• 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.

Why Calvinists and Arminians are both wrong

Status
Not open for further replies.

WinBySurrender

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2011
3,670
155
.
✟4,924.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I came across this while researching and studying the Calvin v. Arminius debates and being uncomfortable with the conclusions of both. Still, as I maintain I am about a 4.5 point Calvinist, this is -- in my opinion -- the best article I've ever seen to explain my views. It was written by Gary Ray Branscome, a Lutheran (ELCA) pastor in Tennessee. I will not debate on this thread. Feel free to do so if you wish, but once I've cut and pasted this, I'm outta here.
A Biblical View of Election

For over four hundred years a controversy has raged between the followers of John Calvin and the followers of Jacob Arminius. This controversy centers around the doctrine of election, and it continues to exist because both parties explain away any Bible passages that contradict their own viewpoint. However, the subject is not an easy one to deal with because election is something that took place in the mind of God, and no man knows the mind of God. Therefore, while I intend to show why Calvinism and Arminianism are both wrong, and to present a Biblical alternative, I want to make it clear that I am not attempting to recreate God’s point of view. Instead, I wish to show how a change in our understanding of the order in which certain decisions were made can determine whether our conclusions contradict Scripture or not.

WHY CALVIN WAS WRONG

Calvin’s theology rests heavily upon certain conclusions deduced from the words, “God has chosen us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). The problem with that theology stems from the fact that some of those conclusions contradict the Bible. Furthermore, instead of rejecting those conclusions because they contradict God's Word, Calvinists reject God's Word by explaining it away whenever it does not agree with those conclusions (Isaiah 8:20).

FOR EXAMPLE:
1- Calvinists hold that if God had chosen some to be saved, then He must not want to save those who were not chosen. That conclusion is wrong because the Bible plainly tells us that God wants all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4, Ezekiel 33:11).

2- Calvinists also hold that if God had predetermined who should be saved, then Christ's death was only intended to atone for the sins of those whom God wanted to save. That conclusion is wrong because the Bible plainly tells us that Christ atoned for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2, John 1:29, 2 Corinthians 5:19).

WHY ARMINIUS WAS WRONG

Jacob Arminius tried to correct certain problems inherent in Calvinist theology without really understanding what the root of those problems was. As a result he simply replaced one set of errors with another.

His theology tries to get around the words, “God has chosen us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world” by conditioning those words with certain assumptions as to why God chose some but not others (Ephesians 1:4). The problem with his theology stems from the fact that his assumptions (regarding free will) are not taught in Scripture, and lead to conclusions that contradict Scripture. Furthermore, instead of rejecting those conclusions because they contradict God's Word, he rejected God's Word by explaining it away whenever it did not agree with his own reasoning (Isaiah 8:20).

FOR EXAMPLE:
1- Arminius assumed that God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation (before the foundation of the world) was based upon His foreseeing that they would respond to his call. Then, on the basis of that assumption, he decided that God selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel. However, we know that that is wrong, because the Bible plainly tells us that faith is a gift of God and that without God's help no one could or would believe (1Corinthians 12:3, Ephesians 2:8).

2- Arminius also decided that if God chose to save those whom He knew would believe, it follows that every sinful, lost human being has within himself the ability to choose to believe or reject the gospel. However, that conclusion is also wrong because the Bible tells us that, “no man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost.” (1Corinthians 12:3)

Because the view of Arminius makes salvation dependent upon a choice made by man, it shifts salvation from what Christ did to what we do. As a result, Christ is not seen as saving us, but instead as making it possible for us to save ourselves by freely choosing to believe. For that reason, every Christian should condemn it (Galatians 1:6-9).

A BIBLICAL VIEW OF ELECTION

Calvin's basic premise (the belief that God has chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world), is Biblical (Ephesians 1:4). However, the fact that some of the conclusions drawn from that premise contradict God's Word, indicates that those conclusions are rooted in a false understanding of that premise (a false understanding of what the Bible says about election). Therefore, in order to have the correct doctrine, we must start with a correct understanding of what the Bible says about election. And, we can determine if our understanding is correct, by taking a view that does not lead to conclusions that contradict the Bible.

For example: If we assume that God first decided to save certain people and afterward decided to send Christ to die for the sins of those He wanted to save, we would draw the same unbiblical conclusions that Calvinists do. However, if we hold that God first decided to send Christ to die for the sins of all men, and then, because no human could or would believe without His help, chose to bring us to faith through the preaching of the gospel, we would not draw those unbiblical conclusions.

Therefore, a Biblical view of election starts with the fact that God did not want man to sin in the first place. However, because God knew that man would sin, He decided from eternity to send Christ to die for the sins of all mankind. Furthermore, since no one would ever know that Christ had died for their sins without divine revelation, He also decided to cause the Bible to be written and the gospel to be preached. And finally, knowing that no man left to himself could or would believe, He determined to bring untold millions of people to faith (in spite of their resistance) through the preaching of the Word. This view of election does not lead to false conclusions, but instead agrees with all that the Bible says.

1- It agrees with those passages of Scripture which tell us that Christ died for the sins of all men. (1 John 2:2, 2 Corinthians 5:19, John 1:29)

2- It agrees with the passages of Scripture that tell us that God wants all men to be saved. (1 Timothy 2:4, Ezekiel 18:23,32, Ezekiel 33:11)

3- It agrees with the passages of Scripture that tell us that faith is a gift of God and no one would or could believe without God's help. (Ephesians 2:8-9, 1 Corinthians 12:3)

4- It agrees with the passages of Scripture that tell us that no man is saved unless God chooses to save him. (John 6:44, John 6:65, Romans 8:28-30, Romans 11:7)

5- It agrees with all of those passages that tell us that the lost are lost because of their own fault, not because God wanted them to be lost. (Matthew 23:37, Romans 10:21, 1 Timothy 2:4)

6- And, it even agrees with the passages of Scripture that indicate that we have a free will or must make a choice, because from our point of view it does look like we are making a choice. However, we know from Scripture that without God's help no man would ever make the right choice. (Revelation 3:20, Joshua 24:15, Hebrews 3:7-8, 2 Corinthians 3:5)

7- Finally, it agrees with what the Bible says about time and chance playing a role in salvation. For if you think about it, a man born in seventeenth century England would have a far better chance of being saved than a man born in seventeenth century Algeria, or first century England. (Ecclesiastes 9:11)

CONCLUSION

Calvinists err because they put God's choice of who should be saved (election) prior to His decision to provide atonement for the sins of mankind. Arminians err because they place God's choice of who should be saved (election) after faith (that is after He knew that a person would believe). The Biblical doctrine that I have presented avoids those errors by placing God's election between God's decision to provide atonement, and His bestowal of the gift of faith.

The theological principles that go hand in hand with this view of election are the principles of Evangelical (Lutheran) theology:

SCRIPTURE ALONE

GRACE ALONE

FAITH ALONE
 
Last edited:

ThyLovingkindness

Senior Veteran
Feb 16, 2012
4,528
381
✟21,859.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Hi, I read it. I do want to embellish upon point #5, stated above. It's my understanding that humans are depraved because of the Fall.

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:" Romans 5:12
 
Upvote 0

WinBySurrender

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2011
3,670
155
.
✟4,924.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Hi, I read it. I do want to embellish upon point #5, stated above. It's my understanding that humans are depraved because of the Fall.

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:" Romans 5:12
OK, one time violation of my statement I wasn't going to further participate here. While The Fall is the reason we have a sin nature, we are guilty of sin by our own actions, and cannot be punished for the sins of our fathers, etc. OK, outta here again.
 
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
It's amazing when some random guy from the 21st century comes along and "figures out" what every other Christian failed to understand, and what all the greatest minds in church history just could't grasp. What the puritans, and reformers, and all the greatest teachers and preachers and theologians just couldn't figure out.

Way to go!
:clap:

Also, I got a kick out of the fact that you admit to be a 4.5 Calvinist, yet in the same article you condemn yourself by saying "Calvinists are wrong.." and "Calvinists reject God's word" and "Calvinists err..."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VCViking
Upvote 0

Hupomone10

Veteran
Mar 21, 2010
3,952
142
Here
✟27,471.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Still, as I maintain I am about a 4.5 point Calvinist,
There is no such thing as a 4.5 point calvinist.
Do you believe in irresistible grace?
Do you believe in limited atonement? I believe I can find posts where you said you didn't support either of these, and you pointed out (and I thought it was a good point) that even Calvin didn't have anything in his writings to support irresistible grace.
Maybe you believe the doctrine of limited atonement half of the time? Is that what makes you a half-point?

For the record, here's what you wrote on 12/30/2011:
I'm SBC, I'm not a Calvinist, and I'm working on a degree from MBTS in KC...
http://www.christianforums.com/t7620040/#post59427081

They are not compatible, so which one should we believe?

Blessings,
H.
 
Upvote 0

Hupomone10

Veteran
Mar 21, 2010
3,952
142
Here
✟27,471.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Nice that you keep a file on me. Do you work for the FBI, or the Defense Intelligence Agency?
I just like to keep people honest and consistent. It's called the search function. Being a newbie, you may not be familiar with that. ;)

In that spirit, please answer the question. Which one do we believe and which one is the lie? Don't change the subject to attacking me like you usually do.

Are you not a Calvinist, or are you a 3, 4, or 4-sometimes and 5-sometimes?
And if you don't understand the historical reference of being anything less than a five point Calvinist among Southern Baptists, I have to wonder why you post on this board. It is a well known joke among us, in case you didn't know.
hmm... I didn't realize that knowledge of some supposed inside joke of being a 4.5 point calvinist was part of the criteria for posting here. Thanks for letting me know.

In case you missed it, the issue was over not being a Calvinist and being a 4.5 point Calvinist. That's like being a virgin and being a 10% virgin.

And you might want to spread your venom to "friend Skala" as you call him (yeah, I remember that post too, LOL), since he ridiculed your 4.5 claim before me; but we both know you won't, don't we? :thumbsup:

Here's what I think: I think you like to be "top dawg" wherever you post. So, you befriend people you perceive are in the majority (until they disagree with you) and you attack anyone else who might have a good independent thought. Rather than giving it consideration you seem to see it as a challenge to your status here, whatever you think that is. Just my opinion for what it's worth, which as we know is very little.:D
"Reprove a wise man, and he will love you." - Prov 9:8

Oh, and to save you the obvious post: yeah, go ahead and put me back on your ignore list. If you're not going to answer a simple question of how you can be a "not calvinist" and a "4.5 point calvinist" at the same time, your posts can't be trusted anyway. When you're caught with your pants down, just admit it. It's called humility, one of the Christian virtues.

Blessings,
H.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hupomone10

Veteran
Mar 21, 2010
3,952
142
Here
✟27,471.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VCViking
Upvote 0

Hupomone10

Veteran
Mar 21, 2010
3,952
142
Here
✟27,471.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I came across this while researching and studying the Calvin v. Arminius debates and being uncomfortable with the conclusions of both. Still, as I maintain I am about a 4.5 point Calvinist, this is -- in my opinion -- the best article I've ever seen to explain my views. It was written by Gary Ray Branscome, a Lutheran (ELCA) pastor in Tennessee. I will not debate on this thread. Feel free to do so if you wish, but once I've cut and pasted this, I'm outta here.
A Biblical View of Election

For over four hundred years a controversy has raged between the followers of John Calvin and the followers of Jacob Arminius. This controversy centers around the doctrine of election, and it continues to exist because both parties explain away any Bible passages that contradict their own viewpoint. However, the subject is not an easy one to deal with because election is something that took place in the mind of God, and no man knows the mind of God. Therefore, while I intend to show why Calvinism and Arminianism are both wrong, and to present a Biblical alternative, I want to make it clear that I am not attempting to recreate God’s point of view. Instead, I wish to show how a change in our understanding of the order in which certain decisions were made can determine whether our conclusions contradict Scripture or not.

WHY CALVIN WAS WRONG

Calvin’s theology rests heavily upon certain conclusions deduced from the words, “God has chosen us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). The problem with that theology stems from the fact that some of those conclusions contradict the Bible. Furthermore, instead of rejecting those conclusions because they contradict God's Word, Calvinists reject God's Word by explaining it away whenever it does not agree with those conclusions (Isaiah 8:20).

FOR EXAMPLE:
1- Calvinists hold that if God had chosen some to be saved, then He must not want to save those who were not chosen. That conclusion is wrong because the Bible plainly tells us that God wants all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4, Ezekiel 33:11).

2- Calvinists also hold that if God had predetermined who should be saved, then Christ's death was only intended to atone for the sins of those whom God wanted to save. That conclusion is wrong because the Bible plainly tells us that Christ atoned for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2, John 1:29, 2 Corinthians 5:19).

WHY ARMINIUS WAS WRONG

Jacob Arminius tried to correct certain problems inherent in Calvinist theology without really understanding what the root of those problems was. As a result he simply replaced one set of errors with another.

His theology tries to get around the words, “God has chosen us in Him [Christ] before the foundation of the world” by conditioning those words with certain assumptions as to why God chose some but not others (Ephesians 1:4). The problem with his theology stems from the fact that his assumptions (regarding free will) are not taught in Scripture, and lead to conclusions that contradict Scripture. Furthermore, instead of rejecting those conclusions because they contradict God's Word, he rejected God's Word by explaining it away whenever it did not agree with his own reasoning (Isaiah 8:20).

FOR EXAMPLE:
1- Arminius assumed that God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation (before the foundation of the world) was based upon His foreseeing that they would respond to his call. Then, on the basis of that assumption, he decided that God selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel. However, we know that that is wrong, because the Bible plainly tells us that faith is a gift of God and that without God's help no one could or would believe (1Corinthians 12:3, Ephesians 2:8).

2- Arminius also decided that if God chose to save those whom He knew would believe, it follows that every sinful, lost human being has within himself the ability to choose to believe or reject the gospel. However, that conclusion is also wrong because the Bible tells us that, “no man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost.” (1Corinthians 12:3)

Because the view of Arminius makes salvation dependent upon a choice made by man, it shifts salvation from what Christ did to what we do. As a result, Christ is not seen as saving us, but instead as making it possible for us to save ourselves by freely choosing to believe. For that reason, every Christian should condemn it (Galatians 1:6-9).

A BIBLICAL VIEW OF ELECTION

Calvin's basic premise (the belief that God has chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world), is Biblical (Ephesians 1:4). However, the fact that some of the conclusions drawn from that premise contradict God's Word, indicates that those conclusions are rooted in a false understanding of that premise (a false understanding of what the Bible says about election). Therefore, in order to have the correct doctrine, we must start with a correct understanding of what the Bible says about election. And, we can determine if our understanding is correct, by taking a view that does not lead to conclusions that contradict the Bible.

For example: If we assume that God first decided to save certain people and afterward decided to send Christ to die for the sins of those He wanted to save, we would draw the same unbiblical conclusions that Calvinists do. However, if we hold that God first decided to send Christ to die for the sins of all men, and then, because no human could or would believe without His help, chose to bring us to faith through the preaching of the gospel, we would not draw those unbiblical conclusions.

Therefore, a Biblical view of election starts with the fact that God did not want man to sin in the first place. However, because God knew that man would sin, He decided from eternity to send Christ to die for the sins of all mankind. Furthermore, since no one would ever know that Christ had died for their sins without divine revelation, He also decided to cause the Bible to be written and the gospel to be preached. And finally, knowing that no man left to himself could or would believe, He determined to bring untold millions of people to faith (in spite of their resistance) through the preaching of the Word. This view of election does not lead to false conclusions, but instead agrees with all that the Bible says.

1- It agrees with those passages of Scripture which tell us that Christ died for the sins of all men. (1 John 2:2, 2 Corinthians 5:19, John 1:29)

2- It agrees with the passages of Scripture that tell us that God wants all men to be saved. (1 Timothy 2:4, Ezekiel 18:23,32, Ezekiel 33:11)

3- It agrees with the passages of Scripture that tell us that faith is a gift of God and no one would or could believe without God's help. (Ephesians 2:8-9, 1 Corinthians 12:3)

4- It agrees with the passages of Scripture that tell us that no man is saved unless God chooses to save him. (John 6:44, John 6:65, Romans 8:28-30, Romans 11:7)

5- It agrees with all of those passages that tell us that the lost are lost because of their own fault, not because God wanted them to be lost. (Matthew 23:37, Romans 10:21, 1 Timothy 2:4)

6- And, it even agrees with the passages of Scripture that indicate that we have a free will or must make a choice, because from our point of view it does look like we are making a choice. However, we know from Scripture that without God's help no man would ever make the right choice. (Revelation 3:20, Joshua 24:15, Hebrews 3:7-8, 2 Corinthians 3:5)

7- Finally, it agrees with what the Bible says about time and chance playing a role in salvation. For if you think about it, a man born in seventeenth century England would have a far better chance of being saved than a man born in seventeenth century Algeria, or first century England. (Ecclesiastes 9:11)

CONCLUSION

Calvinists err because they put God's choice of who should be saved (election) prior to His decision to provide atonement for the sins of mankind. Arminians err because they place God's choice of who should be saved (election) after faith (that is after He knew that a person would believe). The Biblical doctrine that I have presented avoids those errors by placing God's election between God's decision to provide atonement, and His bestowal of the gift of faith.

The theological principles that go hand in hand with this view of election are the principles of Evangelical (Lutheran) theology:

SCRIPTURE ALONE

GRACE ALONE

FAITH ALONE
Because my previous posts were negative, I feel it's important to let you know that for what it's worth, I agree with this article.

Also, I wanted to let you know I like your signature. It shows you see the importance of the renewing of the mind in walking the Christian walk, and the importance of taking our thought life seriously.

Blessings,
H.

 
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
hZaTD.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: VCViking
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.