Dave G
Well-Known Member
To me, that looks quite a bit like the "F.A.C.T.S" of evangelical Arminianism.
An Outline of the FACTS of Arminianism vs. The TULIP of Calvinism
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Provisionalism vs Calvinism
- Thread starter OldArmy
- Start date
An Outline of the FACTS of Arminianism vs. The TULIP of Calvinism
OldArmy
Member
Well, at least we agree on the purpose of the law. But that really had nothing to do with my point.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
Please re-read the post again, where I highlighted the words that God chose the nation, and why.
My point is that what you posted in Deuteronomy 30:19 does not prove that God sets before all men the choice to believe on His Son, or not to believe on His Son.
In that verse, He is setting before His chosen nation of Israel the choice to obey Him under the covenant of Law and receive earthly blessings because of their obedience to it, or to disobey Him and receive earthly cursings ( and even death ) because of it.
It was a completely different covenant with different promises than the one believers are now under.
What's more, the Law was never intended to lead to eternal life, and keeping the commandments would never result in salvation...because only one Man ever could keep it all.
The Law was specifically designed to do several things;
One of which was to drive the child of God to their Saviour, knowing full well that He is and was the only One who ever kept it...for them.
That is part of what made His sacrifice the perfect and amazing thing that it is.
His righteousness through the keeping of the Law, His own Law, is imputed to us as His sheep.
That, my friend, is some of why it's called "Amazing Grace".
Believers are no longer wretched sinners anymore, in God's eyes.
They are His beloved sons and daughters.
Last edited:
OldArmy
Member
Please re-read the post again, where I highlighted the words that God chose the nation, and why.
My point is that what you posted in Deuteronomy 30:19 does not prove that God sets before all men the choice to believe on His Son, or not to believe on His Son.
He is setting before His chosen nation of Israel the choice to obey Him under the covenant of Law and receive earthly blessings because of their obedience to it, or to disobey Him and receive earthly cursings ( and even death ) because of it.
The Law was never intended to lead to eternal life, and keeping the commandments would never result in salvation...because only one Man ever could keep it all.
The Law was specifically designed to do several things;
One of which was to drive the child of God to their Saviour, knowing full well that He is and was the only One who ever kept it...for them.
That is part of what made His sacrifice the perfect and amazing thing that it is.
His righteousness through the keeping of the Law, His own Law, is imputed to us as His sheep.
That, my friend, is some of why it's called "Amazing Grace".
Believers are no longer wretched sinners anymore, in God's eyes.
They are His sons and daughters.
If they could choose to obey, they could choose to disobey. That was my point.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
I know what your point was.
To me, you keep missing my point.
Man choosing versus God choosing.
What does this say?
" But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." ( 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14 ).
God chooses people to salvation...through two things ( not because of them ):
Sanctification of the Spirit, and
Belief of the truth.
But knowing your history of being a former "Calvinist" and rejecting it, and you now knowing my history of being a former "Traditionalist" / "Provisionist" and rejecting those, I know that my presentation of Scriptures will not convince you.
It may convince others ( not very many ), and it may not...
But, as I see things, it will not convince you.
This is my final reply in this thread.
May God, in His grace, bless you richly.
Last edited:
OldArmy
Member
May God, in His grace, bless you richly.
Same to you sir.
P.S.
I'd agree He chooses, He choses those who believe.
Particular
Well-Known Member
Which comes first, God's choice or man's belief?Same to you sir.
P.S.
I'd agree He chooses, He choses those who believe.
So, the foreseen faith view? God looks down the corridors of time and chooses those who choose Him?
somegeek
New Member
Hi. I hope it is ok to post my questions here. I have been back and forth on Calvanism vs Traditionalism since coming back to God last Feb. Calvanism was not a blip on the radar growing up and into my church years as an adult. In Feb. I started watching John MacArthur because he was a pastor I used to listen to in the late 80's/early 90's, but I never heard him mention Calvanism.
I have been reading books, websites, this thread, watching YouTube on both sides of the debate. My friend is a Calvanist and when I told him I was struggling with the whole concept, he told me it was not a salvation issue. I told him it is a salvation issue since it decides how one should witness and mentor a new Christian. I consider myself Traditional right now and this is why:
When I go back to my Baptist teachings, they are Traditionalist. I never knew there were so many Calvanists in the Baptist Community until lately. I even bought Logos software and found it leans heavily Calvanism with the books, etc it promotes. There is no doubt Calvanism is rising up. But the "why" I have not yet fully accepted Calvanism comes down to the peace I feel inside when I compare a God that offers salvation to anyone who accepts it through the sacrifice, blood and resurrection of Jesus, to a God that only picks people at His whim and pleasure to be saved while the rest are doomed to Hell.
I cannot assume the beliefs that people here hold as far as what you believe. I go with John Piper who says that God causes man to sin for his glory. He also says babies and young children are under the same double predestination. Then I think of Jesus telling people to let the children come to him.
Mark 10:14–15 (KJV 1900)
14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
So, why would Jesus say "Such is the kingdom of God" yet God include them in the double predestination? Also, why would Jesus say in effect we have to receive the kingdom of God with childlike faith, implying we can believe if we change our faith to be like a Child and believe?
Also John 3:16 replays over and over in my head. I would think Jesus would say "Whosoever my Father chooseth" instead of "Whosoever believeth"? Knowing that would be one of the most learned and used verses I would think He would inspire John to put that message in there. And nothing around that moment shows that John 3:16 is only for Elect.
I am asking genuine questions here that I cannot find a solution to. Traditionalism settles my soul and gives me hope, Calvanism makes me feel unsettled. I am not closed minded, I just stay confused when I consider both sides, and I know God is not the author of confusion.
Thank you for reading. I am on medications, so I tend to ramble. If anyone needs me to clarify something I wrote, I can. God bless! Also, sorry to butt in.. I thought the discussion was ending.
I have been reading books, websites, this thread, watching YouTube on both sides of the debate. My friend is a Calvanist and when I told him I was struggling with the whole concept, he told me it was not a salvation issue. I told him it is a salvation issue since it decides how one should witness and mentor a new Christian. I consider myself Traditional right now and this is why:
When I go back to my Baptist teachings, they are Traditionalist. I never knew there were so many Calvanists in the Baptist Community until lately. I even bought Logos software and found it leans heavily Calvanism with the books, etc it promotes. There is no doubt Calvanism is rising up. But the "why" I have not yet fully accepted Calvanism comes down to the peace I feel inside when I compare a God that offers salvation to anyone who accepts it through the sacrifice, blood and resurrection of Jesus, to a God that only picks people at His whim and pleasure to be saved while the rest are doomed to Hell.
I cannot assume the beliefs that people here hold as far as what you believe. I go with John Piper who says that God causes man to sin for his glory. He also says babies and young children are under the same double predestination. Then I think of Jesus telling people to let the children come to him.
Mark 10:14–15 (KJV 1900)
14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
So, why would Jesus say "Such is the kingdom of God" yet God include them in the double predestination? Also, why would Jesus say in effect we have to receive the kingdom of God with childlike faith, implying we can believe if we change our faith to be like a Child and believe?
Also John 3:16 replays over and over in my head. I would think Jesus would say "Whosoever my Father chooseth" instead of "Whosoever believeth"? Knowing that would be one of the most learned and used verses I would think He would inspire John to put that message in there. And nothing around that moment shows that John 3:16 is only for Elect.
I am asking genuine questions here that I cannot find a solution to. Traditionalism settles my soul and gives me hope, Calvanism makes me feel unsettled. I am not closed minded, I just stay confused when I consider both sides, and I know God is not the author of confusion.
Thank you for reading. I am on medications, so I tend to ramble. If anyone needs me to clarify something I wrote, I can. God bless! Also, sorry to butt in.. I thought the discussion was ending.
Last edited:
OldArmy
Member
No, my thought on it is simply this, Him knowing isn't causation. He tells us to believe and gave us His inscribed word which is when reviewed carefully a mountain of strong evidence all on it's own. What causes a person to seek? Well I believe He made us to worship, so it's part of our nature to worship, the question is what or whom will you worship. The Bible says only fools believe there is no God.
Last edited:
OldArmy
Member
I will tell you from what I have seen, Calvinism is wide spread online, but I haven't personally seen it in a similar way in person.
Also, it's definitely a salvation issue for some. I have a close friend whom I love who rejected Calvinism, he really was seeking diligently and struggling with an addiction, when he fully realized what 5 point Calvinism teaches (remember double predestination, painting God as a monstrous god) he rejected it. Tragically he also rejected God and stopped seeking him, which deeeply greaves me.
My wife had a similar but different experience because of the arrogance and cruelly cold words from Calvinistic teaching...
Though I was discipled by a hard core OPC 5 point Calvinist pastor for 2 years, I never called myself a Calvinist. I was still searching for which side of this I fell on. I defaulted back to what I was taught growing up in my Baptist church which, I didn't know a name for it but it would be the traditional/provisional view. Which I assert magnifies God far more as a much more loving, gracious, powerful and righteous god. It's the character and nature I see when I read scripture.
Now is it a salvific issue for those that believe and are Calvinist? For most I'd say no, but I think some of them can get so legalistic that it may be getting dangerou, but I'm not prepared to say anything beyond that. What I do know is that His word teaches that those who believe Jesus/Yeshua was who He claimed and that His atoning blood is sufficient payment are His.
Keep digging, keep seeking, try to remain unbiased in your research until you have dug deeeep on both sides of this. It can get confusing, trust me I know, took months to deprogram some of the meanings of particular phrases and words I was taug3back to their natural definitions, and sometimes I still have moments of confusion, but I have accepted the traditional view.
Also, please pray for my wife and friend.
Last edited:
somegeek
New Member
When I first told my wife about it, when I first thought it might be true, we were out at dinner and she said "That is the saddest salvation I have ever heard". She had tears in her eyes.
I have and will continue to dig deep, thank you for that advice. It seems the more I dig, read, watch, etc. I have found myself holding to my Traditional view. I have books by MacArthur, Piper and Sproul and an author that I can't remember at the moment on my Kindle and my shelf, yet I find myself reading John R. Rice, Charles Stanley, etc.. etc. It "feels right", but I am trying to not let feelings dictate.
I definitely see legalism preached. Where some point back to Augustine and Calvin which laid the ground work for T.U.L.I.P, I do not see them as Church Fathers. I am reading about Polycarp and how he was alive around Apostles and others that had first hand knowledge of Jesus. John the apostle was there when Polycarp was made a Minister. That line carries straight from that era and goes around the Reformation (since it never had a base in the Catholic Church in Rome, but according to history started with the apostles and has been preserved right up to today in Traditional Baptist Churches. I cannot find history of Calvanism (really I believe it was Augustine who originated the idea when he came out of Pagan circles) being anywhere before the Reformation.
Please, nobody think I am knocking or slamming on Calvanism, because I am on a honest journey here. I just want to be assured of what I believe.
Your friend and wife have been added to my prayer list. I will pray daily for them.
I saw an interview with the ex-singer of a Christian Band who is now using Calvanism to live life how he wants because he has not felt himself "chosen". He says he could be an "Instrument of destruction". It was heartbreaking to watch that. Calvanism seems to cause more doubt (like even John MacArthur says we won't know if we are chosen until we get to Heaven) than hope. The fact there is so much confusion helps me lean more Traditional too, because I have no doubt or confusion in that Salvation message.
Thank you for your response. It helped.
God bless.
Particular
Well-Known Member
In short, all humans are corrupt (all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God). Not one human deserves God's pardon. Instead, we deserve His condemnation and the sentence of eternal hell for our rebellion. So, when God sends a person to hell, it is entirely Just.
Yet, God, because He is Supreme, has all authority to pardon whomever He wills. (Kings and Presidents have this power.) The King of Creation has the authority to pardon. He does so without ever giving us insight to His reasoning. God does what He does because He can. Humans can hate Him for that or they can submit under His authority. (This is the essence of Jobs reply to his wife in Job 2. Shall we only accept the good from God and not the evil?) But, God has authority to choose and He does so.
From Adam to the end of the age we see God choosing a select people unto Himself while leaving the rest to remain in their sin. God doesn't tell us why. We must accept that.
As for evangelism, the elect obey God and go to all the nations, making disciples and baptizing them. We do this because it is God's ordained will to gather all the elect from every nation, tribe and tongue. We are His servants. Will we hide what He has given us or will we use it to the advantage of the Kingdom? (See the parable of the talents and the King who gives minas to his servants when he leaves.)
Ultimately, the issue lies in our human desire to have control. Do we demand control and demand that God give us the right to choose or do we submit to God's Sovereign right to do as He wills?
I submit. That is why I recognize the position of a Calvinist.
OldArmy
Member
*sigh*
God chooses to pardon those who believe in the Christ/Messiah Yeshua/Jesus.
I agree with what you opened up with. The fact He sent his son to be an atoning sacrifice for our sin rather than just condemning us all, is grace. Yes God can and does pardon the sins, of those who believe in Jesus! Amen to that
But what Calvinism purports is that for no apparent reason God decided I'll make this one for saving and this one for damnation. That's not consistent with the character of God I see in scripture.
P.S. I don't want control because I know I'll screw it up. But that doesn't mean God didn't design things in such a way as to give us genuine choice, and the ability to choose it.
God chooses to pardon those who believe in the Christ/Messiah Yeshua/Jesus.
I agree with what you opened up with. The fact He sent his son to be an atoning sacrifice for our sin rather than just condemning us all, is grace. Yes God can and does pardon the sins, of those who believe in Jesus! Amen to that
But what Calvinism purports is that for no apparent reason God decided I'll make this one for saving and this one for damnation. That's not consistent with the character of God I see in scripture.
P.S. I don't want control because I know I'll screw it up. But that doesn't mean God didn't design things in such a way as to give us genuine choice, and the ability to choose it.
Last edited:
Particular
Well-Known Member
*sigh*
Humans will never believe, apart from God causing them to believe.
Humans will always rebel against God and will always be condemned in their sin (be dead in their trespasses and sins...sin and fall short of the glory of God)
God is just should he choose to never pardon and never extend saving grace. Own this truth. Do not harbor anything else. Do not imagine God is unfair, that you or any other human deserves anything, but damnation.
God chooses to pardon people who are dead in their trespasses and sins. Dead people cannot choose. God does not look over the whole earth seeking to find dead people who have stirred themselves into life and chose God so that He may, in turn, choose them. (That, by the way, is your argument.)
Yes, I state that God has not told us what His method of decision is, which resulted in His election regarding who He pardons and for whom Christ died. You cannot find God telling us His process for choosing.
That means you either trust God or you curse God as the Supreme King who chooses and no one can question His decision. Do you trust God's decision or do you curse it?
One thing is certain...while you were dead in your trespasses and sins you were incapable of choosing God. You were incapacitated, because you were dead. Read what God says and accept it.
Ephesians 2:4-5 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—
So, God never gave you a choice. You responded to God because God chose to give you spiritual life and make you alive with Christ. Be grateful. Be amazed at His gracious favor toward you. Be humbled by that amazing gift which you do not deserve.
Probably not.
Practically no non-Calvinist (at least on this board) believes that this is how it works.
God's foreknowledge is hardly perceptive knowledge.
Are Calvinists simply unable to conceive of foreknowledge based neither on determinism nor perception?
^That is a sincere question B.T.W.^ As I do not think you are intentionally Strawmaning.
I've heard this "look down corridors of time" phrase bandied about by Calvinists for years....
I've practically never heard a non-Calvinist suggest it in either those or any other words. And usually it is by someone who truly considers themselves "Arminian". As most here do not, it is unlikely any of them think God does this.
Last edited:
Particular
Well-Known Member
Are Calvinists simply unable to conceive of foreknowledge based neither on determinism nor perception?
The above question seems like an oxymoron.
Definition of OXYMORON
The above question seems like an oxymoron.
Definition of OXYMORON