Featured Has anyone else ever just been unsure about Calvinism and Arminianism?

I was unsure and unsettled about my non-Calvinist doctrine for years and knew something was amiss in that shallow teaching. Then I was unsure about Calvinism when I heard of it, but not adamantly opposed, just curious and had a plethora of proof-texts would arise to mind to counter or question really this teaching. But I kept reading my Scriptures after confrontation with TULIP and through them, I am no longer uncertain or unsure of the truths of Calvinism/Doctrines of Grace. Now I am convinced and convicted that both Arminianism and all other forms of non-Calvinist (so- called) doctrine are in error.

 

I did not read the rest of the posts, but did read the op and following up to this post.

Before I had studied the doctrines, I assumed the Calvinist view was biblical. But when I first started posting on the internet I met these Arminian folks who disagreed, and some of their arguments seemed to accurately reflect scripture. So I stopped posting and started studying.

After a lot of study and a lot of prayerful meditation, I realized both views were flawed. But at that point I did not see a way around the problem. Then I read an article about corporate rather than individual election. This was the key that unlocked for me, an understanding that meshed with all scripture.

The new view is based on understanding Ephesians 1:4 is referring not to our individual election before creation, but Christ's individual election as God's Redeemer. And of course, when God chose His Redeemer He had a plan to redeem. Thus all those Christ redeems were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world.

As I said this key allows God to choose us individually through faith in the truth, 2 Thessalonians 2:13. This meshes with John 3:16 where the "world" refers to fallen mankind.

In summary, I am a one point Calvinist, once saved always saved (1 Peter 1:3-5).
I am a two point Arminians, Christ died for all mankind, and we are chosen conditionally.

My study has demonstrated to me at least, that total spiritual inability of men of flesh is bogus, 1 Corinthians 3:1. And my study of irresistible grace or the gift of faith is bogus, Matthew 23:13.

My study also took we away from the Arminian view that we are chosen individually before creation based on foreseen faith. My view is we are chosen for salvation through our faith which means during our physical lifetime, not before creation.

Finally, we are called through the gospel of Christ. Some people, the first soil of Matthew 13 cannot understand it, thus they are indeed suffering from total spiritual inability. But they were not born in this condition, they hardened their hearts with the practice of sin. If we understand the gospel, like the 2, 3, and 4 soil of Matthew 13, we are drawn to Christ for we have beheld Him high and lifted up, John 12:32

This view is the only one that fits with all scripture.

 

seek the scriptures, and try to bring in everything taught on these issues...

Also good to pick up a standard reference text for each perspective...

And realize that one can hold to either viewpoint, and be a Christian...

 

I came a hair away from becoming a Calvinist, but the issue that prevented me was the "God predetermined all events, good and bad."

I know about compatibalism, and I agree with it, but I cannot bring myself to believe that God infalliby decreed beforehand everything that happens, including sin. (perhaps I am misinterpreting the Calvinist position?) I know that He sometimes allows and even foreordains evil for His purposes (like what when He predetermined beforehand that Christ would be slain by wicked men) but I do not believe He predetermined every sin, like when a believer is careless and does something stupid. I also know that sometimes he permits evil and sometimes He restrains it according to the fulfillment of His etermal purpose

Maybe I misunderstand the concept. When it is said that God predetermined all events, even evil, is the decree of an evil event by permission or is it causative in Calvinism

I believe (know) that God is Omniscient, and His Omniscience is perfect, therefore immutable, but I think that compatiballism means events already determined from God's eternal perspective but also contingent from our temporal perspective (may not be a correct definition of the term, but that is my perspective on it)

I used to classify myself as a CLASSICAL ARMINIAN, but I'm not sure I fit that category anymore. I never really agreed with more modern strains of Arminian. Now I am not sure if I am a moderate Arminian or a moderate Calvinist. I think I am somewhere in between the two systems, (pretty much always have been)

So what does that make me?

 

God uses primary and secondary causes to bring His will to fruition. There is not one thing beyond His control, nor is there any one thing that comes to pass that He did not decree, even sin. But, you need to study primary and secondary causes.

 

Jut to be clear, I did not come here to argue against Calvinism. I came here to hear a clear definition of the one part of Calvinism I don't understand from a Calvinist.

"God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established."

I am in general agreement with this, but lack understanding of one part

a. I would never question the most holy and wise councel of God. If Calvinism is correct about God, I WANT TO BE CONVINCED.

b. I know that God is not the author of sin.

c. I know that God is FREE in whatsoever He does. No one can say to Him "what are you doing"

The part I am seeking explanation for is the apparant contradiction (I say apparant because it only appears to be contradictory TO ME , not that it is contradictory) in your affirmation that God ordains EVERYTHING that comes to pass while similtaneously denying that He ordained acts of sin. Would you please clarify this for me?

I am not a hard headed person who wants to argue and doesnt want to listen.

To say that God ordains EVERYTHING and then say that He did not ordain sin is contradictory. If He did not ordain sin, He did not ordain everything.

So do you agree with Calvin and the Westminster Confession that God infallibly ordained WHATSOEVER comes to pass? Would this not include acts of sin?

I am not attacking Calvinism. I am trying to find the missing piece in my understanding of it. I know that God did not ordain sin, therefore I cannot believe He ordained EVERYTHING. Am I missing something? If so, what is it?

 

Thank you for your post. I will say that my conversion was undeniably monergistic. God replaced my hard heart with a soft heart instantaneously and revealed Himself to me in Grace when I wasnt seeking Him. It is also undeniably His Power and Grace that is keeping me. I understand many of the tenets of Calvinism experientially, but struggle with some of the spoken and written content, like the part I quoted above.

Blessings

 

Agreed, but still does not answer the question above. But I will do more reading on the subject

 

I for one am not nearly, as one has confessed, on the verge of chucking the Doctrines of Grace, interesting conversation nonetheless. Perhaps Proverbs 23:23 is a good passage to consider. Also, 1 Thessalonians 5:21.

I will add this passage as to further some thought on the way the OP is heading and for glad4mercy:

“You speak as one of the foolish women would speak. Shall we receive good from God, and shall we not receive evil?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips. - Job 2:10

If anyone pretends to understand all concerning the so-called 'problem of evil' they're probably fibbing and presumptuous. God has revealed what He desires us to know through His Word. It is apparent he has decreed all things that come to pass, or, He simply would not be God. I am content that we do not have a monopoly on God, and have it all figured out.

 

No, I have always been sure that both are wrong.

 

The Job passage is completely irrelevant. I am not questioning God, I am examining Calvinism. Like I said, if someone can answer my question reasonably and scripturally, I will receive it with open arms

quote- It is apparent he has decreed all things that come to pass, or, He simply would not be God

How does your conclusion follow from the premise.

Omniscience, Omnipotence, etc are necessary attributes of God. But how is determinism essential to a right understanding of God

And the fact that I realize I don't have it all figured out is why I am asking questions

I approach you all with a question and you all have a golden opportunity to answer someone who is COMPLETELY open minded to what you have to say, and this is the best you can do?

 

Thank you for the answer. I have no doubt that God is Soveriegn, and I have fully realize that He is not the author of sin. I fully believe in the Sovereignty of God.

Nevertheless, decreeing that evil occur and predetermining every event that ever occurs are two very different propositions are they not?

Are all the various choices of individuals decreed infallibly in eternity? If not, how can it be said that God decrees whatsoever comes to pass.

I fully realize that nothing can thwart God's purpose and He accomplishes His Will in everything that happens, but that is not the same as decreein/ordaining everything that happens, is it?

 

It is not. It is clearly a wrong understanding of the Sovereignty of God. God is completely sovereign even when He does not decree something. The problem with Calvinists is if they lose this doctrine they lose the whole thing. All of Calvinism will fall apart.

I just scratched my head. It cannot be proved nor is it even reasonable that a decree went out from God that I would do that. Further, such an idea is foreign not only to scripture but to justice. If God decreed that man would sin then He is the author of evil. My God is not the author of evil. Their God may be but the one true and living God is not. There would be no justice for man to cause men to sin and then punish man for the sin God caused, decreed, and created. Such an idea is blasphemous and should have no place in orthodox Christianity.

 

Yes but you cannot have one without the other.