regenerated, and then be given faith, nd this, is monergistic action. So the more truthful statement would be "you will be saved if God first regenerates you and gives you faith so that you can believe in Jesus." But you cannot say with any confidence that God will in fact do this. So I can see Smelley's use of the word "misleading" if you state it as simply as you suggest given the necessary presuppositions that are left unspoken.

Doug

Click to expand...

Smelley is right that many are misled by such statements, but that is due to their own ignorance of the greater Biblical context.
God, as a primary cause, is usually assumed in conversation as is the case with Jesus and the Apostles when they called men to repentance.

I would not say your statement is more truthful, but rather has different emphasis. I think the choice of our phrasing ought to depend on the particular hearer because some people will tend to depend on their own works, while others will tend to 'let go and let God.'
So, really what we need is a balanced message that says, "work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God that works in you both to will and to work."

FreeGrace2 said:

Calvinist theology doesn't agree with this. Or shouldn't. If Christ didn't die for everyone then the offer CAN'T be for all. That's contradictory, but most Calvinists either don't see it or just ignore it.
How can the offer of salvation be for anyone that Christ didn't die for? That would be an impossible situation.

Click to expand...

The main point of preaching is not the salvation of sinners but of declaring the glory of God.
2 Corinthians 2:15-17
For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life. And who is adequate for these things? For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God.

FreeGrace2 said:

Telling someone for whom Christ didn't die to believe in Him for salvation is meaningless.

Click to expand...

Not if there's a chance He did die for them. Setting election aside, would you feel like you were wasting your breath if no one believed the message? You shouldn't. People's responses shouldn't be the motivating factor behind preaching. It should be God's glory that motivates us.

TibiasDad said:

So you are blaming the unsaved for not understanding the full meaning of the intent of believe? So the presenter has no moral or ethical responsibility to explain the "hidden" aspects that are necessary prerequisites to be able to believe in Christ?

Doug

Click to expand...

Reread my post

TibiasDad said:

What caught my eye is the idea that "there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things."

Click to expand...

When you say the things above:
We are told to preach the Gospel of the finished work
of Jesus and commanded to preach that all men repent.
So that is what the saint have always done.


Where in the Bible does it say that Jesus died for those destined
to pay for their own sins? Or that ANY sin must be paid TWICE?
There is no such verse because no sin must be PAID twice.


Maybe you are aware of such a verse that give us the Biblical
authority to tell men they were "elected" to be "His sheep"
(or "His people") before the foundation of the world?


To be clear... we agree the Bible teaches that SOME MEN
are "elected" (in time before the world began) but where
does it say ALL MEN were "elected"? Chapter and verse
please.

I had always thought the Calvinistic evangelism was like searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack, the rare Elect person in the mass of reprobates...

Click to expand...

Well, there is your problem. We are not looking to "save" men.
We are only preaching the Gospel and the "elect" will become
saved as God "draws" them to Christ... and NONE are lost.


Moreover, here is what we are COMMANDED to do to those
who reject our Gospel... and that is most men:


Mar 6:11-12
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

... but had never thought of the effect of the presentation of the gospel to those who would never be able to experience it. Smelley terms it "misleading" them to think that they might be savable, when in fact, there isn't a sliver of hope that this would happen.

Click to expand...

It would absolutely be "misleading" people to tell them that
God "elected" THEM before the creation of the world... especially
those who are not showing the "fruit" of salvation/sanctification.
However, it would NOT be "misleading" people to tell them the
True Gospel that SOME men are "elected" before creation.


(1) Is Smelley aware that JESUS taught the Christian church
(the Christian "Kingdom of Heaven") consists of both the saved
"wheat/sheep" sown by God and destined to eternal life and the
unsaved "tares/goats" sown by Satan and destined to the same
FIRE prepared for Satan and his demons... and NEVER MEANT
to be "converted" or "forgiven"? [Mat 25:41]


Or, is that not PART of Smelley's "gospel"?
Does he not preach the "whole counsel of God"?
Does he prefer to preach to those with "itching" ears?


2Ti_4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;


(2) Is Smelley aware that (with only a few exceptions) all Gentiles
in the Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 22:2 and 21:43] were
NEVER MEANT to be saved? Could those Gentiles "decide"
to save themselves?


(3) Is Smelley aware that MANY Jews in the Jewish "Kingdom"
were NEVER MEANT to be saved? [Mark 4 and John 10], or does
he just ASSUME all Jews had their sins forgiven? Or all Jews
could just "decide" to save themselves?


(4) Is Smelley aware the people in Galatians 5:20-21 and
1 Co 6:9-10 CAN NOT ENTER the "Kingdom of God"? Or does
he tell them they can "decide" to enter the Kingdom? If a man
cannot enter the Kingdom (and Jesus loses NONE of His sheep)
does that not PROVE they were NEVER MEANT to be saved?
Of course it proves exactly that (or that Christ FAILED)


You see Doug...
If we teach that MEN DECIDE who is saved/elected/His sheep
then Smelley (and you) have a valid point.


However, if GOD DECIDES who is saved/elected/His sheep,
then Smelley (and you) are preaching a heresy that is the
BROAD WAY that leads "Christians" into destruction and
MANY follow that synergistic heresy.


If GOD DECIDES who is saved/elected/His sheep
then we cannot give a "free offer" of salvation to whoever
WANTS to be saved. We must preach a narrow way of the
monergistic Gospel of Sovereign Grace that FEW Christians find.


I have always found it interesting that Jesus teaches [John 6]
that NO MAN can come to Him unless the Father first "draws"
them and ALL MEN the Father draws "shall come" to Him and
He will lose NONE of them.


However, when His disciples realized Jesus was teaching salvation
by "election" many immediately abandoned Him [John 6:65-66]
Now, WHY in the world would any man abandon the Son of God?
Of course the answer is obvious: They (like most men today) did
not WANT a Gospel where God is Sovereign and "elects" who He
wants... they wanted a gospel where MAN decides to save himself.
They did not want a monergistic Gospel where they must DEPEND
on God, they wanted a synergistic gospel so they save themselves.


Is it not AMAZING that nothing has changed from John 6:65-66.
That today men want the BROAD WAY not the narrow way?


Jim

TibiasDad said:

No need to! You put the onus of understanding on the hearer, not the evangelist to ensure a clear understanding of the terms of salvation. That is what "that many are misled by such statements, but that is due to their own ignorance of the greater Biblical context" means. It's not just believe and be saved, but rather be regenerated and given faith by God and then you will be able to believe and be given eternal life. Nobody would get that sequence of events in merely saying "Believe in Christ and your will be saved!

Doug

Click to expand...

If you're not interested in considering the context of a given line, then what's the point of all this?

royal priest said:

The main point of preaching is not the salvation of sinners but of declaring the glory of God.
2 Corinthians 2:15-17
For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life. And who is adequate for these things? For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God.

Click to expand...

The preaching of the gospel IS for the salvation of people, since all have sinned. 1 Cor 1:21.