"doublethink"

[orthotomeo]

Anyone read 1984 by George Orwell? Excellent, scary book; it gets more and more timely all the time.

If you read it, do you remember the term "doublethink?" It was the ability of the brainwashed masses to believe two mutually exclusive ideas at the same time without noticing they contradict each other. Many people today are capable of such mental contortions.No offense intended, but followers of Calvin often are guilty of their own brand of doublethink.

Each pair of quotes (below) consists of two mutually exclusive truths which the men quoted hold as equally valid at the same time. Many such examples from many Calvinists can be cited, but here's just two:

J.I. Packer, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God:

"We should not be held back by the thought that if {men} are not elect, they will not believe us and our efforts to convert them will fail. That is true; but it is none of our business, and should make no difference to our action" (pp. 98-99).

"The belief that God is sovereign in grace {elecing some and reprobating others} does not affect the responsibility of the sinner. Whatever we may believe about election, the fact remains that a man who rejects Christ threreby becomes the cause of his own condemnation. Unbelief in the Bible is a guilty thing, and unbelievers cannot excuse themselves on the grounds that they were not elect. The unbeliever was really offered life in the gospel, and could have it if he would; he, and no-one but he, is responsible for the fact that he rejected it and must now endure the consequences for rejecting it" (pp. 104-105).

* * *

Duane Edward Spencer, TULIP: The Five Points of Calvinism in the Light of Scripture:

"The God of Scripture makes no apologies for the fact that He determined to let most men spend eternity under His wrath, giving them exactly what they deserve. . .It stands, therefore, that the one man 'believes' because such was the will of God, and the other rejects because that, too, was the will of God." (p. 17, 22).

"Christ died to save particular persons who were given Him by the Father in eternity past. His death was, therefore, a one hundred percent success, in that all for whom He died will be saved, and all for whom He did not die will receive 'justice' from God when they are cast into hell" (p. 12).

 

[Dispy]

orthotomego:

As a former Calvinist, I concur with your observation.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord.

 

[orthotomeo]

Thanks, Dispy.

Care to tell us how you came away from Calvinism, and where you are now?

o.

 

[orthotomeo]

...here's another way of phrasing it:

The Bible teaches that God is perfectly just and righteous in everything He does. That means when the Bible says the Gospel of grace is an open invitation to EVERY HUMAN BEING WHO HEARS IT, then EVERYONE, potentially, can be saved. The choice, however, is ours - God gave us that freedom, and He judges us on the basis of whether we do with it (believe or reject the Gospel).

But John Calvin taught that God determined the eternal destiny of EVERY HUMAN BEING way back in eternity. If you end up saved, Calvin said that's not because you believed the Gospel but because God had already "elected" you to salvation. If you end up in the Lake of Fire, it's not because you rejected Christ but because God had already "reprobated" you to Hell. Human choice and will have no real place in salvation or damnation - it's all up to God. Whatever "choice" we may make regarding Christ, it is not really our choice at all...it's simply the result of the choice God made FOR us. And there's nothing we can do to change God's mind.

In other words: when it comes to Heaven and Hell, you and I are will-less, choice-less robots, preprogrammed by God to one eternal fate or the other. You can't trust Christ unless God CHOSE you to trust Christ.

The problem: the Bible repeatedly says God condemns people - not because He reprobated them - but on the basis of how the respond to His revealed will. Today, that would be on the basis of how one responds to the Gospel of Grace.

If God already decided the eternal destiny of every human being (which Calvin said He did), yet He holds unbelievers responsible for the salvation choice they make (which the Bible teaches), how can Calvin's God be the just, righteous God of the Bible?

So the question is: Can a just, righteous God condemn people for making a choice He never really gave them?

o.

 

[Dispy]

o, THANKS for asking.

After forsaking Calvinism and searching for Truth through many denominational and non-denominational chruches for Truth, I was left with no where else to turn. Therefore I became unchurched for many many years but still had a desire for truth.

My problem was that I came from a family that had a STRONG Calvinistic background. In fact my father had to 1st cousins that were professsors at Calvin College and one of them was honored by having a "house" named after him.

First of all, you must understand that I was born several years prior to 1948, the year that Israel became a nation. The Calvinist chruch that I attended was much more "strict" in their doctrine that they are today. They (the church), so they taught, replaced Israel and the Law was their strict guideline.

In my early years I was educated in the "Christian School". I was taught that all the Bible was my "instruction book" and do all it's requirements. However we didn't practise all the Jewish religeous ceremonies. They even taught that "infant baptism" replaced "circumision". Even then, I couldn't figure out why they baptized baby girls.

I was taught that to be a Christian, I had to read my Bible every day, live by the 10 commandmants, and confess my sins every night. To this I tried my best - tried hard and was considered a "good boy". However, I never felt "good enough" to earn a spot in heaven.

My downfall was, I was studying the Bible, more then just reading it. I was studying it and in the only context that I knew how. I was taking everything literally.

Believing, as I was taught, that everything in the Bible was my "instruction book", I found the instructions contradictory, and I became confused as to what I was being taught, and what the Bible said. Of course that caused this "inquiring mind" to go to my teachers and pastor (domminie [sp?]) for answers.

Yes, I got answers alright, but they didn't answer my questions. Their replies fit the "church doctrine." When pressed further, the reply came: "well some things we must just take by faith."

My father was an avid Bible reader and from his own personal studies he came to believe that Israel would one day again become a nation. This is pre-1948. When this was brought up at the Wednesday night church Bible study (men's society), along with other doctrines my dad questioned, he was branded a heretic and excommunicated from the chruch because he refused to change his views.

My dad lived to see Israel become a nation in May 1948. My day died on May 30, 1948.

There is no doubt in my mind that my dad had an influence on my Bible study and how I felt about the church because of the manner in which the church treated him.

At that time in my life I was a teen-ageer and began to look to other churches for Truth. None of them could give me the answers to which I was looking for to clear up the seemingly contratictions I found in the Bible. They all gave me "church doctrine" answers that didn't answer my questions. I even had to quit studying the Bible for fear of going crazy trying to figure it out.

As a young man I did commit my live to Christ, but found it it extremely to live the life that the church expected of me. No matter how hard I tried, I never felt that I had done enough to earn a place in heaven.

After many many years of going unchurched, one Sunday morning circumstances let me to a small church in South Chicago.

Prior to that Sunday morning I don't ever recall hearing about dispensationalism or even know what it meant. Before that morning was over, I knew that it was what I was searching for all my life.

That Sunday morning, Pastor Stam, founder and president of the Berean Bible Society, was "filling in" because that church was without a pastor at the time. That Sunday morning Pastor Stam was beginning a study on the Book of the Acts. His first sermon was an "over all" view of the book. In that one sermon he answered all the questions of my youth and I didn't even have to ask a question. He was explaining that in the Book of the Acts, there is a transition from the teaching of Law, to Israel, to Grace for all mankind without distinction. I also learned that all the Bible was FOR ME but it was not all addressed TO ME. That very morning I became what most people today call an Ultra/Extreme dispensationalist. Bible study is now a joy and not a contradictory book. My understanding of "God's Plan for the Ages" is the most remarkable study that one can undertake. It is much easier to see when one reads the Bible in context and understands that all the Bible is FOR ME and not all addressed TO ME. It is all for our learning, Rms 15:4.

Also, I learned that there is nothing I can do for my salvation. Christ did it all. The only thing left for me to do is accept the "free gift" of God's Grace by putting my faith and trust in the Cross Work (death, burial and resurrection) of Christ.

It is not hard to understand why there are so many denominations in Christiandom today. They all have a doctrine, based in Scripture, that is a mixture of Law and Grace. Each has a little different formula for the mixture of the two. That mixture is what has led to the different denominations and total confusion. The question now is, Which one is right? They are "Scriptural" but not "dispensational".

Again o, THANKS for asking. I hope this wasn't to long and boring.

God Bless.