Calvinist Arminian dialog

[SeventhValley]

I could get along with Spurgeon and any moderate Calvinist

"
I see in one place, God presiding over all in providence; and yet I see, and I cannot help seeing, that man acts as he pleases, and that God has left his actions to his own will, in a great measure.
Now, if I were to declare that man was so free to act, that there was no presidence of God over his actions, I should be driven very near to Atheism; and if, on the other hand, I declare that God so overrules all things, as that man is not free enough to be responsible, I am driven at once into Antinomianism or fatalism.
That God predestines, and that man is responsible, are two things that few can see. They are believed to be inconsistent and contradictory; but they are not. It is just the fault of our weak judgment. Two truths cannot be contradictory to each other.
If, then, I find taught in one place that everything is fore-ordained, that is true; and if I find in another place that man is responsible for all his actions, that is true; and it is my folly that leads me to imagine that two truths can ever contradict each other.
These two truths, I do not believe, can ever be welded into one upon any human anvil, but one they shall be in eternity: they are two lines that are so nearly parallel, that the mind that shall pursue them farthest, will never discover that they converge; but they do converge, and they will meet somewhere in eternity, close to the throne of God, whence all truth doth spring.
"

I like how Spurgeon just says God rules all but we also have free will. That humans cannot understand how it works and leave it at that.
I can easily belong to a church that follows Spurgeon's example.

 

[OzSpen]

I could get along with Spurgeon and any moderate Calvinist

"
I see in one place, God presiding over all in providence; and yet I see, and I cannot help seeing, that man acts as he pleases, and that God has left his actions to his own will, in a great measure.
Now, if I were to declare that man was so free to act, that there was no presidence of God over his actions, I should be driven very near to Atheism; and if, on the other hand, I declare that God so overrules all things, as that man is not free enough to be responsible, I am driven at once into Antinomianism or fatalism.
That God predestines, and that man is responsible, are two things that few can see. They are believed to be inconsistent and contradictory; but they are not. It is just the fault of our weak judgment. Two truths cannot be contradictory to each other.
If, then, I find taught in one place that everything is fore-ordained, that is true; and if I find in another place that man is responsible for all his actions, that is true; and it is my folly that leads me to imagine that two truths can ever contradict each other.
These two truths, I do not believe, can ever be welded into one upon any human anvil, but one they shall be in eternity: they are two lines that are so nearly parallel, that the mind that shall pursue them farthest, will never discover that they converge; but they do converge, and they will meet somewhere in eternity, close to the throne of God, whence all truth doth spring.
"

I like how Spurgeon just says God rules all but we also have free will. That humans cannot understand how it works and leave it at that.
I can easily belong to a church that follows Spurgeon's example.

Would you be so kind as to provide a reference when you give such a quote from Spurgeon. I located it HERE.

How do you think that Spurgeon's view of predestination and human responsibility fits with his understanding of unconditional election?

Oz

 

[Bella Vita]

I'm a Calvinist so I agree with Spurgeon. That's just me though. =]

 

[OzSpen]

I'm a Calvinist so I agree with Spurgeon. That's just me though. =]

How do you think that Spurgeon's view of human responsibility in salvation fits with his understanding of unconditional election? How can one be unconditionally elected to salvation and still have human responsibility in the decision?

I, as a Reformed/Classical Arminian, endorse Spurgeon's view of predestination and human responsibility but I cannot see how that harmonises with unconditional election.

Oz

 

[Bella Vita]

How do you think that Spurgeon's view of human responsibility in salvation fits with his understanding of unconditional election? How can one be unconditionally elected to salvation and still have human responsibility in the decision?

I, as a Reformed/Classical Arminian, endorse Spurgeon's view of predestination and human responsibility but I cannot see how that harmonises with unconditional election.

Oz

I believe in what Spurgeon is saying in the quote is true that the Bible teaches both points of view (human responsibility and unconditional election) and believing in the Bible I see both as truth and therefore they don't have to contradict one another. I think Spurgeon's way of explaining it is very beautiful and dead on. There are things in this life we will never be able to understand this is one of them. I am content in scripture I am content with no having an answer for everything and I put my trust in God that he is going to take care of it.

 

[SeventhValley]

Please stick to the topic this is a thread about bridge building.

 

[OzSpen]

Please stick to the topic this is a thread about bridge building.

I know that you started the thread and that might be what you intended, but you titled it, 'Calvinist Arminian dialog'.

When I raised the issue of Spurgeon's view of unconditional election and how that fits with his understanding of predestination and free will, I understood that I was engaging in Calvinist-Arminian dialogue.

Why is that not so?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Please stick to the topic this is a thread about bridge building.

I consider that Calvinists and Arminians have common beliefs in their teaching in these areas: the Trinity, the deity of Christ, original sin, total depravity, substitutionary atonement, salvation is a free gift received by faith without works of righteousness, the capacity to believe unto salvation depends on God's grace, denial of any human ability to initiate a relationship with God (the divine initiative of faith), the supernatural inspiration of the Scripture (the authority of Scripture), sola scriptura, and the divine sovereignty of God.

These are only a beginning of a statement about common ground. While acknowledging that there are some differences, classical Arminianism and classical Calvinism have a considerable amount of common ground.

In Christ, Oz

 

[SeventhValley]

I consider that Calvinists and Arminians have common beliefs in their teaching in these areas: the Trinity, the deity of Christ, original sin, total depravity, substitutionary atonement, salvation is a free gift received by faith without works of righteousness, the capacity to believe unto salvation depends on God's grace, denial of any human ability to initiate a relationship with God (the divine initiative of faith), the supernatural inspiration of the Scripture (the authority of Scripture), sola scriptura, and the divine sovereignty of God.

These are only a beginning of a statement about common ground. While acknowledging that there are some differences, classical Arminianism and classical Calvinism have a considerable amount of common ground.

In Christ, Oz

Thanks Oz Good points.

 

[SeventhValley]

This thread is about Baptist coming together. Finding common ground between Baptists since Calvinist Arminian debate happens too much.

 

[Don Maurer]

This thread is about Baptist coming together. Finding common ground between Baptists since Calvinist Arminian debate happens too much.

I agree with your motive, but your objective will not be easy to accomplish. On both sides there are people who will radicalize the issues.

I regularly see people who have an Arminian theology and they rarely admit that they are Arminian. Norman Geisler, in his book "Chosen but Free" refers to anyone who accepts TULIP as belonging to "Extreme Calvinism." Geisler then turns around and calls his own Arminian position "modifed Calvinism." Oddly enough, that is probably exactly how the original Remonstrants thought of themselves. They thought they were reformed and just modifying Reformed Theology. Of course the Dutch Reformed, and others from Reformed areas of the world looked at the new Arminian doctrine as a return to Roman Catholic soteriology.

 

[OzSpen]

Spurgeon is big with the SBC. Which is really weird. The guy was a diehard Calvinist, and many things Spurgeon stated are diametric opposite of typical SBC beliefs.

Why don't you get specific about the many things where Spurgeon was diametrically opposed to SBC beliefs (with references for your Spurgeon quotes and the SBC beliefs).

Oz

 

[SeventhValley]

Total depravity is an area where both Calvinist and Arminian agree.

 

[OzSpen]

Spurgeon is big with the SBC. Which is really weird. The guy was a diehard Calvinist, and many things Spurgeon stated are diametric opposite of typical SBC beliefs.

I have a friend who is an SBC pastor in South Carolina. He is a staunch Calvinist. Obviously such theological positions are allowed in the SBC. So why would Spurgeon's theological positions not be allowed?

Oz

 

[SeventhValley]

Calvinists and Arminians agree Christ regenerates then people must repent and have faith.

We agree on the need to evangelize.

 

[OzSpen]

Calvinists and Arminians agree Christ regenerates then people must repent and have faith.

We agree on the need to evangelize.

Why is regeneration not simultaneous with repentance and faith?

 

[OzSpen]

Jesus died for everyone:

• John 1:29, "The next day he saw Jesus coming to him, and said, 'Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!'"
• John 3:16, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life."
• John 4:42, "and they were saying to the woman, 'It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world.'"
• 1 Tim. 4:10, "For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers."
• 1 John 2:2, "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world."
• 1 John 4:14, "And we have beheld and bear witness that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world."

Oz


<edit>

 

[joeboonda]

I'm not Calvinist or Arminianist, I'm a Calvarinianist. I trust in Christ's finished work on Calvary . Hyper-Calvinism is not so cool since they think God will save everyone on his list anyway so there's no point in evangelizing. Not so good.

I look at it like this. God knows the future, so although the gift is offered to everyone, he knew (foreknew) who would accept the free gift of salvation and who wouldn't. Those who accepted the free gift he predestined to see them all the way home, to be conformed to the image of his Son and their names were written in the book; he called them with the preaching of the Gospel, he justified them when they accepted Christ, declared them not guilty, and he glorified them, as we are now seated in heaven with Christ and will be ultimately glorified at the Rapture/Resurrection. Having done all that for us, who can be against us? What can separate us from him? Absolutely no one and nothing.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?
38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 8

 

[OzSpen]

Joe,

From what you have quoted here, you seem to be closer to an Arminian who understands election/predestination according to God's foreknowledge and His knowing in advance those who will respond in faith to the Gospel. Is that what you are saying or am I misunderstanding what you said and supported it from Romans 8:29-39.

What's the difference between what you call a Calvarinianist and an Arminian who accepts predestination as it relates to God's foreknowledge?

I'm seeking your clarification.

Oz

I'm not Calvinist or Arminianist, I'm a Calvarinianist. I trust in Christ's finished work on Calvary . Hyper-Calvinism is not so cool since they think God will save everyone on his list anyway so there's no point in evangelizing. Not so good.

I look at it like this. God knows the future, so although the gift is offered to everyone, he knew (foreknew) who would accept the free gift of salvation and who wouldn't. Those who accepted the free gift he predestined to see them all the way home, to be conformed to the image of his Son and their names were written in the book; he called them with the preaching of the Gospel, he justified them when they accepted Christ, declared them not guilty, and he glorified them, as we are now seated in heaven with Christ and will be ultimately glorified at the Rapture/Resurrection. Having done all that for us, who can be against us? What can separate us from him? Absolutely no one and nothing.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?
38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 8

 

[joeboonda]

Joe,

From what you have quoted here, you seem to be closer to an Arminian who understands election/predestination according to God's foreknowledge and His knowing in advance those who will respond in faith to the Gospel. Is that what you are saying or am I misunderstanding what you said and supported it from Romans 8:29-39.

What's the difference between what you call a Calvarinianist and an Arminian who accepts predestination as it relates to God's foreknowledge?

I'm seeking your clarification.

Oz

Hi, I'm in no way an Arminianist. By calvarinianist I mean Calvary: Calvary-nianist hence calvarinianist. I believe all who have trusted Christ and his finished work on Calvary to have paid for all their sins is freely, completely saved to the uttermost forevermore. God simply knew who would accept the free gift and made sure that those who did would be conformed to the image of his Son after they heard the Gospel and believed it and were declared not guilty and seated in Heaven with Christ. So, all who come to him, he keeps secure and loses none. That's all I meant. He predestined us to Heaven. He made sure we were secure, not because of our goodness, but because of Christ's finished work.

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. Romans 5