Reformed Evangelism

[Proeliator]

Ive heard some people speak of the fact that Calvinist theology essentialy makes personal witness and evangelism useless. How would you respond to that?

 

[McWilliams]

Ive heard some people speak of the fact that Calvinist theology essentialy makes personal witness and evangelism useless. How would you respond to that?

I usually say something like, 'Thats nonsense'!
We are first of all commanded to evangelize and as obedient believers we share the gospel faithfully!
God uses means to accomplish His purpose, for bringing His elect to Himself! We are the means He usually uses! We make no exceptions as we have no way of knowing who the elect are! Some even may not be called until a later time in life but we continue to plant, others water but God gives the increase in His best chosen time!

 

[Lambeth1595]

Ive heard some people speak of the fact that Calvinist theology essentialy makes personal witness and evangelism useless. How would you respond to that?

Preaching does 2 things:

1. saves the elect,
2. increases the damnation of the reprobate.

So it does not seem useless to me!

 

[Proeliator]

Preaching does 2 things:

1. saves the elect,
2. increases the damnation of the reprobate.

So it does not seem useless to me!

Can you clarify #2 with some references please?

 

[Lambeth1595]

Can you clarify #2 with some references please?

God will judge according to the light we have been given. Those who have sat under the gospel for 50 years but rejected it every week will recieve more punishment that someone who has never heard the gospel.

See: http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_50.html

Remember Proverbs 16:4 "The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil."

 

[ghs1994]

Can you clarify #2 with some references please?

God wants to make sure those He condemned from the beginning receive a worse punishment than others who have not heard the Gospel message. You know, God wants us to only preach the Gospel message to the elect. No one else will be able to receive the Gospel message in order to be saved. So make sure you only preach the Gospel message to those who will be saved because you and I have that foreknowledge.

 

[McWilliams]

God wants to make sure those He condemned from the beginning receive a worse punishment than others who have not heard the Gospel message. You know, God wants us to only preach the Gospel message to the elect. No one else will be able to receive the Gospel message in order to be saved. So make sure you only preach the Gospel message to those who will be saved because you and I have that foreknowledge.

Pray tell, how on earth will you be able to preach only to the elect? By what means do you identify them? They have no 'E' stamped on their back and our command is to preach the gospel to every creature! God is the one who reads hearts and regenerates them. We are His faithful ambassadors, bringing the good news of salvation to all!

 

[Proeliator]

Pray tell, how on earth will you be able to preach only to the elect? By what means do you identify them? They have no 'E' stamped on their back and our command is to preach the gospel to every creature! God is the one who reads hearts and regenerates them. We are His faithful ambassadors, bringing the good news of salvation to all!

 

[Beoga]

Ive heard some people speak of the fact that Calvinist theology essentialy makes personal witness and evangelism useless. How would you respond to that?

Three quick names:
1. Jonathan Edwards
2. CH Spurgeon
3. George Whitefield

 

[ghs1994]

Pray tell, how on earth will you be able to preach only to the elect? By what means do you identify them? They have no 'E' stamped on their back and our command is to preach the gospel to every creature! God is the one who reads hearts and regenerates them. We are His faithful ambassadors, bringing the good news of salvation to all!

I apologize. I was actually being sarcastic.

 

[JJB]

Ive heard some people speak of the fact that Calvinist theology essentialy makes personal witness and evangelism useless. How would you respond to that?

hahahahahahahaha

I would suggest the person making this assertion do some research into missionary work.

We have no crystal ball to know who the elect are.

All Christians have been given their marching orders. THey're called The Great Commission.

 

[Paleoconservatarian]

Ive heard some people speak of the fact that Calvinist theology essentialy makes personal witness and evangelism useless. How would you respond to that?

I'd say that this is just about the biggest example of thoughtlessness I have ever heard. The fact that this is such a common objection to Calvinism is worrying. I have to wonder whether these folks really believe it themselves, or are just looking for any old stick they can throw into the spokes. This is how I was when I was an Arminian. For starters, comments like this show how little effort has been put into understanding what the Calvinist position is. I was like this too. When discussing the doctrines of grace with my uncle, I gave this line because all that I had heard about Calvinism is that they believe in predestination, that we are either chosen or damned and there's not a thing we can do about it. No free will, no choice, blah blah. So I tore my robe and leapt upon the heretic. Only when he began to elucidate the doctrines of grace, I could not but abandon my preconceptions.

To begin with, any pragmatic person should understand that if God has predestined some to be saved, others to be reprobated, and has not shared this information with us, then we do not know who is among the elect. For all intents and purposes, we should treat others as though they might be elect. Therefore evangelism is necessary. Not to mention the fact that we are commanded to evangelize. Because all those whom God has elected will be saved, we are guaranteed that our efforts will not fail. Therefore, Calvinism is conducive to evangelism, for we know that we will have 100% success, and reach all of God's elect.

A.W. Tozer said that, "The essence of idolatry is the entertainment of thoughts about God that are unworthy of Him."

I agree with Tozer here, and this is why I believe that synergism is more harmful to evangelism than is Calvinist theology. Under the synergistic view, one may say that he is saved because at one point in history, he did something. "I accepted Christ," he says, and on this sole event, his choice, is his assurance. We become the electors of God, rather than the other way 'round. One disastrous result is the all the stress and worry of wondering whether or not he is really saved, and whether he will lose it by the end of the day. We find Christ unable to keep what is His, while the sinner is struggling to keep his salvation. We struggle to earn God's favor. And we've fallen into idolatry. In Calvinism, we know that we may persevere because we already have God's favor, and this is our assurance.

 

[McWilliams]

I apologize. I was actually being sarcastic.

Accepted! You're off the hook this time!

 

[Scholar in training]

I agree with Tozer here, and this is why I believe that synergism is more harmful to evangelism than is Calvinist theology. Under the synergistic view, one may say that he is saved because at one point in history, he did something. "I accepted Christ," he says, and on this sole event, his choice, is his assurance.

I don't know any synergist who says this. If anything, in my experience synergists are more likely to say that they are being saved, as St. Paul put it, and that their salvation does not hinge on one event, even if one event may have been the first time they responded to the Spirit. Being saved at one moment conflicts with the concept of theosis; many synergists, BTW, do not clearly see the concept of theosis in Calvinistic theology.

We find Christ unable to keep what is His, while the sinner is struggling to keep his salvation.

It's not about God being "unable" to keep us in his hand. Calvinist theology begs the question of whether someone can take himself out of God's hand.

We struggle to earn God's favor.

We struggle that our faith might not be in vain. We believe that certain actions are meritorious, but we do not believe that one can "earn" their salvation.

 

[Proeliator]

It's not about God being "unable" to keep us in his hand. Calvinist theology begs the question of whether someone can take himself out of God's hand.

From what I understand, Calvinist theology doesnt question that at all, its known that cannot happen.

We struggle that our faith might not be in vain. We believe that certain actions are meritorious, but we do not believe that one can "earn" their salvation.

I dont agree with the fact that certain actions are meritorius, for that implys that we can gain more through them. I know for myself that I try to act in a way that would please God, and through though actions, His kingdom will gain.

 

[Scholar in training]

From what I understand, Calvinist theology doesnt question that at all, its known that cannot happen.

That's a cute way to phrase it, but it doesn't settle the issue.

I dont agree with the fact that certain actions are meritorius

It is in this that one strays from the teachings of the Jews and early Christians. It is one of the things that makes Calvinistic theology far too modern for me to accept it.

 

[Jon_]

I don't know any synergist who says this. If anything, in my experience synergists are more likely to say that they are being saved, as St. Paul put it, and that their salvation does not hinge on one event, even if one event may have been the first time they responded to the Spirit. Being saved at one moment conflicts with the concept of theosis; many synergists, BTW, do not clearly see the concept of theosis in Calvinistic theology.

There is no concept of theosis in Calvinist theology. There is santification, but that is something different.

It's not about God being "unable" to keep us in his hand. Calvinist theology begs the question of whether someone can take himself out of God's hand.

This is an incorrect use of the term "begs the question."

Moreover, the propositions that God can keep us in his hand and that man can take himself out of God's hand are contrary to each other. If the one is true, the other cannot be true. Either God can keep us in his hand, and thus man is unable to take himself out, or man can take himself out of God's hand, and thus is God unable to keep us in his hand.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Scholar in training]

There is no concept of theosis in Calvinist theology. There is santification, but that is something different.

Calvinists do not at all define "being saved" in terms of theosis? Even Augustine, who many monergists see as a forerunner of Calvinist theology, used terminology related to the concept of theosis.

Moreover, the propositions that God can keep us in his hand and that man can take himself out of God's hand are contrary to each other. If the one is true, the other cannot be true. Either God can keep us in his hand, and thus man is unable to take himself out, or man can take himself out of God's hand, and thus is God unable to keep us in his hand.

I don't think that they are contrary. God cannot make "square circles" (as the phrase goes), but this does not say anything about his omnipotence; if someone can remove him/herself from God's hand, why does this say anything about his sovereignty?

 

[Proeliator]

It is in this that one strays from the teachings of the Jews and early Christians. It is one of the things that makes Calvinistic theology far too modern for me to accept it.

Wether you accept it or not, truth is truth. You have to be discerning of the things you read and hear, or worrying too much about early Christianity you will end up an Arian, or worse a Pelagian.

 

[lmnop9876]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to McWilliams again.