Featured What Are main Differences between Arms and Non cals?

Okay. Thanks.
Well, I do believe you can reject the Holy Spirit.

I guess I understand these doctrines less than I thought I did, since I had to ask. xD Oh well.

 

Calvinists believe the same things. That said, Cals haven't misused the terms, non and anti-cals have.

Get your act together. :thumbs:

 

Yes, and incredibly they believe that while belief can only occur after regeneration it need not happen instantaneously, in fact they believe one can be regenerated and not be saved. This is how some Cals explain Hebrews 6:4.

I would add that God regenerates us because of belief and it happens in an instant.

 

Define the 'you' who reject the Holy Spirit.

All of His WILL come to Him, i.e. irresistible grace. Thus it is only applicable to His sheep.

 

Don't feel bad, Calvinism can be somewhat complex, and all Calvinists do not believe the same.

The problem that arises between Calvinists and non-Calvinists is they view God differently.

Calvinists generally (CYB) believe that God only loves a few certain persons called the elect. God chose these persons before the foundation of the world to be saved, based upon no conditions in the man himself, but known only to God. At God's chosen time, he will regenerate these persons so that they will be willing to believe on Jesus Christ.

All others God simply passes by and lets them perish in their sin.

Non-Cals believe that God loves all men and desires all men to be saved, but he does not compel anyone to be saved. God does not regenerate a person and make them irresistibly willing, but he lovingly persuades men to be saved. But the man makes his own choice. If a man does choose Jesus and place their trust in him, at this point God regenerates that person and makes them born again.

Calvinists object that non-Cals teach a man saves himself. Non-Cals object that Calvinism makes God non-loving and the author of sin.

Those are the basics, but there is much more to it. Stick around and you will understand it soon.

 

This post answers the OP, IMO.

 

See, it is getting complex already.

Calvinists believe God calls men with two different callings. God calls non elect persons with a "general" call. There is no supernatural power in this call, it will not regenerate the person who hears it, so that person will remain hostile toward Jesus and the gospel and will not believe.

The other calling is called "effectual" or "irresistible". This call goes out to the elect only, and will immediately make that person perfectly willing to receive Jesus and believe on him.

A preacher can preach a sermon to a crowd. Some may receive the general call and will not be saved. Others might receive the effectual or irresistible call and these persons will absolutely believe and be saved.

 

Even thought "Cals" and non-cals disagree to one extent or another on most points, I think the biggest "issue" at the crux, is election. Non cals tend to see election more in terms of purpose, mission and corporate, whereas Cals tend to view election more in terms of individual soteriology.

 

Calvinists certainly do see an effectual call regarding the individual. But they also see a corporate call (although not the same type of corporate call held to by Skandelon). God is calling a people for Himself (the Church). This one, called out people has existed from the time of Adam. As each person is brought into the fold they become part of the Church.

 

Actually the comedic term is Calminian.

 

I modified your post to clarify.

First of all, many among those communions are unsaved. Those that are saved would overwhelmingly be of an Arminian stripe.

Within the Lutheran camp there are conservative churches. Many display an anti-Reformed stance --so their default position is certainly Arminian.

 

The above bears repeating.

 

I don't think that is the great issue. The issue is how God is portrayed. I object to a system that portrays God as one who simply passes by people and lets them die in their sins, this does not accurately represent God in the scriptures at all.

And actually, in Calvinism God doesn't simply pass by folks, in Calvinism God cursed men to be totally depraved and unable to believe, and then punishes them for the very inability he cursed them with. Horrendous.

THAT is the issue.

 

I guess you've never read Luther's "Bondage of the Will". It's frequently cited by Calvinists to make arguments for man not having a free will. Lutherans are definitely not Arminian.

 

I certainly am familiar with it. I have cited it numerous times on the BB. It is indeed excellent. However, most Lutherans have departed radically from Luther's soteriology in this area. The more conservative ones lean more toward Luther's POV in this regard.

Again, they are a varied bunch. I will contend that they are certainly not Calvinists. The more conservative congragations do have Calvinistic intersections, but they are not Reformed. And I know that Presbyterians and other groups would not dare say that any Baptists are Reformed either. But the more charitable among them would acknowledge our Calvinistic moorings. Present-day Lutherans by-and-large are not in the Calvinistic camp unless you want to make it an even bigger tent than it has become.