Calvinism vs. Arminianism

[marks]

T - Total Depravity: Calvinism teaches that man is totally depraved and cannot make a decision to receive Christ unless he has already been born again of the Holy Spirit.

I would teach that there is a middle ground between total depravity and being born again...being drawn by the Holy Spirit...in which a man, who is not yet regenerated or born again, is enabled to either receive or reject Christ in that window of opportunity in which the Holy Spirit is drawing him. If he then receives Christ rather than rejecting Him, he becomes born again of the Holy Spirit through faith in Jesus Christ.

Verses that substantiate this are Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 5:1-2.

There's a term I've heard, "prevenient grace", that was defined something like a grace given to us that enables us to choos whether we will believe or not. I think this agrees well with Titus,

Titus 2:11-12
11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

JP Green translates this as "For the saving grace of God has appeared to all men." I think this refers to a measure of faith being given to each, and that we have to choose whether we will "mix our faith with the Word",

Hebrews 4:2
For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

I think that this idea of total depravity is right, that mankind is fatally corrupted, and unable to seek after God. But that God gives us a grace to enable us to choose to mix the faith He gives to us with the Gospel message we receive.

Much love!

 

[marks]

And no, you are not saved before placing that faith in Christ. It is a simultaneous interaction. The regeneration of the spirit to accept faith.

Simultaneous interaction, you are meaning actions taken by both parties at the same instant?

Isn't your view that God performs the action? And that God's regeneration is what enables the person to have faith?

Much love!

 

[reformed1689]

I don't find a difference between that and hyper-Calvinism at its roots.

Because you don't know what hyper-calvinism and calvinism is as I stated before. If you lump them together we truly cannot have a genuine discussion on this because you don't grasp the basics.

 

[reformed1689]

There's a term I've heard, "prevenient grace", that was defined something like a grace given to us that enables us to choos whether we will believe or not. I think this agrees well with Titus,

Titus 2:11-12
11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

JP Green translates this as "For the saving grace of God has appeared to all men." I think this refers to a measure of faith being given to each, and that we have to choose whether we will "mix our faith with the Word",

Hebrews 4:2
For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

I think that this idea of total depravity is right, that mankind is fatally corrupted, and unable to seek after God. But that God gives us a grace to enable us to choose to mix the faith He gives to us with the Gospel message we receive.

Much love!

Yeah that is Arminianism and not biblical. Scripture clearly states that all God chooses will come to faith. John 6:37

 

[reformed1689]

Really, my conversation is with you, not a link, so, you need not answer me.

No worries!

Much love!

You wanted to know the difference, I gave you where to go for the answer, if you choose not to read it that is your own problem, not mine.

 

[marks]

As concerning 3...

Denies that the gospel makes any “offer” of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal), OR

I'm curious why "offer" is in quotes.



It seems like an artificial distinction to me. You're a "hyper-Calvinist" if you don't think the "offer" of salvation is to all, except, the Calvinist view is that only those selected by God for salvation will be saved. It make the "offer to all" disengenuous, deceptive, and God does not lie.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Yeah that is Arminianism and not biblical. Scripture clearly states that all God chooses will come to faith. John 6:37

Actually, I think I just quoted a verse to you that supports this idea.

You may want to dismiss with a label, "That's arminianism", or whatever label you want to plunk down, but that's not discussion, that's dismissing.

Now, are you thinking that somehow John 6:37 negates the statements made in Titus? I don't.

My comment was regarding how the depraved can be saved.

Much love!

 

[marks]

You wanted to know the difference, I gave you where to go for the answer, if you choose not to read it that is your own problem, not mine.

It's not really a problem to me. Like I said, no worries! This is not a concern.

Mostly, I'm just saying, I can google links all day long. If you have a comment or question, I'm generally interested. That's all.

Much love!

 

[reformed1689]

Actually, I think I just quoted a verse to you that supports this idea.

You may want to dismiss with a label, "That's arminianism", or whatever label you want to plunk down, but that's not discussion, that's dismissing.

Now, are you thinking that somehow John 6:37 negates the statements made in Titus? I don't.

My comment was regarding how the depraved can be saved.

Much love!

No, I am saying you are wrong about what Titus 2 is talking about. The grace of God that appeared is Jesus Christ. It's not talking about a measure of Grace.

 

[reformed1689]

As concerning 3...

It seems to me that the point of Limited Atonement indicates that if someone is of the non-elect, they cannot be saved even if they do what it takes to be saved.

I have argued this point with Calvinists before.

I have said that if someone does what it takes to be saved, that it proves that they are of the elect.

But it really does seem to me that they have made point after point that have the implication that if you are not of the elect, you cannot be saved and that God knows whether or not you are one of His elect and therefore He might cast you out if you come to Him but are of the non-elect.

John 6:37 would tell us differently, of course.

Calvinists that I have contended with believe that if someone does what it takes to be saved, they may not be saved because if they are of the non-elect they cannot be saved no matter what they do.

This doctrine is based in the idea that we cannot save ourselves by anything that we might do but that God does all the saving.

Even to the exclusion of the reality that if we place our faith in Jesus, that faith gives us access into grace (Romans 5:2).

Nothing anyone "does" saves them. Or do you believe in works-based salvation?

 

[reformed1689]

It seems like an artificial distinction to me. You're a "hyper-Calvinist" if you don't think the "offer" of salvation is to all, except, the Calvinist view is that only those selected by God for salvation will be saved. It make the "offer to all" disengenuous, deceptive, and God does not lie.

Again, a misunderstanding of the Calvinist position. The blood of Christ was sufficient to save all, but only effectual for the elect. Because only the elect will follow Him.

 

[marks]

U - Unconditional Election: Calvinism teaches that God arbitrarily chooses out some people for heaven and others for hell based on His choice alone.

I would teach that the Lord predestinates according to foreknowledge.

It is like the following parable.

You see a door in front of you with a sign on it that says, "Whosoever will, let him come." Upon entering, you find a table set with a nametag with your name on it at a place that was specifically set for you. You look back at the door and see a sign that says, "Predestined from before the foundations of the world."

Predestination according to foreknowledge means that the Lord knows who, when faced with the door with the sign on the outside, will choose to walk through that door; and before you walked through it He set a place for you knowing that you would be a guest at the dinner table. In this, He chose you and you did not choose Him; because eternity is a greater thing than time; and God from eternity looked down into time and saw you making the decision to receive Him; and then, by His predetermined counsel and will, chose you and did everything in his Omnipotent power to bring you into the kingdom.

But He still bases His decision on the fact that He looked down from eternity and saw that you received Him.

Verses that substantiate this are Romans 8:29-30 and 1 Peter 1:2.

I think something to remember is what we are predestined to.

For those he did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son, that he might be the firstborn of many brothers.

We are not predestined to be saved, but in God's foreknowledge of our salvation, we are predestined to become like Jesus.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Again, a misunderstanding of the Calvinist position. The blood of Christ was sufficient to save all, but only effectual for the elect. Because only the elect will follow Him.

I don't think this is a misunderstanding at all. Only an unfortunate fact of Calvinist doctrine.

marks said: ↑

. . . the Calvinist view is that only those selected by God for salvation will be saved. It make the "offer to all" disengenuous, deceptive, and God does not lie.

Isn't your view that while God offers salvation to all, only those chosen by God will be saved? Is that not what you believe?

Much love!

 

[reformed1689]

I think something to remember is what we are predestined to.

For those he did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son, that he might be the firstborn of many brothers.

We are not predestined to be saved, but in God's foreknowledge of our salvation, we are predestined to become like Jesus.

Much love!

First, nobody who is not saved is going to be conformed to his Son. Second, you really should learn to not isolate Scriptures and look at the whole.

 

[reformed1689]

I don't think this is a misunderstanding at all. Only an unfortunate fact of Calvinist doctrine.

marks said: ↑

. . . the Calvinist view is that only those selected by God for salvation will be saved. It make the "offer to all" disengenuous, deceptive, and God does not lie.

Isn't your view that while God offers salvation to all, only those chosen by God will be saved? Is that not what you believe?

Much love!

Yes, what is the problem with that? If you have a problem with that you have a problem with God not Calvinism.

 

[marks]

First, nobody who is not saved is going to be conformed to his Son. Second, you really should learn to not isolate Scriptures and look at the whole.

And thirdly, you should learn to stop your pejoratives.

I mean, do you really need to stoop down like that to make your point?

Much love!

 

[marks]

First, nobody who is not saved is going to be conformed to his Son.

Of course. Even so, let's remember what the passages actually say.

I think a cause of much misunderstanding of the Bible is people may sometimes subtly reword a passage in their mind to make it align a little better with something else they think, and then forget that they've done that. So the idea gets implanted in the mind, but not actuall what the Scripture says. I'm not saying you are doing that here. But I am saying that the verse in mention doesn't make the statement you make.

Predestination is not spoken of as towards salvation, being justified, for instance, instead, towards being conformed to Jesus' image. The difference is the salvation itself, is that what is predetermined, or the result of salvation? In this passage, it is the result, and not the salvation itself.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Isn't your view that while God offers salvation to all, only those chosen by God will be saved?

Yes, what is the problem with that?

In your view, God is "offering" something He has ZERO intention to give. Doesn't plan to. Doesn't want to. Never meant it. Only words.

That is disengenuous, which is really another word for dishonest.

Much love!

 

[reformed1689]

And thirdly, you should learn to stop your pejoratives.

I mean, do you really need to stoop down like that to make your point?

Much love!

Stoop down because I said you are isolating Scripture? If you think that is stooping down you really are way to sensitive.

 

[reformed1689]

Isn't your view that while God offers salvation to all, only those chosen by God will be saved?



In your view, God is "offering" something He has ZERO intention to give. Doesn't plan to. Doesn't want to. Never meant it. Only words.

That is disengenuous, which is really another word for dishonest.

Much love!

No. He is offering something that humans do not want. There is a difference.