What is a Calvinist?
I know what I learned at Faith Baptist Bible College. I know what Ryrie says in Basic Theology, and I know what my professors taught me. But people that I KNOW are saved (as much as anybody can really know about someone else) tell me Calvinism is wrong. They describe TULIP and they seem to twist the meanings into doctrines I don’t believe, so I think, “Am I really a Calvinist?”
Background here.
Thoughts?
- 13 views
[Kevin Miller] So HOW would a Calvinist use Romans 5:8 to witness to a person if you cannot tell them that while they are yet a sinner, Christ died for them?
I wouldn’t use Romans 5:8 at all. The context of the “us” in Romans 5:8 is found (in all of the previous sections too) in Romans 5:1-2, “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.”
In their preaching passages in Acts, neither Paul nor Peter announced that Christ died for all men. Peter (Acts 2 to a Jewish audience) announced that Jesus was their Messiah (2:36, “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ”) and they were to “Repent …” (2:38). Paul in his message to gentiles on Mars Hill announced that God will judge the world through the resurrected Lord Jesus. He called upon them to “repent” (Acts 17)
[pvawter] Life is the result of repentance and faith, not the other way around. Jesus said it in John 3:16. The congregation in Jerusalem said it in Acts 11:18. It was the Jews’ unbelief which disqualified them from receiving life in Acts 13:45-46. JohnBrian even said it http://sharperiron.org/comment/67973#comment-67973
John 3:16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
John 20:31 (not in the list above)
…but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
Acts 11:18
When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.”
Acts 13:45-46
But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy; and contradicting and blaspheming, they opposed the things spoken by Paul. Then Paul and Barnabas grew bold and said, “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles.
JohnBrian
The gospel is offered to all who hear, but salvation is conditioned on the hearer believing (John 3:16). All men are commanded to repent (Acts 17:30), and those who do receive eternal life.
Eternal life must have a beginning and that beginning is caused by something or someone. The non-Calvinist position is that man ultimately is the CAUSE, while the Calvinist position is that God is the CAUSE.
The question is which of those views best fits the Bible?
CAN unregenerate man who is “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1), who has a mind at “enmity against God” (Rom. 8:7), who is “a slave of sin” (John 8:34), do something that is pleasing to God, in this case believe? Romans 8:8 says that he CANNOT.
Therefore God must change man’s disposition to give him the ability to believe, and that change is regeneration.
Lazarus had his dead body regenerated, which enabled him to obey the command to exit the tomb. The command of Jesus restored life so that the command could be obeyed.
God “commands all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30), but they do not have the ability, so God must bring them to life in order for them to obey that command.
Rather than “drifting away on life’s pitiless sea,” and upon descrying a stately old vessel, loudly crying, “Ship ahoy!”, we are floating carcasses, that need to have life breathed into us so that we may climb into the ship.
John 1:12-13
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
Notice that spiritual birth is because God will’s such, not man.
Tyler, in an earlier comment, referenced this portion of the 1833 New Hampshire Baptist Confession:
Sec. 7. Of Grace in Regeneration
We believe that, in order to be saved, sinners must be regenerated, or born again; that regeneration consists in giving a holy disposition to the mind; that it is effected in a manner above our comprehension by the power of the Holy Spirit, in connection with divine truth, so as to secure our voluntary obedience to the gospel; and that its proper evidence appears in the holy fruits of repentance, and faith, and newness of life.
Notice that repentance and faith are evidence of regeneration, not the other way around.
1689 Baptist - Chapter 14: Of Saving Faith
Paragraph 1.
The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts,1 and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the Word;2 by which also, and by the administration of baptism and the Lord’s supper, prayer, and other means appointed of God, it is increased and strengthened.3
1 2 Cor. 4:13; Eph. 2:8
2 Rom. 10:14,17
3 Luke 17:5; 1 Pet. 2:2; Acts 20:32
Notice that faith provides enablement to believe and is the work of the Holy Spirit.
1689 Baptist - Chapter 15: Of Repentance Unto Life And Salvation
Paragraph 3.
This saving repentance is an evangelical grace,4 whereby a person, being by the Holy Spirit made sensible of the manifold evils of his sin, does, by faith in Christ, humble himself for it with godly sorrow, detestation of it, and self-abhorrancy,5 praying for pardon and strength of grace, with a purpose and endeavor, by supplies of the Spirit, to walk before God unto all well-pleasing in all things.6
4 Zech. 12:10; Acts 11:18
5 Ezek. 36:31; 2 Cor. 7:11
6 Ps. 119:6,128
Notice that the grace of repentance, along with the Holy Spirit’s work to “make sensible” precedes the humility and prayer for pardon.
The above are from Historic Church Documents
SBC Abstract of Principles - “the first official confession of Faith which Southern Baptists endorsed.”
VIII. Regeneration.
Regeneration is a change of heart, wrought by the Holy Spirit, who quickeneth the dead in trespasses and sins enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the Word of God, and renewing their whole nature, so that they love and practice holiness. It is a work of God’s free and special grace alone.IX. Repentance.
Repentance is an evangelical grace, wherein a person being, by the Holy Spirit, made sensible of the manifold evil of his sin, humbleth himself for it, with godly sorrow, detestation of it, and self-abhorrence, with a purpose and endeavor to walk before God so as to please Him in all things.X. Faith.
Saving faith is the belief, on God’s authority, of whatsoever is revealed in His Word concerning Christ; accepting and resting upon Him alone for justification and eternal life. It is wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and is accompanied by all other saving graces, and leads to a life of holiness.
Notice that regeneration enables the individual to “savingly to understand the Word of God” and “is a work of God’s free and special grace alone.” Repentance is identified as a grace and that faith is shown to be “wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit.”
These confessions affirm the scripture in insisting that spiritual birth is CAUSED by God freely extending the graces of repentance and faith.
[Don Johnson] I don’t think you have proved so far that the source of faith is external to the believer. I don’t think you can prove it, because I don’t think the Bible teaches it anywhere.
You are affirming something against some dudes named Peter and Paul (no Mary).
2 Thes.3:2 - for not all have faith
2 Pet. 1:1 - obtained like precious faith
If all don’t have it, and some obtain it, it’s clear to me that the source is external to man. It is given (at regeneration) and actuates in the individual believing, so at that point it is internal. God doesn’t do the believing for the individual, but by giving repentance and faith enables the individual to believe. Jesus didn’t go into the tomb and drag the corpse of Lazarus out, he enabled Lazarus to walk out by regenerating his physical body.
CanJAmerican - my blog
CanJAmerican - my twitter
whitejumaycan - my youtube
Eternal life must have a beginning and that beginning is caused by something or someone. The non-Calvinist position is that man ultimately is the CAUSE, while the Calvinist position is that God is the CAUSE.
Completely Untrue.
God is the cause and enabler - He gives grace and the ability to become saved (John 6:44). He extends that grace to all (John 3:7-21 [note the shift from ‘you must be saved’ in v. 7 to the universal in vv. 17-21] , others I have cited above). Man is responsible for what he chooses to do as a result of the drawing, and the drawing occurs after the presentation of the Gospel (Romans 10:5-17). At the same time, man is already condemned because they hate the light (John 1), and suppress the general revelation of God as per Romans 1. I’m disappointed that you continue to misrepresent the non-Calvinist position.
Therefore God must change man’s disposition to give him the ability to believe, and that change is regeneration.
So essentially, you’re arguing that God wills it to happen, and therefore it must occur. So then what do you really mean when you say that you (or anyone else, for that matter) have the ability to ‘choose’? It seems to me that in your theology, there is no such thing as choice. There is only the will of God, who moves all things into position and uses them to execute His plans. It is no different than determinism with a little bit of Jesus on top to take the edge off. It’s double reprobation, heavy on the reprobation.
I have heard people say “Well, Johnny, Uncle Jimmy didn’t get saved because that wasn’t God’s Will.”
What kind of crazy talk is that? Is that REALLY the kind of love God has for us? God is willing that some should believe, but others are out of luck because they can’t respond to the gospel even when they’re confronted with it? Yet this is exactly what you seem to believe.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
[JohnBrian]JohnBrian,CAN unregenerate man who is “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1), who has a mind at “enmity against God” (Rom. 8:7), who is “a slave of sin” (John 8:34), do something that is pleasing to God, in this case believe? Romans 8:8 says that he CANNOT.
Therefore God must change man’s disposition to give him the ability to believe, and that change is regeneration.
What is the role of conviction in this process? I read in Acts 2:37, “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Does being “pricked in their heart” mean they were already regenerated before they even asked Peter what they should do? Or can unregenerate man who is dead in sin be convicted by the Holy Spirit before they are regenerated by the Holy Spirit? Can a person be convicted without ever being regenerated? It seems Agrippa was convicted in Acts 26 when he said, ” Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” and yet Agrippa did not become a Christian, at least as far as that chapter tells us.
[Jay]Jay,Eternal life must have a beginning and that beginning is caused by something or someone. The non-Calvinist position is that man ultimately is the CAUSE, while the Calvinist position is that God is the CAUSE.
Completely Untrue.
God is the cause and enabler - He gives grace and the ability to become saved (John 6:44). He extends that grace to all (John 3:7-21 [note the shift from ‘you must be saved’ in v. 7 to the universal in vv. 17-21] , others I have cited above). Man is responsible for what he chooses to do as a result of the drawing, and the drawing occurs after the presentation of the Gospel (Romans 10:5-17). At the same time, man is already condemned because they hate the light (John 1), and suppress the general revelation of God as per Romans 1. I’m disappointed that you continue to misrepresent the non-Calvinist position.
Therefore God must change man’s disposition to give him the ability to believe, and that change is regeneration.
So essentially, you’re arguing that God wills it to happen, and therefore it must occur. So then what do you really mean when you say that you (or anyone else, for that matter) have the ability to ‘choose’? It seems to me that in your theology, there is no such thing as choice. There is only the will of God, who moves all things into position and uses them to execute His plans. It is no different than determinism with a little bit of Jesus on top to take the edge off. It’s double reprobation, heavy on the reprobation.
I have heard people say “Well, Johnny, Uncle Jimmy didn’t get saved because that wasn’t God’s Will.”
What kind of crazy talk is that? Is that REALLY the kind of love God has for us? God is willing that some should believe, but others are out of luck because they can’t respond to the gospel even when they’re confronted with it? Yet this is exactly what you seem to believe.
That seems to be just the crazy kind of talk Paul gives us in Ephesians 1:3-12, particularly verse 11 ” In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will”
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
I love Chafer. I had to read Erickson in Seminary, but I have read nearly all of Chafer’s systematic theology. He had this to say about election; it is simple, clear and to the point:
The thought expressed by the word ‘election’ cannot be modified. It asserts an express intention on the part of God to confer salvation on certain persons, but not all. It is not a mere purpose to give salvation to those who may believe; it rather determines who will believe. (3:172).
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
[Chip Van Emmerik]Jay,
That seems to be just the crazy kind of talk Paul gives us in Ephesians 1:3-12, particularly verse 11 ” In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will”
Chip,
You point out v.11 which talks about predestination according to God’s purpose, but you neglect to point out that v.12 explains this predestination: “that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.” He does not say that we were predestined in order that we might believe, but that we who believe were predestined to be to the praise of His glory. In fact, v.13 indicates that belief is prompted by hearing the word of truth, rather than the determinism of God’s will.
John Brian,
I can only second what Jay said regarding your misrepresentation of the non-Calvinist position. While I affirm what Scripture clearly teaches, that our salvation is wholly of God and not of us, I also affirm what Scripture teaches, that faith is not nor can be a work.
You said, “CAN unregenerate man who is “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1), who has a mind at “enmity against God” (Rom. 8:7), who is “a slave of sin” (John 8:34), do something that is pleasing to God, in this case believe?” But this just illustrates that you are operating under a false definition of faith. Believing is not something we DO to please God, therefore it is not a violation of the doctrine of grace to assert simply what the Bible says concerning faith as condition for salvation.
Of course Lazarus had to be made alive before he could exit the tomb, but you equate his obedience to the command to exit the tomb with an unbeliever believing in the name of Christ. This is truly absurd. Had Lazarus refused to come out of the tomb, would he not have been raised from the dead just the same? Or was he not truly alive until he walked out of the tomb? Does his location with respect to a hole in the ground really prove that regeneration precedes faith? I think you are stretching this way too far.
[pvawter] Chip,You point out v.11 which talks about predestination according to God’s purpose, but you neglect to point out that v.12 explains this predestination: “that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.” He does not say that we were predestined in order that we might believe, but that we who believe were predestined to be to the praise of His glory. In fact, v.13 indicates that belief is prompted by hearing the word of truth, rather than the determinism of God’s will.
Furthermore, the purpose of Ephesians is to write a letter of encouragement to people who are already believers. It’s the worst kind of eisegesis to take Paul’s description of foreordination and predestination, and then argue that only the foreordained and predestined will get saved. That’s not the point of the passage. You’re pulling that section straight out of context to support Calvinist theory.
Chip, I really wish you’d interact with the Johannine passages I (and others) have cited.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
[pvawter]Jay,Chip Van Emmerik wrote:
Jay,
That seems to be just the crazy kind of talk Paul gives us in Ephesians 1:3-12, particularly verse 11 ” In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will”
Chip,
You point out v.11 which talks about predestination according to God’s purpose, but you neglect to point out that v.12 explains this predestination: “that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.” He does not say that we were predestined in order that we might believe, but that we who believe were predestined to be to the praise of His glory. In fact, v.13 indicates that belief is prompted by hearing the word of truth, rather than the determinism of God’s will.
It appears you missed the beginning of the passage I cited. Verse 4 tells us exactly what God means when He uses the term “predestination.” It tells us He chose us before the foundation of the world. It was all about Him, and His choice eventually caused our belief at the time of the hearing of the word of truth (v. 13).
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
[Jay]Jay,pvawter wrote:
Chip,You point out v.11 which talks about predestination according to God’s purpose, but you neglect to point out that v.12 explains this predestination: “that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.” He does not say that we were predestined in order that we might believe, but that we who believe were predestined to be to the praise of His glory. In fact, v.13 indicates that belief is prompted by hearing the word of truth, rather than the determinism of God’s will.
Furthermore, the purpose of Ephesians is to write a letter of encouragement to people who are already believers. It’s the worst kind of eisegesis to take Paul’s description of foreordination and predestination, and then argue that only the foreordained and predestined will get saved. That’s not the point of the passage. You’re pulling that section straight out of context to support Calvinist theory.
Chip, I really wish you’d interact with the Johannine passages I (and others) have cited.
First, unless you are arguing that “foreordained” and “predestined” mean different things when talking about the elect and the non-elect, your argument makes no sense. Second, while Paul is writing to the elect here, he is speaking about the events leading up to their salvation, describing the process, which applies to both elect and non-elect. That’s why you find determinative words like “chose” (v. 4), “according to the purpose of his will” (v 5), “according to his purpose” (v 9) and “according to the purpose of his will” (v 11). Nothing I have written takes any part of the passage out of context.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
Chip,
Eph. 1 doesn’t say that God chose us in order that we might believe, nor does he say that God predestined us to be saved. It says that God chose us to be holy and blameless (v.4), predestined us to the adoption of sons (v.5), and predestined us to be to the praise of His glory (v.11). when you say, “It was all about Him, and His choice eventually caused our belief,” you are saying something Paul did not say.
Hey guys,
I have enjoyed the conversation. Whenever this topic pops up on the radar, I try to jump in for a few minutes to share ideas. No one has been able to settle this issue in hundreds of years, and I don’t expect to solve it either. I just try to push the thinking along between myself and the people God puts in my path. I don’t get too bent out of shape any more as long as the conversation remains civil, and this one certainly has been that. Thank you for the discussion. May God bless us all as we continue to pursue a more informed and intimate relationship with Him.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
First, unless you are arguing that “foreordained” and “predestined” mean different things when talking about the elect and the non-elect, your argument makes no sense.
Foreordained - what God knows about salvation (since He knows both potential and actual outcomes for events)
Predestined - Those who will be saved. This includes the saved but not yet saved or ‘heirs to salvation’ as Hebrews describes.
Second, while Paul is writing to the elect here, he is speaking about the events leading up to their salvation, describing the process, which applies to both elect and non-elect. That’s why you find determinative words like “chose” (v. 4), “according to the purpose of his will” (v 5), “according to his purpose” (v 9) and “according to the purpose of his will” (v 11)…
Where in 1:4-14 do you read anything about the state of unbelievers? I might give you v. 4, which describes the Ephesians 1:14 as being ‘chosen in Him’, and that’s it. It’s not until we get to Ephesians 2 where Paul turns his attention to who they were before salvation:
And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved—and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. (Ephesians 2:1-7 ESV)
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
On Monday (04/28/14), Doug Sayers posted an article at SBCToday, titled There’s a Fire in Adam’s House.
On Wednesday (04/30/14), Micah Burke posted a response to Sayers article at AOMin, titled SBCToday – Calvinism vs Pelagianism.
Burke’s article covers much of the same material we have discussed in this thread, so am posting it here for reference. Here are some quotes from his article:
If we agree that salvation is by grace alone, and grace is unmerited favor, then the requirement of faith in salvation cannot be contradictory to grace alone. If faith is something man brings to the table of salvation out of his own ability or will, then salvation cannot be by grace alone. If faith, however, is in fact a supernatural gift of God to those whom he has chosen out of the mass of rebellious sinners, then faith is gracious too and all of salvation can truly be said to be sola gratia.
The question therefore becomes, is faith a gracious gift of God, or something conjured up in the ability or will of man? If faith is something that supposedly neutral man can conjure up, how is salvation by grace, and how is that not merit?
–-
The Gospel is the message and the means by which God saves. The Gospel is a supernatural message, used by the Holy Spirit to bring to life dead sinners and generate faith within them. Yes, the Gospel message includes the command to believe in it, yet, what God requires he provides, even faith.
–-
We’re not trapped by a fire , we’ve killed the home owner and set the place on fire ourselves in a drunken orgy. The house has burned down around us and we’re smoldering bones that if possible would shake our fist at God. Jesus comes and commands those dead, dry bones to come to life and they do… not of any will or desire of their own, but because they’ve been supernaturally given new life and desires. The response of these formerly-dead bones is to cry out in faith and thankfulness.
–-
Doug admitted that he denies that Adam’s guilt is applied to his offspring, thus denying Original Sin. This of course means that Doug is a full Pelagian.
CanJAmerican - my blog
CanJAmerican - my twitter
whitejumaycan - my youtube
Does Moral Inability Alleviate Our Responsibility? (Dialogue)
“It is the duty and responsibility of all people everywhere to repent and believe the gospel. But all men, in their willful blindness, plunge themselves into darkness and perdition. In other words, so-called “free will” is man’s problem, not his solution… only Divine mercy can save him (Rom 9:16, John 6:63, 65, 37).”
CanJAmerican - my blog
CanJAmerican - my twitter
whitejumaycan - my youtube
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
[TylerR]This was a particularly good, cordial exchange on the extent of the atonement by two scholars who can actually go beyond straw-men:
James White and Michael Brown (Part #1) (Part #2)
In February I was traveling and wanted to listen to the White/Brown debate, so used the Free YouTube to MP3 Converter from DVDVideoSoft to harvest the audio from these YouTube videos.
I have added them to my dropbox here:
p.s. right-click to download
CanJAmerican - my blog
CanJAmerican - my twitter
whitejumaycan - my youtube
Thanks John! I will add these to my listening list.
Discussion