• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

What's the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism?

Epoisses

Well-Known Member
Apr 26, 2012
429
23
East coast
✟671.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

Why don't you explain those big words. I would love to hear it.
 
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married

I'm sorry you reject the Bible's description of the miraculous, gracious work of conversion that God does in us.
God working to change us and save us is "extremeism". Amazing.
 
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
God is love. We can turn from righteousness to wickedness and if we do we will not receive eternal life.

Notice folks: Nothing about putting faith in Christ's finished work on the cross as what saves us. (in Elmanism)
 
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
So you admit it? I am down for us both admitting there are parts of the Bible we both reject. Are you with me?

I don't admit to rejecting any part of the Bible.

But you admit that you reject most of it.

I'm not sure why you think you could demonize someone who believes MORE of the Bible than you do.
 
Upvote 0

elman

elman
Dec 19, 2003
28,949
451
85
Texas
✟54,197.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
I don't admit to rejecting any part of the Bible.

But you admit that you reject most of it.

I'm not sure why you think you could demonize someone who believes MORE of the Bible than you do.
I am not sure why you think you could demonize someone who believes God is loving and kind and resists the portrayal of God as evil.
 
Upvote 0

AlphaTeam

Newbie
Aug 17, 2010
127
2
Nazareth
Visit site
✟22,770.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
So basically, your answer is that human can not stop it from happening, if God wills it.

I have one basic problem with it: Hell! The result of that worldview is that God could save all the world and He did not. I do not agree with this logic.

I also do not agree with how Calvinist explain the human depravity. You see, even after the fall, we humans, are still made on the image of God, we still have a soul, we still have free will, we still have conscience. It is true that we are fallen, "dead", but yet we all (all humans) were once (at least) enlightened (not saved). So even as "dead" we still know the truth, or at least it exists. So we can chose to resist it.

An example of that is Adam. after the fall, he was dead, yet he heard the voice of God, hided, obeyed and interacted with God. although he was "dead", there was a mysterious connection between him and God.
 
Upvote 0

AlphaTeam

Newbie
Aug 17, 2010
127
2
Nazareth
Visit site
✟22,770.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
What about 1 John 2:1-2:

My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
 
Upvote 0

seeingeyes

Newbie
Nov 29, 2011
8,944
809
Backwoods, Ohio
✟35,360.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Yes, both theories accept election, they just define it a little differently. It's semantics.

But the true difference is this: One God can save every fallen man but doesn't want to. The other God wants to save every fallen man, but can't.
 
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
S
I have one basic problem with it: Hell! The result of that worldview is that God could save all the world and He did not. I do not agree with this logic.

The same is true of your soterioloigical view. In you rview, God could save everyone, yet does not. I'm not sure why you think it's unique to Calvinism.


I think you need to study the Bible's doctrine of sin and what the implications of being unregenerate are.

It says we are unable to please God or obey God (Rom 8:7-8). it says we find the gospel foolishness (1 corinthians). It says we are children of wrath by natrue (Eph 2) We cannot perceive the kingdom, let alone enter it, while unregenerate (john 3).

Just to scratch the surface...

Yet you still insist that man can do all of these things while unregenerate.
 
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Yes, both theories accept election, they just define it a little differently. It's semantics.

But the true difference is this: One God can save every fallen man but doesn't want to. The other God wants to save every fallen man, but can't.

What makes you think the other (Arminianism) says God "can't"? I think most Arminians would agree that God could if He wanted to. Nothing is stopping him from doing it.
 
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married

Did you notice it doesn't say that he is the potential atonement, but the actual one? Let me copy/paste something I wrote just yesterday about this verse:

One thing I'd like to point out is that if the verse (1 John 2:2) on the surface has difficulties squaring away with the Calvinist viewpoint, it likewise has difficulties squaring away with the non-Calvinist or Arminian (Unlimited Atonement) viewpoint.

Why?

Because the verse doesn't say that Christ is merely the potential propitiation (for whatever group John goes on to mention), but that He is the actual one.

This does not, on the surface, fit into the Arminian's understanding of Unlimited Atonement, either. Arminianism says that Christ's death only made it possible for people to be saved, but this verse doesn't say anything about possibility or potentiality. It says that Christ is the propitiation. Not the potential propitiation.

Therefore it is mind boggling that they (Arminians) think they can claim this verse as their own, or that it only poses problems for Calvinism. When in fact, since they are taking "us and the whole world" to mean "every individual", they must water down, lessen, or change the idea of propitiation into that of potentiality. In other words, the only way this verse does not pose problems for their view is if they change the meaning of words, which ironically is what they accuse Calvinists of doing

It seems to me that since the verse says he is the actual propitiation or atonement, then when John says "not only us, but the whole world", he cannot be referring to every individual, but rather is just using a sweeping generalization to refer to all nations of the world. In fact if you look at what John had already wrote about Christ's death in John 11:51-52, we learn that Christ's death was not for the nation only (not us only), but also to gather into one the children of God that are scattered across the world (but the whole world). There is parallel between John 11:51-52 and 1 John 2:2.

It is a mistake to automatically assume that the dividing line between "us..and the whole world" is believers and unbelievers. What is more likely is since we have John 11:51-52 to guide us, and we have the fact that John is a Jew, writing to Jews (as his direct audience), that the dividing line between "us" and "the whole world" is Jews and Gentiles.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

elman

elman
Dec 19, 2003
28,949
451
85
Texas
✟54,197.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Yes, both theories accept election, they just define it a little differently. It's semantics.

But the true difference is this: One God can save every fallen man but doesn't want to. The other God wants to save every fallen man, but can't.
Then there is the option that God wants everyone to turn from wickedness and be saved but forces none of them to do that. Like the father in the prodigal son, when they do repent, He rushes to meet them and welcome them home.
 
Upvote 0

elman

elman
Dec 19, 2003
28,949
451
85
Texas
✟54,197.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married

The Bible teaches the wages of sin is death. It also teaches the way to inherit eternal life is to love God and man. It further teaches that we destroy our own spiritual existence with our own sin, but if we turn to righteousness we will live and not die. However if we do not turn to righteousness we will die and not live. Specifically it teaches a person who is dead spiritually but alive physically can turn to righteousness. Jesus warns us unless we repent we will perish. You have misunderstood the bible if you think a spiritually deceased person cannot repent. An unregenerated person is the only kind of person that would ever need to repent.
 
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married

I'm glad you found a part of the Bible that you think is correct.
 
Upvote 0