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

[Jerome]

Wise counsel for those who think they've arrived:

Charles Spurgeon, "The Necessity of Increased Faith":

"Some of you, my hearers, and a great many that are not my hearers are miserable little cramped souls—you have learned a cast-iron creed and you will never move out of it. A certain somebody drew up five or six doctrines and said, 'There are the doctrines of the Bible,' and you believe these."

"I am sure I may pray to the Lord for them—'Increase their faith!' Help them to believe a little more. Help them to believe there may be Christian Wesleyans—that there are good church people, and not only that Particular Baptists are very good sort of people, but that there are some of God’s elect everywhere. I am sure I pray for all bigots, that they may have a little wider heart. I should like to stretch their hearts a little. But, no, they have reached the ultima thule, they have come to the last of the fortunate islands, there cannot be any shore beyond."

"perhaps Calvin is made the standard and what business has any man to think a single thought beyond Calvin? Blessed be God, we have gone a little beyond that. And we can say, 'Increase our faith.' With all our admiration for these great standard divines, we are not prepared to shut ourselves up in their little iron cages. We say, 'Open the door and let me fly—let me still feel that I am at liberty. Increase my faith and help me to believe a little more.'"

"I know I can say I have had an increase of faith in one or two respects within the last few months. I could not, for a long time, see anything like the Millennium in the Scriptures. I could not much rejoice in the second coming of Christ, though I did believe it. But gradually my faith began to open to that subject and I find it now a part of my meat and drink, to be looking for, as well as hastening unto, the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ!"

 

[StefanM]

My story is one of being raised Wesylan, going to a free will Bible College and coming out Reformed. So you could say that I have run the whole gauntlet, but since coming to a reformed view, I have not doubted it. Even while I was taught against it, I could not help but notice that Bible supports reformed theology.

Was there something in particular that convinced you to adopt a reformed perspective?

 

[TCassidy]

I believe the question is worded wrong, but will answer the spirit of the question if not the letter.

I am a Particular Baptist. I believe in Particular Redemption. I believe Christ actually saved me on the cross. He didn't just make it possible for me to stir up some "innate faith" in myself.

I have never had a doubt about the Sovereignty of God. Either He is Sovereign or He is not God. And that includes Sovereignty in salvation.

Salvation is all of God, none of me.

 

[StefanM]

I believe the question is worded wrong, but will answer the spirit of the question if not the letter.

I am a Particular Baptist. I believe in Particular Redemption. I believe Christ actually saved me on the cross. He didn't just make it possible for me to stir up some "innate faith" in myself.

I have never had a doubt about the Sovereignty of God. Either He is Sovereign or He is not God. And that includes Sovereignty in salvation.

Salvation is all of God, none of me.

I appreciate your reply. How would you phrase the question instead?

 

[blessedwife318]

Was there something in particular that convinced you to adopt a reformed perspective?

At my Bible College we were taught to interpret the Bible using the Literal, Historical, Grammatical approach. When applying that to Romans, Ephesians, The Gospel of John, one cannot help but come out Reformed.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[StefanM]

At my Bible College we were taught to interpret the Bible using the Literal, Historical, Grammatical approach. When applying that to Romans, Ephesians, The Gospel of John, one cannot help but come out Reformed.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Thank you for sharing.

I definitely understand what you mean about those books in particular. I, too, get that feeling when I read them.

 

[TCassidy]

I appreciate your reply. How would you phrase the question instead?

I would not use such words as "Calvinist" or "Reformed" or "Arminian." The bible doctrine of Particular Redemption existed long before Calvin, the Protestant Reformation, or James Arminius.

Also those words tend to stir up strife. As Keith puts it, "more heat than light." They are subject to much misinterpretation and have, due to the long standing debate, been loaded down with specious and extraneous baggage.

Unfortunately, those who either do not understand Particular Redemption, or don't care to study what it is actually all about, would rather parrot the mindless "Calvinism bad." "Calvinism evil." "Me good. Me not evil Calvinist." They seem to have abandoned reasoned apollonian study with dionysiac emotional chaos.

 

[StefanM]

I would not use such words as "Calvinist" or "Reformed" or "Arminian." The bible doctrine of Particular Redemption existed long before Calvin, the Protestant Reformation, or James Arminius.

Also those words tend to stir up strife. As Keith puts it, "more heat than light." They are subject to much misinterpretation and have, due to the long standing debate, been loaded down with specious and extraneous baggage.

Unfortunately, those who either do not understand Particular Redemption, or don't care to study what it is actually all about, would rather parrot the mindless "Calvinism bad." "Calvinism evil." "Me good. Me not evil Calvinist." They seem to have abandoned reasoned apollonian study with dionysiac emotional chaos.

I see your point. I was just going with the terms used in the name of the forum.

Nevertheless, I do believe that many would recoil at the concept of particular redemption upon learning what it is.

I understand the concept, and I would say that if pressed for an answer, I come closer to your side than any other (but I have never had qualms with using the term Calvinist for self-identification, either).

I do remember, though, that my wife was warned in college while we were dating that I was a Calvinist. It didn't stop her from eventually marrying me, but I found it funny how she had to be "warned."

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Was there something in particular that convinced you to adopt a reformed perspective?

I was saved as an adult in a church that was basically Arminian. I naturally adopted that position. However, as I grew in the faith, read the Scriptures regularly and also began to read good Christian books, I began to ask myself 'What do you have that you did not receive?' and I slowly came to the realization that salvation was monergistic, not synergistic. The final nail in the Arminian coffin for me was reading A.W. Pink's The Sovereignty of God.

This did not go down tremendously well with my church, and eventually I felt that the Lord was calling me to leave. However, I owe the people there a debt I can never repay and look upon the church leadership of that time as dear brothers in Christ.

 

[SovereignGrace]

When I was saved, I was staunchly non-Cal. I had read about Calvinism whilst God was crushing my heart and thought it was a vile doctrine, a doctrine of Satan. All I was ever exposed to, even as a sinner, was free will doctrine, by those who I love and trusted(I still love them and trust they are God's ppl), so I naturally scoffed at the DoG.

As I grew, I would hear preachers say 'I chose Jesus' and I'd readily amen it, but deep inside I would think 'what about the part where God chose them?'. Over time I would ask God if I had my theology right and I would read something that would cause me to think, but then I would read something else and stay non-Cal. Oddly, a former poster on here said something that shook me to the core, so I asked God to allow me to read His word without any bias, and the DoG jumped off the pages. I haven't been the same since.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Well can I remember the manner in which I learned the doctrines of grace in a single instant. Born, as all of us are by nature, an Arminian, I still believed the old things I had heard continually from the pulpit, and did not see the grace of God. When I was coming to Christ, I thought I was doing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea the Lord was seeking me. I do not think the young convert is at first aware of this. I can recall the very day and hour when first I received those truths in my own soul—when they were, as John Bunyan says, burnt into my heart as with a hot iron, and I can recollect how I felt that I had grown on a sudden from a babe into a man—that I had made progress in Scriptural knowledge, through having found, once for all, the clue to the truth of God. One week-night, when I was sitting in the house of God, I was not thinking much about the preacher's sermon, for I did not believe it. The thought struck me, How did you come to be a Christian? I sought the Lord. But how did you come to seek the Lord? The truth flashed across my mind in a moment—I should not have sought Him unless there had been some previous influence in my mind to make me seek Him. I prayed, thought I, but then I asked myself, How came I to pray? I was induced to pray by reading the Scriptures. How came I to read the Scriptures? I did read them, but what led me to do so? Then, in a moment, I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me, and from that doctrine I have not departed to this day, and I desire to make this my constant confession, "I ascribe my change wholly to God."

CHS

http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.php

 

[Iconoclast]

After the first round, yes. When you get to Wesleyan Arminianism, it's definitely the case.

But a lot of Baptists are the equivalent of 4-point Arminians. They just arrived there by a separate slide away from Calvinism instead of the original Remonstrants. That's why eternal security (a modification of the Calvinist concept of perseverance) was retained. It's really almost more of a parallel to Arminianism than anything.

Arminians who plead the 5th are still Arminian...no matter how much they try and deny the label.
They deny the label because they cannot defend the position biblically.
Calvinism is the truth of scripture explained in easy to understand portions.
People learn and grow at different rates depending on how God intends to use them.
All real believers are "cals"...
They just do not know it yet.....
Sometimes pride and the flesh hinder learning and growth.

 

[Iconoclast]

Read Jn 6,10,17, over and over again. You will not be found on the fence any longer

 

[JamesL]

It's almost comical how most who label themselves as either "Cal, non-Cal, or Arm" basically boil the whole debate down to how man came up with the supposed "will" to seek God or believe.

I am staunchly anti-Calvinist and anti-Arminian. Why? There are several reasons, in no particular order:

both "systems" reduce salvation to only one aspect of salvation, saved from hell, and going to heaven. Meanwhile, salvation in the bible includes at least a half dozen distinct issues like justification, redemption, resurrection, inheritance, etc

both systems refuse to separate justification from works. Both agree - no works, no heaven.

both systems agree on the fate of every individual ever born. Concoct any scenario of faith and works, and subject that person to both systems, and his eternal fate will be the same in both systems. How can two opposing systems both lead everyone to the same outcome?

Both systems neglect the distinctions between spirit and body, faith and works, temporal and eternal, and a whole host of others.

both systems neglect the biblical doctrine of having our sins literally removed while we're still alive here. Both systems have our "born again" experience happening after we die. They just don't realize it.

There's more, but that should be enough to chew on for a bit. I can suggest a 20-year old book if you want a very good treatise

 

[Rob_BW]

I can suggest a 20-year old book if you want a very good treatise

I'm listening.

 

[JamesL]

I'm listening.

Reign of the Servant Kings
by Joseph Dillow

 

[TCassidy]

I am staunchly anti-Calvinist and anti-Arminian.

Oxymoron.

both "systems" reduce salvation to only one aspect of salvation, saved from hell, and going to heaven.

Nope.

both systems refuse to separate justification from works. Both agree - no works, no heaven.

Nope.

both systems agree on the fate of every individual ever born. Concoct any scenario of faith and works, and subject that person to both systems, and his eternal fate will be the same in both systems.

Nope.

How can two opposing systems both lead everyone to the same outcome?

They don't, obviously.

Both systems neglect the distinctions between spirit and body

Nope.

faith and works

Nope.

temporal and eternal

Nope.

and a whole host of others

Such as?

both systems neglect the biblical doctrine of having our sins literally removed while we're still alive here.

Nope.

Both systems have our "born again" experience happening after we die.

Nope.

They just don't realize it.

I can't help but think it is you who is sadly confused. And don't realize it.

 

[TCassidy]

Dillow, who claims to be a Calvinist (but is actually a Hyper-Calvinist) has made some points which are the basis of his claims. The problem with some of his points is that he is often wrong.

1. God has predestined who will be saved and lost.
Those predestined to be saved are saved without condition — not even faith or repentance is required.

That is correct. Faith and Repentance are the result of salvation (the regeneration phase), not the cause of it.

2. The faith of those saved (if any) is a gift of God, not an act of will, because Man is too depraved to exercise faith on his own.

Correct again.

3. Faith and obedience are not related, therefore faith does not necessarily produce obedience.

Correct.

4. Since the saved are saved, there is nothing they can do to lose their salvation.
To argue that the fruit of the Spirit must be manifested in their lives as evidence of their salvation is to argue they are saved by works.

Correct.

5. A saved person can live a life of debauchery and still be saved. In fact “a saved person can even publicly renounce Christ and persist in sin or unbelief to the point of physical death and still be saved.”

Correct.

Unfortunately, from there he goes off on the damnable heresy of Millennial Exclusion. He claims they will spend the Millennial Reign of Christ in Outer Darkness.

His book was so bad they didn't even complete the printing of the first edition.

 

[The Biblicist]

When I was a boy my dad would pay me quarters for every verse I would memorize. A quarter in my day would buy a 16 oz RC Cola, the largest candy bar and twinkies - all for a quarter. So I memorized so much that dad had to reduce it to a dime per verse. That little exercise made me the most knowledgable Bible student in our Sunday School. Yet I was lost. I would sit at the back near the door of the church so I could get out fast to play.

However, one Sunday when I was 13 years old I was seated in my normal back seat during a service when something began to happen inside of me that I was not in control of and which was very uncomfortable. The Holy Spirit was awakening me to sin and when he got through that Sunday morning I realized for the first time in my young life I was the sinner the Bible spoke about and Christ was my only hope of salvation. Later that evening I came forward professing Christ. I was a changed boy. Dad no longer had to pay me to read the scripture, I wanted to. I no longer had to be forced to go to church, I wanted to. I no longer was getting into fights at school, because I no longer wanted to fight. I had been changed from the inside out and I had nothing to do with it.

 

[SovereignGrace]

When I was a boy my dad would pay me quarters for every verse I would memorize. A quarter in my day would buy a 16 oz RC Cola, the largest candy bar and twinkies - all for a quarter. So I memorized so much that dad had to reduce it to a dime per verse. That little exercise made me the most knowledgable Bible student in our Sunday School. Yet I was lost. I would sit at the back near the door of the church so I could get out fast to play.

However, one Sunday when I was 13 years old I was seated in my normal back seat during a service when something began to happen inside of me that I was not in control of and which was very uncomfortable. The Holy Spirit was awakening me to sin and when he got through that Sunday morning I realized for the first time in my young life I was the sinner the Bible spoke about and Christ was my only hope of salvation. Later that evening I came forward professing Christ. I was a changed boy. Dad no longer had to pay me to read the scripture, I wanted to. I no longer had to be forced to go to church, I wanted to. I no longer was getting into fights at school, because I no longer wanted to fight. I had been changed from the inside out and I had nothing to do with it.