Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2012/10/12 16:11
Ron posted this on facebook:
This is a thoughtful and straightforward contribution to the Calvinism debate and a good introduction to Jerry Wall's excel
lent book 'Why I am not a Calvinist". http://ow.ly/eq9C8
I think it would be good to give a look and discuss.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2012/10/30 1:25
Just Got my copy from Amazon 'why I am not a calvinist' :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by MikeH (), on: 2012/10/31 16:33
Interesting series of three videos. Part one set the scene very well and he identified the ULI of TULIP as being where th
e real dispute is. In part two he focused on compatibilism verse liberterianism and drew out some fundamental objection
s to compatibilism. However, he did not really address all three areas of ULI. In part three the quality of the argument b
ecame much weaker and this last section was disappointing, compared to the detailed logic of the first two sections. If t
he book follows the same pattern, it will be like the curates egg.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2012/10/31 21:37
Ok Mike over to you :-) I really would like to hear your ULI or your TULIP objections.
I'm enjoying the book so far page 11
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by MikeH (), on: 2012/11/3 1:57
Delboy asked for
Quote:
------------------------your ULI ... objections.
-------------------------
I have never developed my own arguments as well as Jerry Walls.
Unconditional election - It was interesting to see that in this theology God does not use foreknowledge to decide who t
o elect. My objections are in accord with Jerry's: 1) God is capricious: He decides on a whim!! It is consistent with God's
character. 2) The DA Carson approach to love would make me reject God as a fraudulent; that He loves in a three fold
way: general kindness to creation, a general desire to save, but thirdly really only loves those He has elected to save. I
can say your loved by God, perhaps on the first two basis, but He will still damn you to hell if you miss out on the third.
Limited atonement - Enough people argue this from scripture, it is fairly easy to find the verses that contradict it. But m
y view is that it fails because it is based on the premise that all whose sins are forgiven will be in heaven. I question whe
ther this premise is right since it leads to such an assumption. More likely everyone's sins are forgiven, but it only applie
s if you believe. Would not the realization that you could have been forgiven and all you had to do was believe, eat awa
y at you throughout eternity like a worm that doesn't die (Mark 9).
Irresistable grace - My major objection is that this makes us robots, not humans.
This is where my current thoughts are and objections and corrections gladly received.
1) God knows good and evil but consistently chooses the good (Gen 3:22a And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is
become as one of us, to know good and evil... Isa 7:15 ... that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. ) I
know the latter applies to the Lord in human form, but I think He was doing this as a man, but had always done it as God
.
2) Man was created with the ability to choose (Gen 1:27 So God created mankind in his own image; in his own image G
Page 1/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
od created them; he created them male and female.), but not the experience of good and evil. He was expected to choo
se the good and reject the evil, but when was tempted/tested the second time, choose evil. The whole ULI thing undermi
nes the idea that we are created in God's image.
3) Having chosen evil, he became enslaved to sin and was no longer able to chose the good. (No Pelagianism)
4) Man would not even seek after God (Rom 3:11a ... there is none that seeketh after God. Joh 6:44a No man can com
e to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him:) (No Semipelagianism)
5) But God draws >95% of people; (Joh 5:25 ... The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of t
he Son of God: and they that hear shall live.)
6) We have the ability to hear, and those that hear will be saved. (Mat_11:15; Mat_13:9; Mat_13:43; Mar_4:9; Mar_4:23
; Mar_7:16; Luk_8:8; Luk_14:35;)
7) The question is will you hear what is being said, because you have a choice: Act 13:46 46 Then Paul and Barnabas
grew bold and said, “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and ju
dge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.(NKJV) Note "since you reject it" and "(you)
judge yourselves..." . The decision is clearly the hearers, not God's. Paul makes it clear they could have heard and rec
eived everlasting life.
That's my current thinking on these things, it may not be completely logically defined, but that I think would be possible w
ith some effort :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Ron B (), on: 2013/2/25 21:34
I think I have some issues with the way the T of Total Depravity is sometimes expressed. Often theology is reactive and
when you take ideas out of their historical context we can lose some of their meanings. The reformers were reacting
against ecclesiastical error and against theological error. The theology of the day was often that of Thomas Aquinas
which seems to hold the view that man can reason his way to genuine faith. This is still the prevailing theology of the
Roman Catholic church.
I think some of the positions the reformers took were really anti-Aquinas and I think their slant on Total Depravity shows
this. Modern Calvinists sometimes take up the words of the reformers against Aquinas but forget the historical context.
There is an interesting comment of Christ in
If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven gi
ve good things to those who ask Him! Matt 7:11 NKJV.
Apparently, evil people can sometimes do good things. How would this square with the extreme view of total depravity w
hich would hold that every action and every second of life is inevitably polluted by the old nature?
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/2/25 22:20
This is when i want to push the 'like button'
:-)
Apparently, evil people can sometimes do good things. How would this square with the extreme view of total depravity w
hich would hold that every action and every second of life is inevitably polluted by the old nature?
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Ron B (), on: 2013/3/7 17:38
If this topic is particularly important to you, and I think it should be, there is another book you might like to consider.
(http://www.amazon.com/Against-Calvinism-Roger-E-Olson/dp/031032467X/refsr_1_1?ieUTF8&qid1362670171&sr8-1&
keywordsagainst+calvinism) Against Calvinism: Roger E. Olson
The titles of these two books are telling.
Why I am not a Calvinist
Against Calvinism
The second is expressed somewhat more strongly although the author points out that this would not have been his choi
ce for a title. The second book is more energetic in its approach but not aiming for contention. I haven't completed my re
ading but I am enjoying it.
Page 2/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
One interesting and useful aspect of the "Against Calvinism" is that the author is particularly conscious of the Neo Calvin
ists e.g. John Piper and others and quotes their works quite extensively.
The 'young, reformed and restless' group aka The Gospel Coalition' has been a marked phenomena in the US for the la
st few decades and the internet has made it a world-wide phenomena.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by BeYeDoers (), on: 2013/3/12 4:05
I was a Calvinist once...and then I read my Bible!
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/3/29 7:12
Ron B posted: There is an interesting comment of Christ in
If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven gi
ve good things to those who ask Him! Matt 7:11 NKJV.
Apparently, evil people can sometimes do good things. How would this square with the extreme view of total depravity w
hich would hold that every action and every second of life is inevitably polluted by the old nature?
My response:
If natural man's condition is Total Depravity, How do we account for the apparent "good" in the unregenerate?
Good question because the meaning of total depravity is often misunderstood. It should first be pointed out what "total d
epravity" does not mean. The doctrine does not refer to man being as evil a creature as he can be. All fallen, unregenera
te human beings are endowed with many of God's common graces. God has blessed all men with a conscience and the
capacity to promote virtue and civil righteousness. It is abundantly clear that many beautiful aspects of the world we live
in have been brought forth by those which are unredeemed by God's regenerative grace. God has gifted natural men an
d women with the skill to create beautiful music, make profound works of art, to invent intricate machines and do countle
ss things that are productive, excellent and praiseworthy. John Calvin said,
"Those men whom Scripture calls "natural men" were, indeed, sharp and penetrating in their investigation of inferior thin
gs. Let us, accordingly, learn by their example how many gifts the Lord left to human nature even after it was despoiled
of its true good." (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 274-275).
It would be natural to ask, then, if man is totally depraved, how is it that he can bring forth so many good things? This qu
estion is indeed valid but misunderstands what is meant when we talk about man as being rendered depraved by the fall
.
So what is meant, then, by the total depravity and spiritual inability of the natural man? It means that man's many good
works, even though in accord with God's commands, are not well pleasing to God when weighed against His ultimate cri
teria and standard of perfection. The love of God and His law is not the unbelievers' deepest animating motive and princi
ple (nor is it his motive at all), so it does not earn him the right to redemptive blessings from a holy God. The Scripture cl
early implies this when it states "...without faith it is impossible to please Him." (Hebrews 11:6a, NASB) and "whatever is
not from faith is sin." (Romans 14:23) So if man "is restrained from performing more evil acts by motives that are not owi
ng to his glad submission to God, then even his "virtue" is evil in the sight of God." (John Piper) His purpose for doing go
od works are not from a heart that loves God. Being unspiritual, that is, without the Holy Spirit, "... men do not rise above
themselves" (Calvin) But now through our justification and regeneration in Christ, we are enabled, for the first time, to be
pleasing to God on the basis of Christ's work and, from this union, the work of the Holy Spirit renews our affections for G
od, giving us understanding of, and a delight in, spiritual things and turning our heart of stone to a heart of flesh.
Total depravity only means man is lost (Luke 19:10), unspiritual by nature, and thus he is utterly impotent to recover him
self from his ruined estate (John 6:44, 65, Rom 8:7; Eph 2:1, 2:5; Rom 3:11; 2 Corinthians 4:4-6). In other words he is u
nable to do any redemptive good. Fallen man does not desire God, he loves darkness and hates the light (John 3:19,20)
so he will not come into Christ at all except he be reborn by the Holy Spirit (John 1:13, 3:6, John 6:37, 39, 44, 63-66; Ro
m 9:16).
Calvin made an observation from Romans 1 that all men (regenerate and unregenerate) have a sense of the divine withi
Page 3/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
n them. Even unbelievers know God in a sense because God has impressed his image on all persons. The apostle Paul
said, "For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him..." (Rom 1:21) Since the Holy S
pirit does not dwell with the fallen, the source of natural man's affections come from a polluted well. He has a sense of th
e divine and knows God, but only as an enemy, "and by their unrighteousness suppress the truth" (Rom 1:18). God has i
mpressed humanity with a conscience and it restrains him from doing even more evil, but his heart cannot reach to the h
eavens to God unless the Spirit first pour His blessings down from heaven. God extends his love to man but since he is
hostile to God by nature he will always reject Him. All are responsible to come to Him but inexcusable for their "knowing
Him" but refusing to come to Him. "For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to the
m. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the c
reation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse." It is our duty to repent but we will n
ot do so unless God grants repentance (2 Tim 2:25) and give us new eyes to see the truth. Without Scripture and the Ho
ly Spirit we only distort the true light God has given us in His creation. Since the Scripture declares that we suppress the
truth and make idols of all things created (Rom 1:18), so if our blindness is to be removed, it is not just the light of God w
e need (Scripture), but also new eyes to see that light (the Holy Spirit). :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by MikeH (), on: 2013/3/30 0:17
kvaughn wrote
Quote:
------------------------Total depravity only means man is lost (Luke 19:10), unspiritual by nature, and thus he is utterly impotent to recover himself from his ruined estate.
-------------------------
I have often wondered how anyone can take an extreme view of total depravity. One only has to look around to realise it
isn't true.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/3/30 1:40
Yes Mike, and to even look at the story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19 v1 onwards shows this view to be totally misguided
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Ron B (), on: 2013/4/2 19:24
Quote:
------------------------Total depravity only means man is lost (Luke 19:10), unspiritual by nature, and thus he is utterly impotent to recover himself from his ruined estate (Jo
hn 6:44, 65, Rom 8:7; Eph 2:1, 2:5; Rom 3:11; 2 Corinthians 4:4-6). In other words he is unable to do any redemptive good. Fallen man does not desir
e God, he loves darkness and hates the light (John 3:19,20) so he will not come into Christ at all except he be reborn by the Holy Spirit (John 1:13, 3:6
, John 6:37, 39, 44, 63-66; Rom 9:16).
-------------------------
I think this falls short of the way that high profile names in the Resurgence treat this topic. They constantly emphasise th
at man is 'dead' and therefore unable to hear the voice of God prior to regeneration
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/5/4 7:12
The bible clearly teaches and communicates that we are "dead" and are unable to respond without the regenerating wor
k of the Holy Spirit.
"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins"
- Ephesians 2:1
"Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)"
- Ephesians 2:5
"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forg
iven you all trespasses"
- Colossians 2:13
To be unspiritual, dead in sin or "of the flesh", then, refers to man's natural fallen condition of bondage to corruption prior
to the intervention of the Holy Spirit. In 1 Corinthinans 2, it teaches us that persons in this state cannot understand spirit
ual truths when spoken to them,until the Spirit renews them and gives them understanding.
Page 4/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by MikeH (), on: 2013/5/4 12:24
kvaughn wrote
Quote:
------------------------The bible clearly teaches and communicates that we are "dead" and are unable to respond without the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.
-------------------------
The verses you quote are written to saints, and simply state that, "You were dead, now you are alive." No-one would ar
gue with that. They do not discuss the process of moving from being dead to being alive. There is another verse that yo
u should consider: Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgm
ent: This is talking of the Spirit and it says that He will convict the world; not saints, not the regenerate, not believers, no
t the saved, but the world. How does that work?
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/5/7 6:49
hi there mike
I don't think there is any scripture that would suggest that when the spirit came down at pentacost that the whole world
was convicted of sin , ect
I think what Jesus is saying is the god will uses his holy spirit to through the preaching of the gospel and revival to make
disciples of all the nations ,bringing repentence to the world in a general scenes
I think that scripture shows us that the world ,those dead in sin
will never come to god with out the holy spirits conviction
jesus said because they do not believe in me ,,,
this seems to indicate they will never believe unless the spirit firsts convicts
god deals to each man a measurer of faith , paul said this about the faithful
I think the process of being made alive ,is regeneration ,which man cant do at all ,, I don't think that the scripture show th
at man some how plays a part in recreating him self through some self effort process
I liked the vrses from ezekel
gods said I will ,will, i will ,I will
I will take out that heart of stone and put in a heart of flesh
if we were children of disobedience ,with a spirit of the prince and the power of the air in us , with a stony heart ,enemy's
of god ,
void of the holy spirit ,,being in a natural state ,no able to receive the things of the spirit ,with the mind set on the flesh thi
nking the things of god as foolish ,,not able to come to Jesus unless the father draws us ,,,,,,,in this unregenrent state o
f lost blindness ,I don't see it as possible to choose god with out some divine intervention
weather it is regeneration ,,or some preceding gracious actions of the spirit that occour before regeneration ,or before j
ustification
god must do some thing to bridge the gap ;-) ;-) ;-)
Page 5/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/5/8 17:02
Quote:
------------------------if we were children of disobedience ,with a spirit of the prince and the power of the air in us , with a stony heart ,enemy's of god ,
void of the holy spirit ,,being in a natural state ,no able to receive the things of the spirit ,with the mind set on the flesh thinking the things of god as fool
ish ,,not able to come to Jesus unless the father draws us ,,,,,,,in this unregenrent state of lost blindness ,I don't see it as possible to choose god with o
ut some divine intervention.
-------------------------
I think that all sides of the discussion would agree, for the most part, with this statement with the exception of Gov't of G
od (Finney-ites) folks. God has and does initiate contact with man. He has set the bounds of their habitation that they wo
uld feel after Him though He is not far from any one of us. (Acts 17)
Where I think we get talking past one another sometimes is when it comes to man's response to God's ability. I cannot s
ave myself, but I can respond to God when He brings revelation of His will. Not to be overly redundant, but as Ron has q
uoted many times in these conversations, "no word from God shall be void of power." i give a short explanation of how th
is plays out in this article (http://realrevival.blogspot.com/2011/11/word-generated-faith.html) Word Generated Faith. W
hen God brings revelation to our hearts our hearts the word itself contains the grace (Divine enabling) to do what that wo
rd is saying. There is no need for God to regenerate us and then speak so we can respond. The word as it comes power
s-up our ability to respond to it. No word shall be void of power. When God speaks we can do what He says no matter h
ow depraved and far from God we may be. Our responsibility is to respond to His ability.
Regeneration is not a front end experience, but the consequence of our having been baptized into Jesus Christ by the S
pirit. It is when we are "in Christ" that we are new creatures. Some claim that a profession of faith requires regeneration,
but this is not the case. God speaks and faith comes by hearing; it is as we hear and respond rightly that the work of reg
eneration can be completed. God has chosen to call and has given us the power to answer. We have been given all the
ingredients we need to exercise our choice as to whether or not we will receive Christ. As many as received Him to them
He gave the authority to become the sons of God. etc. :-) blessings, Robert
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Ron B (), on: 2013/5/8 17:47
The issue here is not just the categoric statement of Ephesians 2 but the implications of it. It is sometimes crudely stated
that dead men cannot hear God and so the order of salvation must begin with a sovereign act of regenation. But this is c
arrying things too far? Jesus spoke to Lazarus when he was a corpse and Lazarus heard him. John 5 tells us plainly that
the dead in their graves will hear the voice of the son of God.
Ezekiel 37:5 has God speaking to the dry bones of corpses and 'things happen'. In Ezekiel 37 regeneration is not the firs
t act but the last.
(From a train midway between York and Edinburgh!)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/5/9 1:01
I heard it said once "if Jesus hadn't of called Lazarus by name all the dead around Bethany would have risen :-D
Just look at life around us. Aren't humans capable of love and acts of kindness and still un regenerate. Of course, men a
re able to choose did not the prodigal 'come to his senses'
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/5/9 8:08
hi Robert,,,just watched some of the the beating of the drums tophet ,,,,liked it thanks
I would have to say im not a Calvinist because I see think a bit different nor an arminian probable in between but closer
to Calvinism
yea the finney doctrine ,actually bothers me quite a bit
I feel according to my own experience and what I see in scripture
Page 6/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
I believe a man can also respond after being given a revelation of gods will ,or reject it it ,,,but I don't thing this is done fr
om his so called free will which is inbondage to the flesh.. I don't think his response to receive Christ ,which is a good de
cision could emanate of a natural man ,because the bible says he cant receive the things of the spirit to him it is fooli
sh
for in my flesh nothing good dwells
as you said man can respond when he has been given a revelation of his will ,,,,,this is only possible by the holy spirit ,,
I think the holy spirit comes come into to a person to such a degree and induce the man to respond ,by bending his will t
oward god and somehow releasing our will and heart from the bondage of our corruptive controlling nature ,,,,,,weather
this is a process of regeneration or justification , as an effective drawing grace ,,,or the very seeds of regenerations or ju
stification ,,(depending of your theology of the new birth )
I cant make up my mind ,,but I don't feel as if a natural fleshly carnal man can decided to choose god in that fundament
al state
and if he could it would be a half hearted double minded doubt ridden fleshly response based upon selfishness ,and go
d would never except that response or choice ,,I would consider it a filthy rag to say the least
I in all honestly believe saving faith as a gift from god that comes to us through the regeneration process , or a concepti
on process that would be like the seeds of regeneration
when I say that im holding a belief that justification and regeneration are the same
definitely god has chosen to call and he gives us the power to answer agree,,,,
but im also under to conviction that some how on those who he fore knew he presdinated , these he bestows a complete
ly effective grace and will not let go of certaint ones,,, even tho these ones did choose god he choses them first ,,and h
e is a jealous god
for he who is born of god ,by the grace of god ,he keeps him self
and the evil one does not touch him
it is a mystery
just as the crusafiction was a mystery
it was according to the forknowlage and Devine plane and pourpus
yet by wicked hands was he crucified and slayen ,,,,,, :-) blessings always to you
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/5/15 13:24
Hi bro. Gary,
I was reading recently from Acts 17:
And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times be
fore appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; 27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him,
and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: 28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certai
n also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. 29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, w
e ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device. 30 And the ti
mes of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
This is Paul in Athens and he is preaching to people that are about as dead and ignorant towards God as one can be. Y
et I notice that he states that God "hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That t
hey should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us." We
typically don't think that men can seek the Lord, but Paul, apparently is saying that God has set things up sovereignly in
such a way as to put man in position to be able to seek after and find Him. This is His providence. He gave them a meas
ure of light, but they rejected that light.
Paul comes along and provides a greater measure of light along with a reminder that God has already given them light a
Page 7/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
nd they are in a state of rejecting it. Though God has set them up to seek and find Him, and though He be not far from a
ny of them, the whole city was wholly given to idolatry. Why? Jesus said it:
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their
deeds were evil. (John 3:19)
Our key word here is "loved" (agapao). Agape love is expressed in spite of opposition. When God loves us with agape lo
ve it is expressed in the cross of Christ, the ultimate sacrifice for a people that were completely unworthy. When men ex
press agape love towards sin and the world it is a love in spite of the circumstances to an object completely unworthy of
that kind of reckless love. Men love darkness even after it has ruined them and left them for dead; they just keep on lovi
ng it. It is a conscious decision in which the person at the time knows that what they are doing does not make sense, but
they choose to do it anyway. This is where our reasoning comes into play and we are accountable for how we rationalize
these things.
The Holy Spirit came to convince the world of sin, righteousness and judgment to come. Some people will not be convin
ced because they are in a state of agape with their sin. They are loving it unconditionally. This is the epitomy of idolatry
because only God deserves our devotion like that; expressed towards Him and our fellow man. You cannot force a pers
on to love you. They have to decide that on their own. If I force my wife to love me it is not love. Love has to be offered w
illingly or it is of little value. God wants man to see that it makes sense for us to love Him because He first loved us. This
is what Romans 12:1-2 is about. It is "reasonable" to love God and give ourselves to Him. I don't see this as God reachin
g inside of man and adjusting His love dials, but rather setting before him convincing arguements and truth (light), with th
e hope that they will respond reasonably. If man will do what makes sense, he will do well; if not, sin lies at the door.
He has provided us with all things pertaining to life and godliness. The question is, what will we choose to love? Wil men
go on loving darkness in spite of God's providence or will he... feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from eve
ry one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being. Blessings. Robert
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/6/8 9:50
Wow I'm quite surprised that some on here do not agree/believe in Total Depravity. Even the Father of Arminianism Jac
ob Arminius believed as Calvinists do on the subject.
Arminians wholeheartedly affirm the total depravity of man.
Jacob Arminius writes,
“IN the state of Primitive Innocence, man had a mind endued with a clear understanding of heavenly light and truth conc
erning God, and his works and will, as far as was sufficient for the salvation of man and the glory of God; he had a heart
imbued with ‘righteousness and true holiness,’ and with a true and saving love of good; and powers abundantly qualified
or furnished perfectly to fulfill the law which God had imposed on him. This admits easily of proof, from the description o
f the image of God, after which man is said to have been created, (Gen 1:26-27) from the law divinely imposed on him,
which had a promise and a threat appended to it, (Gen 2:17) and lastly from the analogous restoration of the same imag
e in Christ Jesus. (Eph 4:24, Col 3:10)
But man was not so confirmed in this state of innocence, as to be incapable of being moved, by the representation prese
nted to him of some good, (whether it was of an inferior kind and relating to this animal life, or of a superior-kind and rela
ting to spiritual life) inordinately and unlawfully to look upon it and to desire it, and of his own spontaneous as well as fre
e motion, and through a preposterous desire for that good, to decline from the obedience which had been prescribed to
him. Nay, having turned away from the light of his own mind and his chief good, which is God, or, at least, having turned
towards that chief good not in the manner in which he ought to have done, and besides having turned in mind and heart
towards an inferior good, he transgressed the command given to him for life. By this foul deed, he precipitated himself fr
om that noble and elevated condition into a state of the deepest infelicity, which is under the dominion of sin. For ‘to wh
om any one yields himself a servant to obey,’ (Rom 6:16) and ‘of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in
bondage,’ and is his regularly assigned slave. (2 Pet 2:19)
In this state, the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it i
s also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost. And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they be assisted by g
race, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace. For Christ has said, ‘Without me ye ca
n do nothing.’ St. Augustine, after having diligently meditated upon each word in this passage, speaks thus: ‘Christ does
Page 8/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
not say, without me ye can do but Little; neither does He say, without me ye can do any Arduous Thing, nor without me
ye can do it with difficulty. But he says, without me ye can do Nothing! Nor does he say, without me ye cannot complete
any thing; but without me ye can do Nothing.’ That this may be made more manifestly to appear, we will separately con
sider the mind, the affections or will, and the capability, as contra-distinguished from them, as well as the life itself of an
unregenerate man.”
Arminius further writes,
“THIS is my opinion concerning the free-will of man: In his primitive condition as he came out of the hands of his creator,
man was endowed with such a portion of knowledge, holiness and power, as enabled him to understand, esteem, consi
der, will, and to perform the true good, according to the commandment delivered to him. Yet none of these acts could h
e do, except through the assistance of Divine Grace. But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by hi
mself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good; but it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed
in his intellect, affections or will, and in all his powers, by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit, that he may be qualified ri
ghtly to understand, esteem, consider, will, and perform whatever is truly good. When he is made a partaker of this rege
neration or renovation, I consider that, since he is delivered from sin, he is capable of thinking, willing and doing that whi
ch is good, but yet not without the continued aids of Divine Grace.”
Dr. Brian Abasciano and Martin Glynn, President and Vice-President respectively of the Society of Evangelical Arminian
s, write thus concerning the depravity of man:
“HUMANITY was created in the image of God, good and upright, but fell from its original sinless state through willful diso
bedience, leaving humanity sinful, separated from God, and under the sentence of divine condemnation … Total depravi
ty does not mean that human beings are as bad as they could be, but that sin impacts every part of a person’s being an
d that people now have a sinful nature with a natural inclination toward sin, making every human being fundamentally co
rrupt at heart … Therefore, human beings are not able to think, will, nor do anything good in and of themselves, includin
g merit favor from God, save ourselves from the judgment and condemnation of God that we deserve for our sin, or eve
n believe the gospel … If anyone is to be saved, God must take the initiative.”
The Opinions of the Remonstrants:
“MAN does not have saving faith of himself, nor out of the powers of his free will, since in the state of sin he is able of hi
mself and by himself neither to think, will, or do any good (which would indeed to be saving good, the most prominent of
which is saving faith). It is necessary therefore that by God in Christ through His Holy Spirit he be regenerated and rene
wed in intellect, affections, will, and in all his powers, so that he might be able to understand, reflect upon, will and carry
out the good things which pertain to salvation. We hold, however, that the grace of God is not only the beginning but als
o the progression and the completion of every good, so much so that even the regenerate himself is unable to think, will,
or do the good, or to resist any temptations to evil, apart from that preceding or prevenient, awakening, following and co
operating grace. Hence all good works and actions which anyone by cogitation is able to comprehend are to be ascribe
d to the grace of God… The will in the fallen state, before calling, does not have the power and the freedom to will any s
aving good.”
Roger Olson, author of Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities, and Against Calvinism, writes that,
“ARMINIANS together with Calvinists affirm total depravity because of the fall of humanity in Adam and its inherited cons
equence of a corrupted nature in bondage to sin."
Even Calvinists Peterson and Williams acknowledge that Arminians hold to the doctrine of total depravity:
“ARMINIANS and Calvinists alike believe in total depravity: because of the fall, every aspect of human nature is tainted
by sin.”
John Wesley, commenting on Genesis 6:5, openly taught that,
“CONCERNING man in his natural state unassisted by the grace of God… every imagination of the thoughts of his heart
is still evil, ‘only evil,’ and that ‘continually.’”
Arminians thus wholeheartedly affirm the following definition put forth by Calvinist Charles Ryrie:
Page 9/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
“BECAUSE of the effects of the fall, that original relationship of fellowship with God was broken and man’s entire nature
was polluted. As a result no one can do anything, even good things, that can gain soteriological merit in God’s sight. Th
erefore, we may concisely define total depravity as the unmeritoriousness of man before God because of the corruption
of original sin.
The concept of total depravity does not mean (1) that depraved people cannot or do not perform actions that are good in
either man’s or God’s sight. But no such action can gain favor with God for salvation. Neither does it mean (2) that falle
n man has no conscience which judges between good and evil for him. But that conscience has been affected by the fal
l so that it cannot be a safe and reliable guide. Neither does it mean (3) that people indulge in every form of sin or in any
sin to the greatest extent possible.
Positively, total depravity means that the corruption has extended to all aspects of man’s nature, to his entire being; and
total depravity means that because of that corruption there is nothing man can do to merit saving favor with God.
Leading Calvinist John MacArthur asserts that,
“THE contemporary idea today is that there’s some residual good left in the sinner. As this progression came from Pela
gianism to Semi-Pelagianism, and then came down to some contemporary Arminianism, maybe got defined a little more
carefully by Wesley, who was a sort of, ah, um, messed up Calvinist, because Wesley wanted to give all the glory to Go
d, but as you well know, but he wanted to find in man some place where man could initiate salvation on his own will… S
o that the sinner, un-aided by the Holy Spirit, must make the first move. That’s essentially Arminian theology: The sinner
, un-aided, must make the first move.”
Bro. Robert Wurtz II wrote in his response that "When God brings revelation to our hearts our hearts the word itself cont
ains the grace (Divine enabling) to do what that word is saying. There is no need for God to regenerate us and then spe
ak so we can respond. The word as it comes powers-up our ability to respond to it. No word shall be void of power. Whe
n God speaks we can do what He says no matter how depraved and far from God we may be. Our responsibility is to re
spond to His ability."
Ok so here is what I like to refer to it as "the crutch of it all" as far as unregenerated man being able to respond to God in
salvation.
Non-reformed folk agree as does Robert that there MUST be a DIVINE ENABLING to do what the "word" says or somet
hing that "powers-up our ability to respond" as Robert coined it. So what exactly is this divine enabling or this "poweringup"? If your not a Calvinist then it all "Crutch's" on PREVENIENT GRACE that is given to "All" men under the non-reform
ed view. Prevenient grace is this divine enabling or powering up that FREE'S THE WILL from its Total Depravity and allo
ws for man to choose/reject God. It's put's man in a Neutral state allowing him to so call "Freely choose".
Sorry but for me I find no biblical support for this so-called Prevenient Grace. Here is something I found interesting on th
e subject:
The term “prevenient grace” – a distinctly Arminian doctrine – refers to a universal grace which precedes and enables th
e first stirrings of a good will or inclination toward God and it explains the extent or degree to which the Holy Spirit influen
ces a person prior to their coming to faith in Christ. The Arminian, together with the Calvinist, affirms total human moral i
nability and utter helplessness of the natural man in spiritual matters and the absolute necessity for supernatural preveni
ent grace if there is to be any right response to the gospel. Like Calvinists, Arminians agree that, apart from an act of gra
ce on God's part, no one would willingly come to Christ. This point is important to distinguish so as to not confuse Classi
cal Arminianism with either Finneyism or Semi-Pelagianism, which both reject the need for prevenient grace.
So Christ's redemption is universal in a provisional sense but conditional as to its application to any individual, i.e. those
who do not resist the grace offered to them through the cross and the gospel. Prevenient grace, according to Arminians,
convicts, calls (outwardly), enlightens and enables before conversion and makes conversion and faith possible. While C
alvinists believe the inward call to the elect is irrevocable and effectually brings sinners to faith in Christ, the Arminian, o
n the other hand understand God's grace as ultimately resistible. In short, they affirm that prevenient grace, which is give
n to all men at some point in their life, temporarily brings the sinner out of his/her condition of total depravity and puts the
Page 10/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
m in a neutral state of free will wherein the natural man can either accept or reject Christ.
Prevenient grace defined as follows by "Wesley's Order of Salvation":
"Human beings are totally incapable of responding to God without God first empowering them to have faith. This empow
erment is known as "Prevenient Grace." Prevenient Grace doesn't save us but, rather, comes before anything that we d
o, drawing us to God, making us WANT to come to God, and enabling us to have faith in God. Prevenient Grace is Univ
ersal, in as much as all humans receive it, regardless of their having heard of Jesus. It is manifested in the deep-seated
desire of most humans to know God."
Furthermore, in reply to the orthodox assertion that the sinners' generation of faith itself implies merit the Arminian will of
ten respond by affirming that the human will, aided by prevenient grace, is free, even in accepting pardoning grace; that
though this acceptance is no more meritorious than a beggar’s acceptance of an offered fortune, yet it is accepted freely
, and with the full power of rejection, and is none the less grace for that. In other words, every sinner determines for hims
elf, whether or not he will be saved, and thus determines his own election based on whether or not he responds positivel
y to the gospel offered to him by God while under the influence of prevenient grace. The Arminian contends or reasons t
hat anything else would be unfair of God.
Response:
While the example of the beggar may sound reasonable at first glance, I propose we look more closely at these concept
s. What are the similarities and differences of Arminian theology with orthodoxy on the concept of saving grace?
Arminian Similarities with Reformed Theology:
(1) All men need to be saved from God's wrath through the atoning work of Christ
(2) Both Reformed and Arminians believe, that, without the grace of God, man is totally incapable of responding to the G
ospel. In this both positions are in total agreement.
Arminian Differences with Reformed Theology is in its understanding of the meaning of grace:
Let’s observe at least three ways in which prevenient grace sharply differs from the monergistic view:
(1) The Arminian doctrine of "prevenient grace" is exhaustively universal; meaning, it is extended to all people regardles
s of whether or not they have heard the gospel. This appears to be in direct contradiction to the Bible, for instance the ap
ostle's question: "how can one be believe if they have not heard?" and "...faith comes from hearing the message, and th
e message is heard through the word of Christ." - Rom 10:14-17. This view, then, affirms (or at least make room for) the
idea that the gospel is not cognitively necessary for one to be saved. In spite of the overwhelming case made by Paul ag
ainst the Gentiles in Romans 1-3, some Arminians believe that if a person is faithful, that is, responds believingly to, the
degree of revelation made to them then God will accept that faith and impute it to them as righteousness, whether or not
that have actually heard the gospel. This is, of course, purely speculative and not derived from revelation.
(2) Prevenient grace is not effectual but rather renders the sinner "neutral" – able to decide for themselves whether they
will accept or reject Christ. First, since we must always go to Scripture as our authority in matters of faith (especially mat
ers of this magnitude) we must seriously inquire whether there is any biblical evidence whatsoever to substantiate the Ar
minian dogma that there is a state of being that God places sinners into that is neither regenerate nor unregenerate, an i
n-between state which is neither corrupt nor good. It is imperative that this “state” is substantiated biblically, not merely
by unaided speculation or logical necessity. Where does the Bible say that when God's gives grace to people they beco
me partly regenerate but not fully regenerate?
Assuming for the sake of argument that such a state was shown to exist, more questions quickly arise. If, as the result of
prevenient grace, our desires are suddenly "neutral" what, then, causes a man to choose one way or another? In Jesus
eyes, a person’s decisions and acts are inevitably determined by their inward condition, “A good tree bears good fruit, a
bad tree bears bad fruit,” to think otherwise is impossible. What then of a tree that is neither good nor bad, what determi
nes its fruit? You simply cannot have a will that doesn't care (or is disinclined) and simply believes or rejects Christ by ch
ance. To argue such would imply that God elects his people based upon their chance selection of Him. On the contrary,
people believe in Christ because they see the awfulness of their sin, their great need of a Savior and the beauty, truth an
d excellency of the gospel of Christ.
Only the spiritual regenerate man can see understand and see goodness in the gospel (1 Cor 2:14), an impossible supp
Page 11/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
osition for one with a unrenewed heart. A blind man cannot see unless his eyes are opened. Likewise, those blind spiritu
ally can only see if they are healed and when they are healed, they see. It is both biblical and self-evident that we alway
s choose something based on who we are by nature – an apple tree will never produce grapes.
Moreover, we should take notice that Jesus tells us many times in Scripture why some do not believe. "You do not believ
e because you are not my sheep" (John 10). The order here is of great importance. Jesus does not say, “You are not m
y sheep because you do not believe,” thereby making belief a condition of becoming a sheep. Rather, he says the exact
opposite, "You do not believe because you are not my sheep." To believe therefore, far from being a condition, is the sig
n (or fruit) that one is already a sheep. So too, Jesus speaking to some of the Jews said, "Whoever is of God hears the
words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." The nature of the person determines th
e choice he makes. And who exactly is “of God”? Jesus answers clearly in his prayer to the Father in John 17: 9 when h
e says, "I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours."
The Father has set apart certain persons for Himself and, in His prayer here, Jesus is seen to only pray for them, while s
imultaneously excluding others who were not "given" to Him.
Ironically, the Arminian believes in compatibilism prior to prevenient grace ... meaning that man makes necessary moral
choices based on his nature. Yet after prevenient grace, he believes that man is freed from nature (without being given a
new one), yet no biblical evidence is forthcoming to show the source of this doctrine. In other words, prior to God's grace
the Arminian, like the Calvinists see the impotence of the human will, but when grace comes, he switches gears by spec
ulating that man now does not choose according to nature (as before) but is now granted a libertarian free will, i.e. that
man can choose otherwise regardless of who he is by nature. Baffling, since never once does the Bible give a shred of e
vidence that people are given a temporary libertarian free will. Instead, returning again to Jesus’ words, we hear, “Make
a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad” (Matt. 12:33).
The doctrine of Arminian prevenient grace would therefore appear to have its origin in the idea that God must be “fair.” A
rminians logically conclude that since God is good he must treat those opposed to and in rebellion against Him with abs
olute equity. In order to preserve this definition of “fairness,” the Arminian declares that God must give all people an equ
al chance. However, God is not obligated to give children of the devil (John 8:44) any chance at all if He does not want.
God would have been perfectly just in doing to man what he did to the fallen angels, for whom He did not die. And if God
could justly let all mankind go to hell (which we all agree) then why would it be unjust of God to forgive the debts of som
e, passing over the others? Does not Jesus Himself tell the parable of the landowner which ends by saying "Don't I have
the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?" (Matt 20:15).
And regardless, if this is the case, then why would God be pleased with a choice of a person that is indifferent about the
choice, someone that does not love the object of its choice? If the motive for believing the gospel is indifferent, so is the
act ... If we do not desire God, choice is either impossible or it is by mere chance.
Again, the Bible never teaches in a clear and open manner the concept of prevenient grace. The above response is, ther
efore, simply to further render absurd this untenable belief. Arminians awkwardly force this on the Scripture in order to h
old their system together. This alone should lead us to reject it. Unaided reason should NEVER be the foundation of our
theological insights, especially one of such critical importance.
(3) Arminians hold that while still unregenerate (or partly regenerate as they would have it) some can and will improve o
n that grace. In other words, God's prevenient grace takes us part of the way to salvation (makes us partly regenerate) b
ut man's will (or nature) does the rest (or completes it). Given this were the case, if all human beings have this prevenien
t grace at some point in their life, consider, if two persons hear the same gospel, why does one man believe and not the
other? What makes them to differ? Obviously it was something in nature which made the difference, not grace. From thi
s we surmise that it wasn't prevenient grace that makes these two persons to differ from one another, but rather, someth
ing in the man who made use of prevenient grace that made them to differ. Simply put, if we desire to believe in Christ,
where did this good desire come from? Grace or nature? The Arminian may say "grace". If so, why did not the one who r
ejected him also have this much grace? Since grace is not what ultimately sets the two men apart it must be something
else.
In other words, one man somehow had the natural or innate ability to create a right thought, generate a right affection, or
originate a right volition toward Christ... and if these thoughts were themselves autonomous and independent of this pre
venient grace that led to their salvation, springing from the heart of natural man, then this is quite a troublesome doctrine
. This leads us to ask, why do some men make use of prevenient grace and not others? The Arminian, therefore, still se
Page 12/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
es the grace of God as only a penultimate cause of salvation while the sinners' faith is what is ultimate, the sine qua non
of his salvation. It can therefore be demonstrated that Arminian prevenient grace does not teach salvation by grace alon
e but salvation by grace plus nature. So whether or not God extends prevenient grace you still have the same result: on
e man from his unregenerate will generates belief, another man from his unregenerate will does not generate belief and
rejects Christ. Does one have a natural humility lacking in the other? Is not humility itself a gift of grace? The Apostle say
s, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10).
In the case of believing the gospel, one person is making a morally good choice and the other a morally bad choice. In f
act, any way to look at Arminian prevenient grace, it comes down to one person's internal principle of merit that ultimatel
y makes him to differ from others. This then leads to boasting that they are unlike others who don't have faith. But again,
even more importantly, prevenient grace has no biblical support and this is what makes the position untenable. Arminian
s are making the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is the effect
ual gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble. I guess Arminians believe that some beggars are more equal tha
n others.
In the end the problem with Arminian prevenient grace is that it is guided by unaided human logic and rationality rather t
han the Scriptures.The Scriptures testify that the man without the Spirit cannot understand the things of God (1 Cor 2:14
). Even with prevenient grace theoretically putting humanity in a neutral position, we would still lack the quickening Spirit
to give us what we need. How is it then that the natural man can understand or desire God independent of such quickeni
ng and renewing grace? Can a blind man see prior to his eyes being opened? Can a man with a heart of stone love and
desire God before His heart is made flesh? How can an ox desire flesh to eat ...can water rise above its source? We beli
eve that salvation is of the Lord from beginning to end. He deserves all the glory. While we were still helpless Christ died
for us and His death purchased everything we need to be saved, including our regeneration. For an unregenerate man
would not ever desire the things of God on his own. If God's grace does not save us then man still ultimately decides ba
sed on some principle within, either good or evil.
Lastly, I want to make clear that I am not here trying to show that Arminians are unsaved. On the contrary, I write this in t
he hope it will raise awareness of the inconsistency among our Arminian brethren. It is true that God often saves us in s
pite of our bad or inconsistent theology, or else grace would not be grace. In fact, He saved all of us in spite of ourselves
and our incorrect views. If we know or understand anything it is because God chose to reveal it to us (Matt 16:17). But w
e must make clear that Arminian theology is not orthodox in its view of grace, since it has no biblical support to speak of.
(Obviously only one of these positions can be true so one or the other is orthodox). But their inconsistency is such that I
believe most are sincere believers. For example, that the Arminian affirms, together with us, that they justly deserve the
wrath of God, save in the mercy of Jesus Christ alone, means that perhaps we need to give them some slack. But we sh
ould never let up or grow weary on challenging them to see the deeply flawed problem in their theology of grace, since
God has made it abundantly clear that He saves us by grace ALONE.
Consider: to the degree that we think wrong thoughts about God and how He saves us, to that same degree we are guilt
y of idolatry and, in this God is not pleased. So we must declare such an ineffectual view of grace to be wrong, but at the
same time, also see it as a battle taking place inside the camp. It is serious enough to warrant a fierce debate that may c
ontinue to the end of the age because the idea of prevenient grace is really just a lesser degree of the same error as se
mi-pelagianism (that is, it is synergistic: i.e. that faith is produced by our unregenerated human nature) and still gives a
man too much hope in himself and his own natural abilities. Of the true believer, Paul says that they worship in the Spirit,
glory in Christ Jesus alone and have no confidence in the flesh (Phil 3)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/6/8 14:52
hi kavaugn
I hope your not talking about me brother,,because im a believer in a total an utter satanic depravity ,,that only gods elec
t will escape through gospel grace ,,I don't believe in a common prevenial grace given to all men ,that if they respond we
ll to they will be justified ,of given the opportunity to be saved ,,,
drawing grace is afresh spiritual grace given only to whom god chooses ,,it not of him who will or him who runs but of go
d who shows mercy ,,but in my eyes ,,I see an effectual grace and a non effectual given precisely by god to only certain
ones he chooses ,,for certain reasons that only god him self fully understands ,I have my idea on why and how ,,but I do
n't think it is possible in this life to be sure ,,or to be able to explain gods ways in these areas of theology ,,other wise we
would be sourvern god our selfs
Page 13/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
blessings
;-) ;-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/6/8 22:46
Kevin wrote,Wow I'm quite surprised that some on here do not agree/believe in Total Depravi
ty. Even the Father of Arminianism Jacob Arminius believed as Calvinists do on the subje
ct.
i do believe in it too! but not in the orthodox calvinist way. Its easy to cut and paste bits and pieces that are out of context
. you also assume a lot my friend of people here
Your very last 2 paragraphs show how rigid you are in your views, I see the in consistancy in so called 'reformed theolog
y' from the past century till now. and you Kevin seem to be on a crusade to ignore any one else who differs from you!
I have a Moslem friend who i debate with, he considers himself a "Salaf" of islam,( ie one who sticks to the origional had
diths of mohammed and the early moslems) he is on a mission to reform both Christians and fellow muslims to the 'Right
' view.
:-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/9 17:12
My view is simply that we are all born into this world in Adam, and are by nature the children of wrath. This means we
are born, effectively, children of the Devil.
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God,
neither he that loveth not his brother. (1 John 3:10)
This is why all human beings that have not been born again need to be born again. The Born Again experience (regener
ation) comes as a consequence of our responding rightly to the Holy Spirit as He deals with us by means of the Uncorru
ptable Seed (the Word of God).
This is right response is to the person of Christ. It is not an agreeing with facts or points of doctrine, or the recital of a pra
yer. The Holy Spirit has drawn all men to Christ since He was lifted up (on the Cross). But men do always resist the Holy
Spirit. When one leaves off resisting and truly surrenders to Christ in faith, they are in position to be Baptized into the Bo
dy of Christ by the Spirit. All that Christ accomplished on the Cross is then available to them. They are "In Christ" as Ne
w Creatures, the former things pass away and all is made new.
The question is simply this, "can a person respond to God?" Some may alter is, "Does a person desire to respond to Go
d?" And if so was it their own desire or was it God causing us to desire? My view is that we can respond to God when H
e speaks to us or deals with us. Does a person desire to respond rightly to God? That depends on the person. Some do
and some do not. Some will receive way more revelation than they need and will not respond. Others will respond with
much less revelation. Most Calvinists will say that the desire in the one that responded rightly was planted of God. I do n
ot agree with this. I do not understand the mechanics of desire and nor do I think anyone else does. It is a mystery. Here
is a little something I have written along this line that may be helpful.
To God Be The Glory
RW
One of the indictments on man is that "none seeks after God... they have all turned aside after their own way." Our resp
onsibility is to respond rightly to God when He comes to do a work. It is God's work. He is the author and finisher of our f
aith. Our responsibility is to cooperate with Him. Stephen adds to this point in Acts 7 when he told the religious leaders t
hat they did always resist the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is resistible and will not always strive with man (Genesis 6).
To answer the vain hope that man could ever boast and take credit for their salvation, Jesus gives us a right perspective
; "So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, 'We are unworthy servants; we have onl
y done our duty.'" (Luke 17:10 NIV) All we can ever do is what is expected of us. I think this reality is blurred by the times
we live in that things everything should be praised and rewarded, even common things such as acting civilized or being
a good citizen (for example). Some things in life never deserve honor, they are "our duty" as human beings. Obeying our
Creator is "our duty". God gets the glory for everything.
Page 14/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
An example of God choosing and man choosing is found in Deuteronomy 7:6 and Joshua 24:15:
For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the fac
e of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession. (Deut 7:6)
" And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fat
hers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me a
nd my house, we will serve the Lord." (Joshua 24:15)
God had chosen Israel, now Israel had a choice. They could respond to Him in obedience and faith or they could perish l
ike the rest of the nations. God gave Israel and the Gentiles the ability to choose. Otherwise, responsibility without ability
= blame-ability. In other words, He could blame us and hold us accountable for something we could not do. God said thr
ough Isaiah, "All day long have I stretched forth my hand unto a wicked and rebellious people." This is God's initiative. M
any Israelites died and were lost. They heard the message but refused to mix it with faith the writer to the Hebrews expla
ined. In time Abraham's seed came to be viewed as God's means of Divine Election. John the Baptist said differently. G
od could raise up stones to Abraham, but He didn't want stones; He wanted men and women. Many are called, but few a
re chosen. Of those that are called and chosen, even fewer are called and chosen and faithful. (Revelation 17:14) We h
ave a choice to make. Will we or will we not stop resisting the Holy Spirit? If we do God will do a great work, if not He ha
s already said He will not always strive.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/6/10 1:24
:-) hi Robert I didn't respond to your last post toward me because I didn't want to drag a conversation in to something t
hat might be sinfull ,,,,, I just wanted to comment on how you said god wouldn't ask us to to do something we can do or
something he wouldnt give us the power to do
I think that paul actual taught that even tho god gave the law of moses and the ten commandments' and said obey this ,
he said that the pourpus of the law was not that israle would or could perfectly obey all the laws ,,,but the principle behin
d the law was to show them as sinfull and in need of the Christ ,,,paul made it clear that in the flesh he could not do the
good that he new he should do ,but the evil which he did not want to do ,that he did,,,,,that even the law triggered of and
produced all manner of evil desire in him ,,,,
so he could not keep the law perfectly as he was commanded ,there for god asked him do do something he knew he co
uld not do
I think we see this sort of thing in scripture in more then one place
I see this princaple active in the new covernet
god commands us to repent and forsake or sins ,,knowing too well we cant unless he causes us to ,he asks us to believ
e ,knowing we cant unless he gives us the gift of faith ,,,he asks us to be holy ,,knowing we cant unless he sanctifies us
he asks us to endure till the end knowing we cant unless he keeps us
he tells us do do all manner of things ,,knowing that as he said with out me you can do nothing
this principle is applied to the very first reaction we have to gods spirit and revalation ,,,,,,,,he induces the response in th
e very first
there is no good in our flesh ,,that is in me nothing good dwels ,we don't respond rightly to gods spirit in our flesh ,at the
very beginning of our interaction with god
it is a very good thing to respond to gods spirit ,but paul said no good thing is in me that is in my flesh ,,that response m
ust come not from us but from a renovated inerman or the very seeds of a new man ,,,,and that must be gods work ,,,,,,,,
Page 15/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
,having said that ,,only then can god get all the glory ,,,,we can never say but god we did respond rightly to you so realy
we must in some way deserve some of your grace ,,and we must deserve in some little way to be in heaven ,,,,we aren't
as bad as the others who didn't respond ,,,,,,god must get all the glory
:-D :-D
brother I never want to come to a place where I think my response was not born out of grace ,but that came from me th
at is in my flesh :hammer: :hammer: have you got a helmet I could borrow brother :lol:
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/10 8:46
No trouble here dear brother :-), I don't mind at all engaging in these conversations. Iron sharpens iron.
Quote:
------------------------"so he could not keep the law perfectly as he was commanded ,there for god asked him do do something he knew he could not do"
-------------------------
I am often challenged by Paul's testimony in Philippians:
... concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. (Phil 3:10)
The Law did indeed expose the law of sin that was in Paul's members, prior to his regeneration. But his testimony was th
at he was blameless as pertaining to the righteousness of the Law. I understand also that he was the chief of sinners, bu
t his testimony also was that he commited such sins against Christ and the Church, "ignorantly and in unbelief."
Quote:
------------------------it is a very good thing to respond to gods spirit ,but paul said no good thing is in me that is in my flesh ,,that response must come not from us but from
a renovated inerman or the very seeds of a new man ,,,,and that must be gods work
-------------------------
I think that this concept is really one that is arrived at by logical deduction. If I do anything that is "good" then it must hav
e been the work of God in me. In Isaiah 7;16 we have this passing statement:
For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of
both her kings.
A child can come to know to choose good over evil. I think we err when we suggest we cannot obey God. I think we err
again when we obey God and think we are good people as a result. A person needs to be Born Again rather if they have
been obeying the commandments since their youth or not. Institutional law cannot alter a person's constitutional nature.
What so many of these conversations amount to is that if we say that we obeyed God then somehow we are robbing Go
d of the glory He deserves; so we must say that it was God that obeyed God for us so that God will be glorified. How can
God be glorified by Him obeying Himself for me? That would be like me feeling loved because I loved myself for my wife
in her stead. It's like were trying to do all kinds of wierd gymnastics with our theology to try and make sure we are not abl
e to do anything we could take credit for. But Jesus already answered this, "When you have done these things say we ar
e unprofitable servants and have done only our duty." That, to me, is how we deal with God getting the glory. "I am an u
nprofitable servant and I deserve nothing."
The danger we have in exalting inability is that folk simply shift into a perpetual state of indifference. It happened just pri
or to the Second Great Awakening here in the US. The attitude became, "When God gets ready to regenerate me... He'll
Page 16/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
do it..., but until then I'm just going to keep on doing my own thing." CGF, as Tozer once said, came along and broke loo
se the log-jam that this type of thinking caused. He got things moving again. God and man were at a stalemate.
If we can lay down all of our doctrines and not feel compelled to tow all the doctrinal and denominational lines, the word
of God can become very straightforward and plain to us. I doubt very seriously that Paul ever looked at a crowd and won
dered, "Who might the elect be, hmmm, lets see...." No, he preached so as to expect every person that heard to respon
d to the Gospel. From Mar's Hill to Ephesus he expected men to respond to the Gospel. Why? Because God once overl
ooked innorance, but now calls all men everywhere to repent. We have to stop resisting the Holy Spirit (as Stephen said
). That is very easy to do, in one sense. Stop striving with God and just give in.
No prisoner ever yet congratulated himself for making it to the jail station because he stopped running and resisting. He
knows he was apprehended. Paul said he was apprehended of God. (Phil. 3:12) And for all that God has done to secure
our salvation there is yet one thing that I must do- "receive." The old Calvinists would say that this would constitute "work
s" because if I am receiving I am working. Really? But that is the lengths to which these things can be taken. I have to re
spond rightly to God. He has made all the provision I need- given me all the grace necessary- now I have to decide to st
op resisting and start receiving. If that one tiny, ity bity, incy, bitsy little miniscule decision exalts me worthy of all the glor
y that belongs to God then someone must be living in a parallel universe, because that does not jibe in this one. It make
s nonsense out of the most common ways in which we view life. Nothing in our lives do we approach with this type logic.
:-)
As for helmets dear brother, I think we all have one on these days. 8-) Blessings, Robert
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/6/10 10:49
brother you've said a lot ,I don't think I will be able to answer all of your points ,due to my bad spelling and sloooooooww
ww typing skills :-P
I think what paul is saying ,is all the out ward laws I kept ,I didn't steel I didn't lie I didn't commit adultry and idolatry ,I did
n't bare false witness ,he was blameless when it come to all the out would laws he appeared as righteous as a jew coul
d be ,,,,but deep in the heart where it mattered ,the law was showing him that he had all manner of evil desire like hate
and maby covertus,,,,,,,,,I herd zac poonan say it was covertus that was in him
never the less he made all the sacrifices nessasary to cover the sin in the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of hef
ers did the rest so no speak but like he wrote in Hebrews ,his conscience was not clean
he was as righteous as a fleshly man could be ,,,but still never pleased god because it was self righteousness ,and not t
he righteousness of god by faith .....
I realises I child can come to know a standard of good and evil but the child is still in the flesh and he like paul said abou
t a man under the law does the evil he does not want to do ,and the good that he knows about he cant perform form ,be
cause of the weakness of the flesh
:-) brother I think we err when we as an unregenerate think we can obey god in the flesh and be justified by works done
in the flesh ,,im not sure if you were speaking about a natural man obeying god ,or a regenerate man ,,,,,I believe a rege
nerate man can obey god ,,but with struggle and growth in self control, and sanctification
I think in ezekial it seems to me to be clear ,that god says
that he will cleanse ,,he will take out the old evil heart of stone replace it with one that works ,and put his spirit in the peo
ple ,,,,and that the consequences is that ,,,,I will cause you to walk in my statutes and judgments and you will be carful to
do them ,,,,,, so obedience to gods law comes from god not the flesh of man ,and he is the one at work in a soul ,,,as pa
ul said not I but the grace of god in me ,,,not I but Christ who is in me
im not at all sure what a Calvinist teaches ,,iv never met one my self ,iv never been to a reformend church more then on
ce ,, iv only herd man like paul washer and others preach ,,,,,,but over the years have spent much time in the bible ,som
e days up to 6 hours meditating of books of the bibles particularly the letters of paul ,,
so I was never in doctrinated by reformed theology but more so pentacostal and carsamatic in the beginning of my wal
Page 17/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
k
iknow it sounds proud brother I feel that is what I discovered in the bible and it seems to be taught in a similar way by
Calvinists
im not saying brother that if you say you obey god you are robing god of glory ,,I realises the importants of obedience ,,,,
im just saying true obedience that is excepted by god through us, comes from a reborn spirit ,and not the fleshly carnal
mind or the natural man , and happens because of gods spirual works ,mans fleshly works ,as good as what the latter w
orks seem
and brother I don't feel that a im saying that it is god obeaying god not I
I think I would not even say that within the context of jesus obeying god
brother I don't honestly feel that my want for the glory of god in all things has caused me to interpret the bible and twist s
cripture ,,but on the contrary ,, the way I see the scripture just so happens ,I realised to give god all the credit and stop
my mouth from even the slightest possibility of boasting ,or receiving even one gram of credit ,,,it was and is a joyfully hu
mbling experience for me to understand it in this way ,I see it as far from a contradiction as the east is from the west ,,
,im just thankfull an satisfied ,,,,I don't want any credit for responding to god anyways
:-D :-P :-P brother I understand that people would abuse this and say well I cant do anything its up to god ,so ill keep
on sinning
but look at what the emphisis of free will can do as well ,,and can give birth pleagisim
an doctrine can be abused ,,,,look at the doctrine of faith how it been over emphasized and how its abused
I personally don't teach a lot on this ,and only when the spirit wills I believe ,,,,,,,the same as election and predestinatio
n ,,,there is a time and place to teach and talk about thoses things
mans responsibility to repent and believed should in my opinion be taught more often ,,,,,,I believe in a balance
I think of the crucifixion ,,it was god the father who was responsible to crushed his son ,according to his divine plan he p
rovide a lamb ,,but at the same time he was crucified and slain by wicked hands ,and man was fully responsible ,,it is the
same delema if I can use that word as a figure of speech
brother iv never been a member of any denomination so I don't toe any of there lines ,,iv not even been a member of a n
on denoimation church ,,,but im a little fond to say the least of the open brethren here in my town ,,,tho I wished that we
ren't cesasinists ,,I love all the gifts of the holy spirit toungs as well
I don't think I would either sit there wondering who is elect and who is not ,,when I witness in the spirit and see the spirit
working in some people I do allways hope and believe they are elect othere wise my prayers would be in vain ,,and my f
aith would suffer in prayer ,,I know we must believe
I don't think that paul thought that every one who herd his message would believe the gospel ,I think his experience woul
d have taught him that it wouldn't be that sucsesfull ,,there will allways be morkers he knew that ,, to them his message
was the aroma of death
I believe men need to stop resisting the holy spirit to ,,my doctrines of grace or irresistible grace is probable a lot differen
t to spurgen and others of that camp
yet in contras to what you said about a prisoner
a prisoner can congratulates him self for handing him self in by his own free will ,because it normaly lessens his sentenc
Page 18/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
e, ,and it may allways think how good a move he made to hand him self in
brother I think we need to receive as you said he has given us all the necessary to do that ( by his spirit )
:-o :-o brother I never said that our response if done by me that i is by my flesh exults me worth of ALL GODS GLOR
Y
no just a little no more no less :lol:
:-( that took me about 2 hours to type my eyes ar now sore 8-) :-x you made me do it :-D
brother as allways it is a blessing to talk with you ,I wish I had some pentacostal friends in my town like you brother ,,,im
not at all against you and what you teach ,,but on the contrary i wish we had bible teachers like you in my town
time for my dinner :pint:
blessings
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/10 18:19
Quote:
------------------------that took me about 2 hours to type my eyes ar now sore
-------------------------
you made me do it
Dear brother, I apologize for provoking such a response. :lol: I think that we probably see this more similarly than we thi
nk, but its like threading a needle- sometimes we miss on the right and on the left and keep trying to articulate the center
. It's a hard task.
I also am concerned about how decisional regeneration is plaguing the churches. A person has to be drawn of God and
changed by God. We are His workmanship created in Christ unto good works. If I am anything useful to God, it is becau
se of His work in me. And certainly I think we all would affirm that in me, that is, in my flesh dwells no good thing.
My approach to the laws of God (and I was well worn slick many years ago weaving through 5 semesters of the 613 Law
s of the OT) is that man can obey God. If we take just the 10 Commandments, which one can we honestly say we canno
t obey? Now, granted, there are many laws that are impossible to obey because we are not in the land, etc., etc., but in
a general sense, which of the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount can we not obey even before we are regenerated?
Notice I didn't say, "want to obey" but "can obey"? I can love my enemy because love is a choice and not a feeling. I can
behave to him lovingly no matter how I feel about it. I may not want to, or feel like it, but I can do it. I can't walk on water,
but I can do basic commandments.
If I cannot obey God then He is unjust for condemning me when I don't obey. It would be like telling my son who weighs
100 lbs to lift a 200lb sack of potatoes and then disciplining him when he cannot lift it. That would be awful parenting. Re
sponsibility without ability = blame ability. God does not declare us guilty because we cannot lift the laws He gives us, bu
t because we could have done it and we would not. We are guilty for not using our ability. The condemnation is that light
has come into the world, but men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil.
I don't believe anyone will get to heaven some day and tell God- each time He lays a transgression before them, "I was
unable to do it, but you commanded me to anyway."
But this does not mean we take the approach of Palagias either. God is not interested in people that obey Him just beca
use they can, but He wants people that will agree with Him so that we can walk together with Him. Satan obeys God and
so do the demons. They tremble. But this is obviously not what God wants. He wants people to obey Him from the heart
and in order to do that we have to allow Him to give us a new heart. Paul had this desire but could not find a way to acco
mplish what God wanted in a way that would satisfy what He knew God wanted. The answer to this is that He could not
yield the fruit of the Spirit. He could do right things, but it was more like decorating a Christmas tree. He could decorate h
imself, but there was no fruit issuing from him. It was thorns and briars.
Page 19/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
This is where we have to stop resisting the Holy Spirit and allow Him to come in, change our essential nature and start p
roducing fruit. Only then can we have the full package. I may do some good works and even obey the commands as did
the Rich Young Ruler, but what does it profit if I walk away and am not reconciled to God in such a way that He will birth
me to be one of His sons?
Just some added thoughts. Much love to you my friend. :-) :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/6/11 1:50
Delboy, I'm really not on a crusade I just like to pick on Bro. Robert, he is a dear friend. We go to the same church and di
sagree theologically (on some points) but I am a firm believer in being able to agree to disagree. Arminianism and Calvin
ism both agree on the beginning and the end but how the path in the middle works itself out its just a little different. We'r
e really not that far off. My apologies Delboy.
As far as man "obeying God" Calvinists don't disagree, we just believe that unregenerate carnal fallen man WILL NOT re
spond to God IN SALVATION on his own. Which also holds true to any Arminian (prevenient grace/divine enabling/powe
ring-up or whatever you want to label it) we both agree God takes the initiative FIRST. The bible clearly teaches this, tha
t NO ONE can come to Him unless the Father draws him. The question then becomes who is drawn? Well this is where
we disagree and can get into quite the conversation... Lol
:-D
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/11 15:13
I have been doing research into 17th and 18th century evangelism in the US (Colonies at that time) and have found an
interesting issue that seemed to be more in the minds of folks than nowadays. While counseling anxious sinners (or
awakened sinners) ministers would often encounter folks that were worried that they were not one of God's elect. They
were to be told, to the effect, that there is no way of knowing who the elect are and that there is no reason to believe that
they are not one of God's elect, so they should press on seeking conversion.
Solomon stoddard, grandfather to Jonathan Edwards, wrote a book on leading souls to Christ that is stunningly similar to
similar works by CGF. There was a tremendous emphasis placed on sincerity and heart attitude that is completely abse
nt from any envangelism that I have ever heard of. It is a fascinating work to read. It is about 150 pages of counseling ad
vice. This FREE ebook or scanned PDF file can be found
(http://books.google.com/books/about/A_Guide_to_Christ.html?idHV4XAAAAYAAJ) HERE ("A Guide to Christ" Solomon
stoddard).
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/6/12 9:27
blessings and love back to you Robert
:-D ill shut my big mouth for a wile , even tho I have the urge to talk ,,,,I don't want to seem to repeat my self either ,,a
nd I like to end a conversation on a positive note,,,thats why I like this web site , haven't seen and firey arguments like se
mon index ,,most of the time in the last six months ,,I feel led to not say any thing ,or comment on sermon index,,,,,,I like
d reading through all the most read threads that that you and ron have done in passed years ,,very interesting ,thanks
blessings :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/6/12 11:47
hi bro Kevin,
you are right it is healthy to debate, my aim is to discuss these things so as not to exclude and I'm sure we are close on
these things than our words portray. I would say I am more Weslyan in my understanding and out working of life. I truly b
elieve that many who profess being calvinist or reformed actually in there daily lives dont live it out.
Yes God has and does take the initiative first but man always has a choice God has even made creation as a witness for
mankind to turn,
I think when we are in heaven the question wont be did you follow my TULIP to draw men, or how Weslyan in doctrine,
will it? the greatest test is, See how they love ME and eachother. :-)
Page 20/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/6/18 2:05
Sorry guys I don't know how to work this website to where I can respond to a quote, so I'm just copy and paste it. Maybe
someone can educate me on how-to stuff on here.
Delboy, you said: "I truly believe that many who profess being calvinist or reformed actually in there daily lives dont live it
out.
Yes God has and does take the initiative first but man always has a choice God has even made creation as a whitness f
or mankind to turn, "
I do believe that there are those who err in their ways who claim to be Calvinist because they don't fully understand how
Grace works out in their lives. For example the P in tulip, there are those who think that as long as they accepted Christ t
hey can do whatever in life and still be right with God. This is far from what Calvinism teaches/believes. People who live
like that we're never truly saved to begin with.
I think there is a BIG misconception that we Calvinists believe that Man cannot make choices or decisions in life. Calvini
sm does NOT teach that we are Robots. We do believe that Man makes real genuine choices everyday, and agree that
creation is a witness of that. We believe that you and everyone else have a Will and that is the reason you are able to m
ake choices. Where we might differ is that we believe that Man's will is not Free and is in bondage to sin only before reg
eneration when Man is still spiritually dead. After he is saved his will is no longer in bondage and is Free. Those who Chr
ist sets free are FREE INDEED. (John 8:36)
:lol: :lol:
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/6/18 13:02
Kevin posted part quote: We do believe that Man makes real genuine choices everyday, and agree that creation is a wit
ness of that. We believe that you and everyone else have a Will and that is the reason you are able to make choices.
get Robert to show you how to highlight and paste stuff :-)
I believe the difference is not only in definition but its out working. it is clear from scripture and life, There is no one righte
ous! no one can live a consistant righteous life, look at the contradiction of Paul before he was regenerate, pious yes, rel
igious yes, fervant yes, but "that which he wished to do he could not"
I see un converted men do acts of kindness acts of love, where does this come from? what i meant by creation being a
witness and what i think the scripture says is that even creation will testify of a creator and maybe then man will 'come to
his senses and say to himself, My God, why am i feeding these swine?' to me it is obvious, there is somthing in the very
being of man that is there to respond. Creation is not a witness to man's choices.
Pevienient Grace is not a swear word :-) it makes absolute sense. And it ties in with the verse that says God does not w
ill that any should perish but all can be saved.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/18 14:47
Quote:
------------------------get Robert to show you how to highlight and paste stuff :-)
-------------------------
It's funny, but I'm not 100% sure how to use the quote function. The board functions with html code so I just code it as I'
m writing. I copy the text I want to quote into the space and then I add to the front of it . I do the same at the end of the te
xt I'm quoting. Place a . This tells the software where to start and end the quote. ;-)
Page 21/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/6/18 15:32
Ok, this is what i do.
1, click reply then, copy the words or part post i want to refer to
2, paste it into the white box
3, choose my desired font and colour normally 0000FF (blue)
3, choose to bold or underline or italic
then click 'Add'
4, it then appears in the text box and you can type before the
just a bit of fun :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/6/21 7:08
Delboy said,
Calvinist agree with Arminians that men can do acts of kindness and acts of love, BUT the difference is we Calvinists un
derstand that unregenerate man is Sinful to his core and it effects his entire being. Therefore as far as acts of "kindness
and love" these acts of unregenrate man do not meet God's holy standards. It's important that one understands this bec
ause yes we can look around and see men doing "good deeds" or "showing love" but do those actions or deeds meet G
od's holy standards? Scripture says no.
Isaiah 64:6
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our in
iquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Only when man has become regenerated and is IN Christ does he meet the standards of a holy God and only now throu
gh Christ is his deeds of Love and kindness pure in God's eyes, because apart from Him we can DO NOTHING.
You also said,
This ties back to my previous post as what I coined "the crutch of it all" We both agree that Man can't come to God on hi
s own and God must take the initiative first. So we differ on the issue of Prevenient Grace/Powering-up/or whatever you
want to call it. Arminian Wesleyan theology says this Prevenient Grace is dispensed to "all men" that free's his will and al
lows for him to make a "free-willed" choice in a neutral state to choose or reject Christ at some point in their life.
Can this be supported or proven by sola scriptura? Scripture is our ultimate and final authority in the matter. Other than J
ohn 3:19 and possibly John 12:32 which I think does hermeneutical gymnastics to come to that conclusion. Me personall
y along with Calvinists do not see this Prevenient Grace in scripture.
This is kinda off subject but I watched this video that is a debate between a very well known Arminian Messianic Jew Ap
ologist Dr. Michael Brown and a very well known Calvinist Apologist/Theologian Dr James White on the subject of Prede
stination, Election and the Will of God. Hope this link works, its a 2hr debate but it is one of the best debates on the subj
ects I have seen.
(http://youtu.be/dmeMOo4nINA) Predestination Debate: Michael Brown (Arminian) vs James White (Calvinist) :-D
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/6/21 20:01
Thanks Kevin,
I'm a big fan of James White and have some of his books most recently "what every Christian should know about the
Quran" i'm enjoying it. Also his work on "the forgotten Trinity" is really good.
Calvinist agree with Arminians that men can do acts of kindness and acts of love, BUT the difference is we Calvinists un
derstand that unregenerate man is Sinful to his core and it effects his entire being.
I think many calvinists disagree with what Calvin actually thought. If i am sinful to the core as you say, you cannot Love y
ou cannot do acts of kindness, so you see the contradiction of what you said?
My recent post i said even Paul confirmed himself when in a un-regenerate state wanted to will and do good and love G
od but could not.
maybe you are mixing things up? reaching God's standard is one thing, being able to do it is another. The prodigal 'cam
Page 22/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
e to his senses"
I do so believe that scripture confirms my Wesleyan stance. Are you saying Wesley was wrong? you do imply it ;-)
by the way I'm not into labels! I'm a real mixture I'm a Quakering methodical pentecostal bretheren sort of Guy :-D
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/21 23:57
At the advice of my dear friend Delboy, I have scrapped 10 Keys/Total Victory and am working on a new book entitled,
"Televangelicalism." It is sure to increase my popularity. ;-)
In one of the chapters I deal with the lesser known topic of preparationism, that led to some of the Puritan Calvinist's bei
ng charged with 'Arminianism.' It is a fasicinating look at evangelism in the colonies prior to Jonathan Edwards. It is inter
esting to see how folks were counseled in their anxious state, wondering if the person was elect or not. It was front and c
enter in their minds and many people despaired wondering if they were elect. Several books have been written on the su
bject, but there are some free ones online if anyone is interested. These difficulties were before the enquiry room, anxio
us bench, altar call, sawdust trail, and light years before the sinners prayer.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/6/22 1:23
Wikipedia says,Preparationism is the view in Christian theology that unregenerate people can take steps in preparation f
or conversion, and should be exhorted to do so.
I have come across a few folk who under a so called Calvinist reformed teaching/church lack an assurance of salvation.
one poor lad i remember who responed to a sermon was in real anxiety over being elect. I assured him, you are not in si
n, you produce the fruit of the spirit, you love God passionately, you have the choice to sin or not, then rejoice, God is yo
urs and you are His.
my new book will be called "10 keys to un lock 10 doors but only God Knows which door is the right one.
:-D
If i could say "Televangelicalism." that would be a start ;-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/22 5:13
Quote:
------------------------If i could say "Televangelicalism." that would be a start
-------------------------
:lol: I think it's like 7 syllables. I'm trying to keep this as simple as possible. :-D
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/6/22 5:25
Quote:
------------------------DB's: I have come across a few folk who under a so called Calvinist reformed teaching/church lack an assurance of salvation. one poor lad i remember
who responed to a sermon was in real anxiety over being elect. I assured him, you are not in sin, you produce the fruit of the spirit, you love God passi
onately, you have the choice to sin or not, then rejoice, God is yours and you are His.
-------------------------
When I was a young Christian I spent a lot of time reading the old polemic debates between the Reformers. I was taken
by the fact that some of my friends considered themselves Calvinist, but also believed in eternal security. I wondered if t
hey had really read some of the writings of Calvin and others. The old reformers would admit there was no definitive wa
y to know if you were one of the elect. Today a person can say the sinner's prayer, assume that means they are one of t
he elect, and like a numbing agent on the conscience- never question their salvation again. :-? On the other hand I read
an account once of R.C. Sproul having a bout with wondering if he was one of the elect.
Page 23/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/6/22 12:24
Robert part quote; I wondered if they had really read some of the writings of Calvin and others
I think this is key, many have not even read Calvin and some even assume things to him. As mankind we love to put thi
ngs into neat boxes in our lives whether we are believers or not. The trouble is we just cannot put God in such check bo
xes. Just look at Christ he turned everything upside down.
You know me I love reading church history your new book sounds fascinating :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/7/6 7:54
Delboy said,
No, again this ties back to how God views unregenerate man's actions (love, kindness etc.) and how "Man" views it. The
y are 2 totally opposite views. Men can look at another's actions and say, "that's love" or look at an act someone does to
another person and say they are kindhearted. If God looks at that same "unregenerate" man and I need to make it clear
that it's only when they are unregenerate that God says, Romans 8:5-8
I like the NLT translation of Isaiah 64:6 Look what the text says, "When we display our righteous deeds they are NOTHI
NG but filthy rags"
The scripture is clear God does not look at our deeds the same way carnal man does. All the deeds an unsaved man do
es amounts to nothing the scripture says, if you are in the flesh you are always and forever will be at enmity with God. Y
es men may believe its good and kind in their eyes but God sees just the opposite until you are saved and born again.
You asked,
What I am saying and any Calvinist also would say is this; I dont care who it is but if you believe in prevenient grace- Pro
ve it by Sola Scriptura. Where in the bible does it say or even convey by theological deduction that God gives ALL men
the same amount of this prevenient grace that free's man's will for a moment in time and put's man in a neutral state that
gives him the ability to accept or reject Christ?? This is what prevenient grace is all about.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by kvaughn (), on: 2013/7/6 8:18
Robert said,
Are you referring to that they wouldnt know if they themselves were Elect or other people who they were witnessing to? I
f the latter then the same can be said for all camps, no one knows who they are until they accept Christ.
you said,
I agree as we talked about this the other night. By the way your preaching was spot on bro. The sinner's prayer is over u
sed by all camps and we should reconsider it's validity. As far as Sproul doubting his salvation, I think sometimes we all
have doubted at some point or another the authenticity of our salvation and questioned if we are truly saved. Sin can me
ss with our emotions and thinking and Satan wants all believers to think they are not saved anymore if we break a comm
andment. But glory be to God that when we mess up He is faithful and just to forgive us of our trespasses and sin (1 Joh
n 1:9). I believe that we can have assurance of our salvation and that He gives us the grace to persevere to the end.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/6 15:16
Hi Kevin,
Quote:
------------------------Are you referring to that they wouldnt know if they themselves were Elect or other people who they were witnessing to? If the latter then the same can
be said for all camps, no one knows who they are until they accept Christ.
-------------------------
Page 24/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
It is interesting trying to transport ourselves back to the mentality of the Reformers in order to understand what they mea
nt by doctrines that have been passed down. There is very little continuity with what they believed to be Christianity and
what we believe it to be. I know that is a strong thing to say, but I believe it is true. For example, they lived in a time whe
n Christianity was enforced upon the people by the state. This was true for both Catholic territories and Protestant. As fa
r as I know, few believed that the Christianity could exist if it was "voluntary". Between 1618-1648 some one-third of the
European population died from a “holy war” between Protestants and Catholics. It was this
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War) Thirty Years War that apparently gave the people their fill of bloodshed i
n the name of Christ. A peace treaty was signed and Europe went into a time of religious tolerance. It would take the Gr
eat Awakening to demonstrate that people could be converted without being compelled. This is why it is hard for me to e
ven get inside the head of the Refoermers. Because they clearly do not understand the Kingdom of God in the same wa
y that I understand it. Jesus would have never used force to enforce doctrinal views and He certainly would not have led
Christians against Christians in battle. So when the Reformers make a case for assurance they are moving in a totally di
fferent paradigm than most of us would be. Here is another example:
"Some Anabaptists in the present age mistake some indescribable sort of frenzied excess for the regeneration of the Spi
rit, holding that the children of God are restored to a state of innocence, and, therefore, need give themselves no anxiety
about curbing the lust of the flesh; that they have the Spirit for their guide, and under his agency never err. It would be in
credible that the human mind could proceed to such insanity, did they not openly and exultingly give utterance to their do
gma. It is indeed monstrous, and yet it is just, that those who have resolved to turn the word of God into a lie, should thu
s be punished for their blasphemous audacity." (Inst 3.3.14)
This is Calvin berating the Anabaptists that did not consider their infant baptism to be valid and that believed true regene
ration effectively rendered a person free from their sinful nature. He views them or their doctrine as "monstrous" and justi
fies their punishment. What was their punishment? It was their drowning by Zwingly by decree in 1526 (Institutes was fir
st published in 1536). They were to be hog tied and drowned. Some historians suggest more anabaptists died for their fa
ith than did Christians between Nero and Diocletion (up to the edict of toleration). If you continue reading the whole 3.3.1
4 entry you will notice that he accuses them of antinomianism; which is exactly what the Judaizers did to Paul when he p
reached the true grace of God exhibited, not by legalistic laws, but by having begun in the Spirit one can fulfill the righteo
usness that is in the Law.
So we have three issues here that I cannot rectify. One is that a person who proports to be a Christian could kill another
professed believer for their doctrine or wage war against other Christians, contrary to the principals of the true Kingdom
of God (as Jesus preached it). Secondly, that religion should be enforced by the state. Thirdly, that the regenerate must
not expect to be free from sin in a way described by the Anabaptists.
I know this is getting long, but it is only fair to say that much of the grief that we have suffered as a result of rationalism a
nd the philosophers of the day was probably a reaction against the behaviors beheld by men who saw or knew of the ma
ny that were killed for their dogma. Some came to see Christianity as the most evil thing on earth. So if a person had ass
urance of salvation, what was the nature of it? John said that we know we have passed from death unto life if we love th
e brethren. Was it not Augustine that suggested it was OK to kill a man as long as he loved him while he did it? The Ana
baptists were passifist. That was another reason they were hated. If people start thinking Christians should be non-viole
nt, how will we wage war? So as I sit down with the Reformers to get inside their heads and understand what they mea
n by assurance (as opposed to what Calvinism has come to mean in its many splendored ideas in 2013), I find that we
must be from parallel universes, because I cannot comprehend how a person could have assurance of faith and condon
e the burning and drowning of human beings.
Sorry that was so long...
Much love to you, Robert
:-)
Page 25/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/7/8 2:25
Kevin quote:What I am saying and any Calvinist also would say is this; I dont care who it is but if you believe in prevenie
nt grace- Prove it by Sola Scriptura. Where in the bible does it say or even convey by theological deduction that God giv
es ALL men the same amount of this prevenient grace that free's man's will for a moment in time and put's man in a neut
ral state that gives him the ability to accept or reject Christ?? This is what prevenient grace is all about.
Kevin you are very good at assuming things people havn't said :roll:
Your post very much said what wesley taught was wrong and i asked you directly and you've avoided saying he was wr
ong. Have you read any of Wesley? He explains previenient Grace very well. You ask show me where God gives to all
men the same etc etc. but i'm not even asking! Well i will answer you, begining with. by the way, The Trinity is not menti
oned in scripture but the Great 3 in 1 are there! The bible is full of implications and theological (and logical) deduction of
mankind being able to love or respond to God before new birth. As far as man offering spiritualness/or worth to God, yes
THAT is as filthy rags i.e. man's offering of righteousness. you see? Kevin go back over all the previous posts people ha
ve written good examples of the in- consistancy of calvinism, as you believe it.
Kevin quote:No, again this ties back to how God views unregenerate man's actions (love, kindness etc.) and how "Man"
views it. They are 2 totally opposite views. Men can look at another's actions and say, "that's love" or look at an act som
eone does to another person and say they are kindhearted. If God looks at that same "unregenerate" man and I need to
make it clear that it's only when they are unregenerate that God says, Romans 8:5-8
I cant see this logic at all. I feel you are trying to reinforce your position only with this sentence. It goes deeper than just
mans actions that God judges on. it is so clear through out the whole OT and NT God gives free choice to seek after Go
d. I'm also thinking about the verse in Isa 42 a bruised reed He will not break, in fact the whole chapter speaks of Gods
Grace. I just cannot see God's view of looking at mans acts of love and kindness in the way you imagine. to re emphasis
e,God clearly says man's acts of righteousness towards Him are as filthy rags. :-)
I'm sure back in the day in a post weve asked, its the definition of 'total depravity' understanding this first then colours all
else.
Just to be sure I am NOT saying i have a help in my salvation at new birth. :-)
Finally for now, why did John Baptist say to folk 'prepare the way of the Lord' if they couldn't?
so lets just imagine Lord forgive me! John Baptist was a 'Kevin calvinist'. should he have shouted, Repent! prepare the
way for the Lord! Oh But you cant so ignore me! cause there is nothing you can do! :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/7/10 13:36
I see where kevin is coming from
it is the motivation behind the good works that makes the good works good works ,and the spirit ,,
the flesh can produce deeds that men say are good works
but the bible says those in the flesh cannot please god
the flesh the natural man is at enmity towards god
the love of the spirit of god does not come from the flesh
or from a sinfull heart
god sees that more clearly then I think it is possible for us to fully comprehend
:-(
god does not except that,,, as god ,he looks to the scorce and motivation of these kinds of deeds ,,it does not impress hi
m one bit
this is my beloved son in whom I AM WELL PLEASED
jesus did every good deed so his father could get glorified and praised ,,,
that is the motivation that please god ,because he is the only one who should get glory
who would want to rob god of that glory
those in the flesh rob god
Page 26/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
who here would would be impressed with a gift from a filthy robber
would you except stolen money or equipment from a thief
that is what men in the flesh do they do not pay god the tribute he is owed , in praise for what he has been given ,
and then some even go as far as expecting god to except the stolen gifts back as some sort bribe
it is absolutely astounding :-P :evil:
mans good deeds are as a filthy in the sight of god ,and to suggest there not ,is not :-o :-o a very nice thing to say :-x
:-)
whoo :-D my heart just start to go crazy then ,,beet ,beet ,beet ,beet :-D
brother delboy
john the baptise spoke by the holy spirit and when he spoke god gives the provision by his holy spirit to repent
conviction is wrought by the holy ,,
brother to repent from sin one needs the holy spirit to convict
john could have shouted you cant
Jesus said no man can come unless by father draw him
john said no man can receive anything unless in be granted from above ,,,,,
brother its in the word of god :-o ,,jesus said ye can do nothing with out me
they more or less said exactly what you said in you last paragraph :-)
brother don't lable me as a Calvinist ,,im not I just saw some truth in what kevin said ,,he would say that im not anyways
:lol:
blessings to you delboy ,,its nice to read pleasant remarks generaly as you converse with Robert and ron ;-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/10 17:44
There is a preoccupation in hyper Calvinism with what they refer to as sola dia gloria. Everything must be done for the
glory of God alone. I addressed this earlier when we said that having done the will of God we are to say we are
unprofitable servants and have done our duty. An unprofitable servant that is expected to do his duty has no place
wherein to glory. He obeys God and if he glories in that it is Sin. The focus of our Lord is on obeying Christ and
understanding that it is nothing to glory in, it is what is expected.
I have an article on where faith comes from that I have yet to have challenged. It deals with how faith comes to us. I
titled it
(http://realrevival.blogspot.com/2011/11/word-generated-faith.html) Word Generated Faith. I think a thousand sections
of
theological libraries could be burned if we could grasp this one truth. ;-)
Page 27/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/7/11 0:48
Hi Gary, thank you for your encouragement. I to see Kevin's argument but i see its in accuracies from a non- calvinist
point of view, Paul clearly says in Romans 7. he longed to do the will of God but could not (in his un regenerate state)
then we go into romans 8.
What does not impress God is our motives i agree but i strongly feel God has given/gives man un regenerate,
oppertunity to respond and every man at that! throughout the OT and NT you cannot deny this. your Robber analogy is
interesting. I'm sure Jesus sat with robbers and ate with them :-o oh and died with them ;-)
Zaccchaeus as well, Jesus looked deeper didnt he? oh yes deeper, beyond our feeble vision, and went in and stayed
with him. I agree with your sentiment that God knows far deeper than we. thats why Calvinism doesnt add up, we cannot
put God in neat boxes :-)
I'm in no way saying mans deeds qualify him before God. i'm talking about Righteousness towards God. God does
respond to man in kindness and Grace and mercy when man chooses to seek Him(God enables man to seek him)
choose you this day who you will serve? also either blessing or curse, you choose? previenient grace is available
because it is within the very nature of God. Wesley didnt invent it :-)
John baptist didn't say you can't because he new they could turn, thats my point.
brother I've never labelled you of being a calvinist I dont know you!!
Tell me was Jesus lying when he said to people go and sin no more?
or tell stories about the father's nature if it was not true(the prodigal)
modern day calvinism is way to narrow limiting who God is in my humble opinion :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/7/11 1:16
Robert.
I have an article on where faith comes from that I have yet to have challenged. It deals with how faith comes to us. I title
d it Word Generated Faith. I think a thousand sections of theological libraries could be burned if we could grasp this o
ne truth.
Yes robert this is excellent, a real foundational stone in understanding the very being of God, thank you brother :-)
(http://realrevival.blogspot.com/2011/11/word-generated-faith.html) word generated faith
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/11 1:54
Quote:
------------------------DB: John baptist didn't say you can't because he new they could turn, thats my point.
-------------------------
It is interesting to study Thomas Hooker and Solomon Stoddard, Puritan Preparationists. They tried to get sinners into a
place where they were prapared to receive the grace of God. These praparations held no merit, nor did they secure God'
s grace towards them, but only put them into a position to receive grace.
During the process they were continually being led into the unknown. They were led to believe that God may or may not
have them selected as one of the Elect, so they don't want to put too much stock in feelings or advances in righteousnes
s. They may get prepared only to find out that God has reprobated them. This caused some people to almost lose their
minds and solicited a rebuke from certain non-Preparationist English Puritans.
If I may give my impression as for how this played out, it was as if the person was told that they needed to repent and as
soon as they started to repent- they were told that they can't repent in any meaningful way. So it was like a back and fort
h jerking motion. You must! You can't! You must! You can't! and so on. Add to that the drowning of the Anabaptists by Z
wigley, the burning of Servetus by Calvin, the 30 years War that devistated Europe and you have the recipe for the Ratio
nalism that came about in response to these ideas. I have discovered books written in the 1800's dealing specifically wit
h the melancholy caused by unconditional election. Further there were reactionary doctrines that came about. For each t
heology there is an equal and opposite theology. The opposite of Calvin was Finney.
Page 28/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
In Finney's memoirs and in his religious writings he talks about how as a youth he could not understand the preaching of
Presbyterian ministers and felt he understood why so few people were saved. In other words, he sat under ministers that
seem to have taken Calvinism to its ultimate conclusion. Man cannot save himself, God must do it! Finney retorted with
a few lines from Lorenzo Dow. In his book entitled, The Dealings of God, Man and the Devil we read this lyric:
You can and you can't
You shall and you shan't
You will and you won't
And you'll be damned if you do
And you'll be damned if you don't
Now you know where the expression comes from. Finney used it. The overall attitude towards the doctrine of unconditio
nal election Dow then expresses in a poem of which he gives no author:
There is a Reprobation plan, some how it did arise
By the Predestinarian clan, of horrid cruel ties
The plan is this, they hold a few
They are ordained for Heaven
They hold the rest accursed crew
That cannot be forgiven.
They do hold, God hath decreed
Whatever comes to pass
Some to he damned, some to be freed
And this they call free grace
This iron bedstead they do fetch
To try our hopes upon
And if too short, we must be stretch'd
Cut oft- if we're too long
This is a bold serpentine scheme
It fits the serpent well
If he can make the sinner dream
That he is doomed to Hell
Or if he can persuade a man
Decree is on his side
Then he will say without delay
This cannot be untied
He tells one sinner, he's decreed
Unto eternal bliss
He tells another, he can't be freed
For he is doomed to miss
The first he bindeth fast in pride
The second in despair
If he can only keep them tied
Which way he does not care
This is the backdrop of Finney’s theology.
Sorry so long. :-) God Bless, Robert
Page 29/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/11 2:22
Quote:
------------------------Yes robert this is excellent, a real foundational stone in understanding the very being of God, thank you brother.
-------------------------
Thanks for the encouragement brother. I owe it to Ron and Mr. North. I had studied the Reformers until I was blue in the
face and knew in my heart they did not understand things properly. That is a strong thing to say, but their rhetoric and or
atory did not impress me. I had a good enough grasp of the Bible to know they were leaving out way too many important
issues (such as God's love and His expectation that we imitate Him) and they were explaining away far too many passa
ges. Like a person putting an engine back together and having a box of parts left over.
Ron and I butted heads pretty good on Sermonindex back in 2004, as you recall, because I put so much stock in the Ref
ormers teachings. I was prepared to condemn anyone a heretic that dare "think outside of the box" in these great issues.
I figured that after 1900 years eveything had already been discovered and all we were doing is arguring the ancient talki
ng points. I found out different when I started listening closely to Ron and Mr. North. Indeed, I had studied Wesley and hi
s rebuttals of Calvinism and agreed with them. The trouble with Calvinism is that everything is overstated and rooted in a
Manachean determinism, which he inherited from Augustine. God is not God unless He orders every single atom of mov
ement. It is Greek phoilosophy. These things have already been well traced out here by capable scholars so I will not re
visit it.
I knew that God would not unconditionally damn people and at the same time strive with them while they resist Him. It m
akes God into Satan. It is nonsense. Augustine could not account for these type truths that are fundamental to common
sense. But here is the trick, Finney was chided and called a 'rationalist' because he approached the scriptures with com
mon sense. His Governmental atonement theory was in reaction to Calvin's limited atonement and 19th century Univers
alism. If Christ has died for the sins of the whole world then salvation is universal. To this day Calvinists insist on limited
atonement because they believe the alternative is Universalism. Finney stood against Universalism from a wrong angle;
he mistakenly suggested Christ did not literally die for sins, but in order to be made an example of - of the seriousness of
sin. Ron's teaching on (https://vimeo.com/24649062) The Red Heifer answers this delima. It is not until the Holy Spirit m
akes the blood of Christ effectual to a person by faith, that the blood is applied to the sinner.
These are just a few examples of how there are answers to the questions posed by the Reformers- and beyond that ther
e is an understanding of the New Covenant that builds upon certain of the Reformers beliefs that were valid. Some was
good, some was not. Ron's book on the Better Covenant is better reading than a hunderd works by the Reformers; beca
use it sets the truth out in a way that doesn't leave a box of parts left over when he is done. :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/7/11 11:00
hi delboy , I fully agree with the statement that paul wanted to do the will of god but could not in an unregenerentet stat
e,,
I probably die believing that ,, but I don't see prevenial grace the way weasly taught it ,not at all ,for me the grace that dr
aws men is a deliberate act of the holy spirit that is out side man ,not with in mans heart so to speak ,I see the light that i
s given to every man that cometh into the world ,as a general grace that doesn't led to salvation but to the knowledge th
at men are guilty and god is holy ,god needs to impose his fresh grace to whoo and draw men to the saving arms of Chri
st ,,and when I say draw I men with great force ,,,and as mans responds to this grace it is souly because god is putting d
esires in men to do so ,,some respond others supress this grace as they do in the same way the general light is supress
ed in unrighteousness
I don't believe god gives this second fresh grace to every man ,not at all ,,,,,I see god as not under any obligation to do s
o ,,due to the fact that in general men have already supressed the light he gives to every man ,,for what may me know
n of god is manifest to them for god has shown it to them
it is not of him who wills nor him who runs but god who shows mercy ;-)
im fully aware that Jesus sat with robbers ,,,,,so do I all manner of sinners ,,,, but I wont except a bribe form them or a gi
ft that I know comes from dirty drug money or the likes
Page 30/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
I :-o hope your not suggesting Jesus was excepting dirty money knowingly in to the money bag judus held
my point was saying that gods all knowing powers perceives the hearts and the intents of men ,, his ways are above our
ways and there for sees the heart and not the out ward as men do ,,for him to except good deeds and see them as good
deads would be to go againsts his own highly tuned perfect discernment
also to except mens good deeds ,wile they are servents in sin slaves to the prince and the power of the air ,,would be un
fathomable
in this scence wile a man is a servent to gods number one enemy ,how can in be thought of as plausible ,that god woul
d see the deads of men as anything other then stained
how much toilet waste does it take to contaminate one bucket of clean water ,,,I would say just a drop
I wouldn't expect god to see our life before regeneration as anything other then contaminated
every area of the unregenerate mans life is poisoned by the spirit that is manifest in the children of disobedience ,,the pr
ince and the power of the air ,,in this we all had our walk
I agree god looks deeper ,he stayed with the tax colecter
his vision was so deep ,,,,that he said ,my sheep here my voice
AND I KNOW THEM
all the father have given me will come to me
and him who comes to me ,,,I will in no wise cast him out
jesus saw and knew who were his all along ,and he knew who were not his
I know brother that cavinisim doesn't add up ,,but arminisiam ,doesn't on its own add up what so ever
that why I don't bevieve in an abratary election wher god covers his eyes and randomly chooses people
and why I don't believe in free will as understood my many people
I like to stand in between the two ,
:-) :-D
I cant but think that ,,,choose you this day whom you will serve ,,is an old covernt context ,,,,,,,,,,spoken to those under
the law of Moses ,,so serving in that context is different
iv not seen that quoted by new testament apostals ,,,,,that's interesting ;-)
brother jesus said go and sin no more ,,,the context ,,,,
he is focasing on the known sin that the persons were comiting ,,like adultry ,as the womans was caught it ,,
he was saying repent and he wasnt lieing
and the holy spirit may have wrought a conviction in them ,changing there desire ,,taking out the old heart ,putting In a n
ew spirit ,and as ezkial said as god spoke through him caused them to keep the stautes and judgments
Page 31/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
I whole lists of
I WILL take you from among the nations
I WILL gather you in to your own lands
I WILL SPRINKILE clean water on you AND YOU WILL BE CLEAN
I WILL TAKE OUT YOUR STONY HEART ,and put in you a heart of flesh
I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT IN YOU
I WILL CASUE YOU TO WALK IN MY STATUTS AND JUGMENTS
rather then giving men the ability ,,it all remains gods doings through gracious acts
it not I but the grace of god said our old beloved friend paul :-D ;-)
:-D geee man that took me so long to type :lol:
have a blessed day ,,,,im going to cook up some fresh broiled fish on charcoals :-o ;-) ;-) nooo
fryed fish in olive oil
god has blessed me with so much fish the last 8 months ,, thought my fishing real would burst ,,,,ohh he is a kind god
:-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/7/11 12:49
Fish!! I love fish! :-)
Gary your pictures worry me ;-)
no ones debating if a drop of filth pollutes a bucket of water that is not what I'm saying.
now think brother, In the house of zaccaeus house, do you think Jesus said to him, i'm not sitting on this cushion Zac or
eating your food because youve recieved your gain by swindleing people! no Jesus went in and ate.thats why your robb
er drug money picture is no good. :-)
like i said in my earlier posts just giving my views on why I'm not a calvinist.
have you read Robert's blog he posted? that is a very good starting point on how God is in HIS nature ;-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/7/11 13:39
:lol: I love those little pictures ,,don't worry brother ,,,,,they obviously having an effect :-o
brothers its getting let here and I must rise early for work and prayer,,,so please pray for that god shuts my mouth
:hammer:
I think I may have read that a wile ago ,ill have to cheak ,,,,,if I did ,I didn't agree with it ,his imphisis on unregernerent
mans abilitys ,,,
ill get back to you tomorrow about jesus and god an the dirty drug money anaoligy ,,,,,just think narrow context was my
intent
blessings :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/11 14:59
Quote:
------------------------Bro. Gary: brothers its getting let here and I must rise early for work and prayer,,,so please pray for that god shuts my mouth
-------------------------
Page 32/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
It's comments like these that tell me that we are much closer than we think in our theology. ;-) A card-carrying Calvinist d
oes not believe that prayer moves God. This whole conversation is nothing more than what God had decreed from eterni
ty. Every jot and tittle has been God's immutable will. So there is no need to pray about it, for who hath resisted His will?
We are all doing what is irresistible to us. :-)
I want to say with DB that I am not a Pelagian nor am I a Finneyite. I am not Arminian because he was too Calvinistic for
my taste. Not because I don't believe in Original Sin or because I believe, as Finney, that man in his own power can obe
y God. The issue is not about whether or not I can obey God in my own human strength. It is about whether or not I can
obey God when He speaks to my heart. This is what my article is about. The very nature of faith and obedience is that of
God speaking an empowered word and our responding to it in faith or in disobedience.
Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn fr
om all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye ha
ve transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasu
re in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn , and live ye. (Ezekiel 18:30-32)
Finney was right to point something out in his theology. There is a sense in which God gives a new heart and a new Spir
it. There is a sense in which the word of God accomplishes the work. There is a sense in which the preacher does the w
ork. And as the passage above states, there is a sense in which the sinners gets himself a new heart and a new spirit.
Lyman Beecher was resistive of New Light Calvinism in the early 1800's. He would have resisted Finney and his new m
easures. But he did move off his strong Calvinistic views and was tried in his own church for it. He was Presbyterian. Wh
ile his wife lay dying, and his church looked on, Beecher defended his view that man can respond to God. He was acquit
ted of the charges so they appealed. He was acquitted again. They did not like how he had moved off the Old School vie
w, but could not answer his doctrine. Interestingly he cited Matthew Henry as one of his sources. Beechers quote of Hen
ry's commentary on Ezekiel 18 is very telling:
"Make you a new heart and a new spirit, for why will ye die, O house of Israel." We must do our endeavor, and then God
will not be wanting to us to give us his grace. St. Austin well explains this precept : God does not enjoin impossibilities, b
ut by His commands admonishes us to do what is in our power, and to pray for what is not... The reason why sinners die
is, because they will die, they will go down the way that leads to death, and not come up to the terms on which life is offe
red; herein sinners, especially sinners of the house of Israel, are most unreasonable and act most unaccountably."
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/11 16:46
Just to get us back on the tracks, the original post back in 2012 was in discussion of this video series. Please do feel fre
e to give it a look. :-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wt9ENcBoMRE&feature=relmfu
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/11 17:45
I have said all this before many times and I don't want to steal the show here, but I wonder if we can address one point fr
om the video.
If God has a will that He decrees from, should we not expect His secret counsel to jibe with His revealed counsel? A dou
ble minded man is unstable in all His ways; it would be blasphemous to suggest that God has a secret will inconsistent
with Jesus Christ. And it does not cover the matter to say, "who art thou to reply against God." He has told us to imitate
His behavior. If He has a secret will different than what He has revealed, I must have one too or I am not like Christ. I thi
nk the chances are more likely that men devise theologies that reflect their own heart. God cannot deny Himself. He is w
hat He is in secret counsel and in His revealed counsel. I know that is about as elementary as it gets, but to me, that is t
he main issue.
Page 33/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Ron B (), on: 2013/7/11 18:04
I came across another fascinating,little commented upon, verse just the other week...
And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors justified God, having been baptized with the baptism of Jo
hn. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him. Luke 7:29–
30 NKJV.
The word 'rejected' is (http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?StrongsG114&tKJV) Strong's G114 - athe
teō. If you follow this link to the Blue Letter Bible website you can see Vine's definition of atheteō.
Quote:
------------------------(a) "to act towards anything as though it were annulled;" e.g., to deprive a law of its force by opinions or acts contrary to it, Gal 3:15, AV, "disannulleth,
" RV, "maketh void;"
(b) "to thwart the efficacy of anything, to nullify, to frustrate it," Luk 7:30, "rejected;" 1Cr 1:19, "will I reject;" to make void, Gal 2:21; to set at nought, Jud
1:8, RV (AV, "despised"); the parallel passage, in 2Pe 2:10, has kataphroneo. In Mar 6:26, the thought is that of breaking faith with.
-------------------------
The old Weymouth paraphrase has...
But the Pharisees and expounders of the Law have frustrated God’s purpose as to their own lives, by refusing to be bapt
ized. Luke 7:30 WEYMTH.
Is it possible to 'frustrate the counsel/will of God'? Apparently it is... "as to their own lives". There certain things that God
has fixed and they will happen irrespective of man's resistance...
because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained.
He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead. Acts 17:31 NKJV. We will keep that appointment whe
ther it suits us or not but as to 'my own life' it is possible to 'frustrate the counsel of God'.
atheteō is the word translated 'frustrate' in
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. Gal 2:21 KJV.
I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose. Gal 2:21 ES
V.
God's heart was to include these Pharisees in his plan for their eternal blessing but they 'frustrated' that plan. It is a sobe
ring thing to realise that 'as regards himself' a puny human being can 'frustrate the purpose of God'.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by MikeH (), on: 2013/7/12 17:00
Ron quoted:
Quote:
------------------------And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors justified God
-------------------------
It has always interested me that people (especially tax payers) can justify God!!!
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Delboy (), on: 2013/7/12 19:43
Thanks for reminding me of those lovely tax men Mike!
This is very important, thanks Ron.God's heart was to include these Pharisees in his plan for their eternal blessing but th
ey 'frustrated' that plan. It is a sobering thing to realise that 'as regards himself' a puny human being can 'frustrate the pu
rpose of God'.
I'll get my helmet!!
Page 34/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/12 21:29
Quote:
------------------------This is very important, thanks Ron.God's heart was to include these Pharisees in his plan for their eternal blessing but they 'frustrated' that plan. It is a
sobering thing to realise that 'as regards himself' a puny human being can 'frustrate the purpose of God'.
I'll get my helmet!!
-------------------------
I recall as a young man being so utterly unsatisfied with the explanations of most theologians I read. Others nearly wors
hipped them, but I was disillusioned. I came to think nobody understood God's word rightly. The theologians comprehen
ded their own theology and mistook it for God's word. It is the exact same thing the Rabbi's have done in Judaism.
I came off many of the theologies in favor of omni verbo quod procedit de ore Dei. In other words, we need to be able to
assemble every (omni) word (verbo) in the same sense that Paul could. He gave us a great explanation of the OT and h
ow these great subjects are understood. I'm not too much interested in defending the talking points of Calvin and Armini
us or Pelagius and Augustine. We have to move out into truth so we can grasp the whole counsel of God. I find Mr. Nort
h's teachings to be a giant leap in the right direction.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/7/13 1:11
hi delboy ,Robert and ron
delboy I noticed something interesting ,,we were speaking about jesus eating with sinners,,,dirty money ect
what is apparent ,is the john the baptise led the way for Jesus preaching repentence and baptising sinners
Jesus went around preaching about the kingdom of heaven to those who herd the message of john and were in a state
of repentance and baptised ,genearly speaking
so when Jesus ate with the sinners and tax collectors ,he was comptealy justified in doing so with out sin ,,,,,,but the P
harisees could not see this
but that said ,,,,,,my analogy about thief's and god excepting gifts from thief's was in a narrow context ,I had god the fa
ther in mind siting in his holy thrown room ,and I dirty unrepent sinner walking up to him and offering his dirty life to god
as some bribe as to why god needs to let him in to heaven
hence god excepts no so called good deeds from an unregenerent man ,,,,it remains a filthy rag in his presence
even tho in reality , who can stand in his holy presences
who will acend his holy hill
one who has clean hands and a pure heart
THANK GOD FOR THE BLOOD OF JESUS
AND HIS SPIRIT
:-D ;-)
frusraiting the grace of god is not the same as frustration the councel of god
one is gods heart
the other is gods determinate purpose
I think we need to keep both polars together on one page
frustrating the grace of god
Page 35/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
god works all things according to the councel of his will
these seem like contradictions
just as the incarnation of gods can seem to be ,,fully god ,and fully man
and one hand god in his heart wants even the pharisses to be saved
but one the other hand ,remeber his hands are infinite
there stumble is according to the working all things according to the counsel of his will ,,paul said he has committed the
m all to disobedience that he might have mercy on all
oh the wisdom of god
who can councel him
how deep is is wisdom
his ways past finding out
who can know them
Robert thanks for your kind words
im having trouble trying to to go back to the previous to read what you posted ,,,,,,,,but your right im not a card carring
Calvinist ,,nor a hyper Calvinist ,,only went one time to a reformed church
ill try to go back page
:-) later
blessings ron Robert ,and dellboy
thanks for taking time to dialog ,in a spirit of peace ,I appreciate it very much :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/7/13 2:00
hi Robert just want to coment on what you said
The issue is not about whether or not I can obey God in my own human strength. It is about whether or not I can obey
God when He speaks to my heart. This is what my article is about. The very nature of faith and obedience is that of God
speaking an empowered word and our responding to it in faith or in disobedience
brother the way I see scripture
is when god speaks to a mans heart by the holy spirit , he finds that in him self ,flesh,, he still cannot obey
because he is still in a separated fallen state an indepent state
in this state with out gods seeds of regernation woking in the man ,god does not want man to think he can obey and ple
ase him ,neither does god make it posable to obey and please god in the flesh ,,,,,
but man can want to and that is what god is waiting for a sincere want to do what is right ,,,believe trust and obey
when he sees this god then responds efectivly with his fresh graces and begins to regenerate ,and then because of god
s mercy and grace actively seeking and persuing , the faith from Christ,,gods faith ,is birthed in the heart of this man ,,,a
nd woowww,,
:-o :-o :-o :lol: :lol: :lol: he finds that he is acualy believing in god in a real tangelable way ,and the presenece of god
becomes real in a new way,, for the first time
Page 36/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
but brother having said that ,,I don't believe that he choses everyone to have this experience
:-( because of the light that he gives every man that comes in to the world ,,,that light is being so rejected by many pe
ople so rejected :-( :-x that he is justified in not giving any more light ,neither the light of the gospel
to him who has not
what even he has will be taken away
the princale of rejecting gods light
not only that because god the knows future thoughts and actions of the men he has created ,being able to declare things
as happened be fore they take place in our space and time ,,,,,for god is beoned the limitation of time ,,,he knows who
will reject and who will receive light and gospel grace due to his omnipotence ,,,
and therefore chooses out of his wisdom not to give revelation by his voice and spirit to every one ,,,
but still to some he gives revelation tho he knows they will reject him and fall away ,,, probably for an example for and t
o show his mercy and love extends to those who end up and do hate his and his grace and mercy :-o :-o pheww ;-)
bless you Robert
brother gary :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by robertw (), on: 2013/7/13 6:16
Hi brother Gary,
Quote:
------------------------not only that because god the knows future thoughts and actions of the men he has created ,being able to declare things as happened be fore they tak
e place in our space and time ,,,,,for god is beoned the limitation of time ,,,he knows who will reject and who will receive light and gospel grace due to
his omnipotence
-------------------------
I think what you are suggesting here is what we may call foreknowledge. I agree that God knows everything. What I am
concerned about is the notion that God elects people based on reasons known only to Himself. We certainly need God's
grace to believe, but this grace is resident in the word He speaks to hearts. A man with a withered hand cannot stretch f
orth his hand-unless Jesus speaks and says "stretch forth". He is then made able by the word of His grace.
My approach is that folk are responsible for the light that they have. If we respond rightly to the light God gives, He will gi
ve more light., etc.
Blessings, :-)
Robert
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by brothagary, on: 2013/7/13 6:53
yea Robert I struggle with that type of election,,,,which is why I don't think a Calvinist would really appreciate my view
I see it as he chosses those whom he knows will responed to his fresh grace ,,but :-D I don't feel my response or mans
response was from mans inderpendent free will controlled by his flesh ,,,,but from a will revived from a bondage and a c
hoice made according to a partialy renewed inerr man ,,, :-) I feel god is happy to except what he is already cleansing ,,
rather then a sinnfullheart producing a fleshly response ,,,,,
:-) but brother that's only how I can reconcile scripture with scripture ,,,it is very very satisfying out come for me ,,and I
don't expect others to see it like me
:-D I do believe when we come into glory ,and god tells us face to face what theology was right :lol: we will all be wro
ng in some things ,,so that the scripture is fulfilled ,,let god be true and let every man be a liar :-P ;-)
Page 37/38
Biblebase Book Club :: Why I am not a Calvinist
brother my view is very similar to your view I just blend a little more of the sovernty of god into it, It just makes me feel
more satisfied :lol:
I like to think gods ideal relationship with man ,is one or total and unter dependency upon god in every area,, rather then
leaning towards men as being inderpendent thinkers and doers
I think jesus expressed that type or thing when he came into the flesh ,as a declaration of how it should be
blessings to you :-)
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Ron B (), on: 2013/7/16 17:13
I have always loved the words of Pastor Robinson to those about to sail in the Mayflower from Holland...
Quote:
------------------------At the sailing of the Speedwell from Delfshaven, part of Robinson's Farewell speech read:
"I Charge you before God and his blessed angels that you follow me no further than you have seen me follow Christ. If God reveal anything to you by a
ny other instrument of His, be as ready to receive it as you were to receive any truth from my ministry, for I am verily persuaded the Lord hath more tru
th and light yet to break forth from His holy word.
"The Lutherans cannot be drawn to go beyond what Luther saw. Whatever part of His will our God has revealed to Calvin, they (Lutherans) will rather
die than embrace it; and the Calvinists, you see, stick fast where they were left by that great man of God, who yet saw not all things. This is a misery m
uch to be lamented.
-------------------------
As regards GWN's teaching, he was not as deliberate in his teaching as I often am. (here 'deliberate' is another synony
m for 'pedantic') so I wouldn't want folks to blame him for my views but I think he would have given a hearty amen to the
'frustrating God' idea.
Re: Why I am not a Calvinist - posted by Ron B (), on: 2013/7/16 17:26
I come to election from a different viewpoint.
I see that God 'elected' Israel as his 'chosen people' with a specific destiny, hence Israel as a covenant nation was 'pred
estined'. But, and here's my view, what were they elected/predestined to? Not personal salvation but an earthly calling to
be 'the people of God'.
The New Covenant follows the same line in that when we read of the saints in e.g. Ephesians we are reading of a group
of people who were called out of the world to be God's unique 'people of God'. That group of saints is also known as the
Church and it is the Church that is elected/predestined to a unique calling as 'the people of God' rather than the individu
al.
I also believe in God's omniscience and his omnipotence which is how I would describe his 'sovereignty'; a word that, so
far as I know, does not appear in the scriptures. The question is not 'is God omniscient and omnipotent, ei sovereign?' B
UT how does he use his omnipotence and omniscience.
God is sovereign but he never uses his omnipotence and omniscience to predetermine an individual's salvation. Howeve
r, as soon as they are 'His' they are 'The Elect', the Church, the people of God.
Page 38/38