MacArthur's Calvinism

[For some reason, when I edited, the last part got cutt off, then the time ran out]

You have to prove that our use of them misinterprets them. You put together a contradictory position that affirms and denies the same things; calls them by different names, etc., and then claims scripture is explicit on them. We have shown how the scriptures on calling and blinding were taken out of context to teach total inability and unconditional election when they were referring to something occuring then.

 

I think this discussion shows that Calvinism is not the logical orderly system many critics accuse it of. There is mystery when it comes to Unconditional Election and Whosoever Will may come. Other doctrines that are similar are The Doctrine of the Trinity, The Virgin Birth...neither of which can be explained logically but are certaintly true. The same is true for Election and Whosoever Will may come.

Arminians and hyper calvinists often attempt to put this in a neat system that goes to extremes but Calvinists usual will admit that in our belief in TULIP, there is mystery regarding such ideas as Election and Whosoever Will. I do not try to read the mind of God but am to proclaim to all Whosoever Will may come! This confuses poor theologians such as Dave Hunt who thinks Spurgeon wasn't a Calvinist because of his evangelistic zeal.

 

Well, I'm not trying to put it in a neat system. I think Calvinists have done that by positing TULIP, and justifying it by saying "God ordains it, and then it works out in time with man being responsible even though he was unable". They then use "mystery" only to silence people's charge of unfairness, or why He chooses one over another, etc. I admit how it works together is a mystery, but without assuming TULIP, and now aspects of TULIP such as reprobation are being denied by some, so once again, I don't see why there should be a debate in such case.

 

Hi Eric,

Yes, TULIP is a systemization as has been stated. Just as the Trinity was systemized at Nicea and Chalcedon so TULIP was systemized at Dort between 1618-19. Some would say that the Church Fathers put the doctrine of the Trinity into a neat system at these 2 councils yet I know of no Christian to deny the Doctrine of the Trinity as true and taught by the Bible and to be a mystery. I hold to Double Predestination as the Waldensian confession states, That God saves from this corruption and condemnation those whom he has chosen {from the foundation of the world, not for any foreseen disposition, faith, or holiness in them, but} of his mercy in Jesus Christ his Son; passing by all the rest, according to the irreprehensible reason of his freedom and justice. I reject however the extreme hyper calvinist form of this. In Calvinism there is diversity. There are both single Predestinationists and double Predestinationists.

The Lutheran wing of the Reformation (though not Calvinist and holding strongly to single predestination)has much in common with Calvinism. In fairness to them they probably explain Election and human responsibilty better than most of us Calvinists. The LCMS position on this states

Like so many teachings of Scripture (e.g., the Trinity, eternity, the two natures of Christ, the love of a holy God for rebellious sinners), this teaching seems contradictory and is ncomprehensible to human reason. We believe it not because it "makes sense" to human reason, but because this is what we find taught in the pages of God's holy Word.

 

The Trinity often comes up in this debate as another example of mystery, and it is also a similar example of neat formulation. Well, I kind of feel that the formulation of that doctrine has been a bit problematic as well, and I have a whole page on that issue as well. http://members.aol.com/etb700/triune.html
I prefer the pre-Nicene fathers whose formulation was less symmetrical, and gave less of an appearance of dividing the unity (leading to contradiction). The two formulated doctrines are also similar in being championed by Augustine, who was criticized by Eastern fathers for trying to formulate things like that too much, and not leaving them as mysteries from the beginning.

Is that Waldensian confession from the 8th-11th century group known as the Waldensions? (were they Augustinian?)

 

"Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." -Romans 8:7, 8

Until Arminians can believe that, there is no point in discussing Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, or the Perseverance/Preservation of the Saints.

 

They do believe it, but not that it leads to those assumptions.

 

OK, I've heard the word a lot, but what does dispentsationalism mean, exactly?

 

Dispensational Theology

Dispensational theology organizes history and theology around a series of dispensations, which are each different "economies" or arrangements decreed by God. Each dispensation begins with an offer of blessing by God, and ends with failure by man to meet God's conditions and a resulting period of Divine judgement. Old line dispensationalists taught 7 dispensations. Newer, moderate dispensationals focus only on #1, 5, 6, and 7.

1. The Dispensation of Innocence - untested Holiness
Began at Creation and lasted until the fall
People could have direct fellowship with God, but they must not eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil
Final judgment: People expelled from the Garden

2. The Dispensation of Conscience - Cain & Abel
Began at the time of the fall and lasted until the flood
People were responsible to live according to their God-given conscience
Final judgment: Universal Flood

3. The Dispensation of Government - Noah
Lasted from the time when God offered Noah a covenant with the rainbow until the Tower of Babel
People were to follow God both through their own conscience and by establishing just government
Final judgment: The Tower of Babel - confusion of tongues

4. The Dispensation of Promise - Abraham
From the calling of Abraham (Gen. 12) until the Exodus.
The Covenant People were to remain faithful to Yahweh alone and practice circumcision
Final judgment: slavery in Egypt

5. The Dispensation of Law - Moses
From the giving of the law to Moses until the second advent of Christ.
The Covenant People were to be faithful to Yahweh through obeying the Law
Final judgment: The great tribulation (notice that the church age is inserted as an unforseen haitus in the midst of the dispensation of law. The church is therefore removed in the rapture before things revert to conditions as they were in the Old Testament period.)

6. The Dispensation of Grace or the Church
Lasts from the day of Pentecost until the Rapture
The church is to render saving faith in following Christ
No ending judgment for this dispensation except for the counterfeit church, which goes into the tribulation with the rest of the world

7. The Dispensation of Kingdom
Corresponds roughly to the Millenium
People are to obey Christ who reigns on earth
Great White Throne

Covenantal Theology

Covenantal Theologians organize all history and theology around several covenants, or arrangements between God and humans or the Son. They are:

1. Covenant of Redemption. This covenant is optional. It occurred before creation.
The Son - perfect obedience in death promised to the Father
The Father - promised to the Son: 1) all the Son's needs to be met; 2) Holy Spirit given to the Church; 3) salvation to all believers; 4) exaltation of the son.

2. The Covenant of Works: Lasting from creation until the fall.
Man's conditions - Adam must obey God
God rewards obedience with eternal life, punishes disobedience with death

3. The Covenant of Grace: Lasting from the fall until the second advent.
a. Man's conditions - saving faith issuing in obedience
b. God's response - salvation in all of its phases

http://www.xenos.org/essays/covdisp.htm