Is there a retitle suggestion for Calvinism and Arminianism

[agedman]

The actual idea of once saved always saved is if you are actually saved, which is different from professing Christ, a person is always saved and cannot lose salvation. As far as persevering we have two issues, a person may backslide or get sidetracked such that they produce little or no fruit, but still in their heart of hearts belief Jesus is their savior and they love Him. OTOH, we could know professing Christians who teach and engage in public prayer and so forth, but are simply whitewashed hypocrites who give lip service to the Lord. These face Matthew chapter 7.

But note Christ's words, I never knew you. He did not say, I knew you once, but I lost you. The real problem is Arminians think if they profess Christ, they are "automatically saved" when scripture says God saves us monergistically, He credits our faith as righteousness, or not, and then places us in Christ, we do not put ourselves in Christ.

This is a very good post, Van.

Thank you!

 

[Benjamin]

John 10:28: “Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” But whether they are capable, through negligence, of forsaking again the first beginning of their life in Christ, of again returning to this present evil world, of turning away from the holy doctrine which was delivered them, of losing a good conscience, of neglecting grace, that must be more particularly determined out of the Holy Scripture, before we ourselves can teach it with the full confidence of our mind.

Hi Benjamin, lets take this one assertion at a time, shall we?


We are not incorporated into Christ by faith, we are placed into Christ by God when the Holy Spirit baptizes us into Christ, based on God crediting our faith as righteousness, Romans 4:4-5, and 2 Thessalonians 2:13.

Logically then we cannot get out of Christ if we did not put us into Christ by some myterious automatic transfer. But can we turn our back on our faith and devotion to Christ? Not if we are actually saved, born again if you will. 1 Peter 1:3-5. God protects our faith, thereby keeping us for our inheritance.

Certainly salvation includes earning rewards, and we can lose salvation (rewards) but what we cannot lose entry into heaven, entering as one escaping from a fire bring little or nothing with them. However, because our faith is protected, we will endure to the end.

I made no assertion other than to point out a strawman about Arminians. They are basically saying there is much to be considered before they can teach or answer all questions about assurance with full confidence of mind. I would say they were obviously expressing and/or addressing that they were against those who were force fitting the determinist doctrines to impose eternal security. But, glad you got it all figured out! Keep the faith.

 

[glfredrick]

Not even his hand of wrath?

"And God regretted having creating them...and His anger burned against them" etc

And if God has himself chosen to move in response to his Children's requests, that too is His sovereign prerogative, isn't it?

"The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective."

Nope... Dead already. God just let them know. :thumbsup:

 

[Skandelon]

Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up. 2 He said: "In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared about men. 3 And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, 'Grant me justice against my adversary.' 4 "For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, 'Even though I don't fear God or care about men, 5 yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won't eventually wear me out with her coming!' " 6 And the Lord said, "Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7 And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off?

And glfredrick concludes that must mean, "There is no action of man that can move the hand of God."

Hmmmm.

 

[glfredrick]

Then Jesus told his disciples a parable to show them that they should always pray and not give up. 2 He said: "In a certain town there was a judge who neither feared God nor cared about men. 3 And there was a widow in that town who kept coming to him with the plea, 'Grant me justice against my adversary.' 4 "For some time he refused. But finally he said to himself, 'Even though I don't fear God or care about men, 5 yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will see that she gets justice, so that she won't eventually wear me out with her coming!' " 6 And the Lord said, "Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7 And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off?

And glfredrick concludes that must mean, "There is no action of man that can move the hand of God."

Hmmmm.

Take your Hmmmm, and put it away. By now, you must know that I hold a more serious and thought out position than what I just jotted down here.

But the gist of my position is that God causes us to agree with Him not that we change the mind of God.

 

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Benjamin
The problem with that is it kind of masquerades your view while trying to claim a monopoly on the word “grace”, you guys need to get out there in the open with what you are actually preaching, I think the “Doctrines of Deterministic Pre-selected Grace” is a much more honest approach.

How so? "Calvinism" DEPENDS solely on God's grace. There is no action of man that can move the hand of God.

Sounds to me like you have a bone to pick (duh...) with those who see the Doctrines of Grace as scriptural. Perhaps you have a bone to pick with God... :wavey:

Just saw this... :wavey:back at cha:
My view is also that salvation DEPENDS solely on God’s grace, not only that but that He genuinely offers His grace to every man that comes into the world to whosoever WILL believe; therefore my doctrine of God ‘s grace is BIGGER than yours. How do you like dem apples?!? ha

And…sounds to me like you Determinists are the ones that have a bone to pick with God because you all claim you can’t even find it in your hearts to respond to the influences of His love and freely accept His gift of grace but rather feel the need to claim the effect of your belief was caused against your free will. How messed up of a view of loving grace is that?!? Yeah buddy! You Determinists got a lot of gall wanting to call your doctrine “THE” Doctrine of Grace” as far as I’m concerned!

 

[convicted1]

Mankind doesn't have the ability to gain salvation, neither the power to lose/forfeit it.

 

[Skandelon]

Take your Hmmmm, and put it away. By now, you must know that I hold a more serious and thought out position than what I just jotted down here.

But the gist of my position is that God causes us to agree with Him not that we change the mind of God.

So, according to your view, Jesus' analogy would have been more accurate to suggest that the Judge was secretly causing the women (through effectual means) to continue to beg and bother him?

Interesting... Hmmmm.

 

[drfuss]

I have liked the term fundamental baptist bible believer for years.

Then along came the sorry "fundamentalist" of all religions (especially the IFB-ers) and perverted the term (or maybe the media did) into an autocratic system of extreme prejudice against anybody who doesn't think and believe like me.

I started to consider myself a "biblicist" but found that term was far too broad and inclusive of folks that I held in doctrinal error.

Calvinist have the problem of Calvin - the historical Calvin was a man who most of us wouldn't particularly get along with, yet the systematic theology has few weaknesses.

Arminianist have a problem of Jocobe Arminian - a student of Calvin and died before he could coalesce his stand leaving it up to the Remonstrants to do. I doubt the modern folks would get along well with this group either.

Point being that the titles come with presupposed baggage.

Does anyone know of other terms that would hold to a solidly fundamental, historically Baptist (1689 - modified by Spurgeon) statement of faith, in which a person could easily be identified?

Notice how a thread that was supposed to be a discussion of terms, titles and suggestions, has turned into the ever, endless debate.

 

[DaChaser1]

Then perhaps the Non-Calvinist should say that they believe in The Doctrines of Mercy. How about The Doctrines of Love?

how about the "cals" believe in Election by grace and will of God, while "Arms" would believe in Election by Free will act of man?

 

[agedman]

Notice how a thread that was supposed to be a discussion of terms, titles and suggestions, has turned into the ever, endless debate.

Unfortunately, I haven't seen a good answer.

Although, I have enjoyed much of the interaction.

If I missed the answer, please let me know.

 

[DaChaser1]

No, I am not Arminian. I know nothing of him, but will study him shortly as I've just been introduced to the heretic John Calvin.

Your post would indicate that you mock the teaching of election and predestination that the Scriptures clearly teach.

No. I mock John Calvin and his followers. You presume his teachings are correct, I do not.

I disagree with such attempts of these pretzel bending gymnastic views.

I do not care what you think, nor do I care what you do with pretzels.

Calvin was NOT a heretic, neither was Luthor though!

You can disagree with their conclusions on their biblical theologies, but goes both ways, as we would see those who would not see DoG as being heretics, IF we take your way to categorize Christians!

I would however have no problems calling those like a hagin/Copeland/paulk eyc, just about ALl charasmatic teachers of today as being heretics!

 

[DaChaser1]

Unfortunately, I haven't seen a good answer.

Although, I have enjoyed much of the interaction.

If I missed the answer, please let me know.

We MUST be predestined by God to have this eternal debate until the Lord returns and informs us that "both of your groups were wrong!"

 

[Jerome]

"The fact is, the great dispute between Calvinists and Arminians has arisen very much through not understanding one another, and from one brother saying, “What I hold is the truth”—and the other saying, “What I hold is truth, and nothing else.” The men need somebody to knock both their heads together, and fuse their beliefs into one. They need one capacious brain to hold both the truths which their two little heads contain; for God’s word is neither all on one side nor altogether on the other: it overlaps all systems, and defies all formularies." —Charles Spurgeon, "North and South"

 

[Benjamin]

"Doctrine of Deterministic Pre-selected Grace"


:laugh:

 

[DaChaser1]

"Doctrine of Deterministic Pre-selected Grace"


:laugh:

Vrs:

God can save me once I allow Him that honor!

 

[agedman]

"Doctrine of Deterministic Pre-selected Grace"


:laugh:

How about the "Doctrine of My Free Choice Trumps the Sovereignty of God"

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Vrs:

God can save me once I allow Him that honor!

ROFL :laugh::laugh::laugh: Toooooo Much!!!

 

[Tom Butler]

Ow! Ow! My ears, my ears. Too loud, too loud.

 

[Benjamin]

How about the...

I would say the title you offer me is not a true statement, the tiltle I offer you is. IOW's you suggested my doctrine equals something it does not, what does the title I offered you suggest that is not true according to you?