The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Question about Calvinism from Arminian brother

Ok... one last reply then I have to GET TO WORK!



Yes, of course. Such great verses. They are pertaining to God's grand design of reconciling mankind to Himself through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. This relates to whether God has any plans for the future at all and whether Jesus just happened to fulfill all 109 prophesies by luck.
Since we are not arguing Open Theism, we'll both agree with what these verses are saying.


I don't know of any theology that adheres to that concept of God's sovereignty, unless it is some form of pseudo-Calvinism that you have come across. I would be interested in your other posts, if you would please link them here.

Regarding A and B, we are going back and forth on this. I'm going to break down the logic a little simpler for you, then I think I'm going to solve the problem for you. I'll expect a gift card or something for it.

My argument is

(A) No action by any man will have any bearing on the salvation of any man.

(B) The minister sharing the gospel is an action.

(C) The minister sharing the gospel will have no bearing on the salvation of the dying man.

By this logic, you might be tempted to accept A. B is basic and undeniable. C is thus irrefutably concluded.

The only way out of this is to deny A, which I think you actually don't believe anyway. I think your defense to this line of argument is to restate premise A.

(A) No choice by any man will have any bearing on the salvation of any man.

(B) If the minister's witness is the divinely ordained means for the sinner's salvation, his action of witnessing will not be a choice, but will be mandated by God.

(C) The minister sharing the gospel will have bearing on the salvation of the dying man.

This is where I whip out my Gotcha question I save for all Arminians :D, why does one choose life and another choose death?

and then you have to account for those who have never been presented with the Gospel (i.e. life long Muslims, heathens, etc.)

You do a pretty good job explaining your position and I like your answers to my questions.

Is Calvin's position based purely on logic? Well, Calvin borrowed heavily from Augustine who used scriptures to trounce the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians.

Arminians are not the same as these groups in that they agree man has no ability to be saved without the grace of God, I believe you guys call it Prevenient grace. That God gives the individual the initial grace that enables them to be saved - here's where the cooperation on the part of the individual must come in. This becomes the crux of the matter and brings me back to

So does everyone on this planet have the grace needed to make the right choice? And why do some choose life and others death?

I believe the Bible supports Calvinism, not in a straight forward matter so much but when breaking it down to the essentials and taking the Bible as a whole:

T otal Depravity of Man
U nconditional Election
L imited Atonement
I rresistable Grace
P ersevernce of the Saved

Uh-oh, AC's bringing out the big guns now!


Ok, well. I don't have time for a lengthy response. I know that you are probably thinking, in that Calvinistic brain of yours (haha, I tease only), that it is because God's grace is more abundantly distributed to the one who chooses to believe.

However, that would be the conclusion in a world-view without free will. And that is of course my answer to your question. Free will.

I'm sure you were expecting this answer and have a follow-up and so I will quickly post this reply and hide out in my bunker as you start dropping bombs on it...

Kent

We are most certainly not agreeing on what those passages are saying. What they are saying is that God predestined ALL that occurred concerning the crucifixion and ALL that happened beforehand, e.g., the prophesies given to the men of old which foretold the coming of Christ, His life, death and resurrection. And pray tell how is it that all those prophecies came to pass exactly as predicted if God had not foreordained ALL things? I suppose we could reduce all possible answers to three groups:

1. God decree all things according to His eternal determinate council without reference to anything in any man.
2. God somehow foresaw these things happening by 'looking into the future', which results in POST-destination.
3. God, as well as men, was amazed that they happened due to the infinite possibilities which were necessary for them to actually occur.

So, where do you stand?

Actually, this view does not originate with some 'pseudo-Calvinism' but rather from historic classic Arminianism. You can read this for yourself in the Canons of Dordt, Article 1 in the section: "Rejections of Errors".

Unfortunately, you aren't comprehending what I have written several times on this matter.

1. Man DOES have a 'choice' and is wholly responsible to make that choice.
2. That choice does have a definite bearing upon one's salvation.
3. The bringing of the Gospel and a person's response to it are certainly to be considered "actions".
4. But the instrument (minister's bearing witness to Christ in the Gospel) and the exercise of the sinner's will (the making of a choice) are the ordained means of God to save each and every individual He has presdestinated and elected to salvation in Christ.

All these things are done most freely, i.e., without a forcing of man's will, but they would have never occurred without the Spirit's influence and working in man.

As you can plainly see, and which history and logic shows, you cannot bifurcate the doctrine of predestination from the doctrine of the Fall and Original Sin, aka: Total Depravity. Nevertheless, the topic for discussion in this particular thread is Predestination. Therefore, I must ask you a couple of questions:

1. Do you believe that God has predestined some of Adam's fallen race to salvation and some to damnation?
2. If your answer to #1 is yes, even in part, then upon what basis did God base that predestination?

My friend Pilgrim,

As I am participating in this discussion, I am being very careful to make sure that I fully understand your points, from your point of view before responding and that my response is something that encourages you to deeper thinking. I'm careful not to have any tone, and please let me know if I do, that might be belittling or argumentative. Let us be examples to the world on how to discuss our disagreements.

Now, I apologize for such a brief point, but can you please explain how you can argue that the following four statements are all true. You are correct in that I am not comprehending how you can state that all of these statements are true.

1. No action by any man will have any bearing on the salvation of any man.
2. Man DOES have a 'choice' and is wholly responsible to make that choice.
3. That choice does have a definite bearing upon one's salvation.
4. The bringing of the Gospel and a person's response to it are certainly to be considered "actions".

If we work this backwards and simplify, you are saying:

1. The action (bringing the Gospel) is a choice that has bearing upon one's salvation.
2. No action by man can have a bearing upon one's salvation.

I'm sure that you can see how supporting two opposites is confusing to me.

Another apparent self contradiction is where you say "All these things are done most freely, i.e., without a forcing of man's will" and yet you believe in Irresistible Salvation and Unconditional Election. In fact, you probably also believe in Compatibilistic Free Will, which states that God does not coerce man to choose against his will, but rather sovereignly determines what man wills in the first place. How is "determining what a man wills" not "forcing a man's will"?


1. No, of course not. That's the whole point of Arminianism.
2. N/A

Ok, I'll put my machine gun away for now

At this juncture, all is just dandy.

1. I've never written what you have in #1. However, IF I have stated this, then it was due to a typo. Put positively, every action of every man will have a definite bearing on the salvation of a man. What you seem to be laboring under is the falsehood that Calvinists believe that men are mere 'puppets'. But nothing could be further from the truth. Men are free agents, i.e., they are very capable and do make choices (actions). The issue is, what choices/actions are men capable of doing in their natural fallen state? Are they DEAD or simply wounded?

Again, #2 is totally opposite of what I have written several times. ALL actions have a bearing upon one's salvation. One must repent of sin(s) and believe the Gospel. God has ordained the means as well as the end. Repentance and faith are the result/fruit of God's sovereign work of regeneration, which is the means unto salvation. Thus these "actions" have a "bearing" upon one's salvation for without them, salvation is impossible. Now, what has been added here in addition to predestination is the doctrine of the Fall and that of "Effectual Calling", aka: "Irresistible Grace".

1. I do not believe in anything called, "Irresistible Salvation". Rather, I believe in "Irresistible Grace".

2. No I do not believe in "Compatibilistic Free Will" or any other kind of "free-will". I believe in "free-agency", i.e., men are more than capable of making choices... According to their nature.

3. This is worded rather poorly; sorry! Yes, I believe God does not "force" a man's will, i.e., no man is forced to do that which is contrary to his will, which is determined by his nature. A man in his natural fallen state will most freely choose sin but is totally incapable of choosing not to sin (Gen 6:5; 8:21; Eccl 7:29; 8:11; 9:3; Isa 64:6; Jer 13:23; 17:9; Jh 5:40; 6:44,65; Rom 3:10-18; Eph 2:1-5)

Would I be correct then, that since you deny that God has predestined some to salvation, that you totally reject any notion whatsoever of predestination? Remember, I did ask and qualified #1 in #2 above, with the phrase "even in part".

a. If you totally reject any idea of predestination, then you are not Arminian in your theology. Classic, historical Arminianism clearly affirms that God has elected some to salvation. In the matter of damnation, it avers to agnosticism... they are not sure.

b. IF you affirm there is no predestination then what do you do with all the myriad passages of Scripture which speak of predestination, ordination, ordained, chosen, elected, etc.?? :scratch2:

c. IF you affirm that there is a scriptural doctrine of predestination, then what do you believe it teaches? I asked this question in my last reply but you haven't responded with an answer.

I agree with Pilgrim, men are free agents. We have the ability to make choices and will do so (and can only do so) according to our nature.

Man does not possess a free state of neutrality (similar to Adam & Eve pre-Fall) when it comes to spiritual matters, as the unBilical Arminian doctrine of prevenient grace teaches.

Our wills are in bondage to sin and we are incapable of choosing or doing anything that is spiritually good until we are spiritually restored via regeneration. After we are regenerated we are no longer enslaved to the old fallen nature. We are new creatures made alive in Christ.

Hi again

I may start another topic, however being how in the next little while I am not completely sure how much time I can spend on this. Perhaps others on this board might want to start a new thread, after all many of those verses (and articles) came from this site.
However, I will state that Romans chapter 9, Ephesians chapter one and John 6 just to name a few were very influential.

Tom