|
|
Post by shiloh on Feb 24, 2014 5:25:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 24, 2014 6:03:26 GMT
Thanks Shiloh, I liked the Kinsella info.
|
|
|
|
Post by shiloh on Feb 24, 2014 7:47:19 GMT
Arminianism isn't an issue for me because I believe in OSAS. I stand firm on that and believe scripture supports that. We cannot lose our Salvation because if we could, then it is works based and meaning we have to maintain our salvation. If that's the case, then Jesus died for us in vain. I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't bear fruit. If we are abiding in Him, we will bear good fruit.
Calvanism is harder for me to understand. If we are predestined, we are predestined after giving our lives to the Lord and asking Him to come into our hearts as Saviour and Lord of our lives.
If some are born and predestined to be lost, then where is the mercy of God and where does free will come in? Even the angels were created with free will. I equate that to a woman having an abortion. To me, that sounds like he created some just to damn them for eternity. So, I disagree with Calvanism. God IS love and loves all of His creation. Why would He create something just to destroy it? That sounds like a cruel joke and like something Satan would do if it were possible for Satan to create.
Even though God knows the end from the beginning, we still have free will. |
|
Becka
Numbers' Donkey
Spurgeon Addict
Posts: 169 
|
Post by Becka on Feb 24, 2014 17:30:03 GMT
Here's the thing - even if Arminianism is true and Calvinism is bupkus, God would still create souls He knows are going to Hell. There is nothing that surprises God. He knows everything there is to know, including the end from the beginning. The difference would be they went there of their own free will rather than being elected to go there. I posit that perhaps these aren't separate issues but one in the same. *Because* they freely choose not to follow God, then God's foreknowledge "elected" them to go to Hell. Not that God sat down and wrote Bobby into Heaven and Billy into Hell. The election of God is due to the foreknowledge of God, since nothing can not be known by the mind of God. Make sense?
Now, even Arminians have to acquiesce the point that Christ died for a specific group of people, as Calvinism asserts. We KNOW the atonement of Christ is NOT universal. While it is true that Christ died for the "whole world", we know the "whole world" is not saved. We must CHOOSE Him. Therefore, the atonement is sufficient for the whole world, yet efficient for only those who believe.
With that said, Christ did not go to the cross "with the hope" that some would be saved. Due to God's foreknowledge, He absolutely knew He was dying for you and for me. Specifically. The cross is not ambiguous, it is not a blanket atonement. It is for individuals. YES, anyone can come. But God already knows who WILL come. And because He already knows that my grandbaby's grandbaby will believe, they are therefore elect.
This allows both God to know and the believer (or non-believer) to have free will. We are elect due to God's awesome mind knowing the end from the beginning. And we come to God or reject God freely.
Interestingly enough, Spurgeon made a claim I'd never heard before, but makes so much sense. No one prays as an Armenian. If we truly have free will, then why do we pray for God to come in to someone's life? Wouldn't that be the Holy Spirit overriding that person's free will to choose God? I certainly don't pray for God to set up certain conditions for that person to decide for themselves the reality of God, no, I pray, "Lord, soften their heart". What is that if not a Calvinist prayer of irresistible grace? Food for thought.
~~Becka
|
|
|
|
Post by LS on Feb 24, 2014 22:35:33 GMT
Becka, you've just articulated my stance on this issue; something I couldn't have done myself ... so thanks  |
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 25, 2014 0:52:04 GMT
It makes sense - but that's not Calvinism.
Calvinism teaches that God made the choice as to who would go to heaven and who would go to hell - regardless of foreknowledge.
This is the point of the acronym, "TULIP". Allow me to quote:
There are other differences between Calvinism and Arminianism, but essentially it comes down to this one (often neglected) point; that Scripture tells us, time and time again, that God already FOREKNEW those he PREDESTINED; that God, being outside of time, saw who would come, predestined who would come, called who would come, saved who would come, glorified who would come. THAT is the pattern of salvation as established in Scripture.
Calvinism willfully neglects the foreknowledge of God under the guise of "God's sovereignty".
I could take issue with elements, light and shadow, within the other points (particularly Limited Atonement, which is abhorrent), but I think it's better to keep it simple for now, as this conversation has really centred around predestination rather than Calvinism per se.
|
|
|
|
Post by LS on Feb 25, 2014 1:34:27 GMT
Some of us are old enough to have heard or read these arguments countless times over the years. Great men went to their graves divided over these issues. When I see these debates I'm reminded of 2Timothy 2:14 , so I decided to see what Matthew Henry had to say about this verse and I cherry-picked this:
|
|
Becka
Numbers' Donkey
Spurgeon Addict
Posts: 169
|
Post by Becka on Feb 25, 2014 1:41:12 GMT
Aha! \O/ So I'm not the only one with a Matthew Henry commentary on the Bible!!  (Mine's Kindle, though. I'll have to buy a physical copy.) |
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 25, 2014 1:56:25 GMT
LS, I don't see any flying daggers zinging past. I don't even sense animosity. I'm just glad most people seems to believe in predestination. (Maybe some in a Calvinistic way, and some in a God could see down the road, way). I think I'm right about that?
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 25, 2014 2:15:07 GMT
Benjamin has given info regardin Calvinism and TULIP. Here is info on Arminianism:
As per Kinsella's Omega Letter,
Calvinism is one of two schools of thought within Protestant theology. If one claims the title of ‘Protestant’, one is either a Calvinist or an Arminian.
Arminianism is the other model within mainstream Protestantism. It is named for Jacob Arminius, a Dutch contemporary of Calvin. Arminianism does not advance ideas of its own, but draws its doctrine from its opposition to Calvinism.
Are you an Arminian?
Arminius rejects Unconditional Election in favor of Prevenient Grace. Prevenient, or prevenial grace is that grace extended by God to the unsaved.
Arminius rejects the doctrine of irresistible grace. A person is equally free to reject the call.
Arminianism rejects predestination and dispensationalism.
It rejects unconditional election.
It rejects limited atonement, arguing that it was made on behalf of all people, not just the elect.
Believers can sin their way out of salvation.
This is from the article that Shiloh posted the link to. You can also find it by clicking here
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 25, 2014 2:21:33 GMT
I think that it's highly probable that there is no such thing as a stock Arminian or a stock Calvinist. The more I read, and listened to what people were saying the more I see this.
|
|
Becka
Numbers' Donkey
Spurgeon Addict
Posts: 169
|
Post by Becka on Feb 25, 2014 3:00:07 GMT
I agree Elizabeth. I'm a hybrid of both beliefs. Since salvation is of our God, I'm not so sure it's as "cut and dried" as we'd like to think it is. Like the Trinity, God in three Persons, it could be one of those mysteries we cannot fully grasp seeing as how we don't (yet) have eternal minds. Neither do we see all and know all. We don't even know (nor will we know until we pass on) all that Christ bore for us on the cross in the Spirit.
How can we, with finite brains that have a beginning, comprehend what it's like to have a Mind that is eternal and knows all? I mean, think of this - for as long as God has existed, He's always known you and loved you. He always knew He would create you. The Body of Christ would not be complete without you. I mean, those are humbling thoughts to me, a woman who used to be a young girl asking life's "big" question: "Why am I me?"
As long as God knows what He's doing, I'll be happy to follow Him wherever He may lead. Even if His answers are "hard" ones. I'm not sure anything could shake my faith at this point. My trials seem only to bring me closer to Him.
|
|
|
|
Post by LS on Feb 25, 2014 3:58:38 GMT
Elizabeth, you said: Elizabeth, I was referring to the topic in general, and others like it (you know what they are  ). I was not at all referring to this particular thread, forum, moderator, contributors, Forum Boards Inc. ... (let's see, do I have everything / everyone covered? {puzzled expression} |
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 25, 2014 4:11:19 GMT
Sorry for misunderstanding Jim. And yes, I think you did cover everybody.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 25, 2014 4:33:17 GMT
I think the issue for a lot of people is that they make the assumption that people are either Calvinists or Arminianists...
Though personally I think the Biblical reality is somewhere in between.
Does God predestine? Absolutely; but He does so according to foreknowledge.
Can grace be refused? Absolutely, but by those foreknown, it isn't.
The real issue, for me, at the heart of Calvinism and Arminianism, is the character of God.
Calvinists fail here in that they see only limited atonement; as if the blood of Christ could not or did not cover all (and thus God is less than 100% loving). Scripture, instead, says that Christ died for sin, not just for men (though it does that too, obviously); and not just for elect men, but for all.
Arminianists fail here in that they too often lose sight of the fact that Christ lost none that were given to Him (and thus God is less than 100% powerful), as if the God of all the Universe would somehow lose that 99th sheep, if the sheep wandered far enough.
The truth, again, lies somewhere in between. Both sides of this argument lose sight of what Scripture presents so well: a God who is balanced. It doesn't have to be one way or the other: God can be both sovereign AND love everyone; He can be a righteous judge AND be merciful, and so on. What God does, He does fully. Every. Single. Time.
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 25, 2014 6:42:38 GMT
I don't think the biblical reality is somewhere in between. I think there is an absolute biblical reality, we just don't know what that is. I think that is why many of us are not clear cut on where we stand.
Benjamin, you suggest God is 100 percent loving. God does not always love, and God does not always treat people the same. God entered into a relationship with Abraham, and then the resulting Jewish race. Later on when Jewish people died, they had a hope for a good eternal life. Gentiles, since the beginning of time, up until Christ was crucified and the Gospel was preached, had no option for this. When they died, they ended up in Hades or Hell. That's a whole lot of people.
To my human mind that seems terribly unloving and unfair, but I am no one to judge God. Everything He does is Holy and right. My human mind cannot in any way comprehend.
(Isa 55:8) "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," declares the LORD.
(Isa 55:9) "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts.
I see predestination in a similar way. I don't understand it, I just accept it.
Also, terms like all, whoever, and every that are often used in Arminian arguments:
In the days of Israel, the only saved people were the Jews. When Christianity came however, it applied to all men, meaning men of every nation, creed, etcetera, not just Jews.
This is very hard to write about, I find, I apologize for not being more articulate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 25, 2014 7:40:22 GMT
I think you're misunderstanding my point a little.
What I'm suggesting is that God is 100% loving, but that He is also 100% righteous; He is 100% merciful, but also 100% just...
and that one does not exist in God's person to the detriment of the other.
That doesn't mean that God has to treat everyone the same, and it doesn't mean that God can't have a "Chosen People"; obviously He does, and has. But think a little... what did God chose those people FOR? ...to be a light among the nations! They were chosen to be a vehicle through which the WHOLE WORLD would see and know that "the Lord, He is God".
God didn't choose 100% of the people in this world for His own - but he did choose to make that light visible to all.
He didn't choose Israel to condemn the world, but that through Israel, and through her Messiah, salvation might come to all.
In the same way, when God sent Jesus Christ, He did not send him so that all WOULD have salvation, but He certainly sent Him so that all COULD. This is why Christ, we're told, died "for sin", not just for the elect. Christ died "for all... the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring us to God."
...and here, especially here, in the Cross, we see how God is 100%.
In the cross, God afforded love, ALL of His love, by sending His only son to die for all.
...but likewise, the cross itself becomes a judgement upon those who refuse to believe.
100% love, 100% righteousness, 100% mercy, 100% justice - all in the one act.
|
|
|
|
Post by elizabeth on Feb 25, 2014 8:24:29 GMT
Benjamin, that sounds lovely, and all but would you please consider this. The gentiles from the beginning of time, until after Christ was crucified and the gospel was preached, had no choice of an afterlife destination. Paradise was not an option for them. God does declare some people ineligible for salvation. It doesn't sound nice, but wasn't that the truth?
|
|
|
|
Post by shiloh on Feb 25, 2014 9:10:56 GMT
What about Acts 13 and Romans 3? God doesn't wish that any should perish.
I would feel terrible and grieve greatly if I thought one of my children had been destined to damnation. That makes no sense. Why would God condemn those who don't know any better, or for that matter, those who have never heard the Gospel? For Calvinism to be true, that would make John 3:16 look like a lie. As far as you want to take this, what about those who are born with permanent brain damage, or babies who cannot make an informed decision and die? You would have to include them in the damnation lot also.
To believe Calvinism is the correct view, you have to believe we have an unmerciful and unloving Creator.
|
|
Becka
Numbers' Donkey
Spurgeon Addict
Posts: 169
|
Post by Becka on Feb 25, 2014 10:23:07 GMT
Not true. Why would the mentally challenged and the innocent babes be chosen for damnation when we know God is righteous and justly judges? Why can we not assume that those with no mental capacity to choose are not chosen of God? And are we not placing some responsibility for salvation in the hands of man when the Bible clearly states salvation belongs to our God? Is that part of salvation or the whole? Did Christ get the ball rolling on the cross and now the salvation ball is in our court? When, exactly, does He BEGIN the good work in us? When we believe? Or when He draws?
I read Bible verses such as "He is the AUTHOR of our faith" and take it at face value. I see Christ talking about the dead burying the dead and I wonder if those dead in sins can even come to Christ without being drawn? How can a man dead in his sins come out of the grave of this world if his soul has not been quickened?
I read Bible verses that claim there no one righteous, no not one, and that no one seeks after God (Romans 3:10-12), coupled with the predestination verses of Romans 8:29, Ephesians 1:4-5, Ephesians 1:11, and various others, such as "all my days were written in Your book" (Psalm 139:16) along with Revelation 13:8, and piece it all together. I do agree with Benjamin to a point, but I also believe the Father draws. You mentioned in the other thread that you called out to God in desperation. That is also Biblical, as all who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. However, how are we to view that in light of the "You did not choose Me, but I chose you" verses? When we begin to split hairs and say, "Oh, well that was a promise only for the Apostles" then the Scripture ceases to be a living, supernatural book that is suitable for teaching in season and out of season. It ceases to speak directly to us when breathed upon by the Holy Spirit. If this is so, then the picture of a heart of stone turning to a heart of flesh in Ezekiel is only for the Jews. The Scripture God has used to speak directly to my heart out of Isaiah and Jeremiah must only have been what I wanted to see, and not the two-edged Sword of the Spirit.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not grumpy about anyone's views. However, there is sufficient Scripture to back up *both* views, enough so that I question either view, Calvinism or Armenianism, is 100% correct. I cannot deny free will and Christ's atonement sufficient for the whole world. Yet neither can I deny the fact that God draws His children.
Was God in the wrong to harden Pharaoh's heart (Exodus 4:21)? No, because he had rejected the God of the Hebrews, and through his rejection, God's glory could clearly be seen by those who DID choose Him. That is what I believe He does for the unregenerate as well. He is Just, He allows them a chance to hear or know the Gospel, but if they reject it, He does not draw them. And in that, His wrath shows His children another side of His glory - His Righteous Justice.
I believe aborted/miscarried babies, infants and toddlers who pass, and the mentally challenged are in Heaven. There is no reason to send them to Hell if no offense against the Most High has been committed.
~~Becka
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 25, 2014 12:06:44 GMT
I wouldn't suggest for a moment that either Calvinism or Arminianism is 100% correct. I don't believe that either is.
However, I also don't think that God arbitrarily hardened Pharaoh's heart.
Romans talks about those whom God "gave over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done", and I think this, likewise, is the case with Pharaoh. Pharaoh had already made his choice and decided upon his path. God foreknew this; the hardening came after that point.
Likewise with salvation, I think the call, the grace, is always there; first in Israel, then in Christ. That offer is always there, both in general terms (e.g. we have the Bible, God's written Word) and in specific (that God "tugs on our heart strings", so to speak). I believe, however, that this call is offered broadly. "Many are called, but few are chosen".
The issue I take with Calvinism is that it teaches that the heart of man must be regenerated BEFORE Christ can be accepted. That isn't a teaching you'll find anywhere in Scripture.
Calvinism teaches that we cannot possibly respond to God of our own volition because we are "totally depraved"... yet Psalms tells me I am "fearfully and wonderfully made". Which is it?
The truth is, we ARE depraved - "there is no one righteous, no, not one", and "all our righteousness is as filthy rags", but just as we can stand and view a sunset, and see beauty even in this fallen world, groaning so desperately under the weight of sin, awaiting its redemption, so too does the reflection of God still shine in us, however dimly. "Let us make man in our image".
We are fallen, and broken, and hopelessly lost - don't get me wrong - and sin affects every single part of our lives, no doubt... but I believe there are still faint echoes of the Maker's hand, even here. So no, none can come to the Father except through Jesus Christ... but nowhere in Scripture is that death equated with an inability to heed the call of the One who gives us life. Rather, we're told it's almost a RESPONSIBILITY to respond when we hear His voice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Benjamin on Feb 25, 2014 12:11:01 GMT
Benjamin, that sounds lovely, and all but would you please consider this. The gentiles from the beginning of time, until after Christ was crucified and the gospel was preached, had no choice of an afterlife destination. Paradise was not an option for them. God does declare some people ineligible for salvation. It doesn't sound nice, but wasn't that the truth?
I don't believe that to be so, no. Paul says that those who sin apart from the law are exempt from the consequences of it. The law was given to Israel, not to the gentiles. Now, that doesn't mean that every gentile who never heard the law is going to be in heaven... but I believe they are judged on a different basis... that they will be judged according to what they DID know. Romans 1 says that "What may be known of God is manifest... for God has shown it to [them]. For since the creation of the world, His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse." So no, the gentiles who died outside the law will not be judged according to the law and the commandments, and I don't believe that "paradise is not an option for them". I believe they'll be judged according to what they could reasonably discern from the knowledge that they were given. |
|
(Mine's Kindle, though. I'll have to buy a physical copy.)
). I was not at all referring to this particular thread, forum, moderator, contributors, Forum Boards Inc. ... (let's see, do I have everything / everyone covered? {puzzled expression}