My Testimony of into and out of Calvinism

The following is a repeat comment from Is Everything Predestined?, if I'm allowed to do that this one time.

I see it as completely pertinent to the O.P., however alone I may be in that regard.

To assert, "I'm not Calvinist or Arminian" is for the critics to resolve.

That may cause someone to fall into the category of, "Fatalist", whether that prospect thrills us, or not.

I just think this 'issue' is enormously important to 'brush up on' and take seriously under consideration, concerning 'our beliefs'.

It's worth praying and thinking hard about and by substituting whatever label that we want to believe we are with one or the other, "Predestinationist", or "Fatalist", (or by 'trying' to call that something else?

Like, just straight up, flat out, "Arminianism"?

"Calvinism" is "Predestinationism".

"Predestinationist", or "Fatalist" are complete opposites and they are as hard, or impossible, to fall between, as "Calvinism" and "Arminianism".

"Arminianism" is just plain old "Fatalism"?

Look and see, if The Lord allows you to sit still and read up on it...

1 Peter 5:8-9; "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

"Whom resist steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world."



From: Fatalism

"The question which now arises for all Arminians and partial predestinarians to answer is, as the whole future is known to God, and therefore certain, therefore determined, by whom or by what has it been determined and rendered certain?

"The objector has ruled God out (as The Sovereign God of The Universe), let him bring forth his substitute.

"He has now dethroned the eternal Jehovah, will he leave the throne of the universe vacant, or whom will he place upon it?

(Alan's note: Whom will the Fatalist/ Arminians and partial predestinarians place upon the throne of the Universe?

I have to take a Biblically educated guess that it is the same deceiver that remains..., after God is 'removed' in any other arena, like Prayer in Schools and Creation, etc...

That would be Satan, then, behind 'evolution', etc., right?

People don't realize that when they choose to profess 'they came from a monkey' just so they can be 'independent'/ immoral 'apart from GOD'!

Then, what is left?

Only The DEVIL.

It is the same case with us adapting our own ideas for our 'religion', etc., apart from bowing to The Lordship of Jesus and His Word.

Satan is there to take over and pick up the pieces, fill their/ our head, doctrine, organization, and practices, with 'irregular' nonsense and then to devour them, i.e., & us).

"He (the "Fatalist" and/or "Arminian") here places himself in a dilemma from which he cannot escape.

"He has on the one hand a vacant throne, and on the other an absolutely certain future.

"He has to account for a determined future, while his principles will not allow him to admit an Intelligent Personal Determiner.

"Here it can be easily seen that outside of God’s decrees as the determining cause, all must be attributed to the soulless, passionless, unintelligent idol, Fate.

(Behind which lurks? Satan himself).

“There are certain men crept in unawares,
who were before of old ordained to this condemnation.”
Jude 1:4.


excerpts from: Fatalism
by Elder H. M. Curry

"Fatalism as a doctrine, system of philosophy, or religious belief, originated among those nations of antiquity that knew not God; hence it is of purely heathen origin...

"Some came to the conclusion that there are no gods, and that all events come upon men inevitably by a blind destiny.

"This is original Fatalism...

"Fatalism in its various ramifications formed the prominent feature of all ancient literature except that of the Jews...

"The reason for this is that Moses and the prophets taught them that one supreme God ruled this universe...

"In Sophocles and some others of this time, the term fate became synonymous with the word 'chance'.

'"At first glance, it seems that these two words are directly opposite in meaning, but a little reflection will make it plain that 'chance' and Fatalism' or blind destiny are about the same thing after all...

"It will now be seen that Fatalism is first the belief that all things come inevitably upon the human race by blind destiny, with no God to send, direct, or avert them...

"Now, whoever saw anyone purporting to be an Old Baptist who believed any of the foregoing phases of doctrine?

"Who ever saw an Old Baptist who believed there is no God, and that all things come by a blind and necessary destiny; that all events are fortuitous or by chance?...

"Now, if anyone will consider the difference between events coming to pass that God Himself cannot hinder (Fatalism') but on the contrary
is bound to permit, suffer or endure, and events coming to pass as He Himself has ordained by His own determinate counsel (Predestination)
such a one can see the difference between Fatalism and Predestination;...

"Strange as it may seem, those very Arminians who are most vociferous in charging Old Baptists with Fatalism are really Fatalists themselves.

"It is true that they do not think so, but they think that the ground of this charge is far from them, but upon a very slight analysis of their doctrine it will appear most clearly that the sin justly lies at their door.

"One sentence from their daily teaching will establish the truth of this assertion.

"Do they not persistently proclaim that men go to hell against the will of God?

(note: the "Fatalist" and/or "Arminian "saying "God wants all men to repent and not perish, i.e., as is up next...)

"that God desires all men to be saved and has done all He can to save them, and yet men go to hell?

"that Christ made a full and complete atonement for the sins of all the world, and yet men go to perdition?

"If all this be true what takes men to hell but fate?...

"Again the Arminian rejects the decree of Election on the ground of the certainty of the result decreed, and at the same time admits the foreknowledge of God.

"Is not the result as certain by foreknowledge as by the decree of Election?

"There is nothing gained by denying the decree of Election and substituting for it 'divine foreknowledge'.

"This denial involves the objector in a greater difficulty than that which he sought to escape, and which he imagined was chargeable upon predestination alone.

"By rejecting the decree of Election, and admitting the foreknowledge of God, he has shut himself up to the dread alternative of blank Fatalism, which rules God out of the empire of human history, including even Divine Redemption...!

"The question which now arises for all Arminians and partial predestinarians to answer is, as the whole future is known to God, and therefore certain, therefore determined, by whom or by what has it been determined and rendered certain?

"The objector has ruled God out, let him bring forth his substitute.

"He has now dethroned the eternal Jehovah, will he leave the throne of the universe vacant, or whom will he place upon it?

"He here places himself in a dilemma from which he cannot escape.

"He has on the one hand a vacant throne and on the other an absolutely certain future.

"He has to account for a determined future, while his principles will not allow him to admit an Intelligent Personal Determiner.

"Here it can be easily seen that outside of God’s decrees as the determining cause, all must be attributed to the soulless, passionless, unintelligent idol, Fate..."

...and behind the scenes, actually by default, worshipping?

Antichrist and
"the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan",
Revelation 20:2.

 

@George Antonios I watched your video and it's a nice presentation and a good testimony too. But I don't agree with your use of the book of Job as being anti-Calvinist. I agree that the way we talk about God's intentions and motives in theology boarders on irreverent but that is not exclusively a Calvinist problem. And in Job, what happened to him shows just as much a Calvinistic or deterministic theology as not - it certainly does not put Job in control.

Also. If you started as a 4 point Calvinist most people on this board will not accept your premise that you ever were really a Calvinist. Believe me, I know.

Another thing is that the Leighton Flowers web site uses a lot of straw man and misrepresented garbage type arguments against Calvinism that simply don't ring true. They are the little smart aleck quips that don't really belong in a serious conversation.

And lastly. I share the belief that the chief weak point in Calvinism is the extreme predestination where God directly causes all things. I don't know how to explain why but I do know that the Calvinists I read don't do that in their preaching. But I do know that some of the anti-Calvinist arguments are of no help if your desire is to correct a misrepresentation of God that as you claim Calvinism does. Too many people have not had an opportunity to believe and circumstances vary far to much to allow you to vindicate God by sweeping away God's sovereignty. The message of Job was that we are not in a position to judge God, not that Job (the book) was refuting God's sovereignty.

 

Amen, sir.
I also see that plainly stated in Romans 9:14-24.

 

George, I have watched your presentations in the past. You tend to wander all over and make it hard to know what your point really is.
If you were in a Reformed church, you were not discipled very well. Instead, it seems you have just attempted to wing it and make things up along the way. I have heard you enough to know that I take your opinion with a grain of salt. I am content to hope that God will keep working in your heart.

 

Watched the video. Made some good points, including the one about Job’s friends. Some under Calvinism do quite wrongly seem to think it a more humble position, or worse, the only humble position.

 

I watched your video thanks be to God you realized the truth. You said your enlightening was by reading the rest of Romans 9..Understanding the whole text is key to complete understanding.
MB

 

Hi George, great video.

I really like your "Arminianism is Calvinism Light" observation.

I also like your idea that Calvinists read scripture within the mind-set of Calvinism, thus the Cal-hammer sees nothing but nails.

I came to many of your same conclusions, that if everything is predestined (exhaustive determinism) then God is not just in punishing the fallen for sinning as God predestined their sin. Or, stepping back a little, if the fall resulted in total spiritual inability, then God is not just in punishing the fallen for rejecting the gospel, the volitional sin of unbelief.

 

Both you and George have to ignore or twist Romans 9 to come to that conclusion.

 

Yet another mindless "taint so" post from someone who seems unable to even do a word search.