The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Watchman Nee would agree with this

Troy,

Whoever wrote that little ditty, and you should really try to include the author whenever possible, has presented a distorted caricature of biblical Calvinism which is riddled with erroneous conclusions from the very beginning. If, as you say, Watchman Nee would agree with that summary of Calvinism, then he surely didn't know much if anything about it.

In reply to:

---

The foundation of Calvinism is the Doctrine of predestination.

---

First off, this introductory remark is false. Calvinism's foundation is God, Who has revealed Himself in Scripture, not one part of what He has determined to do in regard to the salvation of sinners. If one were to pick but one aspect of God that Calvinism deems most important, it would be that He is Omnipotent, i.e., sovereign. God's aseity (independence) is incontrovertible as myriad Scriptures teach us. (cf. Rev 4:11; Isa 41:22; 43:13; 44:7; 45:21; 46:9, 10; 55:11; Psa 33:11; 135:6; Dan 4:35; Rom 11:33-36; Eph 1:9-11; et al). The writer posits that because the Scripture declares that not all will be saved, "so in Calvin's mind this must be the will of God to only save some (the Elect) and not all". Calvin came to the conclusion that it must be the will of God not to save all because that is exactly what the Scripture teaches. It is even feasible to conclude that if God wills that all be saved that some will NOT be saved? This would make God's will fallible and is akin to the teaching of Atheism. For, if God is not in total control of all things; having determined all thing according to His immutable counsel, then there is no order to the universe. Events then would occur according to "fate or chance". And what is fate or chance, but no. . .thing.

In reply to:

---

There is no Bible proof that the atonement is limited,

---

Unless the writer, Watchman Nee and yourself are willing to state that every man, woman and child who has ever been born or ever will be born will be saved, then a "limited" atonement is the only logical choice. And this is exactly what the Scriptures teach; i.e., only some are going to be saved that the remainder are going to be judged and cast into everlasting hell. The question is HOW is the atonement "limited"? Calvinism teaches that the atonement was designed to actually atone for a definite number of people. Arminianism and all cults, sects, etc., teach that Christ's atonement was "indefinite", i.e., He didn't actually secure salvation for anyone, thus leaving those who would be saved to provide something to add to what Christ had accomplished. Simply put, Calvinism teaches that Christ's atonement infallible secured all that was necessary to save those whom the Father gave Him. Arminianism teaches that Christ only provided a "possibility" salvation which is ultimately determined by what a person does. (faith+works=salvation). But the the salvation of God is by grace and grace alone. (Eph. 2:8, 9; et al). See this brief challenge by John Owen to all universalists: For Whom Did Christ Die?

In reply to:

---

then how can God be one with a "saved" but sinful creature? Calvin solves this with the theory of imputed righteousness.

---

Again, the writer wrongly states the facts. Calvin's teaching of an "imputed righteousness" was not derived due to a logical conclusion or a contrived "theory", but from sound biblical exegesis of myriad passages. See, for example, Gen 15:6; Psa 106:31; Rom 4:3; 5:1-21; Gal 3:6; Jam 2:23; et al). If the righteousness of Christ is not imputed to a sinner, how is it that a sinner is reckoned as righteous? Is he therefore justified by his own righteousness? (cf. Is 64:6; Rom 1:3-18) Or, is righteousness infused into an individual as the Roman Catholic Church and most all cults believe?

In reply to:

---

If God can no longer see the predestined sinners sin because of imputed righteousness, (which is an impossibility since God is all knowing) then this makes the Elect person's salvation irrevocable, non-negotiable, and inevitable.

---

Once again, the writer has failed to understand the Bible's teaching concerning imputed righteousness. It isn't that God, Who is Omniscient, "can no longer see . . . sin because of imputed righteousness" that a sinner's salvation is irrevocable. But rather, it is because God has decreed to save an individual that it will infallible come to pass. It is simply God's eternal will and His bringing it to pass that makes it irrevocable. Since the Son atoned for the sins of an individual, being a vicarious substitutionary atonement, which satisfied all that the law required, there is nothing upon which God could condemn that individual. As for God "not seeing. . .", this too is erroneous thinking. When a sinner comes to Christ in repentance and a lively faith, God declares that sinner to be righteous. It is a forensic/judicial pronouncement of the Supreme Judge that the sinner is free due to the fact that his debt has been paid in full. Through the blood of Christ the sinner has been reconciled to God. God's enmity has been resolved. God's anger has been propitiated by the removing of the sin which provoked Him to anger. Thus, although the individual continues to sin, the atonement of Christ has completely satisfied the punishment due for them all.

So, how do you biblical refute all of this?

In His Grace,