Is Paul Washer a Calvinist?

[Martin Marprelate]

Personally I don't get too involved in the degrees of Calvinism but it seems to me that Calvinists would be better served making their case appealing to a systematic exposition of the Scriptures and leave the confessions out of it.

I think I have said it about 100 times but quoting Scriptures is not the same as making a biblical case for doctrine.

You did notice, I trust, that it was not I who brought up the subject of confessions.
However, the 1689 Confession is a systematic exposition of the Scriptures.

 

[37818]

not what you asked, but it all happens at one point in time simultaneously...new heart, repentance, faith, belief, at one point in time. like a light switch going on, death to life.

Romans 10:13-15's ". . . shall be saved" does present, faith prior to calling on the LORD prior to ". . . shall be saved" as such. Also Romans 10:9 and Mark 16:16. So I cannot agree with your understand in those contexts.

 

[thomas15]

You did notice, I trust, that it was not I who brought up the subject of confessions.
However, the 1689 Confession is a systematic exposition of the Scriptures.

I wasn't trying to throw rocks at you personally. While the historic confessions are a form of systematic study, they have at their core a few assumptions that are not as solid as they seem, quoting of Bible verses not withstanding.

Protestant (and Baptist) theology of the period of the 16th to the mid 19th century was driven by the professional/educated clergy. It is true that protestants advocated for primary/secondary education of the masses partly to facilitate the study of the Bible, the actual Bible itself and tools such as concordances and dictionaries and the education required to use them remained elusive to the masses until the 19th century. The average laymen would never challenge reformed theology because they only knew what they were told and those doing the telling were reformed.

But today we don't have the excuse of a lack of education or limited access to the Scriptures and study resources. We have the spare time and the ability to question doctrine against the actual Bible. Laymen such as myself can and do begin to assemble college and seminary level educations not to put a career together but for personal enrichment and edification.

I'm also not trying to give you a lecture. But consider this, the Roman church does the same thing, they use Bible verses to make their theological points and there are many who look no further than the roman theologians to get their information. When you depend on the confessions not the Bible in it's fullness, the disputes are settle by force of will. I'm not trying to offend you or anyone else.

 

[Iconoclast]

Romans 10:13-15's ". . . shall be saved" does present, faith prior to calling on the LORD prior to ". . . shall be saved" as such. Also Romans 10:9 and Mark 16:16. So I cannot agree with your understand in those contexts.

Sorry but we cannot see the unseen work of the Spirit .
What you are posting is an image as if someone is watching with a stop watch;
8:18......The Spirit is beginning to convict the person

10:30....the person is thinking it out

11:22.....there might be an indication of faith.

12:45.....The Spirit would like to do something but must wait for a sign

1:20....a weak profession of faith....

1:25.....okay now a new heart can be given

That is not what is taught.
What happen to Saul?

You do not mention how The Spirit works.
Your statements are man centered as if the man just figures it out intellectually.
Being born from above is a supernatural work....not a natural fleshly undertaking.

 

[37818]

Sorry but we cannot see the unseen work of the Spirit .
What you are posting is an image as if someone is watching with a stop watch;
8:18......The Spirit is beginning to convict the person

10:30....the person is thinking it out

11:22.....there might be an indication of faith.

12:45.....The Spirit would like to do something but must wait for a sign

1:20....a weak profession of faith....

1:25.....okay now a new heart can be given

That is not what is taught.
What happen to Saul?

You do not mention how The Spirit works.
Your statements are man centered as if the man just figures it out intellectually.
Being born from above is a supernatural work....not a natural fleshly undertaking.

You are supposing what the text does not say, "has been saved."
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the LORD has been saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?

 

[Yeshua1]

You did notice, I trust, that it was not I who brought up the subject of confessions.
However, the 1689 Confession is a systematic exposition of the Scriptures.

I think that he is just stating that the final appeal to scriptures alone is where to go to get our theology from, and every Calvinist I have read and met would agree with that!

 

[Yeshua1]

I wasn't trying to throw rocks at you personally. While the historic confessions are a form of systematic study, they have at their core a few assumptions that are not as solid as they seem, quoting of Bible verses not withstanding.

Protestant (and Baptist) theology of the period of the 16th to the mid 19th century was driven by the professional/educated clergy. It is true that protestants advocated for primary/secondary education of the masses partly to facilitate the study of the Bible, the actual Bible itself and tools such as concordances and dictionaries and the education required to use them remained elusive to the masses until the 19th century. The average laymen would never challenge reformed theology because they only knew what they were told and those doing the telling were reformed.

But today we don't have the excuse of a lack of education or limited access to the Scriptures and study resources. We have the spare time and the ability to question doctrine against the actual Bible. Laymen such as myself can and do begin to assemble college and seminary level educations not to put a career together but for personal enrichment and ed and other fication.

I'm also not trying to give you a lecture. But consider this, the Roman church does the same thing, they use Bible verses to make their theological points and there are many who look no further than the roman theologians to get their information. When you depend on the confessions not the Bible in it's fullness, the disputes are settle by force of will. I'm not trying to offend you or anyone else.

I do respect the positions taken on the while in the Confessions, but none of them are a substitute for Bible itself as the final authority!i

 

[Iconoclast]

You are supposing what the text does not say, "has been saved."
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the LORD has been saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?

You are taking one text and seeking it to walk on all fours as if God did not give detailed teaching on the topic and reality of regeneration and conversion
No one calls upon God unless God enables them.
Paul is describing a whole process of means that result in deliverance from sins power.
God is behind it all.
It is not up for grabs....it is certain.
That's why God has ordained the means...preaching/teaching.

 

[37818]

You are taking one text and seeking it to walk on all fours as if God did not give detailed teaching on the topic and reality of regeneration and conversion
No one calls upon God unless God enables them.
Paul is describing a whole process of means that result in deliverance from sins power.
God is behind it all.
It is not up for grabs....it is certain.
That's why God has ordained the means...preaching/teaching.

Well we will at least agree there are false teaching and false preaching amoug us believers. Though we are not in agreement on some of those.

Merely arguing the disagreement does not convince either side. Where the plain reading should do. Unfortunately one side needs to claim the text to mean what it does not say.

 

[Iconoclast]

Well we will at least agree there are false teaching and false preaching amoug us believers. Though we are not in agreement on some of those.

Merely arguing the disagreement does not convince either side. Where the plain reading should do. Unfortunately one side needs to claim the text to mean what it does not say.

37,
A forum like this can be instructive in that you test out your understanding and others can offer Correction.
Believers should agree on most things.
Fine tuning and sifting out ideas and verses to establish truth is where the hard work is

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I wasn't trying to throw rocks at you personally. While the historic confessions are a form of systematic study, they have at their core a few assumptions that are not as solid as they seem, quoting of Bible verses not withstanding.

This issue has been argued uphill and down dale on the board, so I will try to be brief.
I foresee no circumstances when I am likely to leave my church, but if I did, I would never join one that did not have a clear and reasonably detailed Statement of Faith (it doesn't have to be a Puritan one). I was saved in a church that 'just believed the Bible' and left it ten years later because of doctrinal drift. Today it has gone entirely off the rails, simply because there was no standard that said what the church believed the Bible to mean. J.W.s and other fringe groups say they believe the Bible. Unitarianism and Hyper-calvinism came into some English Baptist churches in the 18th Century because they abandoned the 1689 Confession. The Anglican churches collapsed into liberalism when they abandoned the XXXIX Articles and of course PCUSA went off the rails when it sidelined the WCF in the early 20th Century.
Further examples might be added, but these will do.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Under Calvinism the only way that a person can believe is if God gives them faith. But the problem with that is that they can never be sure that their faith is real. They may just think they are saved {re Calvin}. But that is not what the bible says is it. We can know we are saved because of the numerous verses that show a choice has to be made. {Eph 1:13, Rom 10:8-11, Rom 10:13)

There is such a thing as false assurance, and it applies whether one is Calvinist or Arminian. A man can go forward at an evangelistic rally, entranced at the oratory of the preacher, say a sinner's prayer or whatever, and yet show no signs of regeneration. At the end of his life, Finney confessed that he could hardly find one of the thousands of supposed converts that he thought he had made. And BTW, you would do well to read Ephesians 1:13 in the light of verse 11, and Romans 10 is no refutation of Calvinism.

But I am sure you will say that I just do not understand Calvinism and that is true.

Well it's good that we can agree on one thing.

I can not understand how anyone can read scripture and say they are Sola Scriptura and yet not see the clear teaching that we have to believe before we are saved.

We have to believe in order to be saved. No one was ever saved without believing. But the fact is that people will not believe unless God does a work on their hearts (John 3:19; 1 Corinthians 2:14). Even Arminius believed in 'Prevenient Grace.' I find it difficult to understand how anyone can read scripture and say they are Sola Scriptura and yet not see the clear teaching that no one can believe unless God first opens his heart (Matthew 11:25-27; John 6:44).

Yet the Calvinist view has this:

A man is not saved because he believes in Christ; he believes in Christ because he is saved.”1

“A man is not regenerated because he has first believed in Christ, but he believes in Christ because he has been regenerated.”2

“We do not believe in order to be born again; we are born again that we may believe.”3

“Faith is the evidence of the new birth, not the cause of it.”4

“. . . regeneration is the necessary precondition and efficient cause of faith in Jesus Christ.”5

“the revived [regenerated] heart repents and trusts Christ in saving faith as the only source of justification.”6

1 Lorainne Boettner, Predestination (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1936), 101.

2 Arthur W. Pink, The Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978), 55.

3 R. C. Sproul, Chosen By God (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 1986), 73.

4 John Piper, Desiring God (Sisters, OR: Multnomah, 2003), 63.

5 Robert Reymond, New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998), 708.

6 ESV Study Bible, 2531.

I have a slight issue with the Boettner quote. I have looked it up and it needs to be read in context.. The rest seem fine. What exactly is your issue with them?

 

[Silverhair]

You did notice, I trust, that it was not I who brought up the subject of confessions.
However, the 1689 Confession is a systematic exposition of the Scriptures.

LBCF — Chapter III: Of God's Decree

1. God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature,

WCF — Chapter III: Of God's Eternal Decree

1. 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,

So here we have God decreeing “all things”, “whatsoever comes to pass” but then they have to add “thereby is God neither the author of sin” in an attempt to get God of the hook that they have placed Him on. They by their own words have made God the only free will entity.

LBCF — Chapter III: Of God's Decree

3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.

4. These angels and men thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.

WCF — Chapter III: Of God's Eternal Decree

3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death.

4. These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it can not be either increased or diminished.

Here again we see a major problem. If God has “predestinated and foreordained, ...and unchangeably designed; “how can this be interpreted as “their just condemnation” since they had no choice in how they would act in light of “God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass”

LBCF — Chapter III: Of God's Decree

5. Those of mankind that are predestinated to life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid...hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving him thereunto.

WCF — Chapter III: Of God's Eternal Decree

5. those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid...hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his free grace and love alone, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto; and all to the praise of his glorious grace.

LBCF and WCF are the same text in section 6

6 ...wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.

Here we clearly see that God, in these two sections, has chosen a certain group to be saved based upon nothing. While the balance of humanity will be condemned to hell for no other reason than what, God’s not loving them.

LBCF 7 and WCF 8 are the same text

This came about as WCF section 7 was not included in the LBCF

...so shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel.

How would this doctrine {LBCF} or the {WCF} and it’s portrayal of God, when compared to how God is shown in the bible, move anyone to praise, reverence, or admiration?




The question that comes to mind after reading through the above sections is:

1] For what reason did Jesus have to be crucified as God had already picked out those to be saved because He had from all eternity freely and unchangeably, decreed all things which must include those that would be saved and this based on nothing He foresaw in them.

2] If God has decreed all things then why is anyone condemned, they are just doing what God decreed for them to do.

This is what I find wrong when just looking at 1 section of the WCF or LBCF. This is what happens when “smart men” try to reinterpret the word of God. God has said He loves the whole world and wants all to be saved and know the truth. Jesus the Christ died to pay for our sins and rose to provide a way of salvation for those that would believe the gospel.

The LBCF and /or the WCF may seem like great documents to some but for me they are just men trying to justify their own ideas that they have read into the bible. These documents have made God arbitrary, unjust and unloving.

This may sound a bit harsh but this what I see in these documents. I do not see the systematic exposition of the Scriptures here, just the opposite.

 

[Silverhair]

There is such a thing as false assurance, and it applies whether one is Calvinist or Arminian. A man can go forward at an evangelistic rally, entranced at the oratory of the preacher, say a sinner's prayer or whatever, and yet show no signs of regeneration. At the end of his life, Finney confessed that he could hardly find one of the thousands of supposed converts that he thought he had made. And BTW, you would do well to read Ephesians 1:13 in the light of verse 11, and Romans 10 is no refutation of Calvinism.
Well it's good that we can agree on one thing.

We have to believe in order to be saved. No one was ever saved without believing. But the fact is that people will not believe unless God does a work on their hearts (John 3:19; 1 Corinthians 2:14). Even Arminius believed in 'Prevenient Grace.' I find it difficult to understand how anyone can read scripture and say they are Sola Scriptura and yet not see the clear teaching that no one can believe unless God first opens his heart (Matthew 11:25-27; John 6:44).

I have a slight issue with the Boettner quote. I have looked it up and it needs to be read in context.. The rest seem fine. What exactly is your issue with them?

Aside from the fact they are not biblical.

 

[Iconoclast]

You

LBCF — Chapter III: Of God's Decree

1. God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature,

WCF — Chapter III: Of God's Eternal Decree

1. 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,

So here we have God decreeing “all things”, “whatsoever comes to pass” but then they have to add “thereby is God neither the author of sin” in an attempt to get God of the hook that they have placed Him on. They by their own words have made God the only free will entity.

LBCF — Chapter III: Of God's Decree

3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.

4. These angels and men thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.

WCF — Chapter III: Of God's Eternal Decree

3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death.

4. These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it can not be either increased or diminished.

Here again we see a major problem. If God has “predestinated and foreordained, ...and unchangeably designed; “how can this be interpreted as “their just condemnation” since they had no choice in how they would act in light of “God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass”

LBCF — Chapter III: Of God's Decree

5. Those of mankind that are predestinated to life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid...hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving him thereunto.

WCF — Chapter III: Of God's Eternal Decree

5. those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid...hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his free grace and love alone, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto; and all to the praise of his glorious grace.

LBCF and WCF are the same text in section 6

6 ...wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.

Here we clearly see that God, in these two sections, has chosen a certain group to be saved based upon nothing. While the balance of humanity will be condemned to hell for no other reason than what, God’s not loving them.

LBCF 7 and WCF 8 are the same text

This came about as WCF section 7 was not included in the LBCF

...so shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel.

How would this doctrine {LBCF} or the {WCF} and it’s portrayal of God, when compared to how God is shown in the bible, move anyone to praise, reverence, or admiration?




The question that comes to mind after reading through the above sections is:

1] For what reason did Jesus have to be crucified as God had already picked out those to be saved because He had from all eternity freely and unchangeably, decreed all things which must include those that would be saved and this based on nothing He foresaw in them.

2] If God has decreed all things then why is anyone condemned, they are just doing what God decreed for them to do.

This is what I find wrong when just looking at 1 section of the WCF or LBCF. This is what happens when “smart men” try to reinterpret the word of God. God has said He loves the whole world and wants all to be saved and know the truth. Jesus the Christ died to pay for our sins and rose to provide a way of salvation for those that would believe the gospel.

The LBCF and /or the WCF may seem like great documents to some but for me they are just men trying to justify their own ideas that they have read into the bible. These documents have made God arbitrary, unjust and unloving.

This may sound a bit harsh but this what I see in these documents. I do not see the systematic exposition of the Scriptures here, just the opposite.

W
You want to blame God for man's sin

 

[Silverhair]

You

W
You want to blame God for man's sin

No I did not nor do I blame God for mans sin but that is what the WCF & LBCF do. Man sins because man sins.
Did you not read the text?

God has given man a freed will or God controls all things, as in nothing happens that He has not decreed. {"freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass" LBCF, chp 3 sec 1}
You have to pick one or the other.

Calvinists like to say:
If people have free will then God could not be sovereign. God is all sovereign therefore free will is impossible.

But that only works if we use their definition which means meticulous control. I agree that God is sovereign and because He is He can do whatever He wants with His creation. That includes giving man a free will, in other words the ability to choose. The ultimate choice being either to turn to Jesus the Christ in faith or to reject Him. God is love and He loves the whole world and wants all to come to a saving faith in His son Jesus the Christ.
So my question is why would He not give all men the ability to make that choice?

 

[Yeshua1]

No I did not nor do I blame God for mans sin but that is what the WCF & LBCF do. Man sins because man sins.
Did you not read the text?

God has given man a freed will or God controls all things, as in nothing happens that He has not decreed. {"freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass" LBCF, chp 3 sec 1}
You have to pick one or the other.

Calvinists like to say:
If people have free will then God could not be sovereign. God is all sovereign therefore free will is impossible.

But that only works if we use their definition which means meticulous control. I agree that God is sovereign and because He is He can do whatever He wants with His creation. That includes giving man a free will, in other words the ability to choose. The ultimate choice being either to turn to Jesus the Christ in faith or to reject Him. God is love and He loves the whole world and wants all to come to a saving faith in His son Jesus the Christ.
So my question is why would He not give all men the ability to make that choice?

Adam had real free will, bujt after the fall. that option no longer existed for rest of us!

 

[Silverhair]

Adam had real free will, bujt after the fall. that option no longer existed for rest of us!

That is not biblical it is only from the Calvinist view. Note text from NKJV

Gen 3:16 To the woman {EVE} He said: "I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you."
Gen 3:17 Then to Adam He said, "Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat of it': "Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life.
Gen 3:18 Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, And you shall eat the herb of the field.
Gen 3:19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread Till you return to the ground, For out of it you were taken; For dust you are, And to dust you shall return."

Where do the Calvinists find free will lost here?

 

[Yeshua1]

That is not biblical it is only from the Calvinist view. Note text from NKJV

Gen 3:16 To the woman {EVE} He said: "I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire shall be for your husband, And he shall rule over you."
Gen 3:17 Then to Adam He said, "Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat of it': "Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life.
Gen 3:18 Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you, And you shall eat the herb of the field.
Gen 3:19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread Till you return to the ground, For out of it you were taken; For dust you are, And to dust you shall return."

Where do the Calvinists find free will lost here?

From Jesus, who stated all are slaves to sin, unless he sets them free!

 

[Iconoclast]

Adam had real free will, bujt after the fall. that option no longer existed for rest of us!

The bible does not teach that anywhere.