Calvinism Vs. Wesleyan Theology

[TSIBHOD]

But what happens when a thriving fruitful branch ceases to produce?

(Mat. 7:17-18) Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18) A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

​

(Emphasis mine.)

Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. (John 15:2 ESV)

It's a valid question.

 

[The Prokeimenon!]

Interesting you should say that since Paul's epistles form about 90% of Calvinist theology.

Maybe, but Paul's Epistles also form 90% of Arminian theology. And 90% of Jehovah's Witness theology. And 90% of Lutheran theology. etc. When I was a Baptist, we were something like 3-point Calvinists and 50% Arminians at the same time. You'll never guess where we got all our ideas... Paul's Epistles. Everybody can quote a couple hundred out of context Bible passages and form a new theology and call it Biblical.

Moses

 

[we5frogs]

I also hold to Wesleyan theology, although I do think we need to be careful to "not put too much emphasis on man and his decisions, and not enough on God and the gospel".

The differences between Calvinism and Arminian/Wesleyan lie within the 5 points, as I understand it. They are:

1. Total Depravity

Mankind is totally depraved, we are all evil from birth vs we are all born sinners but God has extended His common grace to all pulling us towards Him so that every man or woman can search and find God.

​

2. Unconditional Election

Before the foundation of the world God predestined who would be saved, the decision is all God vs all are chosen to salvation but each is free to accept or refuse His offer.

​

3. Limited Atonement

Christ died for only a chosen few vs Christ died for all and the atonement of Christ is open to all men everywhere, limited only by our refusal to be accept salvation.

​

4. Irresistible Grace

The grace of God is given to the chosen few, and it is irresistible, no man can keep from being saved if they are chosen vs common grace is available to all but saving grace can be refused by a stubborn heart.

​

5. Perseverance of the Saints

Once saved, a person will always be saved, they can't quit and even those who live in flagrant sin are on their way to heaven vs by rebellion through defiant, continual, purposeful, rebellion a person who has been saved refuses God's grace

Feel free to point out anywhere I have may have erred in my post. I am simply listing what we have been taught about the differences.
​

 

[sinner/SAVED]

But what happens when a thriving fruitful branch ceases to produce?

(Mat. 7:17-18) Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18) A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

​

(Emphasis mine.)

But if the elect's assurance of salvation is by their fruit and for whatever reason cease to produce, does that mean that they were never elected and had a false sense of assurance or that the fruitful elect can become unfruitful and un-elected?

 

[Jon_]

Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. (John 15:2 ESV)

It's a valid question.

Yes, it is a valid question. I certainly was not denying its validity, but I had thought that the verse answered it sufficiently.

The verse that you have quoted fits in with the theme of Matthew 7:17-18 perfectly. Those branches which do not bear fruit do not belong in the kingdom. They never belonged in the kingdom. Read forward a couple of passages:

(John 15:5-6) I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

​

But if the elect's assurance of salvation is by their fruit and for whatever reason cease to produce, does that mean that they were never elected and had a false sense of assurance or that the fruitful elect can become unfruitful and un-elected?

No. It means that their lack of fruit shakes their assurance. This is the warning of Hebrews 10:26-27.

For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
​

But the author goes on to say that such is not true of believers in v. 39:

But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.
​

Since an evil tree cannot bear good fruit and a good tree cannot bear evil fruit, any tree bearing forth good fruit is of the vine of Jesus Christ.

John writes about those among the church who go out never to return:

(1 John 2:19) They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

​

Though they were among us, they never bore fruit. They were never grafted into the vine of Jesus Christ. As unfruitful branches, they will be cut off and thrown into the fire. But those who remain and abide in Christ do so eternally.

Think about the prospect of "unelection." Is it reasonable for us to assume that God would unchoose people after redeeming them? What would be the reasoning behind that? Would God admit that he made a mistake? That the person really wasn't "good enough" to justify election? Who among us is? That is precisely why it is called grace.

On the prospect of unfruitfulness, we need only look to nature to complete the analogy. Some trees bear more than others. Some seasons produce more than others. Some seasons see no fruit. Sometimes there is blight and famine. Other times there is a bumper crop. Trees do not bear constantly. During the winter, they go into hibernation, preparing for the warming sun to return to touch their leaves that they may begin the cycle afresh.

But do not doubt, he that abides in Christ will bring forth fruit and that abundantly (John 15:5).

 

[Philip]

No. It means that their lack of fruit shakes their assurance.

Does this mean that it is impossible for someone to think that they are bearing fruit when actually they are not?

 

[Jay2004]

one theology is 250 years old
the other is 400 years old

I follow what has been passed down by christ..........and then the apostles.. etc..
faith and works
scripture and tradition all the way

 

[alaurie]

Three questions, one answer: fruit.

That's why I left.

 

[Paleoconservatarian]

.

 

[Jon_]

Does this mean that it is impossible for someone to think that they are bearing fruit when actually they are not?

No, men truly think they do right by themselves, though they do not.

(Pro 16:2) All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes; but the LORD weigheth the spirits.

​

That's why I left.

Care to elaborate? Perhaps your disenfranchisment with Calvinism was a result of a misconception about its true profession. It would be a shame if you distanced yourself from it due to a misunderstanding.

 

[alaurie]

Care to elaborate? Perhaps your disenfranchisment with Calvinism was a result of a misconception about its true profession. It would be a shame if you distanced yourself from it due to a misunderstanding.

It wasn't a misunderstanding; I sat under the teaching of learned professors at RTS who attended my church. I left because I didn't see much grace extended by most followers of the theology to other Christians. My time at CF has only reinforced that perception.

 

[Philip]

No, men truly think they do right by themselves, though they do not.

(Pro 16:2) All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes; but the LORD weigheth the spirits.
​

No. It means that their lack of fruit shakes their assurance. This is the warning of Hebrews 10:26-27.

What, then, shakes their confidence if they believe that they are doing right?​

 

[sinner/SAVED]

Yes, it is a valid question. I certainly was not denying its validity, but I had thought that the verse answered it sufficiently.



The verse that you have quoted fits in with the theme of Matthew 7:17-18 perfectly. Those branches which do not bear fruit do not belong in the kingdom. They never belonged in the kingdom. Read forward a couple of passages:

(John 15:5-6) I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.



​

No. It means that their lack of fruit shakes their assurance. This is the warning of Hebrews 10:26-27.

For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.


​

But the author goes on to say that such is not true of believers in v. 39:

But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.


​

Since an evil tree cannot bear good fruit and a good tree cannot bear evil fruit, any tree bearing forth good fruit is of the vine of Jesus Christ.




John writes about those among the church who go out never to return:

(1 John 2:19) They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.



​

Though they were among us, they never bore fruit. They were never grafted into the vine of Jesus Christ. As unfruitful branches, they will be cut off and thrown into the fire. But those who remain and abide in Christ do so eternally.


Think about the prospect of "unelection." Is it reasonable for us to assume that God would unchoose people after redeeming them? What would be the reasoning behind that? Would God admit that he made a mistake? That the person really wasn't "good enough" to justify election? Who among us is? That is precisely why it is called grace.

On the prospect of unfruitfulness, we need only look to nature to complete the analogy. Some trees bear more than others. Some seasons produce more than others. Some seasons see no fruit. Sometimes there is blight and famine. Other times there is a bumper crop. Trees do not bear constantly. During the winter, they go into hibernation, preparing for the warming sun to return to touch their leaves that they may begin the cycle afresh.

But do not doubt, he that abides in Christ will bring forth fruit and that abundantly (John 15:5).

This reinforces my belief that Calvinism offers no assurance of salvation. What of the trees that bring forth good fruit this year (giving the assurance of being among the elect) and bad fruit next year (thereby annulling the former assurance)?

 

[Jon_]

It wasn't a misunderstanding; I sat under the teaching of learned professors at RTS who attended my church. I left because I didn't see much grace extended by most followers of the theology to other Christians. My time at CF has only reinforced that perception.

I think it's very sad that you found your view of the truth of Reformed theology on the actions of some of its members. Many non-Christians would argue that is precisely why they are not Christians. Is it anymore a valid argument for them?

I'm sad to hear that how you feel about Reformed theology affects what you know about it. It does not surprise me that you became a Methodist. That's not intended to be an insult, either. The Wesleyan doctrine is very good at making people feel like they play an active role in their salvation, even though they do not. Some people need that. I suppose you do. I would rather walk in the truth, though, which is why I left the Nazarene church.

Go and be blessed, sister.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Astronaut]

I think it's very sad that you found your view of the truth of Reformed theology on the actions of some of its members. Many non-Christians would argue that is precisely why they are not Christians. Is it anymore a valid argument for them?

Jesus thought so: John 13:35 "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

True Christianity is the belief held by people who approve of all other people. Thus, a true Christian could be a Budhist, a Hindu, etc.

 

[Jon_]

This reinforces my belief that Calvinism offers no assurance of salvation. What of the trees that bring forth good fruit this year (giving the assurance of being among the elect) and bad fruit next year (thereby annulling the former assurance)?

You do not think it offers assurance because from the ground up you do not believe its tenets. How could you honestly believe in eternal security if you think that salvation is synergistic? Apparently, Norman Geisler can, but he is the exception. Most synergists, such as yourself, find this impossible to grasp. It is no surprise then that you think Calvinism offers no hope of assurance. You cannot accept that we are assured of anything, seeing that you believe our salvation hinges upon our own willingness to believe (and not believe).

It's a sad state of affairs, truly. The recent proliferation of the chruch growth movement in America coupled with faulty doctrines such as Wesleyanism and Arminianism have left people aching for the very thing they claim to profess: faith. Christianity in America is 3000 miles wide and half an inch deep. My heart goes out to those who are entombed in such a despairing doctrine. Would that I could be used as an instrument to show all of them the truth of God's loving grace. Grace is something that Wesleyans and Arminians struggle with very deeply, even though they don't realize it.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Jon_]

Jesus thought so: John 13:35 "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

True Christianity is the belief held by people who approve of all other people. Thus, a true Christian could be a Budhist, a Hindu, etc.

I think you had better qualify that a bit. It sounds as if you're saying that all religions that put love at the forefront lead to God. They do not.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[sinner/SAVED]

The Wesleyan doctrine is very good at making people feel like they play an active role in their salvation, even though they do not.

Wesleyan doctrine is based entirely on grace.

You cannot accept that we are assured of anything,

I have total assurance of my salvation by grace through faith in Christ.

 

[sinner/SAVED]

I think you had better qualify that a bit. It sounds as if you're saying that all religions that put love at the forefront lead to God. They do not.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

With this I am in total agreement with Jon.

 

[alaurie]

I think it's very sad that you found your view of the truth of Reformed theology on the actions of some of its members. Many non-Christians would argue that is precisely why they are not Christians. Is it anymore a valid argument for them?

I'm sad to hear that how you feel about Reformed theology affects what you know about it. It does not surprise me that you became a Methodist. That's not intended to be an insult, either. The Wesleyan doctrine is very good at making people feel like they play an active role in their salvation, even though they do not. Some people need that. I suppose you do.

I'm afraid you've read a few sentences I've posted here and incorrectly inferred a lot about me.

My decision to leave calvinism was based on much study of theology and observation of the behavior of people who follow its theology. My personal walk during my time in a reformed church was much more legalistic than now; now the motivation I have to honor God and bear fruit is love. I heard the word 'grace' spoken a lot there, but saw much more pride than grace. The theological system at times seemed almost more important to its adherents than Christ. A friend of mine who abandoned reformed theology shortly after I did remarked that she felt so free in Christ's grace now that she no longer felt the need to prove her salvation by correct theology. Her remarks sum up my experience beautifully.

Thanks for your good wishes for blessings. I am very blessed and wish the same for you.