What if Calvinism is incorrect?

[evangelist6589]

I read lots of books on evangelism including many by Calvinist authors. Lately I have been reading an Arminian Baptist type book on evangelism by pastor Paul Chapell of Lancaster Baptist Church. I am reading story after story in this book of people that have been saved, discipled, and grow to be pastors or to work in the ministry full time. I have not read of such biblical success in any Calvinism based evangelism book I have read. I do not know if the people being led turn out to be false converts, but I can't assume that. It does not appear that Paul Chapell uses the 10 commandments nor gets into as much depth on sin, hellfire, and the coming judgment of Christ as the Calvinist evangelists do in their books. Perhaps this is the reason why he seems to get so many converts, but I can't say as maybe God is using this ministry. Newborn babes do not exactly fully understand hell, sin, the coming judgment, and other such doctrines that oftentimes the Calvinist based evangelism books push.

So what if Calvinism is incorrect in some areas or all areas? These kinds of books certainly make me wonder. I try and read Arminian based books with the same fairness as the Calvinist books as I strive not to have a bias nor agenda. Every book is compared to the scripture and I find much scripture support in both the Calvinist and Arminian based evangelism books. So what say you?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Paul Chappel is not an Arminian or a Calvinist.

He is what many would refer to as a Biblicist.

basically we believe in Eternal Security but reject irresistible grace, and unconditional election, blah blah blah.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

I think no matter what method you use, there will always turn out to be false converts..

I'm not really a big fan of Lancaster..

You should read this:

http://www.wayoflife.org/free_ebooks/fbs_and_quick_prayerism.php

 

[PreachTony]

He is what many would refer to as a Biblicist.

basically we believe in Eternal Security but reject irresistible grace, and unconditional election, blah blah blah.

That's a pretty nice summation, Jordan. I like that.

 

[Don]

So what if Calvinism is incorrect in some areas or all areas?

Jesus will still be Jesus.
People will still be saved.
His Word will still be preached.

The same applies if arminianism is incorrect.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

I don't really think the Arminianism and Calvinism debate is really all that important and doesn't change much.

the only thing I have a problem with is Calvinist who are too lazy to do soul winning and claim God will save the elect no matter what, If Calvinism is wrong, and I believe it is, then Satan has used it to prevent many from hearing the Gospel.

the other problem I have is with Arminians who teach you can lose your salvation, because it can very easily turn into basically teaching works salvation.

 

[annsni]

I don't really think the Arminianism and Calvinism debate is really all that important and doesn't change much.

the only thing I have a problem with is Calvinist who are too lazy to do soul winning and claim God will save the elect no matter what, If Calvinism is wrong, and I believe it is, then Satan has used it to prevent many from hearing the Gospel.

the other problem I have is with Arminians who teach you can lose your salvation, because it can very easily turn into basically teaching works salvation.

I agree - except I believe Calvinism to be correct. But bottom line is the Scriptures say what they say and God works as to His own will. What we decide as the "system" that things are run by doesn't much matter. What matters is that God is good, God gives life and He never fails.

 

[evangelist6589]

Paul Chappel is not an Arminian or a Calvinist.

He is what many would refer to as a Biblicist.

basically we believe in Eternal Security but reject irresistible grace, and unconditional election, blah blah blah.

This is false. Arminian soteriology is all over the book. There are different degrees of Arminian just as there are differing degrees of Calvinist.

 

[evangelist6589]

I don't really think the Arminianism and Calvinism debate is really all that important and doesn't change much.

the only thing I have a problem with is Calvinist who are too lazy to do soul winning and claim God will save the elect no matter what, If Calvinism is wrong, and I believe it is, then Satan has used it to prevent many from hearing the Gospel.

the other problem I have is with Arminians who teach you can lose your salvation, because it can very easily turn into basically teaching works salvation.

Any Biblically sound Calvinist will see the need to be out witnessing just as Paul did, George Whitfield, etc..

According to most on that board I visited a month or two ago being a Calvinist meant being a devil. Those people had so much hate towards Calvinism I could not believe it. Demonizing me, lying, treating others whom were non Cal with different standards than a Calvinist, etc..

 

[evangelist6589]

That's a pretty nice summation, Jordan. I like that.

Except its false.

 

[evangelist6589]

I think no matter what method you use, there will always turn out to be false converts..



I'm not really a big fan of Lancaster..



You should read this:



http://www.wayoflife.org/free_ebooks/fbs_and_quick_prayerism.php

Talking like a Calvinist? That's another word for easy believism which Lancaster does a bit of.

In the book chapel was confronted by a Way of the Master evangelist whom said he was promoting easy believism.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Talking like a Calvinist? That's another word for easy believism which Lancaster does a bit of.

In the book chapel was confronted by a Way of the Master evangelist whom said he was promoting easy believism.

I'm not sure what exactly Lancaster's view of Repentance is, but they very well may be weak on repentance.. a lot of IFB churches are nowadays.

Of course I believe it's possible for a person to repent of their sins without being taught what repentance is and being commanded to do it.

I know for me I had no idea that I was doing what the bible calls repentance when I had gotten saved, but I know that it was there.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Any Biblically sound Calvinist will see the need to be out witnessing just as Paul did, George Whitfield, etc..

According to most on that board I visited a month or two ago being a Calvinist meant being a devil. Those people had so much hate towards Calvinism I could not believe it. Demonizing me, lying, treating others whom were non Cal with different standards than a Calvinist, etc..

Evan you are exaggerating here.

And you did not exactly act above reproach yourself while on that board.
In fact I was disappointed quite a bit because I did not invite you over there to talk about Calvinism... which it ended up happening.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

This is false. Arminian soteriology is all over the book. There are different degrees of Arminian just as there are differing degrees of Calvinist.

No Evan, just because you are a Calvinist does not mean everyone who is not is an Arminian.

the Biblicist position is the middle ground between the two extreme and both unbiblical positions of Calvinism and Arminianism.

http://cbctinleypark.org/assets/calvinism.pdf

 

[plain_n_simple]

What defines a false convert?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

"For many decades in America there has been a very large and
growing sector of Bible believing churches that see unscriptural
extremes in both Calvinism and Arminianism. The term 'Biblicist'
has been coined for those who would consider themselves neither
Calvinistic nor Arminian. This position has historically rejected as
unscriptural three of the Five Points of Calvinism (unconditional
election, limited atonement, irresistible grace), and two of the Five
Points of Arminianism ( uncertain perseverance, enablement of the
Spirit by second blessing). Therefore, Biblicists have been called
Two-Point Calvinists or Three-Point Arminians in the past. Calvinists
saw them as Arminians, and Arminians saw them as Calvinists.
Biblicists today, however, reject all the points of Calvinism as
unscriptural and all the points of Arminianism as unscriptural. "

-Tim Spitsbergen

 

[evangelist6589]

No Evan, just because you are a Calvinist does not mean everyone who is not is an Arminian.



the Biblicist position is the middle ground between the two extreme and both unbiblical positions of Calvinism and Arminianism.



http://cbctinleypark.org/assets/calvinism.pdf

You can read WhAt is Reformed theology or chosen by God by RC Sproul. The middle ground is an Arminian view.

 

[evangelist6589]

Evan you are exaggerating here.



And you did not exactly act above reproach yourself while on that board.

In fact I was disappointed quite a bit because I did not invite you over there to talk about Calvinism... which it ended up happening.

This is false. I mentioned Calvinism on occasion but my goal was to speak on evangelism. However all the posts that I mentioned calvinism were misinterpreted. But can I expect no better? Those people had a bias against me from the start.

 

[InTheLight]

This is false. I mentioned Calvinism on occasion but my goal was to speak on evangelism. However all the posts that I mentioned calvinism were misinterpreted. But can I expect no better? Those people had a bias against me from the start.

I happened to see those posts. The mods continually asked you to stop bringing up Calvinism but you kept on doing it.

 

[evangelist6589]

I happened to see those posts. The mods continually asked you to stop bringing up Calvinism but you kept on doing it.

Yes I did but my intent was not to cause division just as a statement of reference. All in all a bad fit for me and I left.

But I did not mention calvinism to cause any fights as my goal was to talk evangelism but if I used calvinist tracts and highly endorse them why can't I say that?