Are you Arminian, Calvinist, or other?

[ReverendRV]

Don't be so sure the common narrative is correct on this. I can't find it, but I read a letter from Calvin to someone, puzzled that it was claimed he had been consenting to the death of Servetus, when in fact he had tried to avoid it. He certainly did not order it. The following is basically a synopsis, if I understand correctly, of a longer treatment of just what did happen and how to understand it.

The Servetus Affair

“For many,” Bruce Gordon opens his chapter on Calvin and Servetus, “the execution of Michael Servetus in Geneva has defined John Calvin’s posthumous reputation. From the sixteenth century to this day detractors have seized this moment as confirmation of his…

www.desiringgod.org

ChristB4us said:
I am sure one can be agreeing with Calvin side more so but still one can be ensnared to think they have to defend everything Calvin taught just because they agree with some points of truth as applied from the scripture, but I point out that Calvin at one time had agreed to the execution of a heretic which is not supported by scripture but reproved instead.

It depends who controls the Narrative. Often, a Non-Calvinist will promote Calvin and Servetus as a reason to reject Calvinism. A Calvinist will show that Calvin didn't want Servetus dead...

So what happens? You root for your Team anyway...

I stay out of the Servetus and Calvin debate. If something can be found out about Calvin and used against him; something can definitely be found out about ME and be used against me. AND YOU TOO! It doesn't have to be something major, but it can be used against us...

Have you ever noticed how people of different Soteriologies fall on one side or the other? In light of this, Rooting for the home Team is Special Pleading...

 

[Arial]

I understand your view but can you align what is being written in scriptures that runs contrary to your view?

John 15:1I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. 8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.

See how that branch was of the vine and yet can be taken away and cast forth into the fire?

Then we read how He is warning believers to be ready or else be cut off to be with the unbelievers and they will get certain measure of stripes for not being ready and still called servants as still His servants for when He sends that fire on the earth.

Luke 12:40 Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not. 41 Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all? 42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season? 43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. 44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.

45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. 47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. 48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more. 49 I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?

So here we have a cutting and a taken away as having been saved but what? Missing out on the firstfruit of the resurrection for ceasing to abide in Him and thus not being ready to go.

Yet if a saved believer, even a former believer departs from iniquity before the Bridegroom comes, he shall be received as that vessel unto honor in His House but if they do not look to Him for help to depart from iniquity by the time the Bridegroom comes, they will be left behind to die, but their spirts will be with the Lord in Heaven to await for their resurrection after the great tribulation as vessels unto dishonor in His House.

2 Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

So those that have gone astray and those that are saved but fallen into sin in reaping corruption, He will finish His work in those left behind as He will lose none of all the Father has given Him. This explains why there are vessels unto dishonor in His House as they are still saved.

I will have to get to this later as there is much to unpack. And it seems there is conflation in places where there needs to be distinction. I will also break it into sections where it can be done so without losing the thought, so as not to have the post be too long. I have been told I use too many words, go into too much detail--keep it simple. But I like to flesh out my thought processes and cover all the bases. Right now I need to go take care of my dog Boaz and start supper.

 

[makesends]

Figurative as in "pattern for," as in the OT sacrifices were figurative of Christ's sacrifice.
They were penal, substitutionary, sin-covering (while Christ's was sin-remitting) for those
who had faith in the promise (Ge 15:5, seed; Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16).

I see the OT sacrifices as figures OF Christ's sacrifice —the real thing. His sacrifice was not (in my estimation) patterned off of them. His was the reason for them. They were not the reason for his. They were patterned from what he did, which in God's decree, (to my mind, anyway), came 'first'.

 

[ChristB4us]

This is how you should interpret the Parable of the Sower; IE in light of Fundamentals providing Hermeneutical influence in your Doctrine...

Those who left us were never of us...

What you should do is ask me, 'Why is my Verse not a Fundamental?'...

Rightly dividing the word of truth is essential to being fundamental, right?

Why would you apply that verse in 1 John epistle to the parable of the Sower when it was about those departing from us in chasing after the spirits of the antichrist in context?

1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Why not apply what Jesus said what the parable of the Sower meant when He had explained it to His disciples when it is about the 3 different walks of the saved believer that had received the seed?

 

[makesends]

It depends who controls the Narrative. Often, a Non-Calvinist will promote Calvin and Servetus as a reason to reject Calvinism. A Calvinist will show that Calvin didn't want Servetus dead...

So what happens? You root for your Team anyway...

I stay out of the Servetus and Calvin debate. If something can be found out about Calvin and used against him; something can definitely be found out about ME and be used against me. AND YOU TOO! It doesn't have to be something major, but it can be used against us...

Have you ever noticed how people of different Soteriologies fall on one side or the other? In light of this, Rooting for the home Team is Special Pleading...

Nevertheless, there is truth. No?

The author of the article was not Piper, nor, as far as I know, even a Calvinist nor Reformed, though I haven't looked him up to find out. He is an associate professor of philosophy at Wheaton College, which is not known to be Calvinistic, I don't think.

 

[ChristB4us]

Don't be so sure the common narrative is correct on this. I can't find it, but I read a letter from Calvin to someone, puzzled that it was claimed he had been consenting to the death of Servetus, when in fact he had tried to avoid it. He certainly did not order it. The following is basically a synopsis, if I understand correctly, of a longer treatment of just what did happen and how to understand it.

The Servetus Affair

“For many,” Bruce Gordon opens his chapter on Calvin and Servetus, “the execution of Michael Servetus in Geneva has defined John Calvin’s posthumous reputation. From the sixteenth century to this day detractors have seized this moment as confirmation of his…

www.desiringgod.org

From the link:

"What the civil magistrates and Calvin shared was the belief that heresy had to be confronted and punished. Their reasons for holding this belief were probably somewhat different. For Calvin, opposition to heresy was primarily a matter of upholding God’s honor: both heresy and blasphemy were affronts to God, and the purpose of confronting and punishing both heretic and blasphemer was “to vindicate the honor of God by silencing those who sully His holy name” (Ibid., 116). On the issue of whether mercy should be shown to a heretic like Servetus, Calvin thought Christians had no choice, as some of his commentary on Deuteronomy 13 makes clear:

Those who would spare heretics and blasphemers are themselves blasphemers. Here we follow not the authority of men but we hear God speaking as in no obscure terms He commands His church forever. Not in vain does He extinguish all those affections by which our hearts are softened: the love of parents, brothers, neighbors and friends. He . . . practically denudes men of their nature lest any obstacle impede their holy zeal. Why is such implacable zeal demanded unless that devotion to God’s honor should be preferred to all human concerns and as often as His glory is at stake we should expunge from memory our mutual humanity.

And..

"A careful consideration of Calvin’s part in Servetus’s arrest, trial, and execution makes it clear, then, that Servetus’s fate is not “confirmation of [Calvin’s] tyrannical, intolerant character.” Gordon, whom we have already seen to be more than willing to highlight Calvin’s faults, stresses that while Calvin took heresy to be a capital offense, he wanted “Servetus to recant, not die” (Gordon, Calvin, 223). And, indeed, when the sentence was passed that Servetus would be burned at the stake, Calvin tried to get the mode of execution changed to either beheading by sword or hanging because either would be less painful and thus more humane."

That does not sound like he disagrees with execution of heretics.

Unless, I am missing something, that is what I had spotted at a glance.

 

[ReverendRV]

Rightly dividing the word of truth is essential to being fundamental, right?

Why would you apply that verse in 1 John epistle to the parable of the Sower when it was about those departing from us in chasing after the spirits of the antichrist in context?

1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Why not apply what Jesus said what the parable of the Sower meant when He had explained it to His disciples when it is about the 3 different walks of the saved believer that had received the seed?

Why? Because All Scripture is Good for the Doctrine produced from the Parable of the Sower. You use Other Verses to make a point too; right? It's Special Pleading to ask me why, without asking yourself...

Perhaps 2nd Timothy 3:16 is the foremost Fundamental Verse in the Bible. Let's use it as a Hermeneutic...

Hey, I'm going to take a break for a while...

 

[David1701]

Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. - Luke 8:12 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke8:12&version=KJV

I teach that the Trodden ground is the hard hearts of the Reprobate. The Stony and Weedy Soils are Reprobate hearts too, but the Wayside is the hardest Reprobate hearts in existence. If the Gospel Seed weren't carried away, Jesus said he would HAVE to heal them, as he healed the Good Soil...

Jesus did not say that if the gospel seed were not carried away that he would have to heal them.

Luke 8:12 Those by the wayside are those who hear; then comes the devil and takes away the word from their heart, that they may not believe and be saved.

In other words, the devil is trying to make sure that these people cannot be saved. This does not mean that he knows who is elect and who is not; it simply means that he knows the means God uses to save people, so he tries to remove that means from them, as God permits.

 

[makesends]

From the link:

"What the civil magistrates and Calvin shared was the belief that heresy had to be confronted and punished. Their reasons for holding this belief were probably somewhat different. For Calvin, opposition to heresy was primarily a matter of upholding God’s honor: both heresy and blasphemy were affronts to God, and the purpose of confronting and punishing both heretic and blasphemer was “to vindicate the honor of God by silencing those who sully His holy name” (Ibid., 116). On the issue of whether mercy should be shown to a heretic like Servetus, Calvin thought Christians had no choice, as some of his commentary on Deuteronomy 13 makes clear:



And..

"A careful consideration of Calvin’s part in Servetus’s arrest, trial, and execution makes it clear, then, that Servetus’s fate is not “confirmation of [Calvin’s] tyrannical, intolerant character.” Gordon, whom we have already seen to be more than willing to highlight Calvin’s faults, stresses that while Calvin took heresy to be a capital offense, he wanted “Servetus to recant, not die” (Gordon, Calvin, 223). And, indeed, when the sentence was passed that Servetus would be burned at the stake, Calvin tried to get the mode of execution changed to either beheading by sword or hanging because either would be less painful and thus more humane."

That does not sound like he disagrees with execution of heretics.

Unless, I am missing something, that is what I had spotted at a glance.

My bad. I had somehow sleepily assumed it said more. Calvin, as I remember, had repeatedly urged Servetus by letter, not to come to Geneva, for this very reason.

You did apparently miss that Calvin's role in the matter was as an expert witness as to the nature of blasphemy or heresy — not as prosecutor seeking Servetus' death.

 

[ReverendRV]

Jesus did not say that if the gospel seed were not carried away that he would have to heal them.

Luke 8:12 Those by the wayside are those who hear; then comes the devil and takes away the word from their heart, that they may not believe and be saved.

In other words, the devil is trying to make sure that these people cannot be saved. This does not mean that he knows who is elect and who is not; it simply means that he knows the means God uses to save people, so he tries to remove that means from them, as God permits.

I disagree, Jesus did say lest they Believe and be Saved. For you to be right, the Trodden Soil would have to be Elect. For me to be right, the Trodden Soil would have to be Reprobate...

Only the Good Soil was Elect. Why does Satan steal the Gospel? Because it is the Power of God unto Salvation; none of the four Soils had the Power of God unto Salvation. If you believe the Regenerated Good Soil had the Power of God unto Salvation, Salvation would be Synergistic...

 

[David1701]

I believe if we read on from John 3:18, we may see how and why God the Father draws some unto the Son to reveal His Son to them so they can believe in him and be saved and not others whom He foreknew that prefer their evil deeds rather than come to the light to be reproved of them.

Everyone, unless God saves him, prefers his evil deeds, rather than come to the Light. It is by God's grace that we are saved, not by some, supposedly self-generated, better inclination.

Eph. 2:3 (Webster) Among whom also we all had our manner of life in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

 

[David1701]

I disagree, Jesus did say lest they Believe and be Saved. For you to be right, the Trodden Soil would have to be Elect. For me to be right, the Trodden Soil would have to be Reprobate...

The devil takes away the word from their heart, that they not believe and be saved. Of course he tries to stop people from being saved. This is nothing to do with whether or not they are elect, since there is no indication that he knows that.

Only the Good Soil was Elect. Why does Satan steal the Gospel? Because it is the Power of God unto Salvation; none of the four Soils had the Power of God unto Salvation. If you believe the Regenerated Good Soil had the Power of God unto Salvation, Salvation would be Synergistic...

I'm unsure why you posted this. You know that I don't believe in synergism in salvation.

 

[David1701]

As post # 250 explains not any man will be saved if the Father is not behind it this refuting Fullerism.

I don't support Fullerism.

"Specially" of those that believe would refer to individuals that believe and not all men as such a broad category.

"Specially" is a word denoting degree; in other words, the salvation there referred to is all kinds of salvation, not only salvation from sin. Unbelievers get many salvations from disease, disasters, famines, droughts, wars, etc.; but, they do not get salvation from sin, death and hell.

What about the preceding verse at the beginning of the chapter?



Romans 5:1Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

What about it?

Seems the KJV has it right after all.

Only if "atonement" is taken to mean "at-one-ment" (i.e. reconciliation), which is not its normal meaning.

 

[ReverendRV]

The devil takes away the word from their heart, that they not believe and be saved. Of course he tries to stop people from being saved. This is nothing to do with whether or not they are elect, since there is no indication that he knows that.



I'm unsure why you posted this. You know that I don't believe in synergism in salvation.

The devil doesn't know, but the Holy Spirit knows. The Holy Spirit drew distinctions between the four Soils. The Condition of the Soils diminishes from the Good Soil to Rocky and Weedy Soils; to the worse Soil there is. The Trodden Soil is the Reprobate Heart. But if the Gospel were not carried off, it would take root. The Gospel is like the grass you see growing in sidewalk cracks...

 

[David1701]

The devil doesn't know, but the Holy Spirit knows. The Holy Spirit drew distinctions between the four Soils. The Condition of the Soils diminishes from the Good Soil to Rocky and Weedy Soils; to the worse Soil there is. The Trodden Soil is the Reprobate Heart. But if the Gospel were not carried off, it would take root. The Gospel is like the grass you see growing in sidewalk cracks...

But if the Gospel were not carried off, it would take root.

The verse does not say that. You are reading it into the text.

 

[ReverendRV]

The verse does not say that. You are reading it into the text.

Right the Verse doesn't say that...

So let's take this approach. Do you think the Trodden Soil is the Reprobate heart or the Elect heart? I suspect you to agree the Weedy and Stony Soils are Reprobate hearts because of their failure. Isn't it true that the Parable steps down further and further into Reprobation?

I'm getting tired, I had to edit this Post too much...

 

[Deleted member 5]

Jesus did not say that if the gospel seed were not carried away that he would have to heal them.

Exactly. That is quite a spin being placed upon the word there.

Luke 8:12 Those by the wayside are those who hear; then comes the devil and takes away the word from their heart, that they may not believe and be saved.

In other words, the devil is trying to make sure that these people cannot be saved. This does not mean that he knows who is elect and who is not; it simply means that he knows the means God uses to save people, so he tries to remove that means from them, as God permits.

Here are my thoughts on this text. I don't think the point Jesus is making is that Satan can literally prevent persons from being saved, but is illustrating via parable that through the word of God those intended to be saved will be. Those intended on being saved would be the good soil, and the others, Biblically speaking, could never have been saved.

Satan does take the word from others however he is able to do so, but, if we want to entertain the point further here, why is he not capable of doing this to all persons? The point of him doing these things is showing the futility of his actions (as if he were literally preventing a person from being saved). These are merely the allowed workings in those who will not ever be saved and shows his limitations.

It is not like "Oh, shucks, if only they would believe they would be saved" which in the end is a disingenuous theory that fails the 2 Timothy 2:15 test.

We know that there are none whom God intends to save who will not be saved. The other issue is when some attempt to make a parable walk on all fours, as they say, they come up with Biblical and theological contradictions as teachings.

 

[Arial]

John 15:1I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. 8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.

See how that branch was of the vine and yet can be taken away and cast forth into the fire?

Here Jesus is invoking OT imagery of Israel as God's vine to indict Israel's leaders who should have been producing the fruit of His vineyard and were not. Jesus is the true Vine and the unfruitful branches of Israel were taken away. A person abiding in Jesus is depicting an organic union with Him---branches that bear fruit, not of themselves but by Him and that union. They bear the fruit because they are in the Vine and will bear fruit because they are in the Vine. It is not saying that one can lose their salvation or stop abiding in Him. He is making declarative statements of fact.

Now they are perfectly in agreement with all the scriptures that declare we cannot be separated from Christ. Rather than being an apparent contradiction.

 

[ReverendRV]

Exactly. That is quite a spin being placed upon the word there.

Here are my thoughts on this text. I don't think the point Jesus is making is that Satan can literally prevent persons from being saved, but is illustrating via parable that through the word of God those intended to be saved will be. Those intended on being saved would be the good soil, and the others, Biblically speaking, could never have been saved.

Satan does take the word from others however he is able to do so, but, if we want to entertain the point further here, why is he not capable of doing this to all persons? The point of him doing these things is showing the futility of his actions (as if he were literally preventing a person from being saved). These are merely the allowed workings in those who will not ever be saved and shows his limitations.

It is not like "Oh, shucks, if only they would believe they would be saved" which in the end is a disingenuous theory that fails the 2 Timothy 2:15 test.

We know that there are none whom God intends to save who will not be saved. The other issue is when some attempt to make a parable walk on all fours, as they say, they come up with Biblical and theological contradictions as teachings.

If satan can carry the Gospel Seed away from the Trodden Soil where nothing grows, it proves they are Reprobate. satan is unable to carry the Gospel Seed away from the Rocky, Weedy and Good Soils...

 

[David1701]

Right the Verse doesn't say that...

So let's take this approach. Do you think the Trodden Soil is the Reprobate heart or the Elect heart? I suspect you to agree the Weedy and Stony Soils are Reprobate hearts because of their failure. Isn't it true that the Parable steps down further and further into Reprobation?

I'm getting tired, I had to edit this Post too much...

Let me cut this discussion short, by saying that the issue here is not about whether or not the wayside soil represents a reprobate heart (although it does). The issue is that you are assuming something that the verse does not state (or even imply), which is that these people would believe, if the devil did not take the word from their heart.

If the devil wants to stop someone from being saved, someone who has heard the gospel, one of the things he tries, is to take the word from that person's heart. This does not mean that the person would believe if he hadn't done that.