Arminianism and Calvinism

[JonC]

I always thought that "indian giver" referred back to the time that the US Government would make promises to the Native Americans only to dishonor the agreements later. But I just looked it up and apparently it was something else entirely. My apologies.
But from my understanding, those who hold to an "Arminian" type belief, say that God can save a person, and later take that salvation away if the "apostasize". No, an "Arminian" would not openly say "God is trustworthy" but I would assess from that that He wasn't.

No apologies needed - I didn't know what it meant, but I do remember the problem with the Redskins.

The problem that I see with speaking about other beliefs that way is that we are assuming or ascribing to them our own conclusions. Arminianism departs from what I would consider biblical long before it decides that eternal life is sometimes temporary.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

And thats honorable right martin? He could save all three but decides just to save one. In real life you would find that acceptable. You would call this person a great person because although he can save all 3 he decides to only save one.

You still don't get it, do you?
In all three scenarios only one blind child get saved, and of course that's pure supposition. The Great Crowd of Revelation 7 is so vast that no one can count it, so why do people assume it's really small? But the Crowd persists in singing, "salvation belongs to our God." And so it does. So where do you get off telling Him how many he's got to save?

And another thing; if you have a judge who lets all the criminals go free, what do you do with him? You fire him. He's not doing his job.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Problem with that is: nobody "killed" the Owner's Son. he laid down His life "of Himself" the Bible says.

Here's the deal:
We are all born sinners. True, God is all powerful and He can decide to kill us all like ants if he wants. But thankfully God is not like that. What He CHOSE to do, was to offer the life of His only begotten son as the sacrifice for all sinners. Jesus' blood was sufficient for every sin and every sinner. His power, his knowledge, his love and His salvation is not limited. So to keep you from going to Hell, all He asks is that you believe on His Son as the propitiation for your sins. "ONLY believe" the Bible says. But wait!! Is that weak? No sir. If you refuse His Son, He will cast you into the Lake of Fire for all eternity for refusing His boundless love and Grace. Your fault, your choice.

The trouble with this is that nobody gets saved. 'There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.
They have all turned aside;
They have together become unprofitable.....' and so on (Romans 3:11-18).

"And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil' (John 3:19).

'Unless the LORD of hosts had left to us a very small remnant, we would have become like Sodom, we would have been made like Gomorrah' (Isaiah 1:9).

On the other hand, if someone says that the God of the Bible predetermined only certain ones for Hell, yeah that would be His prerogative IF....IF God wanted to. But that is not the character and intent of the God of the Bible. That would be twisting His Holy Word into something it doesn't say.

'But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honour and another for dishonour? What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory......' (Romans 9:20-23).

 

[Calv1]

Arminianism teaches men that God is untrustworthy and an indian giver.

Calvinism teaches men that God is selfish and that His love is limited.

No they don't, you have no idea what you are talking about. Ever thought of FIRST learning them, then commenting so you don't embarrass yourself online?

 

[Calv1]

God gets EXACTLY ALL whom He intended to get saved by the death of Christ!

Exactly, what these pagans don't get is that the Bible teaches us Definite Atonement, that is God saved exactly who He wanted to save. The pagan Arminianism teaches God is a desperate beggar, sending His Son to die (Oh what if they in their free will didn't kill Christ?), there Christ died, yet not one man came forward in his free will.

This is the teaching of the Roman Church, and the hinge of the Reformation, these uneducated people debating you don't understand they are defending Rome. In Luthers Opus, "Bondage of the Will" he thanked Erasmus that he didn't bother Luther with minor things, but went right to the heart of the issue, THE WILL, that man has volition, but by no means free will, GOD HAS FREE WILL, denied by Arminians, but yeah it's sick to see this ignorance, even if you said God and man has a free will (Which we don't), the question is "whose is more powerful".

If man had free will, no guarantee Judas would betray Christ, hey they might have made Him King, but these guys have to have the Spirit to understand Spiritual things, so don't bang your head, they are like talking to a wall, you give them scripture, they give you philosophy of fallen man, so good luck!!

 

[SovereignGrace]

No they don't, you have no idea what you are talking about. Ever thought of FIRST learning them, then commenting so you don't embarrass yourself online?

Can you make it so I can PM you, please?

 

[InTheLight]

The pagan Arminianism teaches God is a desperate beggar,

these uneducated people debating

"How to Debate", by A. Calvinist.


Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo.

 

[Van]

Arminianism teaches men that God is untrustworthy and an [takes back His salvation gift]
Calvinism teaches men that God is selfish and that His love is limited.

Yes, both Arminianism and Calvinism are based in part on false theology, but unless you have a biblically supported alternative, you are just providing heat rather than light, in my opinion.

Arminianism correctly asserts Christ died for all mankind, those saved or would be saved, and those not saved, and would not be saved. Arminianism also correctly asserts that we are chosen through faith in the truth.

Calvinism correctly asserts once a person is saved, they are saved forever and cannot lose their salvation.

But for years, not one advocate of either view has been willing to objectively address the scriptures that demonstrate their false theology doctrines. Instead we get, the verse does not mean what it says, and those that disagree with the false theology do not know what they are talking about.

So SheepWisperer, are you willing to actually answer questions about your understanding of the passages that demonstrate these two views are false theology?

 

[JonC]

Oh that's right Calvinism teaches God loves everyone and doesn't send folks to hell to show off how great he is.

Exactly.

But some here are pretending otherwise based on their own ideas of what they believe Calvinist should conclude from Calvinistic doctrine. They can't provide evidence that Calvinism teaches against God loving everyone or that God takes pleasure in the destruction of the wicked because there is none. They are false accusations just as many tossed at free-will theology are false accusations.

The difference I see on this thread is not one of doctrine but one of integrity when examining views different from the one personally held.

 

[TCassidy]

Arminianism teaches men that God is untrustworthy and an indian giver.

Calvinism teaches men that God is selfish and that His love is limited.

Please provide the documentation that Arminianism teaches that God is untrustworthy and an "Indian giver" (is that a politically correct term?).

Please provide the documentation that Calvinism teaches men that God is selfish and that His love is limited.

Still waiting for an answer to Jon's questions.

No, an "Arminian" would not openly say "God is trustworthy" but I would assess from that that He wasn't.

So you are admitting you told an untruth regarding Arminianism?

Are you also admitting to telling an untruth about "Calvinism" in the same post?

No Arminian on this forum teaches that God is untrustworthy nor that He fails to keep his promises.

And no "Calvinist" believes God is selfish and that His love is limited.

Is your understanding of the theology of soteriology so flawed that you have to make up untruths about what others believe?

The 5 points of Arminianism are:

1. Human Free Will--This states that though man is fallen, he is not incapacitated by the sinful nature and can freely choose God. His will is not restricted and enslaved by his sinful nature.

2. Conditional Election--God chose people for salvation based on His foreknowledge where God looks into the future to see who would respond to the gospel message and believe.

3. Universal Atonement--Jesus bore the sin of everyone who ever lived.

4. Resistable Grace--The teaching that the saving grace of God can be resisted and finally beaten so as to reject salvation in Christ.

5. Fall from Grace--The Teaching that a person can fall from grace and lose his salvation. (Although Arminius did not believe this, he did leave the door open for further study on the matter.)

So, where in there does it teach that God is untrustworthy or that He fails to keep his promises?

The 5 Points of "Calvinism" are:

1. Total Depravity -- Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel.

2. Unconditional Election -- God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will and not on any merit of the person being saved.

3. Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption -- Christ's atonement was sufficient for all but efficient only for believers (the elect) and actually secured salvation for them and not just made salvation possible if they did certain things considered meriting salvation.

4. Irresistible Grace or The Efficacious Call of the Spirit -- In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. God's saving Grace is always efficacious - it always accomplishes what God intended it to accomplish. God, and His efficacious grace, never fail.

5. Perseverance of the Saints -- All who are drawn by the Father, redeemed by the Son, and given faith by the Holy Spirit are eternally saved. They are kept by grace through the power of Almighty God and thus are preserved by His efficacious grace to the end.

Now, where in there does it teach that God is selfish and that His love is limited?

Honesty, especially in recounting what the other side believes, is of paramount importance in this type of discussion. To try to twist what others believe into a falsehood simply proves you are unqualified to discuss the issue. If you don't let others speak for themselves there is no reason to listen to what you have to say as you have already proven yourself to be an unreliable witness.

 

[SheepWhisperer]

Yes, both Arminianism and Calvinism are based in part on false theology, but unless you have a biblically supported alternative, you are just providing heat rather than light, in my opinion.

Arminianism correctly asserts Christ died for all mankind, those saved or would be saved, and those not saved, and would not be saved. Arminianism also correctly asserts that we are chosen through faith in the truth.

Calvinism correctly asserts once a person is saved, they are saved forever and cannot lose their salvation.

But for years, not one advocate of either view has been willing to objectively address the scriptures that demonstrate their false theology doctrines. Instead we get, the verse does not mean what it says, and those that disagree with the false theology do not know what they are talking about.

So SheepWisperer, are you willing to actually answer questions about your understanding of the passages that demonstrate these two views are false theology?

Yes, I will answer your questions.

 

[InTheLight]

But some here are pretending otherwise based on their own ideas of what they believe Calvinist should conclude from Calvinistic doctrine. They can't provide evidence that Calvinism teaches that God takes pleasure in the destruction of the wicked because there is none.

Well there is this exchange from Sunday in another thread:

Even the bizarre cults are established by God for purposes of separating the wheat from the chaff.

Whereupon I replied:

So....God who knows the future from the past and is sovereign over all, needs to create bizarre cults so that on Judgment Day he will know how to separate the wheat from the chaff.

And MennoSota said:

When does God "need" to do anything?

Calvary Chapels largest church, Harvest of Riverside, CA, joins the SBC

So, God creates cults (the "chaff") so he can destroy them on Judgment Day.
MennoSota says God does not need to do this.
Therefore, God must be doing this for his pleasure.
So, there you have it. God creates people so he can take pleasure in the destruction of the wicked.



You're welcome.

 

[Rob_BW]

So Calv1 is still questioning other members ' salvation, with a backhanded "pagan Arminians" comment?

If only the forum rules were as easy to understand as the Five Points.

 

[Van]

Yes, I will answer your questions.

Question 1, which of the following doctrines do you thing are unbiblical?

Natural, unregenerate Men of Flesh have the innate ability to understand the milk of the gospel.
God chose foreseen individuals before the foundation of the world for salvation
God chose foreseen individuals before the foundation of the world unconditionally.
Christ's sacrifice paid only for the sins of the previously chosen elect.
We are automatically saved when we profess Jesus as Lord and Savior.​

 

[SheepWhisperer]

Still waiting for an answer to Jon's questions.

So you are admitting you told an untruth regarding Arminianism? No sir. Arminianism teaches that one can lose their salvation and that is not Biblical.. So MY assessment is that their god is NOT trustworthy. Although I'm sure THEY would not admit that. Understand now?

Are you also admitting to telling an untruth about "Calvinism" in the same post? Do you believe that God loves the sinners who are "not of the elect"? . If you do, my apologies.Otherwise, my statement is not untrue. If that concept of God doesn't love the ones who are NOT of the elect and if their damnation was intended for his glory, my assessment is true.

No Arminian on this forum teaches that God is untrustworthy nor that He fails to keep his promises.

And no "Calvinist" believes God is selfish and that His love is limited.

Is your understanding of the theology of soteriology so flawed that you have to make up untruths about what others believe?

The 5 points of Arminianism are:

1. Human Free Will--This states that though man is fallen, he is not incapacitated by the sinful nature and can freely choose God. His will is not restricted and enslaved by his sinful nature. The only thing I disagree with here is that a person has to be "drawn" by the Holy Ghost (attracted...not "dragged").

2. Conditional Election--God chose people for salvation based on His foreknowledge where God looks into the future to see who would respond to the gospel message and believe.

3. Universal Atonement--Jesus bore the sin of everyone who ever lived. Now that I agree with. AND He offered that salvation to every one as well.

4. Resistable Grace--The teaching that the saving grace of God can be resisted and finally beaten so as to reject salvation in Christ. Sir,

5. Fall from Grace--The Teaching that a person can fall from grace and lose his salvation. (Although Arminius did not believe this, he did leave the door open for further study on the matter.)

So, where in there does it teach that God is untrustworthy or that He fails to keep his promises?

The 5 Points of "Calvinism" are:

1. Total Depravity -- Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel.

2. Unconditional Election -- God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will and not on any merit of the person being saved.

3. Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption -- Christ's atonement was sufficient for all but efficient only for believers (the elect) and actually secured salvation for them and not just made salvation possible if they did certain things considered meriting salvation.

4. Irresistible Grace or The Efficacious Call of the Spirit -- In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. God's saving Grace is always efficacious - it always accomplishes what God intended it to accomplish. God, and His efficacious grace, never fail.

5. Perseverance of the Saints -- All who are drawn by the Father, redeemed by the Son, and given faith by the Holy Spirit are eternally saved. They are kept by grace through the power of Almighty God and thus are preserved by His efficacious grace to the end.

Now, where in there does it teach that God is selfish and that His love is limited?

Honesty, especially in recounting what the other side believes, is of paramount importance in this type of discussion. To try to twist what others believe into a falsehood simply proves you are unqualified to discuss the issue. If you don't let others speak for themselves there is no reason to listen to what you have to say as you have already proven yourself to be an unreliable witness.

 

[SheepWhisperer]

Question 1, which of the following doctrines do you thing are unbiblical?

Natural, unregenerate Men of Flesh have the innate ability to understand the milk of the gospel. yes, No, but the "Voice of the Lord" is powerful enough for the dead to hear. I heard it.
God chose foreseen individuals before the foundation of the world for salvation unbiblical
God chose foreseen individuals before the foundation of the world unconditionally. unbiblical: However, God already KNEW who will be saved
Christ's sacrifice paid only for the sins of the previously chosen elect. unbiblical
We are automatically saved when we profess Jesus as Lord and Savior. unbiblical with an explanation: simply "professing" is not salvation. One has to believe on Jesus for salvation with all his heart. When that happens, the person is indwelled by the Holy Spirit and made a new creature.​

 

[Yeshua1]

Exactly, what these pagans don't get is that the Bible teaches us Definite Atonement, that is God saved exactly who He wanted to save. The pagan Arminianism teaches God is a desperate beggar, sending His Son to die (Oh what if they in their free will didn't kill Christ?), there Christ died, yet not one man came forward in his free will.

This is the teaching of the Roman Church, and the hinge of the Reformation, these uneducated people debating you don't understand they are defending Rome. In Luthers Opus, "Bondage of the Will" he thanked Erasmus that he didn't bother Luther with minor things, but went right to the heart of the issue, THE WILL, that man has volition, but by no means free will, GOD HAS FREE WILL, denied by Arminians, but yeah it's sick to see this ignorance, even if you said God and man has a free will (Which we don't), the question is "whose is more powerful".

If man had free will, no guarantee Judas would betray Christ, hey they might have made Him King, but these guys have to have the Spirit to understand Spiritual things, so don't bang your head, they are like talking to a wall, you give them scripture, they give you philosophy of fallen man, so good luck!!

Many people say that God still is sovereign in salvation, bu how can He really be if He is still waiting to see what we will do?

 

[JonC]

Well there is this exchange from Sunday in another thread:



Whereupon I replied:


And MennoSota said:


Calvary Chapels largest church, Harvest of Riverside, CA, joins the SBC

So, God creates cults (the "chaff") so he can destroy them on Judgment Day.
MennoSota says God does not need to do this.
Therefore, God must be doing this for his pleasure.
So, there you have it. God creates people so he can take pleasure in the destruction of the wicked.



You're welcome.

....yes, providing a quote from a baptistboard member certainly settles the issue

What you need to provide is actual Calvinistic doctrine stating your conclusion (e.g., "under the First Head of Doctrine, the Canons of Dort states that God condemns men because he enjoys it").

 

[Revmitchell]

Many people say that God still is sovereign in salvation, bu how can He really be if He is still waiting to see what we will do?

This is a stawman, who ever said; made the claim, or even implied that God is waiting to see what we will do?

 

[Revmitchell]

So Calv1 is still questioning other members ' salvation, with a backhanded "pagan Arminians" comment?

If only the forum rules were as easy to understand as the Five Points.

Lately a lot of these attacks are allowed where they once were not.