A Question Calvinists must Answer

[David Lamb]

Statistics show the neo-reformed movement is made up in large majority of young white males, leaving out many mothers, wives, sisters and more "sensitive" and less "intellectual" types. Maybe God prefers them?

Not trying to be contentious - just asking! What statistics? And are they world-wide, or confined to the United States? And by "the neo-reformed movement", do you simply mean people who believe the doctrines of grace? I say again, just asking!

 

[Skandelon]

Not trying to be contentious - just asking! What statistics? And are they world-wide, or confined to the United States? And by "the neo-reformed movement", do you simply mean people who believe the doctrines of grace? I say again, just asking!

It was an article I think we discussed on this board a while back talking about the resurgence of Calvinism/reformed beliefs. It had stats about how most of them were young, white and male. That was me when I became a Calvinist too. I was 19 in college and was recommended a MacArthur book "Ashamed of the Gospel." It introduced me to Calvinism and I adopted that belief all the way through seminary and many years following (about 10-11 years total).

Certainly there are women, blacks and older people too, but this was just about the "resurgence" and the majority of those that are represented. That is just interesting to me considering what Calvinists believe about God's decrees and such.

 

[Skandelon]

NOTE TO ALL CALVINISTS,

I just read through all the replies and there is clearly a misunderstanding about my question. Please understand that point #1 is NOT arguing that belief in Calvinism is what saves. Instead, it is an REASON or CAUSE for why a professing believer might reject Calvinism. So, let me try again and speak more clearly this time.

Why did John Wesley, a professed believer and ardent follower of Jesus, reject Calvinistic belief while you accepted it?

Was it because:
1. He wasn't really saved, which lead him to believe falsely
2. He was not as smart (good) as you?
3. God didn't give him enough grace to accept it, but he gave it to you and other Calvinists.

Is there another option?

Thank you.

 

[Amy.G]

You are not being definitive. Will you say point-blank that Calvinism is not a different gospel?

I'll go a step further and say Calvinism is not THE gospel. That is what I have a problem with. The gospel has nothing to do with John Calvin or any other man. You will never get saved by the gospel of Calvin. All the ism's in the world are not THE gospel.

I'm not going to argue with you about this anymore. You need to spend your time on the board either learning or edifying, not searching through months of posts so you can accuse me of something I didn't do.

 

[jbh28]

NOTE TO ALL CALVINISTS,

I just read through all the replies and there is clearly a misunderstanding about my question. Please understand that point #1 is NOT arguing that belief in Calvinism is what saves. Instead, it is an REASON or CAUSE for why a professing believer might reject Calvinism. So, let me try again and speak more clearly this time.

Why did John Wesley, a professed believer and ardent follower of Jesus, reject Calvinistic belief while you accepted it?

Was it because:
1. He wasn't really saved, which lead him to believe falsely
2. He was not as smart (good) as you?
3. God didn't give him enough grace to accept it, but he gave it to you and other Calvinists.

Is there another option?

Thank you.

D: it was because he interpreted Scripture differently.

 

[quantumfaith]

I'll go a step further and say Calvinism is not THE gospel. That is what I have a problem with. The gospel has nothing to do with John Calvin or any other man. You will never get saved by the gospel of Calvin. All the ism's in the world are not THE gospel.

I'm not going to argue with you about this anymore. You need to spend your time on the board either learning or edifying, not searching through months of posts so you can accuse me of something I didn't do.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Havensdad]

NOTE TO ALL CALVINISTS,

I just read through all the replies and there is clearly a misunderstanding about my question. Please understand that point #1 is NOT arguing that belief in Calvinism is what saves. Instead, it is an REASON or CAUSE for why a professing believer might reject Calvinism. So, let me try again and speak more clearly this time.

Why did John Wesley, a professed believer and ardent follower of Jesus, reject Calvinistic belief while you accepted it?

Was it because:
1. He wasn't really saved, which lead him to believe falsely
2. He was not as smart (good) as you?
3. God didn't give him enough grace to accept it, but he gave it to you and other Calvinists.

Is there another option?

Thank you.

Because God has decreed that His purposes will be accomplished (exactly how, when and where He wants them to occur) through the free choices His people make, of which He has decreed both the choice, and the result.

Thus: why did Wesley believe wrongly about the Gospel? Because he was left to his own devices to study and seek out the truth, and like all of us he was not perfect.

However, equally true at the same time, and with no contradiction, God decreed that Wesley would get it wrong. Perhaps Wesley's incorrect interpretation of the Gospel, served as a balancing force to keep Hyper Calvinism in check. Or perhaps it was to keep God's church from flooding the world before the proper time. Who knows? The point is, that God both allowed it, and decreed it, and His purposes are His own. John Calvin said, rightly I believe, that where scripture is silent, we should be silent. Thus, to posit answers (whose possibilities are in the billions, surely), is a ridiculous waste of time and energy.

 

[ashleysdad]

No... I believe that some (or perhaps even many) Arminians can be saved. They are elect and just don't realize it, thinking instead that they in some part played a deciding role in their own salvation. It would be silly to the extreme to suggest that only one group of people holding one particular theology are the only ones saved by God, who is the author and finisher of our salvation.

Stop placing words in my mouth, thank you very much...

I want to say thank you for this post! My day started off REALLY bad, but after reading this and hearing that I can be/might be saved after all even though I am not a Calvinist, well lets just say that my day is now SO much better!

 

[webdog]

I want to say thank you for this post! My day started off REALLY bad, but after reading this and hearing that I can be/might be saved after all even though I am not a Calvinist, well lets just say that my day is now SO much better!

Hey, don't put words in his mouth!

He clearly has called out the salvation of everyone not a calvinist on this board...and nothing was done about it. That should tell you which direction the administrators and moderators of this board lean.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I want to say thank you for this post! My day started off REALLY bad, but after reading this and hearing that I can be/might be saved after all even though I am not a Calvinist, well lets just say that my day is now SO much better!

now of course if you are a lawyer, banker or politician you know the rules are changed. Read Edwards sermon on Sinners In the Hands of an Angry God. Bankers, politicians & lawyers are those spiders hanging by a thread in the Pit of Hell. :laugh:

 

[Luke2427]

Because God has decreed that His purposes will be accomplished (exactly how, when and where He wants them to occur) through the free choices His people make, of which He has decreed both the choice, and the result.

Thus: why did Wesley believe wrongly about the Gospel? Because he was left to his own devices to study and seek out the truth, and like all of us he was not perfect.

However, equally true at the same time, and with no contradiction, God decreed that Wesley would get it wrong. Perhaps Wesley's incorrect interpretation of the Gospel, served as a balancing force to keep Hyper Calvinism in check. Or perhaps it was to keep God's church from flooding the world before the proper time. Who knows? The point is, that God both allowed it, and decreed it, and His purposes are His own. John Calvin said, rightly I believe, that where scripture is silent, we should be silent. Thus, to posit answers (whose possibilities are in the billions, surely), is a ridiculous waste of time and energy.

Excellent post and dead on.


Skandelon seems to me to be a very smart man, seems to be well educated and seems, at least to me, to be a thorough Arminian (which is WORLDS better than this deadly new nameless theology that many have just made up to suit them which has no roots is historic orthodox Christianity).

Where Skandelon misses it, imo, is in creating false dilemmas- narrowing the options to 2 or 3 when they could be, as you say, in the billions.

We don't have to know the "how" to know for certain the facts that ARE revealed.

We know that it is a biblical and logical FACT that God willed for everything to happen that ever happens. We know for a FACT that God's power, plan and purpose are behind EVERY single event.

We also know that men make real choices that have real consequences.

How we reconcile the two is a mystery for the ages. But that they are both most CERTAINLY taught in Scripture is beyond question.

 

[ashleysdad]

now of course if you are a lawyer, banker or politician you know the rules are changed. Read Edwards sermon on Sinners In the Hands of an Angry God. Bankers, politicians & lawyers are those spiders hanging by a thread in the Pit of Hell. :laugh:

Great, it just so happens that I DO work for a bank! Now I am REALLY concerned. I am not a Calvinist AND I am a banker! I'm doomed!!

 

[saturneptune]

Great, it just so happens that I DO work for a bank! Now I am REALLY concerned. I am not a Calvinist AND I am a banker! I'm doomed!!

Does that mean you were elected as Chairman of the Board?

 

[saturneptune]

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems here that you are somehow implying that perhaps only one theological flavor has a corner on the sovereignty of God issue.

If I sounded that way, I do not. There are many views on God's sovereignty. I try to get my limited understanding of it from Scripture, and totally ignore Calvin. Augustine, and others I will read, but not Calvin.

 

[Skandelon]

D: it was because he interpreted Scripture differently.

Why? Is one smarter, better at interpreting than another, or did God give more grace so that one could interpret correctly while the other could not?

 

[Skandelon]

Because God has decreed that His purposes will be accomplished (exactly how, when and where He wants them to occur) through the free choices His people make, of which He has decreed both the choice, and the result.

Thus: why did Wesley believe wrongly about the Gospel? Because he was left to his own devices to study and seek out the truth, and like all of us he was not perfect.

However, equally true at the same time, and with no contradiction, God decreed that Wesley would get it wrong. Perhaps Wesley's incorrect interpretation of the Gospel, served as a balancing force to keep Hyper Calvinism in check. Or perhaps it was to keep God's church from flooding the world before the proper time. Who knows? The point is, that God both allowed it, and decreed it, and His purposes are His own. John Calvin said, rightly I believe, that where scripture is silent, we should be silent. Thus, to posit answers (whose possibilities are in the billions, surely), is a ridiculous waste of time and energy.

Ok, now we are getting somewhere. So you believe God granted something to Calvinistic believers that he didn't give to Wesley?

I realize you haven't acknowledged knowing God's purpose in decreeing Wesley's rejection of Calvinism, but you do appear to be saying that ultimately the reason Wesley rejected Calvinism was because God decreed it to be so, correct? If not, please expound further?

 

[Skandelon]

I enjoy exchanges with you but your great debating weakness is "false dilemma". You do this repeatedly.

It's either _______ or _________. So which is it??!!??

A false dilemma would'nt allow and even ask you to provide your own choice would it? I did, which I notice you conveniently didn't do. If not one of these options, which one? There has to be a cause for that choice to reject or accept Calvinism within a deterministic system, right? So, why? What causes it?

This same "dilemma" can be turned upon you.

You Arminians- it's either 1,2, or 3.

Which is it?

Its not a dilemma for us because we affirm free will (LFW). We believe in self-determiniation. I determine my choices. God created me with the ability of first cause choices...i.e. choices not caused by Him. I determined to be Arminian, not God. If I'm wrong its my responsibility because it was my choice. I could have done otherwise because nothing prevented me from seeing and understanding the truth and responding to it.

Since you deny the possibility of LFW you cannot say this. You must either say (1) we don't accept Calvinism because we aren't really saved or (2) we don't accept Calvinism because God didn't grant the grace to some of His children to accept it, while he did to others. There is really no other option unless you affirm LFW.

 

[glfredrick]

Hey, don't put words in his mouth!

He clearly has called out the salvation of everyone not a calvinist on this board...and nothing was done about it. That should tell you which direction the administrators and moderators of this board lean.

No... I have "called out" all those who believe that salvation is of ANYTHING other than Jesus Christ. That includes Calvinism.

 

[glfredrick]

A false dilemma would'nt allow and even ask you to provide your own choice would it? I did, which I notice you conveniently didn't do. If not one of these options, which one? There has to be a cause for that choice to reject or accept Calvinism within a deterministic system, right? So, why? What causes it?


Its not a dilemma for us because we affirm free will (LFW). We believe in self-determiniation. I determine my choices. God created me with the ability of first cause choices...i.e. choices not caused by Him. I determined to be Arminian, not God. If I'm wrong its my responsibility because it was my choice. I could have done otherwise because nothing prevented me from seeing and understanding the truth and responding to it.

Since you deny the possibility of LFW you cannot say this. You must either say (1) we don't accept Calvinism because we aren't really saved or (2) we don't accept Calvinism because God didn't grant the grace to some of His children to accept it, while he did to others. There is really no other option unless you affirm LFW.

Might I suggest that most here on this board are apt to disavow your stated reasons for asking questions like you do because of this "a priori" issue:

www.critiquingcalvinism.blogspot.com

As far as I can see, after reading dozens upon dozens of your posts is that you only ask with ulterior motive in mind -- not a desire to actually get to any truth in the matter. And I'm really not trying to attack you -- you are "free" to believe whatever you like -- and deal with whatever consequences come from that belief, just like the rest of us -- but you ask PRIMARILY for the sake of an argument... :thumbs:

 

[Robert Snow]

Robert, agreed! I dont see Calvinism as a proverbial "different gospel", but rather a distinctly different interpretation as to the methods, means and motivation of God with respect to redemptive history.

We will probably find one day that this disagreement is not nearly as important as some think it is, like the Pharisees debating over how to wash the utensils they were concerned about. Some say wash one way and some another. :laugh: