Why do Calvinists argue?

Because we are the instruments God uses to accomplish the things He desires to accomplish. Just as God ordains the results, He also ordains the means, and we are the means He has ordained to get out the message of salvation.

To a calvinist (as opposed to a hyper-calvinist), both of these things are true:

1. No one believes without a preacher, and if we don't preach, they won't believe.

2. Everyone whom God elects to salvation will believe.

Now, specifically in regards to this forum. I really assume that most of the people who post here are genuine believers, whether they are calvinist or not. So I don't really think that anything much of what I post here makes much difference regarding who gets into heaven or not.

I do think, however, that correct doctrine is important, and correct thinking in regards to God and who He is is important. I don't really think I will convince those who are firm in their opposition to Calvinism, and that is not my intent. But more people read here than actually post, and I assume many of them are not so set in their ways, and may be using this forum to learn more about the different views of God so they can come to their own understanding of who He is, and who we are in relation to Him. Perhaps God will use what I write to help bring them to a better understanding of Him.

Besides, some of us (and I include people of both persuasions here) are just wired by God to LOVE this sort of thing. We are genuinely fascinated by this stuff, and discussions like these are the way we learn.

[ July 08, 2002, 12:25 AM: Message edited by: russell55 ]

 

Excellent point. I've always thought that maybe Calvinists are fighting doubt about their position by trying to convince everyone else of its validity. I've known two people (in person) who have spent hours trying to convince me that Calvinism is true, but their lives told me it wasn't. (Now I'm not saying that that is the case here, but it seemed to me in those two cases that they were trying to convince themselves more than convince me.)

 

True, true. So many of the "Calvinists" I know will still go up and preach that God wants all men to be saved. They've got their position down on paper, but it just doesn't "preach" as well, I suppose. They'll be able to quote Pink and Spurgeon when discussing election when talking about theology, but acr like an Arminian in the things they say to their congregants. (This is Baptist - I've never been to a Presbyterian church and don't know how they preach.)

 

The answer is marvelously simple. They argue because they must!

 

I also find that my Arminian Baptist brothers and sisters are the ones that are fascinated with Election and Predestination more than we are. I'm always fascinated by Non Calvinist Baptist mental gymnastics on the subject of election.

Of couse Historically all Christians be they Arminians or Calvinists believe there are some things predetermined before hand or else you have to deny Bible prophecy.

Scott said,

I know of no Reformed Baptist who does that but you may be confused on what Calvinists believe in regard to election and evangelism. Spurgeon was once asked, "Pastor how do you reconcile Unconditional election and Whosoever Will may be saved?" Spurgeon's reply, "Why do I need to reconcile friends?"

 

I don't break a sweat with the issue of free will. It is must simpler than believing God created people for destruction!

At least that's mostly true. Some people like Open Theists may believe that God has predetermined the things He will bring about, although the timing and methods may be "improvised". (That's probably not the best word, but the best I could do off the top of my head. )

Non-Calvinists find that unconditional election and "whosoever will" are much friendlier than Calvinists ever thought possible!

Thanks for the post!

 

I speak for those of the Primitive/Calvinist brethren on here So you disagree how we interpret doctrine and you say we are wrong and you are right? We have heard it before but that doesn't bother me and our doctrine shouldn't bother you. We love a good debate as that is our nature and are diggers of deep doctrine. You want to disagree with how I see predestination and election fine... I have a thick hide. Many of the Primitive/Calvinist on here were once of the Arminian brethren and came from your ranks... Why?... Just because I say something does not mean you have to believe it... If you didn't want to debate why did you come here?... I don't feel this is a worthless endeavor, to the contrary I learn a great deal from my Primitive/Calvinist brethren and a few from the Arminian side to. I don't see anyone on here calling the other side names but just having a healthy debate... There is no debate when both agree. Disagree with us all you want... For me it just stirs the blood and gets me to dig deeper and deeper into Gods word for those treasures of doctrinal truths... Brother Glen

 

Originally posted by Helen:

Out cuttng berry canes and scratching myself to pieces this evening, so I started thinking to take my mind off the blood...

Hi Helen

You could have thought about the blood instead...it's very symbolic! - but I digress...

I don't understand why Calvinists even take the time to argue these points. If Calvinism is right, then everything is decided and it really doesn't matter what anyone things anyway, does it?

Ah but they want everyone else to benefit from seeing the truth as they do!

Seriously though, it's important to understand that Calvinism does not remove individual responsibility; what Calvinism says is that as we choose to do what God calls us to do we are fulfilling His pre-ordained plans and purposes at the same time.

In other words God's will is fulfilled as we fulfill it. We have a very active role to play; we have choices to make all day long!

I don't think God will be impressed by anyone who, seeing Jesus face to face says "Well, I hid my talent in the ground because everything was decided ahead of time anyway..." - we have the very clear passage telling us that God would not be pleased with that kind of attitude.

So isn't it a real waste of time for any Calvinist to mount an argument for his position, especially over and over and over in a forum like this?

Possibly - but not because 'everything' is decided; rather because people don't easily change their minds and while Christians argue in here over doctrines, people are dying without Christ...

'otherHelen'

 

Hey ya'll, remember your history. It was the followers of Arminius who started this debate with their remonstrance that culminated in the meeting of the Synod of Dort which found the Arminian system flawed from a Biblical perspective and produced the now famous TULIP. The Arminians have been attacking and the Calvinists have been defending ever since. So if you want we Calvinists to stop defending, maybe Arminians, non-Calvinists, whatever(such as Dave Hunt, Adrian Rogers, Tim LaHaye, et al), should stop attacking. And if that happens, there would be no need for this section of the Baptist Board.

One redeemed by Christ's blood,

Ken
Were it not for grace...

[ July 08, 2002, 08:47 AM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]

 

Or on a further note, if Augustine hadn't been so eager to change theology himself with all of his neo-Platonic leanings, we wouldn't be here either. The early church fathers had a very consistent and Biblical picture of God until Augustine came and made God Greek.

 

They're rather rampant in the SBC. I understand how Calvinists reconcile evangelism and election - it's the phrases "God loved everyone and sent His Son to die for them" that seems to go against Calvinist theology. That's what they say that goes against what they say in private.

 

My kids say this all the time i.e. "he/she started it!!!"

 

Primitive Baptists are not Calvinists. We do not believe in the absolute predestination of all things. We believe the Christian is responsible to walk in the light God has given him. Why do Calvinists fight? Probably the same reason Arminians do. Arminians fight over whether or not somebody can lose their salvation. If I were an Arminian, I sure wouldn't believe that. Hey, you get it by your free-will; you lose it by your free-will, but thank God I'm not in bondage to that godless junk anymore.

 

The difference and please correct me if I'm wrong is the Arminian/Calvinist interpretation of election.

Arminian election says you are elected for eternal glory in time for what you do for the Lord after you come to him in obedience and Godly living.

Primitive/Calvinist election says you are passive in this and you have no ability to elect yourself but was elected in eternity before the world was made. You will come to God in time drawn by him because you have no ability to draw yourself. You walk in obedience and Godly living not to get election but because you already have it.

Predestination only means you were destined to eternal glory before the world was made. Election/Predestination work hand in hand and you can't have one without the other.

God does not predestinate everything you do and that is Absolute Predestination which the Primitive brethren have been fighting in their ranks and I won't go into it here.

Arminians believe you can fall from Grace... Primitive/Calvinist brethren believe that is impossible and to reach one of God chosen you would have to overthrow the Godhead... They are secure in Christ... I will say it again as I've said it so many times before...

... So whats the argument?... Brother Glen

[ July 08, 2002, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

 

And on an even further note, if the apostle Paul hadn't been lead by the Holy Spirit to write all of those things that we now call "Calvnism" in Romans, Ephesians, etc, we wouldn't be here either.

One redeemed by Christ's blood,

Ken
Were it not for grace...

 

Cute, but that's typical Arminian belittling of a Calvinist standing up for what he believes.

One redeemed by Christ's blood,

Ken
Were it not for grace...

 

And on an even further note, if the apostle Paul hadn't been lead by the Holy Spirit to write all of those things that we now call "Calvnism" in Romans, Ephesians, etc, we wouldn't be here either.

One redeemed by Christ's blood,

Ken
Were it not for grace...</font>[/QUOTE]And what about the things he wrote that we call "Arminianism?" Believe it or not, Arminians believe the Bible, too, whether you accept that or not.

 

Cute, but that's typical Arminian belittling of a Calvinist standing up for what he believes. </font>[/QUOTE]Ah but I'm not an Arminian!

And besides you weren't standing up for what you believed; you were explaining why it's ok to argue