Why so much against Calvinism?

[jeremiah1five]

Okay. I disagree there also. Mainly because I am not a premill. But thats for another thread.

Thanks for your reply.

If I understand pre-mil I am not either.

 

[360watt]

Believers will struggle with sin until they are glorified, we may be born anew but the law of sin remains. Those who walk away and never return are those who were never part in the first place. But only God knows the heart.

I don't know why you would have an issue with believing the saved will remain? It has nothing to do with works salvation.

Which verse?


It's about a lively faith, which produces good works. Good works are a fruit of the Spirit.

Yes, proved by his believing God. Again, everyone who believes has been born again. So, if you are believing, it's proof God has done His work in you.

...............

Okay.

Okay

I agree.

I can't help but wonder who you know that is a Calvinist that would say such, or maybe you heard them wrong? Why would they say such, because you're not a Calvinist? Is that what you think?
I'm a 5-point Calvinist and I have no doubt I have synergist brothers and sisters in Christ. I also believe you are wrong and probably misunderstang something about Calvinists, because I highly doubt a mature Christian (Calvinist) would say you're not saved if you're not a Calvinist.



No, not true again. I'd ask you to defend that thought.

Matter of fact, there are Calvinists besides myself here. Ask..

Okay, yeah I picked up on that this site is actually run by calvinists. I may not stick around here. But I have encountered it alot in other forums.. where someone will talk of someone caught up in sin.. and then a bunch of calvinists come down on them with 'never saved in the first place' lines.

If someone is not saved by works at all at salvation.. then works after salvation shouldn't be the measure of someone's eternal state. The measure would be if they believed Jesus is God, that He died and rose again and believed the were given eternal life by that. Not if they were faithfully going to church or sharing their faith etc..


There will be fruit from being saved. That doesn't mean they will continual faithfully to the end.

I'l' try some other topics.

 

[Carbon]

No.. a believer can't lose salvation. I'm not Armenian.

No all Arminians believe one can lose salvation.

And there are false converts. I agree with that.

Okay.

But carnal christians are a reality.

Explain Carnal Christians, please. Thanks

Paul called himself chief of sinners. He knew he had a fleshly nature as well as being able to follow the Spirit.

The more you know Christ the more you hate your sin.

There are wayward believers.. they exist.

You use some language I am not familiar with. Sorry. What is a wayward believer?

 

[360watt]

YOU SAID: Why is it so difficult for Arminians, (semi-pelagians and other free will believers) to accept reformed theology? Why are they so much against Calvinism? And actively against it?

RESPONSE: People are uncomfortable they have no control over salvation. But it's more than just being uncomfortable not having control, their pride in their own sufficiency blinds them to the truth of God and His plan of salvation. It is born from a deep-seated hatred for God.
And since they cannot touch God to harm Him they attack those who claim salvation is of the Lord in all its parts.
It will be the unconverted of Arminianism that will kill believers thinking they do God service in the Tribulation.
The Church will go through the Time of Jacobs Trouble with Israel.

And here it is... calling professing believers unsaved. There are false converts of course. But this is very common with calvinists.. condemning others they do not know what God has done with their soul.

This is the issue-- this is why we rail against calvinism.. the arrogance of the chosen.

No all Arminians believe one can lose salvation.

Okay.

Explain Carnal Christians, please. Thanks

The more you know Christ the more you hate your sin.

You use some language I am not familiar with. Sorry. What is a wayward believer?

Okay-- someone who is saved .. can still struggle with sin.. any sin. There is no guarantee a saved person will be faithful. It isn't what God wants for a saved person.. but it happens. So there are wayward believers. Someone who intially believes.. but fails. It happens.

 

[Carbon]

And here it is... calling professing believers unsaved. There are false converts of course. But this is very common with calvinists.. condemning others they do not know what God has done with their soul.

This is the issue-- this is why we rail against calvinism.. the arrogance of the chosen.

As I said, ask a Calvinist. Unless you are here to just attack Calvinism?

Okay-- someone who is saved .. can still struggle with sin.. any sin. There is no guarantee a saved person will be faithful. It isn't what God wants for a saved person.. but it happens. So there are wayward believers. Someone who intially believes.. but fails. It happens.

This is not a carnal Christian.

 

[360watt]

As I said, ask a Calvinist. Unless you are here to just attack Calvinism?


This is not a carnal Christian.

I'll stop attacking calvinism. It's just a bugbear of mine from being attacked myself. The worst kind in my opinion are charismatic calvinists.. because they not only attach a whole lot of things to what a believer should be doing.. but attach speaking in tongues and sign gifts as proof of having been chosen.

Anyway.. I'll go to another topic. I didn't expect when I was referred here to be on a calvinistic site.. but it's ok.

 

[Carbon]

I'll stop attacking calvinism.

Thank you. {EDIT- and Arminianism as well} Disagreeing and debating them is fine.

It's just a bugbear of mine from being attacked myself.

I understand how that could happen, were all human.

The worst kind in my opinion are charismatic calvinists.. because they not only attach a whole lot of things to what a believer should be doing.. but attach speaking in tongues and sign gifts as proof of having been chosen.

Anyway.. I'll go to another topic. I didn't expect when I was referred here to be on a calvinistic site.. but it's ok.

You are welcome here and no one will attack you personally. But to be on any forum, you have to grow thick skin, because some of your beliefs will be debated.

 

[Carbon]

I'm concentrating now real hard in order to grow think skin! Just think how much smarter I'll be!

darn typos. Thanks

 

[makesends]

The phrase chosen has two aspects, the generic, Jesus chooses those who have followed ie. His people are His followers, or out of a crowd He chooses randomly individuals who come to be a believer.

The generic, if that is an accurate description of it, is an illusion. God doesn't do anything randomly, and he is particularly particular about whom he saves. He has plans, specific members of the Body of Christ, and the Bride of Christ. And he created the particular people he had in mind from the beginning for his use of them. He doesn't choose from a pool of possibles. He has no second string players.

I suppose, for some readers, that's not good enough. Then I would like them to explain to me how anything can happen by 'Random' and his unpredictable sister, "Chance", or how they can even logically be real. It is self-contradictory to think that they can determine anything.

 

[jeremiah1five]

And here it is... calling professing believers unsaved. There are false converts of course. But this is very common with calvinists.. condemning others they do not know what God has done with their soul.

This is the issue-- this is why we rail against calvinism.. the arrogance of the chosen.


Okay-- someone who is saved .. can still struggle with sin.. any sin. There is no guarantee a saved person will be faithful. It isn't what God wants for a saved person.. but it happens. So there are wayward believers. Someone who intially believes.. but fails. It happens.

God does not raise failures. In the eyes of man it may appear to be failure but God is the Author and finisher of our faith. No one can initially believe and fail.

Who exactly did I call unsaved who professed to be a believer?

Or are we just a false accuser of the brethren?

 

[PeterJens]

Your problem seems to belong to only you, because Reformed people who believe in predestination (by the way, that word is in the Bible itself, so how you can't believe that is another problem...) have never taught not to evangelise people. The opposite is the case. I must conclude that you picked that idea off of the internet somewhere.

Repentance and following Jesus has been the mountain some have demolished. Evangelism is preaching repentance and following. So spreading a belief system that is not Christian to me is no long evangelism.

Why is it the belief in the failure of the human heart to in any way be acceptable to God has led to gnostic ideas of being spiritually alive but in one's flesh doomed? It is because responsibility for sin has been removed from the believer and only Christ's covering matters, the rest is just self righteousness.

God gives us real choices and real opportunities. Equally we are predestined to the Kingdom, chosen and blessed. This tension matters, but maybe if one suffers from depression or PTSD, it is impossible to see or express.

So I wonder which is real and is this even a discussion or maybe just a declaration of insecurity and emotional health?

 

[PeterJens]

The generic, if that is an accurate description of it, is an illusion. God doesn't do anything randomly, and he is particularly particular about whom he saves. He has plans, specific members of the Body of Christ, and the Bride of Christ. And he created the particular people he had in mind from the beginning for his use of them. He doesn't choose from a pool of possibles. He has no second string players.

I suppose, for some readers, that's not good enough. Then I would like them to explain to me how anything can happen by 'Random' and his unpredictable sister, "Chance", or how they can even logically be real. It is self-contradictory to think that they can determine anything.

Predestination has embedded in it choice. God's choice and our choice. If one holds all sinners equally lost and incapable then to be chosen is random, without outcome judgements only God's choice. If God's choice is like a farmers seeking good fruit and certain responses and outcomes this is a cause and effect.

For some a response affect is earning salvation, so heresy. For me love is about interaction and choice by both parties. God is love, so His gift of life is choice.

Those lost in darkness are lost and doomed but when the light appears so does a real choice. Equally we are born loving, though often betrayed it is still real. To see sin as revenge on this betrayal makes sense of our God given image of the Father and why we desire to be in the Kingdom.

 

[Alive]

I have not finished reading the thread, but I agree with much of what my brethren have opined.
Especially regarding those who are militant and on a mission to attack the reformed, I see a particular pride at work…but are blind to it.
Its an odd thing when so much of the record can be ignored so. I have seldom witnessed an open mind.
Having High Towers will do that.
If there is anything clear from Gen to Rev, besides the Word Himself…it is that God Chooses and God Does. And this according to His Eternal Purpose, as mentioned by Paul.

 

[PeterJens]

I think you believe a believer can lose their salvation. Is this the issue?

If you read the parable of the soils, you may notice that all the soils, but the prepared soil, produce fruit quickly. Then die off. Which proves they were never saved in the first place. Are you interested in going through Hebrews 6:4-6?


I'll start a thread.

A reductionist view says what is important in Jesus is a salvation transaction, and nothing else.
If one believes revelation and acceptance is salvation alone, at any point in ones life, no matter what is done later in life, then you end up saying a flash in the pan is what Jesus came to die for.

Jesus emphasises it is the walk of the straight path that matters, the driving of love from the heart. Pauls question is how can this be achieved? Not through asceticism, though being good for the body does not relieve spiritual stress etc. Of course if our walk matters, or the communion with the Lord, having a loving soft heart, then you raise ideas of being close to Jesus and possibly falling away.

If you take the letters to the churches in Revelation, overcoming is the key point here. The idea we can fail, need to repent and work through issues is simply not clear cut for those who are perfectionists or nothing, failure can never lead to success.. Yet look at the temple and sacrifices for sin, and the Lord continually forgiving His people, so the walk could continue. This doubly emphasises the walk is eternity, a true reflection of realisation of the heart. Armenians often take this too far, without pain there is no meaning, while calvanists often declare with is just pomposity.

What the accuser of the brethren loves is what each side claim they have the "truth" and exagerate the other side of the argument. Pauls answer was follow his example as he followed Christ and do not judge one another. I have seen hurt people make the enemy of another group, and then fight committing sin and lying while claiming to know Jesus and the truth.

So can we ever say who has salvation and who has not? I think that is Gods territory, but we can say what behaviour is loving and filled with the Holy Spirit, and bless those folk. God bless you

 

[Dave_Regenerated]

A reductionist view says what is important in Jesus is a salvation transaction, and nothing else.
If one believes revelation and acceptance is salvation alone, at any point in ones life, no matter what is done later in life, then you end up saying a flash in the pan is what Jesus came to die for.

Jesus emphasises it is the walk of the straight path that matters, the driving of love from the heart. Pauls question is how can this be achieved? Not through asceticism, though being good for the body does not relieve spiritual stress etc. Of course if our walk matters, or the communion with the Lord, having a loving soft heart, then you raise ideas of being close to Jesus and possibly falling away.

If you take the letters to the churches in Revelation, overcoming is the key point here. The idea we can fail, need to repent and work through issues is simply not clear cut for those who are perfectionists or nothing, failure can never lead to success.. Yet look at the temple and sacrifices for sin, and the Lord continually forgiving His people, so the walk could continue. This doubly emphasises the walk is eternity, a true reflection of realisation of the heart. Armenians often take this too far, without pain there is no meaning, while calvanists often declare with is just pomposity.

What the accuser of the brethren loves is what each side claim they have the "truth" and exagerate the other side of the argument. Pauls answer was follow his example as he followed Christ and do not judge one another. I have seen hurt people make the enemy of another group, and then fight committing sin and lying while claiming to know Jesus and the truth.

So can we ever say who has salvation and who has not? I think that is Gods territory, but we can say what behaviour is loving and filled with the Holy Spirit, and bless those folk. God bless you

I believe it is Arminian and not Armenian. Armenia is a place.

 

[civic]

I believe it is Arminian and not Armenian. Armenia is a place.

Yes and their cuisine is quite good I might add

 

[Dave_Regenerated]

Yes and their cuisine is quite good I might add

I wonder if there are any Arminians in Armenia

 

[Alive]

I have a record of things Arminius actually wrote and it is quite different than what most folks attribute to him.....hold on.
I found it.

Arminius Disputation 11; Sections 7 and 8


VII. In this state, the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost. And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they be assisted by grace, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace. For Christ has said, "Without me ye can do nothing." St. Augustine, after having diligently meditated upon each word in this passage, speaks thus: "Christ does 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 consider the mind, the affections or will, and the capability, as contra-distinguished from them, as well as the life itself of an unregenerate man.


VIII. The mind of man, in this state, is dark, destitute of the saving knowledge of God, and, according to the Apostle, incapable of those things which belong to the Spirit of God. For "the animal man has no perception of the things of the Spirit of God;" (1 Cor. ii. 14 in which passage man is called "animal," not from the animal body, but from anima, the soul itself, which is the most noble part of man, but which is so encompassed about with the clouds of ignorance, as to be distinguished by the epithets of "vain" and "foolish;" and men themselves, thus darkened in their minds, are denominated "mad" or foolish, "fools," and even "darkness" itself. (Rom. i. 21, 22; Ephes. iv. 17, 18; Tit. iii. 3; Ephes. v. 8.) This is true, not only when, from the truth of the law which has in some measure been inscribed on the mind, it is preparing to form conclusions by the understanding; but likewise when, by simple apprehension, it would receive the truth of the gospel externally offered to it. For the human mind judges that to be "foolishness" which is the most excellent "wisdom" of God. (1 Cor. i. 18, 24.) On this account, what is here said must be understood not only of practical understanding and the judgment of particular approbation, but also of theoretical understanding and the judgment of general estimation.

 

[civic]

I have a record of things Arminius actually wrote and it is quite different than what most folks attribute to him.....hold on.
I found it.

Arminius Disputation 11; Sections 7 and 8


VII. In this state, the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost. And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they be assisted by grace, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace. For Christ has said, "Without me ye can do nothing." St. Augustine, after having diligently meditated upon each word in this passage, speaks thus: "Christ does 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 consider the mind, the affections or will, and the capability, as contra-distinguished from them, as well as the life itself of an unregenerate man.


VIII. The mind of man, in this state, is dark, destitute of the saving knowledge of God, and, according to the Apostle, incapable of those things which belong to the Spirit of God. For "the animal man has no perception of the things of the Spirit of God;" (1 Cor. ii. 14 in which passage man is called "animal," not from the animal body, but from anima, the soul itself, which is the most noble part of man, but which is so encompassed about with the clouds of ignorance, as to be distinguished by the epithets of "vain" and "foolish;" and men themselves, thus darkened in their minds, are denominated "mad" or foolish, "fools," and even "darkness" itself. (Rom. i. 21, 22; Ephes. iv. 17, 18; Tit. iii. 3; Ephes. v. 8.) This is true, not only when, from the truth of the law which has in some measure been inscribed on the mind, it is preparing to form conclusions by the understanding; but likewise when, by simple apprehension, it would receive the truth of the gospel externally offered to it. For the human mind judges that to be "foolishness" which is the most excellent "wisdom" of God. (1 Cor. i. 18, 24.) On this account, what is here said must be understood not only of practical understanding and the judgment of particular approbation, but also of theoretical understanding and the judgment of general estimation.

if you did not preface this post with Arminius and left us guessing who wrote the above most would guess it was written by a calvinist.

 

[Alive]

if you did not preface this post with Arminius and left us guessing who wrote the above most would guess it was written by a calvinist.

Ya--that is my point. Honestly, I owe some of these things to member Josheb. Things he has said, cause me to deep dive into the events and players leading up to and including the reformation and what followed.
Far too many folks online, anyway, simply repeat things they have heard or read, that are not factual.
We are blessed with an 'embarrassment of riches'--so there is little excuse.

This creates an atmosphere where a great deal of patience and preseverence is required to wade through it when trying to discuss these issues.
Josh has those characteristics and I applaud his efforts.