Arminian Or Calvinist?

[Vince53]

We have seen that God loves the world, that His call to all men to be saved is genuine, and that He gives grace and repentance to all men. We have also seen that God does not predestine anyone to Hell, nor does He force anyone to sin.

Psalm 145:9 tells us: The LORD is good to all, And His tender mercies are over all His works.

 

[Albion]

We have seen that God loves the world, that His call to all men to be saved is genuine, and that He gives grace and repentance to all men.

"We have seen" nothing of the sort, Vince. We have seen that something similar to what you have stated, is true, but not what you have chosen to make it into. God loves the world but that doesn't mean he must save everyone. Yet if you make "love" the definer of his plan of salvation, you cannot avoid being a Universalist. And if you are that, you are clearly intentionally ignoring over a hundred explicit references in scripture to the opposite conclusion.

We have also seen that God does not predestine anyone to Hell

Are you trying to convince yourself of that?
"We" certianly have not seen anything scriptural which would add up to this. God may predestine men to hell, yes. You may say that you can't find it in the Bible that he does this, I appreciate, but that certainly does not give anyone the license to conclude that God cannot do this or does not do this!

nor does He force anyone to sin.

We all agree to this, so it's not relevant here.

Psalm 145:9 tells us: The LORD is good to all, And His tender mercies are over all His works.

Did you notice that salvation is not mentioned or hinted at in that passage in any way. Do you not understand that God may well show his goodness to people whom he nevertheless does not save eternally? Think about it. God gives life to people who by their own sin reject God. Does this make God unloving? Not in the least. It is an act of love to give any of us life in the first place.

 

[TimRout]

We have seen that God loves the world, that His call to all men to be saved is genuine, and that He gives grace and repentance to all men. We have also seen that God does not predestine anyone to Hell, nor does He force anyone to sin.

Psalm 145:9 tells us: The LORD is good to all, And His tender mercies are over all His works.

I'm sorry Vince, but the "all" spoken of in this Psalm are the "godly ones" (v10) --- a limited group. Consider also verse 15:

"The eyes of all look to You, and You give them their food in due time."

Do you really expect us to believe that the eyes of both the righteous and the wicked look to the Lord for their strength? But of course, your theology requires you to insist that "all" has to mean all people exhaustively, even when the text demands a more limited assessment --- in this case all the "godly ones".

It's one of my ongoing concerns with your posts, Vince. Many citations. Absolutely no meaningful exegesis.

 

[TimRout]

God may predestine men to hell, yes.

Indeed brother!

"While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled." [Jn. 17:12/NASB]

Judas was prophetically destined to perish.

 

[TimRout]

A word from Ignatius (30AD-107AD). An introduction to his first Epistle:

"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia, deservedly most happy, being blessed in the greatness and fullness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning of time, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace."
SOURCE

Three points of interest:

Firstly, Ignatius considered himself to have been predestined by God before the beginning of time.

Secondly, Ignatius believed his saved status to be "unchangeable" (Perseverance Of The Saints).

Thirdly, Ignatius believed it was the will of God alone that elected him (Unconditional Election).

It is important to keep in mind that the writings of the Ante-Nicene fathers were, in many ways, polemical. They presented arguments against the various heretical challenges of their day. Therefore, if an issue didn't come up, they rarely wrote about it. This does not suggest a disbelief in the doctrines of grace, but rather suggests that these doctrines were largely assumed by most churches.

We see this very assumption being made by Paul (through Luke).

"When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." [Ac. 13:48/NASB]

Here we see a powerful example of God's sovereign electing grace at work, wherein the Jews have largely been rejected (for a time) and the Gentiles have now come under grace. Not all the Gentiles were given grace to believe, but only those who had been appointed by God unto eternal life. Neither Paul, nor Luke, attempt to defend or explain this divine appointment. Rather, their theology simply assumes it.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Oh, but that (the so-called five points) wasn't what you were claiming had no precedent. It was that there was no hint of anything but freewill--which of course is incorrect and you must realize it now if you are re-fashioning your claim into this very narrow claim that doesn't prove much anyway. I mean, someone else's way of explaining predestination--Luther or Augustine, for example--proves my point just as well that there is no truth to the claim that the early church was unanimously against this Biblical teaching. Maybe if you were to say that you don't know of anyone in the early church who explained election using the exact words that Calvin did, we could agree to that. LOL


As I was saying....

Let us get a few facts straight.

1. I never made the claim that there is no hint of anything but freewill in the Scriptures. Indeed, I posted Scriptures which can reasonably be interpreted to teach that man’s freewill has been limited by God in some instances.

2. The doctrine that man does not have a freewill is a subset of the larger set of doctrines known as the Five Points of Calvinism. Therefore, I have not narrowed my claim, but broadened it extensively.

3. The Early Church that I wrote of was, as I specified, the Ante-Nicene Church—the Church up to the Council of Nicaea in 325.

4. Augustine was born in 354.

5. Luther was born on November 10, 1483.

6. It is a historical fact that none of the doctrines comprising the Five Points of Calvinism are found in any writings prior to 325. If you disagree with this historical fact, all that you have to do to prove your case is to quote one document written prior to 325 in which one of the doctrines comprising the Five Points of Calvinism is taught or even referenced.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Romans 8:29-30:
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined {to become} conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

foreknew- predestined - called
those He called, He justified - those He justifies, He glorifies

Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

So being called - doesn't that mean we were chosen?

This supports Calvinism imho

Everyone who is familiar with the history of the exegesis of Rom. 8:-29-30 knows full well that this passage can be reasonably interpreted in many different ways and that the very large majority of the exegetes both prior to and since the Reformation have interpreted them in a manner very differently than did Calvin.

Ephesians 1:4 is a small part of a very complex sentence in the Greek New Testament. In order to convey this critical fact to the English reader, it is absolutely essential that in the English translation this most basic element of the structure of the passage be preserved lest some of the subordinate clauses be read as primary clauses necessarily changing to a great degree the meaning of the passage. Those of us who are familiar with the history of the interpretation of this passage are all too aware of the theological aberrations that have blighted Christian theology because this most basic element of the structure of the passage has been ignored. Fortunately, the American Standard Version of 1901 preserved this sentence structure in their translation of this sentence that comprises Ephesians 1:3-14,

Ephesians 1:3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ:
4. even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him in love:
5. having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6. to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved:
7. in whom we have our redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trepasses, according to the riches of his grace,
8. which he made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence,
9. making known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he purposed in him
10. unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth; in him, I say,
11. in whom also we were made a heritage, having been foreordained according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will;
12. to the end that we should be unto the praise of his glory, we who had before hoped in Christ:
13. in whom ye also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation,-- in whom, having also believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14. which is an earnest of our inheritance, unto the redemption of God's own possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Millions of readers have read Eph. 1:1-14 in inadequate translation and have misunderstood it to be a series of objective doctrinal statements rather than what it actually is—a doxology eulogizing the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; and let us never forget that eulogies are not intended to be understood as a series of objective statements of fact that tell the whole story. In Ephesians 1:3-14 we find many words and phrases telling us what God has done, but not so much as one word of the responsibility of man to believe and obey God in order that he might receive the blessings—words that do not belong in a eulogy and hence are not there but have been reserved for the very many passages of Scripture in which men are admonished to obey God and warned of the consequences of failing to do so.

 

[Albion]

Let us get a few facts straight.

1. I never made the claim that there is no hint of anything but freewill in the Scriptures.

Nor did I accuse you of that.

2. The doctrine that man does not have a freewill is a subset of the larger set of doctrines known as the Five Points of Calvinism.

I disagree...strongly. There are many who have accepted predestination because of the Bible's witness AND ARE NOT CALVINISTS. Nor do they necessarily accept the five points. So for you to tie the two together is not appropriate.

3. The Early Church that I wrote of was, as I specified, the Ante-Nicene Church—the Church up to the Council of Nicaea in 325.

4. Augustine was born in 354.

5. Luther was born on November 10, 1483.

Whoa. You did say ante-Nicene at several points, but you also said that there was nothing but freewill until the Reformation. I contended against both of those errors. And don't forget Irenaeus, who is NOT excluded by your use of dates here.

6. It is a historical fact that none of the doctrines comprising the Five Points of Calvinism are found in any writings prior to 325.

We've already covered that. No, there was no John Calvin to explain what he believed prior to...well, John Calvin. But you have said much more than that no one agreed with Calvin prior to the Reformation. You have also said that the early Church was unanimous in favor of freewill--which is incorrect. Therefore, you are indeed narrowing your argument, now trying to make it seem that all you have charged is that the five points were not affirmed prior to Calvin, not that predestination was known among the Fathers, which it was.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Well Vince, as a general rule, when one presents a positive case that is then challenged, it is customary to respond to that challenge and demonstrate why your presentation must be correct. You seem unwilling to do this. Calvinists value careful exegesis. So far we have seen much verse citation, but no meaningful exegesis of those texts whatsoever. So then, to get back to the subject at hand....

Can you demonstrate from Scripture why we (Calvinists) should believe that "world" in Jn. 3:16 has to mean all people everywhere?

Countless exegetes of the New Testament have already demonstrated from the Scriptures and other sources that the word world in John 3:16 was intended by Jesus to be a reference to all the people of the world. Calvinists have never been able to refute their exegesis and yet they tenaciously cling to their beliefs that have been proven to be incorrect. Therefore, why should Vince53 waste his time?

A few pages back, I demonstrated from the Scriptures and extra-Biblical texts, based upon the typology found in Genesis, Ecclesiasticus, and Jubilees, that the word world in John 3:16 was intended by Jesus to be a reference to all the people of the world but the Calvinists continued to argue that Jesus did not intend his reference to the world to be understood as the world but as the elect of God as though Jesus had extremely poor communication skills—indeed, such extremely poor communication skills that no one was able to understand John 3:16 until John Calvin came along.


Once again, let us compare the themes in John 3:16 with themes found in Genesis, Ecclesiasticus, and Jubilees.

John. 3:16. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” (NASB, 1995)

Genesis 22:15. Then the angel of the LORD called to Abraham a second time from heaven,
16. and said, “By Myself I have sworn, declares the LORD, because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, your only son,
17. indeed I will greatly bless you, and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies.
18. “In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.” (NASB, 1995)

Ecclesiasticus 44:19. Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations,
and no one has been found like him in glory.
20. He kept the law of the Most High,
and entered into a covenant with him;
he certified the covenant in his flesh,
and when he was tested he proved faithful.
21. Therefore the Lord assured him with an oath
that the nations would be blessed through his offspring;
that he would make him as numerous as the dust of the earth,
and exalt his offspring like the stars,
and give them an inheritance from sea to sea
and from the Euphrates to the ends of the earth. (New Revised Standard Version)

Jubilees 18:14. And the Lord called Abraham by his name a second time from heaven, as he caused us to appear to speak to him in the name of the Lord.
15. And he said: ‘By Myself have I sworn, saith the Lord,
Because thou hast done this thing,
And hast not withheld thy son, thy beloved son, from Me,
That in blessing I will bless thee,
And in multiplying I will multiply thy seed
As the stars of heaven, And as the sand which is on the seashore.
And thy seed shall inherit the cities of its enemies,
16. And in thy seed shall all nations of the earth be blessed;
Because thou hast obeyed My voice,
And I have shown to all that thou art faithful unto Me in all that I have said unto thee:
Go in peace.’ (From The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament by R.H. Charles, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913)


Let us also observe the fact that Paul taught in his Epistle to the Galatians that the seed written of in Genesis 22:18 (quoted above) was a reference to Christ,

Galatians 3:16. Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as referring to many, but rather to one, “And to your seed,” that is, Christ. (NASB, 1995)

And let us also observe in Genesis 22:18 the words, “all the nations of the earth,” a reference to all the peoples of the world. The offering up by Abraham of his only son is a figure of God the Father offering up His only son, Jesus. The Israelites, as a people, pursuing righteousness through the Law rather than through faith, rejected the blessing and nailed Jesus to the cross. Therefore, it can be seen that the gift of our Savior, Christ Jesus, was given to the world by God who “so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life,” but not all of the world chose to receive that gift into their hearts to be born again.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

[/b][/color][/size][/font]
Nor did I accuse you of that.


I disagree...strongly. There are many who have accepted predestination because of the Bible's witness AND ARE NOT CALVINISTS. Nor do they necessarily accept the five points. So for you to tie the two together is not appropriate.


Whoa. You did say ante-Nicene at several points, but you also said that there was nothing but freewill until the Reformation. I contended against both of those errors. And don't forget Irenaeus, who is NOT excluded by your use of dates here.


We've already covered that. No, there was no John Calvin to explain what he believed prior to...well, John Calvin. But you have said much more than that no one agreed with Calvin prior to the Reformation. You have also said that the early Church was unanimous in favor of freewill--which is incorrect. Therefore, you are indeed narrowing your argument, now trying to make it seem that all you have charged is that the five points were not affirmed prior to Calvin, not that predestination was known among the Fathers, which it was.

Please quote for us even just one post-Biblical writer prior to the 16th century expressly teaching from the Scriptures that man, as a whole, does not have sufficient freewill to decide for himself whether or not to accept Jesus as his Lord and savior. Augustine apparently believed at some point or points in his life that some men, but only some men, did not have sufficient freewill to decide for themselves whether or not to accept Jesus as their Lord and savior. Calvin taught that no man has sufficient freewill to decide for himself whether or not to accept Jesus as his Lord and savior; it is this new, novel and incorrect belief that I am arguing against.

 

[Vince53]

Psalm 145:9 tells us: The LORD is good to all, And His tender mercies are over all His works.

"Did you notice that salvation is not mentioned or hinted at in that passage in any way."

Uhm, yes it is. It says ALL His works.


I'm sorry Vince, but the "all" spoken of in this Psalm are the "godly ones"

Uhm, no, the ALL spoken of in this Psalm are "all His works."

 

[TimRout]

Psalm 145:9

Uhm, no, the ALL spoken of in this Psalm are "all His works."

"The LORD is good to all...." I think you're focusing on the wrong "all", my friend. This "all" (highlighted) is a reference to the "godly ones" in verse 10.

 

[Albion]

Psalm 145:9 tells us: The LORD is good to all, And His tender mercies are over all His works.

"Did you notice that salvation is not mentioned or hinted at in that passage in any way."

Uhm, yes it is. It says ALL His works.

Uhm, no it doesn't. I mentions works but not salvation.

You may think that we earn salvation by doing good deeds, but even if that were so, this particular verse doesn't connect the doing of good works to our eternal destiny.

I'm sorry Vince, but the "all" spoken of in this Psalm are the "godly ones"

Uhm, no, the ALL spoken of in this Psalm are "all His works."

Here's a thought for future reference...learn how to indicate when you are quoting someone's words. The icon at the top which looks like a written page will enclose the other person's words when you highlight the part you want to quote.

 

[Albion]

Please quote for us even just one post-Biblical writer prior to the 16th century expressly teaching from the Scriptures that man, as a whole, does not have sufficient freewill to decide for himself whether or not to accept Jesus as his Lord and savior.

"God is not so poor and indigent as not to give to every body its own soul as its proper form. Hence plerothentos ton arithmou ou autos par auto proorise, pantes oi engrapheetes eis zoen anastesontai, having completed the number which he before determined with himself, all those who are written, or ordained unto life, shall rise again, having their own bodies, souls, and spirits, in which they pleased God; but those who are deserving of punishment shall go into it, having also their own souls and bodies in which they departed from the grace of God." --Irenaeus.

 

[Vince53]

I think you're focusing on the wrong "all", my friend.

No, I'm focusing on the "all" in "all His works." God's tender mercies are over all His works. He has no works of cruelty or evil, such as predestining people to Hell.

 

[Vince53]

My friend Albion writes: " God may predestine men to hell, yes. You may say that you can't find it in the Bible that he does this, I appreciate,..."

Okay, help me out. Quote a Scripture that says "God predestines men to Hell."


He continues: "... but that certainly does not give anyone the license to conclude that God cannot do this or does not do this!"

Psalm 145:9 tells us: "The LORD is good to all, And His tender mercies are over all His works." This verse teaches that God does not predestine men to Hell.

 

[Jessica01]

Everyone who is familiar with the history of the exegesis of Rom. 8:-29-30 knows full well that this passage can be reasonably interpreted in many different ways and that the very large majority of the exegetes both prior to and since the Reformation have interpreted them in a manner very differently than did Calvin.

I am looking at the plain reading of the the text.
Looking at Young's literal translation, it seems even clearer:

29:because whom He did foreknow, He also did fore-appoint, conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be first-born among many brethren;

30: and whom He did fore-appoint, these also He did call; and whom He did call, these also He declared righteous; and whom He declared righteous, these also He did glorify.

fore-appoint - If God is appointing ahead of time, that looks to be predestined as a Calvnist sees it to me.

Now it was suggested by Vince that all men are called:

We have seen that God loves the world, that His call to all men to be saved is genuine, and that He gives grace and repentance to all men. We have also seen that God does not predestine anyone to Hell, nor does He force anyone to sin.

However, we read this in Rev. 17:14:
These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him [are] called, and chosen, and faithful.


So ALL, as in all mankind, are called - and so are ALL, as in all mankind, with the Lamb against the beast and the 10 kings who oppose the Lamb?

Ephesians 1:4 is a small part of a very complex sentence in the Greek New Testament. In order to convey this critical fact to the English reader, it is absolutely essential that in the English translation this most basic element of the structure of the passage be preserved lest some of the subordinate clauses be read as primary clauses necessarily changing to a great degree the meaning of the passage. Those of us who are familiar with the history of the interpretation of this passage are all too aware of the theological aberrations that have blighted Christian theology because this most basic element of the structure of the passage has been ignored. Fortunately, the American Standard Version of 1901 preserved this sentence structure in their translation of this sentence that comprises Ephesians 1:3-14,

Ephesians 1:3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ:
4. even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him in love:
5. having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6. to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved:
7. in whom we have our redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trepasses, according to the riches of his grace,
8. which he made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence,
9. making known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he purposed in him
10. unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth; in him, I say,
11. in whom also we were made a heritage, having been foreordained according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will;
12. to the end that we should be unto the praise of his glory, we who had before hoped in Christ:
13. in whom ye also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation,-- in whom, having also believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14. which is an earnest of our inheritance, unto the redemption of God's own possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Actually the whole thing looks like it supports election and predestination to me. "chose us in him before the foundation of the world" "having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will"
The "in whom ye have believed" doesn't contradict predestination.

Millions of readers have read Eph. 1:1-14 in inadequate translation and have misunderstood it to be a series of objective doctrinal statements rather than what it actually is—a doxology eulogizing the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; and let us never forget that eulogies are not intended to be understood as a series of objective statements of fact that tell the whole story.

It is a doxology based on sound doctrine. There is no reason to expect that it is less than sound doctrine.
We are chosen, we are the called, we are fore-appointed, predestined.

I don't usually make proCalvinist arguments on websites, and I do look at scripture and think the Calvinists have a point.

 

[Albion]

My friend Albion writes: " God may predestine men to hell, yes. You may say that you can't find it in the Bible that he does this, I appreciate,..."

Okay, help me out. Quote a Scripture that says "God predestines men to Hell."

Vince, at some point you're going to have to read carefully what the rest of us have written. I said that "God MAY predestine men to hell." I did not say that God DOES predestine men to hell.

It could be that he predestines men to heaven and does not predestine men to hell, but we cannot presume to think what you were contending--that God absolutely does not predestine men to hell. He may. He is God. He judges.

You would like God to march to your own standard of justice, even though we are instructed in scripture that God's ways and our human ways are not identical. Fine. You've made that clear and we know what your own religious beliefs are. We merely have mentioned that they don't square with scripture. You're still entitled to them, however.

 

[Vince53]

You're growing, Albion. You've realized that the Bible does not teach that God predestines people to Hell. Now think, Albion, think. If you did not get the doctrine of predestination to Hell from God, whom did you get it from?

Psalm 145:9 tells us: "The LORD is good to all, And His tender mercies are over all His works." This verse teaches that God does not predestine men to Hell.

 

[bpetruzzo]

Phew! Here's a topic that's not going to end any time soon!