Why is it such a big deal?

[Sapper Woody]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But why is the Cal/Arm debate such a huge deal? I don't see how it affects mine or anyone else's eternal destination. Looking at the 5 points, I don't see how whether they are right or wrong changes anything except our own outlook.

My biggest problem with the five points myself is that in my mind, they negate the need for evangelism. But our residents Calvies all claim to evangelize, so that doesn't change anything.

Whether or not man can come of his own volition or not, both groups seem to be working towards the same goal: reaching the lost.

The second problem I have is the "P". But if someone believes a person who doesn't persevere isn't saved, it doesn't change my belief that he is.

So, maybe people from both camps can help me out. Rather than being a debate, this thread hopefully will be a discussion of why it's a big deal to you. And please, let's keep it on that topic. Let's not degenerate into debating people on their views.

 

[The Biblicist]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But why is the Cal/Arm debate such a huge deal? I don't see how it affects mine or anyone else's eternal destination. Looking at the 5 points, I don't see how whether they are right or wrong changes anything except our own outlook.

My biggest problem with the five points myself is that in my mind, they negate the need for evangelism. But our residents Calvies all claim to evangelize, so that doesn't change anything.

Whether or not man can come of his own volition or not, both groups seem to be working towards the same goal: reaching the lost.

The second problem I have is the "P". But if someone believes a person who doesn't persevere isn't saved, it doesn't change my belief that he is.

So, maybe people from both camps can help me out. Rather than being a debate, this thread hopefully will be a discussion of why it's a big deal to you. And please, let's keep it on that topic. Let's not degenerate into debating people on their views.

The doctrine of "free will" as defined by Arminians is the same doctrine embraced by all other major world religions as well as the lost world. It is the doctrine of lost humanity as a whole.

It is the doctrine that is more consistent with the whole world's view of justification by works and damnation by works or good and bad karma held by all world religions and the natural lost humanity in general.

It is inconsistent with the doctrine of OSAS because if you can will yourself in you can will yourself out just as all works by justification believe or you have to come to a Calvinist view of the will after salvation - Philip. 2:13. Indeed "free willism" is essential to the doctrine of justification by works

It is of this world - period. It is opposed vehemently by Arminian OSAS Baptists as much as by advocates of nearly all world religions and the world in general.

It affects how you look at lost humanity, as merely sick not dead spiritually,and thus only need to look to their own will power (will worship) and so evangelism appeals to the human will as final power (but no Arminian prays that so and so chooses the right way) instead of God's grace and power primarily. It practically has an effect on producing and filling churches with false professors who have simply made a decision but have not been supernaturally transformed by the new birth.

 

[Winman]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But why is the Cal/Arm debate such a huge deal? I don't see how it affects mine or anyone else's eternal destination. Looking at the 5 points, I don't see how whether they are right or wrong changes anything except our own outlook.

My biggest problem with the five points myself is that in my mind, they negate the need for evangelism. But our residents Calvies all claim to evangelize, so that doesn't change anything.

Whether or not man can come of his own volition or not, both groups seem to be working towards the same goal: reaching the lost.

The second problem I have is the "P". But if someone believes a person who doesn't persevere isn't saved, it doesn't change my belief that he is.

So, maybe people from both camps can help me out. Rather than being a debate, this thread hopefully will be a discussion of why it's a big deal to you. And please, let's keep it on that topic. Let's not degenerate into debating people on their views.

OK, this might be difficult to explain, but there is a HUGE difference between Calvinism and Arminianism/Non-Calvinism.

An Arminian or Non-Cal believes we are elect ONLY because we have been baptized into Jesus's body. He is the Elect One. We are just going along for a free ride on Jesus's coattails.

A Calvinist believes God chose HIM (the Calvinist) before the foundation of the world and then God the Father gave you to Jesus.

Non- Calvinist

Father ----> chose Jesus ----> Believer baptized into Jesus

Calvinist

Father ----> chose sinner -----> sinner given to Jesus

Now, how did Jesus say any man comes to his Father?

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

In the non-Calvinist view, we do come to the Father through Jesus, or literally "in Jesus".

In the Calvinist view, God chose YOU. Not because of anything Jesus did, but because he chose YOU. Then he gave YOU to Jesus. You now believe on Jesus, but that is secondary, what was primary is that God chose YOU.

When you look at your salvation, thank God. Thank God because you're a Christian because He chose you. I don't understand the mystery of that, that's just what the Word of God teaches. That is the most humbling doctrine in all of Scripture. I take no credit, not even credit for my faith. It all came from HIm. He chose me. He selected people to be made holy in order to be with Him forever. Why He selected me I will never know. I'm no better than anyone else, I'm worse than many. But He chose me.

http://www.gty.org/resources/print/sermons/80-46

If you ask a non-Cal why did God choose you, they will answer "because I believed Jesus and was baptized into his body. He is the elect, and because I was baptized "into Jesus" now I am elect."

If you ask a Calvinist why did God choose you, they will answer, "I don't know, but God chose ME."

Would you consider that an important difference?

 

[Salty]

... Rather than being a debate, this thread hopefully will be a discussion of why it's a big deal to you. And please, let's keep it on that topic. Let's not degenerate into debating people on their views.

Sorry, Sapper - your question is pre-destined to be a debate.:saint:

 

[Winman]

The chapter that shows we are the accepted IN THE BELOVED is Ephesians 1. Note how many times it says we are "in Christ" or "in him" or "in whom".

Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.
15 Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints,
16 Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers;
17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

God did not choose us, he chose Jesus, but because we are "in him" we have been made "accepted in the beloved". (Eph 1:6)

Mat 12:18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.

Is the difference between Calvinism and non-Calvinism becoming apparent now?

 

[Winman]

If you want to cut through everything and bring it down to bare basics;

The Non-Calvinist is elect because he believed.

The Calvinist believes because he is elect.

 

[Winman]

This quote makes it crystal clear;

I'm a Christian today because before the foundation of the world from all eternity past, God chose to set His love on John MacArthur and to give Him the faith to believe at the moment that God wanted him to believe.

http://www.gty.org/resources/print/sermons/80-46

There ya go.

It must feel pretty good to be a Calvinist.

 

[The Biblicist]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But why is the Cal/Arm debate such a huge deal? I don't see how it affects mine or anyone else's eternal destination. Looking at the 5 points, I don't see how whether they are right or wrong changes anything except our own outlook.

My biggest problem with the five points myself is that in my mind, they negate the need for evangelism. But our residents Calvies all claim to evangelize, so that doesn't change anything.

Whether or not man can come of his own volition or not, both groups seem to be working towards the same goal: reaching the lost.

The second problem I have is the "P". But if someone believes a person who doesn't persevere isn't saved, it doesn't change my belief that he is.

So, maybe people from both camps can help me out. Rather than being a debate, this thread hopefully will be a discussion of why it's a big deal to you. And please, let's keep it on that topic. Let's not degenerate into debating people on their views.

In Ephesians 1:4 the direct object of the verb "chose" is "us" not "him". Thus, the text does not grammatically state that "Him" was the object of election by the Father before the world. The pronoun "him" is the object of prepositional "in" not the verb "chose."

Hence, it is grammatically incorrect to say that God chose Jesus before the world began and indirectly then chose us because we were baptized into him in time and space. That is not what this text says grammatically.

Second, the idea of being "baptized" in to Christ is full of confusion as it is neither Biblically sound or rationally sound. Spiritually we are "created in Christ' not "baptized" into Christ. Secondly, Christ is the administrator of baptism in the Spirit as it the Spirit that is the object of the verb baptize. The so-called spirit baptism reverses and thus confuses the administrator with element of that baptism. Thirdly, the baptism in the Spirit is for only WATER baptized believers (Mt. 3:11; Acts 1:5). Fourthly, it is an institutional baptism not an individual baptism. Fifthly it is historical fulfilled thus leaving only "one baptism" which is in water "unto the end of the world (Eph. 4:6; Mt. 28:19). Last, 1 Corinthians 12:12-13 refers to water baptism under the leadership of the Holy Spirit in forming the local congregation at Corinth as previously taught in 1 Cor. 3:6-9.

 

[Sapper Woody]

If you want to cut through everything and bring it down to bare basics;

The Non-Calvinist is elect because he believed.

The Calvinist believes because he is elect.

In my view, the Calvinist gives glory to God for choosing him to be saved, while the non-Cal gives glory to God for allowing and making the way to be saved. Neither is taking credit.

Your answers, Winman, show a difference, but not why it is a big dividing point. Not to say I don't appreciate them, as they were informative. But I feel as if the question's been skirted.

 

[Don]

Actually, Sapper, the Cal gives glory to God for saving him by His sacrifice on the cross; the classical Arm gives glory to God for saving him by His sacrifice on the cross.

The only difference really seems to be, the Cal says "I was chosen"; the Arm says "I've been chosen."

 

[Winman]

In my view, the Calvinist gives glory to God for choosing him to be saved, while the non-Cal gives glory to God for allowing and making the way to be saved. Neither is taking credit.

Your answers, Winman, show a difference, but not why it is a big dividing point. Not to say I don't appreciate them, as they were informative. But I feel as if the question's been skirted.

Skirted the question? I answered it directly.

Ephesians 1:6 teaches that we have been "made accepted in the beloved". Do you understand what that means? It means you have been chosen because God saw you "in Christ" before the foundation of the world.

Eph 1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

"The Beloved" here is Jesus.

Mat 12:18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.

Jesus is the "chosen one", he is the "beloved", not us.

But that is not what Calvinism believes, Calvinism believes the exact opposite, Calvinism teaches that YOU were chosen OUTSIDE of Christ for the purpose of being given to Jesus AFTER you were elected.

The Arminian view makes Jesus primary. He is the ELECT, the beloved, the CHOSEN ONE. We are only elect when we believe on Jesus and are placed into his body.

The Calvinist view makes MAN primary. God chose YOU. After God chose YOU, he then gave YOU to Christ so that Christ could save YOU. This makes Jesus secondary, almost your servant. His death on the cross was solely designed for YOU the CHOSEN ONE. I know that looked stupid to emphasize YOU so much, but that is exactly where the emphasis is in Calvinism, on YOU, not Jesus.

If you cannot see a huge problem here I do not know what to tell you.

 

[steaver]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But why is the Cal/Arm debate such a huge deal? I don't see how it affects mine or anyone else's eternal destination. Looking at the 5 points, I don't see how whether they are right or wrong changes anything except our own outlook.

My biggest problem with the five points myself is that in my mind, they negate the need for evangelism. But our residents Calvies all claim to evangelize, so that doesn't change anything.

Whether or not man can come of his own volition or not, both groups seem to be working towards the same goal: reaching the lost.

The second problem I have is the "P". But if someone believes a person who doesn't persevere isn't saved, it doesn't change my belief that he is.

So, maybe people from both camps can help me out. Rather than being a debate, this thread hopefully will be a discussion of why it's a big deal to you. And please, let's keep it on that topic. Let's not degenerate into debating people on their views.

I know the Calvinist say they evangelize, and I do not doubt their word on that.

I can only speak for myself when I say that if I were to accept TULIP, my evangelism would take a different turn, it would be out of obedience alone to God because He commanded us to go out and make disciples of Jesus Christ. My heart would change, I wouldn't feel any urgency to reach a friend or a loved one for Jesus. My motivation would change drastically. Why would I feel any great urgency since my witnessing, or lack thereof, would play no part in the person's election anyways. If I didn't get to them, and no one else did either, oh well, they weren't one of the elect anyways if they didn't make it in. Or, if they are one of God's elect and I don't speak with them, someone else will because God will make it happen without me. Sure I may be dinged for my disobedience, but at least I am still saved.

Now if the consequence of my lacking is the person not hearing about Jesus and that person dies and goes to hell because I didn't witness, then that is on me and my heart must live with that consequence of burden.

It would actually be less burdensome to be a Calvinist. Because I can tell you that believing a person has a choice to make causes me to have a heavy heart daily for the lost. If I were a Calvinist, so what, if I don't get to them God will send someone else. Just my opinion and tis what I feel. You make me into a Calvinist and I will tell you a truth, my burden and urgency for the lost will be gone!

 

[The Biblicist]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But why is the Cal/Arm debate such a huge deal? I don't see how it affects mine or anyone else's eternal destination. Looking at the 5 points, I don't see how whether they are right or wrong changes anything except our own outlook.

My biggest problem with the five points myself is that in my mind, they negate the need for evangelism. But our residents Calvies all claim to evangelize, so that doesn't change anything.

Whether or not man can come of his own volition or not, both groups seem to be working towards the same goal: reaching the lost.

The second problem I have is the "P". But if someone believes a person who doesn't persevere isn't saved, it doesn't change my belief that he is.

So, maybe people from both camps can help me out. Rather than being a debate, this thread hopefully will be a discussion of why it's a big deal to you. And please, let's keep it on that topic. Let's not degenerate into debating people on their views.

Election is "unto salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" and promotes evangelism because (1) the outcome is not based upon your ability as a salesman but upon dependency upon the Holy Spirit -1 Thes. 1:4-5; (2) the means of salvation are as chosen as the persons - 2 Thes. 2:13; (3) the urgency is not affected as no human knows who are the elect from the non-elect; (4) faithful proclamation of the Gospel obtains victory whether it is received or rejected (2 Cor. 1:15-17).

 

[convicted1]

To Brother Sapper Woody:

To me, it has more to do with the "L" or better, definite atonement than anything else...or it is to me....here's why....

If the atonement Christ made was unlimited in it's scope, then myriads of sinners died being sinners, no matter how hard Christ tried to save them. Therefore, they rendered that atonement helpless. It is an atonement that never atoned. They have produced a Christ which failed to redeem them...eventhough He did everything to try to redeem them. If the atonement was unlimited, then mankind has tied Christ's hands, desiring to save them, yet their will trumped His...They have made Christ a failure....

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

To Brother Sapper Woody:

To me, it has more to do with the "L" or better, definite atonement than anything else...or it is to me....here's why....

If the atonement Christ made was unlimited in it's scope, then myriads of sinners died being sinners, no matter how hard Christ tried to save them. Therefore, they rendered that atonement helpless. It is an atonement that never atoned. They have produced a Christ which failed to redeem them...eventhough He did everything to try to redeem them. If the atonement was unlimited, then mankind has tied Christ's hands, desiring to save them, yet their will trumped His...They have made Christ a failure....

Bingo...:thumbs:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I know the Calvinist say they evangelize, and I do not doubt their word on that.

I can only speak for myself when I say that if I were to accept TULIP, my evangelism would take a different turn, it would be out of obedience alone to God because He commanded us to go out and make disciples of Jesus Christ. My heart would change, I wouldn't feel any urgency to reach a friend or a loved one for Jesus. My motivation would change drastically. Why would I feel any great urgency since my witnessing, or lack thereof, would play no part in the person's election anyways. If I didn't get to them, and no one else did either, oh well, they weren't one of the elect anyways if they didn't make it in. Or, if they are one of God's elect and I don't speak with them, someone else will because God will make it happen without me. Sure I may be dinged for my disobedience, but at least I am still saved.

Now if the consequence of my lacking is the person not hearing about Jesus and that person dies and goes to hell because I didn't witness, then that is on me and my heart must live with that consequence of burden.

It would actually be less burdensome to be a Calvinist. Because I can tell you that believing a person has a choice to make causes me to have a heavy heart daily for the lost. If I were a Calvinist, so what, if I don't get to them God will send someone else. Just my opinion and tis what I feel. You make me into a Calvinist and I will tell you a truth, my burden and urgency for the lost will be gone!

Never....never.....never ever is your compassion for those that are lost does it wane. In fact it grows.....boy does it grow.

 

[steaver]

To Brother Sapper Woody:

To me, it has more to do with the "L" or better, definite atonement than anything else...or it is to me....here's why....

If the atonement Christ made was unlimited in it's scope, then myriads of sinners died being sinners, no matter how hard Christ tried to save them. Therefore, they rendered that atonement helpless. It is an atonement that never atoned. They have produced a Christ which failed to redeem them...eventhough He did everything to try to redeem them. If the atonement was unlimited, then mankind has tied Christ's hands, desiring to save them, yet their will trumped His...They have made Christ a failure....

Jesus covered this issue though. He said every sin would be forgiven men, with the exception of unbelief (Matt12:31). Those who find themselves in hell will find themselves there because of unbelief (rejecting the call to repent and believe). God has paid the sin debt for the whole world, not just the elect (1Jo2:2).

 

[steaver]

Never....never.....never ever is your compassion for those that are lost does it wane. In fact it grows.....boy does it grow.

IDK brother, when I ponder the thought of TULIP being truth, my thought process goes directly to complacency and then I snap back into reality.

 

[steaver]

Election is "unto salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" and promotes evangelism because (1) the outcome is not based upon your ability as a salesman but upon dependency upon the Holy Spirit -1 Thes. 1:4-5; (2) the means of salvation are as chosen as the persons - 2 Thes. 2:13; (3) the urgency is not affected as no human knows who are the elect from the non-elect; (4) faithful proclamation of the Gospel obtains victory whether it is received or rejected (2 Cor. 1:15-17).

I agree with all of this with the exception of #3. I do believe urgency is affected, maybe not across the board in Calvinistic circles, but I would think it would have to affect evangelism, at least it would for me when I think about it. But everything else you said is the same beliefs held by non-cals.

 

[kyredneck]

Maybe I'm missing something here. But why is the Cal/Arm debate such a huge deal? I don't see how it affects mine or anyone else's eternal destination. Looking at the 5 points, I don't see how whether they are right or wrong changes anything except our own outlook.
.

I generally agree, one's bent in this area has nothing to do with either their own or anyone else's eternal destiny, how much they love the Lord, or their 'Christianity'. All His Children are equipped with the law written in their hearts, which ultimately is all that is required for them to stand in the judgment.