Why are some christians calvinist?

[victoryword]

Would you say that the majority of the faith movement is arminian? If not, what are they?

I would say that it is pretty much influenced by Arminianism. For example, Kenneth Hagin Sr. was a great fan of John Wesley's teachings. Furthermore, the Hagin Sr.'s faith teaching has its roots in the Assemblies of God which is a predominantly Arminian denomination (though word has come to me in recent times that many leaders in the denomination are turning into Calvinists). E. W. Kenyon was a Free-Will Baptist, which is primarily Arminian.

The only thing that many Word-Faithers would differ from most Arminians is that a number of Word-Faith teachers are OSAS (Once Saved Always Saved). Hagin was neither OSAS nor was he into the belief that a person lost his salvation every time he sinned. Kenyon, on the other hand, was very much OSAS.

Most Word-Faithers would not want to be classified as either Arminian or Calvinist (and I don't blame them) but for all practical purposes, I would say that the WoF leaned very close to Wesleyan-Arminian.

 

[godson777]

Thanks so much for explaining everything victoryword!

 

[PastorJoey]

Hi Victory & Godson,

The only thing that many Word-Faithers would differ from most Arminians is that a number of Word-Faith teachers are OSAS (Once Saved Always Saved). QUOTE]

Thats interesting. I didnt realize that the majority was osas. I would not have even guessed it. I do know that Bob Yandian is osas. By the way, in my opinion, he has the most clear & concise teaching on JDS.

I've heard Pastor Robb Thompson say that he is neither Arminian or Calvinist, because, "Its not how you begin a race, but how you finish it that matters."
Pastor J

 

[PastorJoey]

Question for you Victory,

I took this online test "How pentecostal are you?"

The results came back that I was 1oo% 'evangelical-holiness/wesleyan' & only 50% charismatic. I realize that the results of these tests depend on the depth of understanding of each branch of christianity the one righting the test has.
I do know that Wesley stressed holiness, evangelism & was an Arminian, but the 50% charismatic surprised me. What do you make of it? From my understanding WOF is nothing different than charismatic except WOF emphasis the power of confession & prosperity.
Pastor J

 

[godson777]

What web-site is the test on?

 

[PastorJoey]

Go to the pentecostal section and find thread "How Pentecostal are you?"Then go to the first post. There is a link.
Pastor J

 

[godson777]

I got similar results to you PastorJ!

I was 82% evangelical-holiness wesleyan
and 79% pentecostal/charistmatic

 

[godson777]

Apparently I am more methodist than I am charistmatic/pentecostal!?

What's the deal with that?

 

[PastorJoey]

Hi Godson,
First of all The writer of the test has his own ideas of what it means to be Charismatic (probably is critical). And as far as being methodist goes, if John Wesley was alive today, he probably wouldnt be a methodist, even though he was its founder. The Methodist church in general isnt the same as it originally was. He'd roll over in his grave if he saw the formalism & traditions of men that have taken over.
Pastor J

 

[victoryword]

Hi Godson,
First of all The writer of the test has his own ideas of what it means to be Charismatic (probably is critical). And as far as being methodist goes, if John Wesley was alive today, he probably wouldnt be a methodist, even though he was its founder. The Methodist church in general isnt the same as it originally was. He'd roll over in his grave if he saw the formalism & traditions of men that have taken over.
Pastor J

Many branches are also embracing LIBERAL THEOLOGY of the Bishop Spong type.

 

[godson777]

Thanks PastorJ. True.

I am going to find out what this Bishop Spong teaches cause it sounds kinda dodgy.

 

[PastorJoey]

Part 1 of 2

T. Total Depravity (total inability)
U. Unconditional Election
L. Limited Atonement
I. Irresistible Grace
P. Perseverance of the Saints

Briefly, this is what they mean. Total depravity is the teaching that man is so affected by the fall that he is totally unable to do any spiritual good and it is therefore impossible for him to do anything on his own to contribute to his salvation. They say an unbeliever is an "unregenerate" (not made spiritually alive) man who, because he is dead spiritually, cannot understand spiritual truth.

He, therefore, has no capacity to choose God; meaning thereby that he cannot have faith in God until God "regenerates" him and then gives him faith.



(Spiritually dead, yes, but not ceasing to exist or unable to listen or respond. The only “spiritual truth” an unbeliever must understand is that they are sinners. This fact, their own conscience will bear them witness through the use of God's law in the evangelistic preaching of the gospel.)



Scriptures:



Romans 2:15

(15) Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another



Romans 2:15 AMP

(15) They show that the essential requirements of the Law are written in their hearts and are operating there, with which their consciences (sense of right and wrong) also bear witness; and their [moral] decisions (their arguments of reason, their condemning or approving thoughts) will accuse or perhaps defend and excuse [them]



(GNB) Their conduct shows that what the Law commands is written in their hearts. Their consciences also show that this is true, since their thoughts sometimes accuse them and sometimes defend them.



Psalms 19:7

(7) The law of the LORD [is] perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD [is] sure,

making wise the simple.



Romans 7:7-9

(7) What shall we say then? [Is] the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

(8) But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin [was] dead.

(9) For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.



Romans 7:12-13

(12) Wherefore the law [is] holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

(13) Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.



Rom 7:13

(AMP) Did that which is good then prove fatal [bringing death] to me? Certainly not! It was sin, working death in me by using this good thing [as a weapon], in order that through the commandment sin might be shown up clearly to be sin, that the extreme malignity and immeasurable sinfulness of sin might plainly appear.


Only when we acknowledge & repent of our sins & take Christ as our Saviour are we regenerated by God.



The sinner is as “totally deprived” as a man trapped in a car about to explode after a horrible crash, and only has his voice to cry out for help.



Romans 10:13

(13) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.



Is God any less virtuous than the “good Samaritan?”


Unconditional election: The term "elect", seems, by definition, to refer to someone who is chosen by another. Consequently, they say membership of those who are in this group of chosen ones is not conditioned on the free actions of men.



God purposes to save all who conform to His plan- and this is His choice or “election” in the matter.

By Grace, men who conform will become the elect and be saved, while those who do not will be damned.

The choice “election” was first on God's part; and it must be accepted by men to become a part of the elect or chosen ones (Taken from Dake’s notes).



It is on men's part to make their calling and election sure.



2 Peter 1:10-11

(10) Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

(11) For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Pastor J

 

[PastorJoey]

Part 2 of 2
Limited Atonement: states that Christ did not die for the sins of all men, for if he did then supposedly everyone would make it to heaven. Christ's death, they say, was not meant for other than those particular individuals whom He had decided beforehand to save.
O.K. first of all, Just because Jesus died for the world, doesn’t mean that the world will be saved.

Eternal life is a gift from God, but like any other gift, eternal life must be received in order for it to become vital to the one it was meant for. Calvinist’s seem to only have a grasp on the “legal side” of redemption (what God did for us in Christ). But there is also a “vital side” of redemption where we appropriate God's word in our lives & obey His commands. This is where the “legal” (God's part) becomes “vital” (our part) in our lives. I believe it was Pastor ***** who says, “For everything done on Earth, there is both a God ward side and a man ward side”. – (It only takes a Sunday school education of the Word to see realize this truth.)

John Wesley: “It seems as though God can do nothing in the Earth except men ask Him.” (This is where the significance of “the Authority of the Believer” teaching comes into play.)

With the understanding of the afore mentioned of this article, limited atonement would no longer have any relevance.


Irresistible Grace: is their doctrine which maintains that a sinner has no capacity to refuse the special grace of God in bringing him to salvation.



Bottom line, God’s Grace can be resisted. I didn’t say it was easy. God’s angel will chase you to the ends of the world, but God will not infringe on your or my right to choose, even if it is the wrong choice.

This belief of “Irresistible Grace” stems from a misunderstanding of what it means for God to be Sovereign. They feel that God would not be Sovereign or Almighty if someone that He has chosen could resist His will. However this would in no way infringe on God's Sovereignty or on His Almightiness. Why? Because He has reserved a day of Judgment for the disobedient, the wicked and rebellious. They all will find their place in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone for ever.



Revelation 21:8

(8) But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Because of their misunderstanding of God's Sovereignty, Calvinist’s are thereby inclined to interpret scripture in light of that understanding. Attempting to defend God's sovereignty (at least their understanding of it) they are forced to teach and believe that “all” doesn't mean all, “whosoever” doesn't mean whosoever, “world” doesn't mean world, “any” doesn't mean any, etc…



John 3:16-17

(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

(17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

1 Timothy 2:3-6

(3) For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

(4) Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

(5) For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

(6) Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

2 Peter 3:9

(9) The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.



The Calvinists that I have spoken with have no problem accepting that “all” means all when it comes to sin. Romans 3:23

(23) For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

Yet with the verses above, in their view, “all” changes its meaning.

If “all” doesn't mean all in 1 Timothy 2:4,6 and 2 Peter 3:9, then the same rule could apply for Romans 3:23 as well.



Romans 5:17-19

(17) For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

(18) Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.

(19) For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.



Judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so (in like manner) the free gift came upon all men to justification.



If “all” doesn't mean all referring to justification, then neither does it mean “all” when referring to condemnation.



I would like to point out this one thing now. What brings men to condemnation is judgment. What brings men to justification (or righteousness), is the free gift.



Romans 6:23

(23) For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.





Notice, Romans 6:23 speaks of sin as being a wage and eternal life as a gift. A wage is something earned and deserved. It being an undesirable wage would be considered a penalty.

Death was forced upon us as a penalty of our sins. Eternal life on the other hand, is a gift, and like any gift, eternal life must be received and will not be imposed upon us.

A good study of Covenant relationships would shed much light on the necessity of the receptivity of a gift.

A gift can be bought and paid for, but it cannot be given unless received.

It therefore is not an infringement on God's character for one to reject His free gift, but speaks only of the character of the one who rejects the gift.



Let's look now at Romans 5:17

Romans 5:17

(17) For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)



(GNB) It is true that through the sin of one man death began to rule because of that one man. But how much greater is the result of what was done by the one man, Jesus Christ! All who receive God's abundant grace and are freely put right with him will rule in life through Christ.



· What God did in Jesus at Calvary was “much greater” & “much more” than what Satan did in Adam in the Garden of Eden.



Romans 5:20

(20) Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:



My question is, how could Christ’s accomplishment at Calvary be greater than Satan's accomplishment in Eden if what Satan caused resulted in unlimited death and what Jesus did only resulted in a “limited atonement”?



The doctrine of limited atonement, in essence, teaches that what Satan did in Adam was greater than what God did in Jesus.



1 Corinthians 15:10

(10) But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which [was bestowed] upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.



· What Paul did with the Grace of God, determined whether or not it was given to him “in vain”.



2 Corinthians 6:1

(1) We then, [as] workers together [with him], beseech [you] also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.

· Here Paul beseeches (strongly urges) believers to see to it themselves that they “receive not the grace of God in vain.”


Perseverance of the Saints:teaches that no true Christian will fall away and be lost. Or, at the least, it means that those Christians who wind up in the end as Christians, were the ones who persevered and were the only ones meant to be perseveres by God.
Right now I won't even get into the 200 plus examples and warnings the bible has of losing salvation. If people would just judge their doctrine in light of the word instead of judging the word in light of their doctrines things would be a lot simpler.

The whole of the Calvinistic doctrine can all be traced back to God's sovereignty, (or their understanding of Sovereignty). I believe that if this one word is understood, the TULIP would not even exist.



#1 The “Total depravity” doctrine came about because they believe that to be Sovereign means that God is in absolute control& no one could possibly resist a Sovereign beings will. With this interpretation, they had to be able to answer the question then, “why do people live and die and never believe?” Their answer: Total depravity. Man cannot hear and believe unless God chooses it to be so. Then they must explain away the crystal clear verses that it is God's will for all to be saved.

#2The“unconditional election” doctrine teaches basically that God elected or chose some for eternal life & the rest for eternal death. They believe that man has no choice in the matter whatsoever. They actually relate people (made in God's image) to hamsters in a cage who may choose whether they will run on the wheel or go in the tunnels, but ultimately have no choice of their destiny. This teaching ties in with “total depravity” in that “man is incapable to make a choice or discern truth”, so God must choose for them.

#3 The “Limited atonement” doctrine also roots back to the misconception of God's sovereignty. This teaches that Christ did not die for everyone at Calvary, only for those who He chose to be saved. Their misunderstanding of God's sovereignty forces them to have a limited atonement, because you cant have a loving God who is in total control of every choice man makes & yet many still die as unbelievers.

#4 The “Irresistible Grace” doctrine teaches that (all those few) that God has chosen cannot resist His will to be saved. They must heed the call of the elect. This understanding, I believe takes the “great” out of the commission. Evangelism looses its urgency the moment we believe that God has predetermined the outcome of the lives of people. We are all Predestined, but not predetermined. Again this all rests on their teaching on Sovereignty.

#5 The “Perseverance of the saints” doctrine. If you believed that to be Sovereign meant to be in total control and the cause of everything that happened both good and bad, you would naturally believe in “once saved always saved” because in your understanding of Sovereignty, “God's will must be & will be done”.



To all Calvinist’s who may be reading this post, sometimes it can be hard to portray your heart attitude through writing. I am not angry with you, however, I am very passionate in my beliefs. I have a Pastor friend who is a Calvinist; we get along in spite of our differences of beliefs. I don't believe that he is a heretic; neither does he believe that I am a heretic. We both agree that Jesus is the only way to God and that is the main issue. Please don't respond with anger. If there is something that I am missing in your beliefs, then fill me in. I want to know.

Pastor J

 

[victoryword]

I am very much tempted to add comments to this, but since this is a WoF forum, it may be unfair to present any more of my understanding of Calvinism, to include commenting on your post PastorJ since, per the rules, non-WoFers are not allowed to debate here (though that has not stopped some of them).

However, I would welcome any Calvinists who are reading the posts that if they want to comment then they should start a new thread on one of the general forums and let us know about it so that we can discuss these things.

 

[SPALATIN]

Well I don't know why some are Calvinist, because I reject Calvin's TULIP theology. Instead I embrace Martin Luther's teaching as more correct and when compared to scripture makes the most sense for me.

 

[victoryword]

Well I don't know why some are Calvinist, because I reject Calvin's TULIP theology. Instead I embrace Martin Luther's teaching as more correct and when compared to scripture makes the most sense for me.

You mean including Luther treatise, "The Bondage of the Will"? This book can be labeled CALVINISM as well (although Luther wrote it before Calvin wrote his institutes).

Luther went to the extreme in his debates against Erasmus just like Augustine did with Pelagius. Both were concerning the issue of free will and soteriology. Simply because Pelagius and Erasmus went overboard on the free-will issues, Augustine and Luther went to the very opposite directions.

Calvin was actually influence by lot of Augustine, Luther, and Zwingli's teachings. In many ways, Luther was a "Calvinist" before John Calvin's infamous works were published, though he may not have gone to the utmost extreme that Calvin did.

 

[PastorMike]

I took the online test too..."How pentecostal are you"...Seems I am Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan (86%) also and I know that this is not right...must be a strong bias on the part of the quiz...Mike.

 

[J4Jesus]

2 Corinthians 5
15And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.


Romans 10
9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved


Mark 16
5And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

 

[J4Jesus]

Tip toeing through the Tulips

Part 1 of 2

T. Total Depravity (total inability)
U. Unconditional Election
L. Limited Atonement
I. Irresistible Grace
P. Perseverance of the Saints

TULIP ???!!!
LOL I never heard of this! Funnnny!

 

[KenBrauckmann]

Actually, J4J, TULIP has long been the easy way to remember those points. But it is catchy!

Question, if I may?

How would strict Calvinist teaching deal with Personal Evangelism? If God is sovereign (in their definition) then how can we "choose life" - if we have no influence, how can we 'decide' to repent and follow Jesus??

Ken