Calvinism & Evangelism training

BobRyan says:

Matthew 7:14, I believe is the complete title of the text you are referring to.
That's strange, because in another thread, somebody else (Scott Emerson or Ray Berrian, I think, my apologies to these gentlemen if I am wrong), quotes exactly that verse as their proof text to show that there will be less people in heaven than in hell, and both are Arminians, while Brother Glen, Ken Hamilton, and some of the Calvinists, including myself (though I would rather be called Primitive Baptist than Calvinist) were arguing that the love and grace of God implies otherwise.
As to the "probably" ?
I personally would not say that because evangelizing means proclaiming the gospel which is good news and not bad news.
If after having proclaimed the good news of God's Grace and the Holy Spirit quickens the listener and causes him/her to turn to Christ then I believe the Holy Spirit will reveal to them the Doctrines of Grace, Himself.
On the other hand, children of God who have been long awakened by the Holy Spirit as to the Sovereignty of God in electing His own unto salvation will need no one to tell them that their being elect from the foundation of the world does not necessarily extend to their loved ones and that God will deal with their loved ones according to His good pleasure, as He does with all His creation, and with all His children.
BobRyan's problem is that he wants Calvinists to admit that they are evil and elitist and hiding behind a facade of sainthood.
I have confronted him with Scriptures and a challenge and his only response is the kind one can read in his post.

 

Uhhh ... Bob ... Pinoy and I are sayign the same thing. You are wrong about Calvinism. I asserted it; he showed it.

Whosoever will is a Calvinist doctrine. For you to say it is not is simply wrong. Ask pinoy; I think he will agree with me. The difference is that you think man's will was unaffected by sin and the fall when the Bible says that it clearly was affected. Man cannot come to God; he has no desire for the things of God. He operates according to his free will.

Again, I encourage you to do a little reading through the forum here to explore what has already been said. If nothing else, it will at least be educational for you about the topics you are chiming in on here.

 

I assume you have read Peter's sermon in Acts chapter 2. One does not start in teaching someone with the harder points to understand. One lays a foundation first and then goes forward. One does not have to have a proper Biblical understanding of God's sovereignty in order to be saved. And that's good for you non-Calvinists, or else ya'll would be in deep trouble spiritually.

Ken
A Spurgeonite

[ September 08, 2002, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]

 

I would have to agree with them there that the direct and explicit "contrast" between "MANY" and "FEW" make the point so obvious that even the most casual reader gets the point.

[PinoyBaptist]
Brother Glen, Ken Hamilton, and some of the Calvinists, including myself (though I would rather be called Primitive Baptist than Calvinist) were arguing that the love and grace of God implies otherwise.[/quote]

OH - I absolutely agree that if we "Agree" to talk only about the "love and Grace of God" instead of looking at the content of the text of Matt 7 - we "Can" come away with some entirely different conjectures/conclusions. But the "details" of Matt 7 make it clear - that the intent is to contrast "MANY" with "FEW " and associate the former with Hell and the later with Heaven.

Well IF you consider that "many" contrasted to "few" is describing a "probability" in clear favor of the "MANY" - then indeed "probably" is accurate - but "Not good news" for a Calvinist model and certainly not something you would "want" to tell people you were trying to evangelize "IF" the model was "MOTIVATION" instead of deterministic observation.

Indeed - the "many" vs the "few".

And should you find yourself in heaven where the Law of Love is paramount - and you should see your poor children writhing in agony in hell - and you should go to God as a loving caring parent saying in anguish "Oh my Father - couldn't you have done something to save them?"

then in the Calvinist Model He will respond "Sure I could - IF I had cared to - now go your way and forget about it".

Indeed - IF you allow the "mature" Christian to really "Contemplate" as you have stated above - the real implications of Calvinism - I would wonder if they would not take a second look at the Arminian support from scripture.

No my argument is that Calvinists know that Calvinism fails as a method of evangelism so they freely use Arminian methods of "persuasion" and "motivation" and calls for 'choice' - even making the "hard choices".

My point is that IF Arminians did the same thing - arguing FOR the Arminian position but then RELIED upon Calvinist methods of "observation" and "determinism" to conduct evangelism - the Calvinists would be Questioning US intensely - and rigthfully so. I think this is an obvious point.

In Christ,

Bob

 

ACtually if you look at the details in his post - he does not hold up "Whosoever will" or "Savior of the World" texts and say "Hey Bob lets see how you answer these Calvinist texts" - because He knows that these are not Calvinism - you do not get Calvinism by going to those texts - you get it "in spite" of those texts.

I am sure he has a way to "tolerate" them - but that does not make his case. And so they are not what he used above when he wanted to "show" Calvinism IN scripture - because they don't work as Calvinist statements - rather you "need to rework" them just to get along with them - at the very outset.

And in my point that Calvinism is NOT presenting its views in Evangelism - but rather relying on Arminian methods - Ken Hamilton also seems to agree - by arguing that we must wait a while before presenting Calvinism based on the model in Acts.

Instead of arguing that Calvinism IS being presented - they are arguing that it is NOT being presented in the classic methods of evangelism - just as I have been stating.

I believe the point stands, and if you care to see it - it is being reluctantly endorsed even by the Calvinist posts on this thread. (It is difficult to have it "both ways").

In Christ,

Bob

[ September 08, 2002, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

Bob Ryan,

Lets look at the text, "Whosoever will may come." Here's my interpretive paraphrase of it: Absolutely anyone who wants to come may come.

Do you agree with that explanation of the text or not? Or is there something more there that I am missing?

Anyway, that's how I see the text, and there is nothing in my paraphrase that does not fit perfectly with Calvinism.

The gospel message is simple: "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved". Since that's all that anyone needs to know to be saved, that's what is preached in a gospel message. And that method is neither Arminian or Calvinistic, but scriptural.

Calvinism is an explanation of what goes on behind the scenes when someone believes unto salvation. It tells us what God is doing, the way He is working.

Look at Acts 13:46-48.

Paul and Barnabas give the gospel message: For this is what the Lord has commanded us: I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.

The people respond: When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord;

And finally, the explanation of what God was doing behind the scenes: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

That's what Calvinism is--the explanation after the fact of what went on behind the scenes when someone responds positively to the gospel message. It is supposed to be a pastoral doctrine, so that those of us who have believed know exactly who we were before we were justified--people who are by nature objects of God's wrath, just like everyone else is, who were dancing after Satan, just like everyone else is; and exactly what it is God has done for us--freeing us from our bondage to sin, working saving faith within us, recreating us into people who do the good works that He prepared for us to do.

 

Hold on, Bob. Let's not get carried away. Let me explain further. My point is that in initially talking to an unbeliever you don't talk about the deeper things of the Bible. Now, if a pastor is preaching expositionally through the Bible to an audience of believers and unbelievers and he comes across passages that concern election, particular redemption, human inability, effectual calling, eternal security, etc., then unbelievers will be hearing about these subjects. My point is you don't start at the same point with everyone you discuss the gospel with. Obviously, almost all of Peter's audience in Acts chapter 2 was composed of unbelievers.

Ken
A Spurgeonite

 

Bob Ryan:

My question to you now is, have you ever gone "evangelizing" with a Calvinist ? I don't know about other Calvinist brethren here, but as far as others I know of, when we do present the gospel, we do not dish it out as an "accept Christ or..." thing.
Also, as a Primitive Baptist, I don't believe in Gospel Regeneration.
As one who agrees with Calvin's Soteriology, it will be pretty inconsistent for me to present the gospel or preach it and then ask people to raise their hands or pray the sinner's prayer.
The Holy Spirit is the One who convicts those whom He will convict, and He will bring them to their knees as He did Paul, in His own way and His own time.
My job is simply to preach Christ, and Him crucified, and not to get people saved - that is the job of the Holy Spirit.
So, the gospel preacher deals with the listeners at that given time, not with the listener's family, or extended family.
Going back to your "wish" for us to tell listeners out and out that they may be saved, but their children or loved ones are probably not, I would say, is that how you Arminians do it ?
Do you say, "well, you accepted Christ as your savior" but if you don't know that your loved ones did or did not, then they are "probably" not in heaven, you see, it all depends on whether they repented and accepted Christ, if they did not, then, they are definitely not in heaven.
When I do get to heaven, I will look for Jesus and bow at His feet, and cry, "Holy and Righteous art thou, Lord".
If I do see any of my loved ones there, then we shall be rejoicing together, eternally thankful to the One who bore our sins and washed it in His own blood.
If there are some of our loved ones who are not there, there will be no questions asked, only amazement at our being there, because we know that we don't deserve to be in Heaven anymore than Peter or Paul or David or Moses or our loved ones, because we are all as corrupt as those of our loved ones whom God left to their sins.
{b] You {/b], on the other hand, can go and blame God if you want.

 

I come from a family of three brothers and one sister... me being the eldest brother. I was raised in a good christian home along with my siblings and we all went to church on Sunday. My brother joined the church and was baptised when he was twelve and when he reached adulthood stop coming altogether. None of the others ever joined any church of the boys except me.
My sister went to church in Chicago after she got married and joined a different denomination but she is not going to church now. Left church a long time ago because of a disagreement and has not tried to find another.
There has always been something in the church for me... There is a connection that none of the others have. If my brother or sister ever came to me and inquired about the things of God I would only be to happy to sit down and share the Gospel. I'm not worried about my siblings they are in Gods hands and I will leave it like that.
I'm sure that the Lord is capable of saving all his children and the eternal salvation of his children... THANK GOD!... This is not in the hands of us infallible men!... AMEN!
I see nothing wrong with evangelizing if done in the right manner and way. Those who want to hear the gospel and the things of God and his son Jesus Christ will show a desire for the same. God has prepared the one to receive what you have to say. If he has not you might as well be talking to an Atheist because you will be casting your pearls before swine... Who will trample them turn again and rend you.
We Primitive Baptist brethren believe in the Macedonian call and when there is a desire there you will know it as God will bring his sheep to you or send you to them. Did he not do the same with Philip and the eunch? Has his ways changed of doing things over time? God will do it in his way and in his time and his manner and none can stay his hand or say unto him what doest thou.
Primitive Baptist brethren have been accused in the past of not having any evangelistic zeal as our Arminian or our Calvinistic brethren.
We believe in a God that worketh in all his children the will and the to do according to his own good pleasure. There may be books written to fill a library on the doctrine called "Soul Winning" but I will use the Bible only and say that the Primitive Baptist brethren are interested in truth winning... Bringing someone to the truths as they are in Christ Jesus... I am the WAY... the TRUTH... and the LIFE... No man cometh unto the FATHER but by ME. I'm all for truth winning there is to much unsound doctrine that is blinding God children to the truth! I will leave "soul winning" to the Lord as men are not qualified!... Peter... Lovest thou me more than these... Feed my sheep and feed my lambs!... Brother Glen

 

For the "Arminians" here, let me ask a question... Does God have complete and perfect foreknowledge? If so, then what is the point of witnessing? God already knows who is going to believe, he has "foreseen" it. Understand? You are just one step removed from the Calvinist.

For the "Calvinists" here, let me ask you a question... What IS the point of evangelism if God has predestined certain individuals to salvation?

For both: the one and only answer is this - God has commanded it, so we are responsible to do it. Period.

By the way, you Arminians would do well to study your church history. The great majority of noted soul-winners / missionaries in the history of the Church have been "Reformed."

Rev. G
Ph.D. Cand. in Evangelism
Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

 

Do you have foreknowledge of 2 + 2. What part of 4 did you cause to be or to happen?

We wittness because God's foreknowledge did not predetermine events.

Ever watched a movie for the second time. While watching it the second time, you already know that Billy Bob was gonna get shot at the end of the movie. What part did you predetermine.

Not a calvinist, not an Arminian. Don't want nobodys sins on my back but mine. (Too heavy} I'm a Christian. The only yoke that i want on me is Christs....

[ September 16, 2002, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: Chappie ]