SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Is Calvinism for reaching the Lost or Reaching the Saved?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next Page )
PosterThread
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re:

Hello brothers and sisters. I've got my "helmet of salvation" on because I've seen the debris flying on this thread and it's bound to smack me too. Please read this with love, it hurts when people respond three seconds after a post to blast the writer, without considering what was written.


There was once a man from Geneva who happened to help popularize a certain theology, some of which I agree with. Unfortunately for me, there is a heavy stigma attached to his name. I have not read his books. What I believe about salvation comes largely from my experiences while coming to faith and reading the word. I believe it as sincerely as you do your beliefs.

My explanation of the so-called "Calvinist View" is this (which I believe to be truth taught in the scriptures):

By Adam sin has come upon all men born of his seed, and this mass of sinful people is worthy of hell. They seek a form of "God", yet not as He is, nor would they ever. Their will is so corrupt that it is, for all practical purposes, not a "will", but a "won't ever want to".

Yet God has taken some from this lump of fallen clay, determining from before time to save them with the power of His grace in Christ. These ones, His elect, He changes in time by circumstances and second causes, and regeneration of the will, so that at last they come freely to Christ for salvation.

All who come are called. All who are called come. No one deserved to be called, all deserved hell.

[b]Why should I weep?[/b]

I weep for lost sinners because I see something of the magnitude of grace shown to myself, that it is free and unmerited, and shows the kindness of God... and what makes me weep about them is they hate this grace. They willfully hate Christ because it is in their power to willfully sin. This makes me weep, because I deserve their same punishment apart from Christ, yet God has loved me freely.

I understand that their refusal and resistance is genuine, that God didn't force these people to hate Him; yet they do and will always unless God interrupts their wickedness with mercy. I do not weep because I want God to save them apart from His plan; I weep because even if I could make them intellectually comprehend grace, they would reject it for works. I weep over sin, not over God's election.

How can I communicate this which makes perfect sense in my head, this which was taught to me, I believe, by the Spirit through the word?

Now, I can easily understand why an Arminian would weep. I used to be one. Back then I wept because I thought that souls perish because the missionaries flopped and the preachers weren't good enough speakers; men didn't pray enough to have the power of the Spirit, so the lost were too confused or too deceived to understand. The damnation of souls is a massive tragedy in the world of the Arminian, a great theological catastrophe where God seems to be begging men, "please, someone help me!" yet few answer His call. Souls perish because God is not powerful enough to convince them to repent.

That is the silliness of it. As a Calvinist, I believe the will of man is in bondage that can only be broken by God. Yet it is no hard thing for God to break the will of man. God simply desires it and it is finished. Somehow in the Arminian view, God has a terribly difficult time bringing someone to repentance. He needs really good preachers and really devoted prayers, or else it doesn't work; no one responds. You say, "we do not depend on man, but on prayer!" For what? For God to "show" a person enough to choose? Why doesn't God "show" everyone? What makes two people different?! The twins, yet being unborn and neither having done good or wrong, yet both being by nature sinful, were discriminated by God; one received justice, the other mercy.

I weep for the lost because they hate God, and no one should hate God. I weep because their sentence gets worse every day and it doesn't have to - even in their fallen state they could pick up a bible and turn from certain sins... they don't have to murder and war and rape and steal... I weep because they love sin.

I weep because when I was an Arminian I thought something in me first chose God.

 2007/9/8 15:04Profile
Blunt
Member



Joined: 2007/3/14
Posts: 50


 Re: Right on.

I am sure brother your Heart is set on Jesus.
I to want to see Jesus Glorified.
I guess it comes back to this question.Does "reformed teaching" have a great tendency to shipwreck us into intelectualism and "Knowledge for growth" based walk.

I spent alot of time studying Calvinism early in my walk,it did not make me more like Jesus.When I got real with setting my theology books aside and reading the Word in expentancy of what Jesus wants to say and not another tool to add to my Flesh.Wow.....
I am kind of retracing my steps....Ya know.

I dont want to see people repent of Calvinism I believe it has its place but can it be a trap for us and a snare the enemy uses to get us to focus on something besides The Simple Truth's in Scripture?


 2007/9/8 15:07Profile
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re:

To answer the original question very directly: Calvinists are for reaching the lost, including the ones who think they are saved.

It is inherent in the Calvinist system to believe that anyone who says, "I came to God of my own original ability" has no idea what grace is or what depravity is, and leaves the Calvinist to lovingly suspect false conversion. You can replace the word "Calvinist" with "Michael Spotts" if you want to, because I describe myself. I wan't all of my friends to make their calling and election sure. I want them to know that God saved them because He was gracious, and He determined to do it without regard to who they were, or would be, and I want them to have the joy I have in the grace of Christ. My motives are for the joy and security of those I speak with.

 2007/9/8 15:12Profile
Blunt
Member



Joined: 2007/3/14
Posts: 50


 Re:

If there is a conference coming up and everyone feels this topic is to heavy maybe we should kill the thread.Sorry I did not put 2 and 2 together. Is there a way to do that?

Moderators you can do that right?

Maybe I can ask these questions and continue then.

-BLUNT

 2007/9/8 15:18Profile
LoveHim
Member



Joined: 2007/6/14
Posts: 562
Indiana, US

 Re:

Quote:
Your premise is always that God forces people to be saved according to the Reformed faith. That is inaccurate and I hope just misinformed. Reformed believers believe that man will not come to God apart from a supernatural change of heart. They will not because they desire not.

dear brother whyme, i wrote about this is another thread, but it continues to beg the question...

why does one have to be born again before one is born again?? here is what i mean. you are saying that a natural man cannot and will not choose Christ without a new heart. the new heart comes by the new birth of being born again. so you believe that one needs to be regenerated before one can be regenerated.

epphesians 2:8 tells us that we are saved by God's grace only after we have used faith (as the vehicle) to receive His grace. then we are saved (born again, made anew, etc)

the bible shows these steps to salvation
1) man places faith in God (faith according to the strong's dictionary means reliance upon Christ [b]for salvation[/b]. so one must not be born again or regenereated if one is hoping for salvation)
2) man receives God's grace (which according to strong's dictionary is the favour, gift, graciousness of God)
3) man is saved (born again, made anew, etc).

do you see that the bible tells us that first we must reach out to God with faith (reliance upon God for salvation/strong's) and receive His grace that will then save us and make us a new creation.

so brother whyme, biblically one cannot be born again to become saved...it just doesn't work out that way.

ps. before you may write back that the natural man would not choose Christ, please know that i agree with you. a man left to himself would not choose Christ. but a natural man who has been drawn by the Holy Spirit and convicted of his sins, may and does sometimes choose Christ. please re-read what i just wrote you and look at ephesians 2 slowly and look at the order of salvation in verse 8 and meditate on it and i believe that it may just change the way you see salvation..

love you brother,
phil

 2007/9/8 15:24Profile
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re:

Blunt, thank you for your kind response. I agree that launching into the thick of theology from square-one is like telling a new born to eat steak. It is not only impossible for him to chew, but will probably make him sick!

Yet the scriptures say that it is "good to be established in grace". The doctrines, especially relating to grace, must be cut very small and spoon fed with love and attention by the patient teachers of the word of God.

I am glad that I was not handed the "TULIP" directly, but was given a "baby food" version:

Grace Needed
Grace Promised
Grace Provided
Grace Applied
Grace Fulfilled

We needed grace because man is unqualified, and is by nature hateful of anything that makes light of his works. (Depravity)

God promised to give grace in Christ to His elect from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1 & 2)

Grace was provided on the cross (Hebrews 9:26-28) for many. The worth of Christ was sufficient for all, yet He sprinkles His blood upon those who the Father gives Him so that there will be a demonstration of grace and justice. His grace was promised and will be given with assurance to His people.

Grace is applied as we are drawn from sin to Christ and then given new birth and the seal of the Spirit.

Grace is fulfilled when God preserves His saints. All of God's elect are protected, restored, delivered, and strengthened with such maintenance that none of them fall away entirely. God preserves His children in holiness.

The reason why Paul tells them to make their calling and election sure is because the source of joy and desire for grateful holiness stems from our gratitude to the free grace of God!!

Oh God, how I love you! Yet not enough. They day comes.


 2007/9/8 15:26Profile









 Re:

Quote:

whyme wrote:
The reformed doctrine is all about Christ. You mischaracterize the heart of some who follow the doctrine. I'm sorry you haven't met loving reformed people. I'd like to introduce myself and I know many, many others. Two of the most well known speakers I know are two of the most loving active Christians I've ever seen Arminian or Christian.... John Piper and Paul Washer. There are many, many, many. At the same time, as Paul Washer has said, there are many Arminians who have lived far above their theology and many Calvinist who have lived far below theirs. Holding the correct doctrine means nothing if Christ is not being formed in you.

Dear Whyme

"reformed doctrine ", "reformed people"

Why all the labels?

Quote:
"many Arminians who have lived far above their theology and many Calvinist who have lived far below theirs."

That doesn't make sense. What's this about "above or below" anyone's theology?

I did once know an [i]atheist[/i] who managed to live down to his beliefs, but why should "reformed" or any other brand of theology be thought superior (or inferior for that matter)?

If any Christian (that is, one who knows God and believes the Bible is true) thinks their particular understanding of a particular doctrine is superior to that of all others who hold different understandings on certain points, they are in error - however "correct" their theology may be!

I find it impossible to understand the mentality that claims Calvinism to be the only correct theology.

And if someone said Armenianism was the only correct theology I would find that impossible to understand too!

Why get so excited about merely man-made attempts to interpret Scripture?

Blessings

Jeannette

 2007/9/8 17:07









 Re:

Quote:

theopenlife wrote:
Blunt, thank you for your kind response. I agree that launching into the thick of theology from square-one is like telling a new born to eat steak. It is not only impossible for him to chew, but will probably make him sick!

Yet the scriptures say that it is "good to be established in grace". The doctrines, especially relating to grace, must be cut very small and spoon fed with love and attention by the patient teachers of the word of God.

I am glad that I was not handed the "TULIP" directly, but was given a "baby food" version:

Grace Needed
Grace Promised
Grace Provided
Grace Applied
Grace Fulfilled

We needed grace because man is unqualified, and is by nature hateful of anything that makes light of his works. (Depravity)

God promised to give grace in Christ to His elect from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1 & 2)

Grace was provided on the cross (Hebrews 9:26-28) for many. The worth of Christ was sufficient for all, yet He sprinkles His blood upon those who the Father gives Him so that there will be a demonstration of grace and justice. His grace was promised and will be given with assurance to His people.

Grace is applied as we are drawn from sin to Christ and then given new birth and the seal of the Spirit.

Grace is fulfilled when God preserves His saints. All of God's elect are protected, restored, delivered, and strengthened with such maintenance that none of them fall away entirely. God preserves His children in holiness.

The reason why Paul tells them to make their calling and election sure is because the source of joy and desire for grateful holiness stems from our gratitude to the free grace of God!!

Oh God, how I love you! Yet not enough. They day comes.

Thank you, Brother, for your gracious and patient attempts to put forward what you believe.

I especially like:
Quote:
Grace Needed
Grace Promised
Grace Provided
Grace Applied
Grace Fulfilled

Unlike you I was thrown into Calvinism at the deep end. Being a Christian for about 5 months, the first Christian Union talk I went to in college was called "Justification by Faith", which I'd never heard of.

The speaker explained (simply and clearly) what it meant, and i thought, "Why do they have to used long theololgical words for something that's so straightforward?"

Almost the whole of the Christian Union was very strongly Calvinistic, and i didn't hear any teaching that wasn't from that viewpoint for a long time.

However, at that stage in my Christian life I [i][u]needed[/u][/i] the teaching of "once saved, always saved". Being a very insecure person I was terrified of losing the wonderful thing God had done in my life, so this was great reassurance.

Gradually I began to realise that it wasn't quite as simple as this. While there are scriptures aplenty that affirm the Calvinistic viewpoint, there are also many that suggest that it is possible to turn one's back on God and become apostate, thus losing one's salvation. Not lose through accident or through lack of zeal as a Christian, but through consistent, deliberate rebellion against God, over a period of time.

For some years I was very perplexed by these apparent contraditions in Scripture, but eventually realised, as posted on this and other threads, that God's Word is far greater than our finite minds can grasp.

Predestination and freewill are both aspects of Truth, and both present in the Bible, so what's the point of insisting on holding to one or the other?

In Him

Jeannette

 2007/9/8 17:26









 Re: Is Calvinism for reaching the Lost or Reaching the Saved?

Quote:

Blunt wrote:
I am not calvinist or Armenian but I love Calvinists.I believe they are a part of the body of Christ,.I know alot of Godly 5 pointers ,7 pointers and 12 pointers and so on...

My notice though of alot of our brothers who abide and teach Calvinism spend more time preaching to other believers then to the Lost.Maybe it is a maturity issue that these guys suffer from or who I am fellowshiping with.Anyone out there notice this also?


Remember I love my Reformed Bro's I am not bashing just throwing a question out there.

Just reminding myself and all of us of the original question of this thread.

I don't personally think it's helpfult to preach Calvinism or Armenianism, or any similar "ism" to those who aren't yet Christians. The basic Gospel is enough. Anything more would probably confuse and put people off!

Someone said (can't remember who, or the exact words) something like "Preach as if it all depended on you, and pray as if it all depended on God".

Paul said: (Colossians 1:from the end of verse 27) [i][color=000099] Christ in you, the hope of glory:
28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:
29 Whereunto I also labour, [u]striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily[/u].[/color][/i]

As a young Christian I used to get all uptight about "witnessing" and felt terribly guilty at missing what seemed to be an opportunity.

I shared this with a mature and wise friend, (who, belonged to a church that tended to preach the Armenian position). She went away and prayed about it, and God gave her the answer I needed, "Do you [i][u]really[/u][/i] think God would allow someone to go to hell because of you?"

Which is rather "Calvinistic" I suppose, but was the answer I needed.

And when I was still unsaved but seeking, I heard, and never forgot, a testimony where the person said several times, "Christ died for [i][u]me[/u][/i]!"

So please, Brethren, whatever shade of Calvinist you may be, don't ever preach limited atonement to those who are (as yet) lost!

Concerning the fact that it's all by grace, that doesn't necessarily mean that we are incapable of responding to, or refusing, that offer of grace. If, in any degree, it's actually we who choose Christ, He gives us power to do so.

Maybe He brings us back to the choice of Adam - do we eat of the tree of doing our own will, deciding for ourselves what is good and what is evil, or do we choose Life?

Or does Calvinism extend to Adam's choice too?

(Don't bother to answer that) :-P

Love to all

In Him

Jeannette

 2007/9/8 17:50
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re:

Jeannette, thank you for the gracious and civil response, and your testimony. Perhaps I can answer at least one question:

Quote:
Predestination and freewill are both aspects of Truth, and both present in the Bible, so what's the point of insisting on holding to one or the other?



To my "reformed mind" (by the way, labels like "reformed" can be ugly but they also help us recognize what we're talking about. People who claim to hate the word Calvinism sure do love it when the time comes to define [b]what they aren't[/b]! The word "Reformation" speaks of the major restructuring of the visible Church as it publicly left the Roman Catholic Church in droves. They "re-formed" into organized non-Roman Catholic churches, hence the name. The term "Reformed" is useful in identifying with the major ideas of the time - TULIP, 5 Solas, amongst others.)

Anyways, I will attempt to answer your question, "what's the point of insisting on holding to one or the other, if both are true?"

That's just the problem. I don't think [b]both[/b] are exactly true. I believe that Adam had a will inclined towards good, yet also had the potential to choose evil. After sin, I believe that his will became corrupt and disabled, so much that all a natural man does is tainted with other motives and sins, more than he can perceive.

I believe all men have, by nature, a will that is in bondage to sin. This sin-bondage is not such that they cannot choose between lesser and greater degrees of actual sin, but rather it prevents them from desiring or doing true good - from coming to God on the basis of His righteousness, from departing from themselves and turning to Christ. Their will is enslaved to sin, and thus - though they are responsible to repent - yet they have forfeited the ability to do so.

It is something like a drunkard who crashes his car into a person and kills them. Though the drunk was unable to control himself, yet his inability only aggravates his guilt.

So, in essence, the point is that I believe that "free will" is a false concept, and that "a will in bondage" must be understood in order to appreciate the grace of God in setting us free.

Much love, my sister.

{edit} With the drunkard analogy, one may say, "He chose to drink! I didn't choose to be born in sin!" Adam was our federal head and we have received his nature. That seems tough, yet look how willingly we accept the righteousness of Christ, our new federal head! These work in the same way.

 2007/9/8 17:55Profile





All sermons are offered freely and all contents of the site
where applicable is committed to the public domain for the
free spread of the gospel.