Calvinism vs. Arminianism- Are we missing the boat?

[Wayne222]

Making your calling and Election sure is not meant to be the way to be saved. Salvation comes by trusting in Jesus finish work on the cross. Then God sends the Holy Spirit to seal us as a guaranteed until the promise inheritance. 

                   We are going to receive a reward for our works. Paul wrote let no one take your reward. Because if you do not qualify for rewards at the judgement someone else will receive what you were going to receive. Make sure you are NOT going to lose this great rewards. 

                By being diligent by practicing those things peter layout in his letter. But all born again believers will bear some fruit. Jesus said some 90 some 60 and some 30. 

             Now Paul said examnie yourself if you are in the faith. If someone who claims they are Christian and they live in unrepentant sin as a way of life. Then they are disproved. And need to trust in christ for salvation. 

                      But teaching work salvation is against the gospel. To say we have to do good works to be saved is added to the gospel.  We are justified by the blood alone.

[Omegaman 3.0]

You know, the answer is yes, we can miss the boat! I do not care that much about the arguments of Dutch reformers, so much as what the Bible says.

I am not Arminian or Calvinist, as I do not get my theology from them. I believe what I believe, because of things that James, Peter, Paul, John, and especially Jesus said, and they never heard of Calvin or Arminius.

[Tristen]

1 hour ago, Josheb said:

This is a text-based medium. All we have is the words on the screen and none of us are mind readers. I am not reading anything into a sentence that states,

"The whole topic of Calvinism vs. Armenianism is, I believe, ultimately a smokescreen from the enemy."

The whole topic of Calvinism vs. Armenianism is ultimately a smokescreen from the enemy. 

The whole topic is from the enemy.

That is what it actually factually observably undeniably irrefutably says. I did not read that into the op. ...

“ "The whole topic of Calvinism vs. Armenianism is, I believe, ultimately a smokescreen from the enemy."

The whole topic of Calvinism vs. Armenianism is ultimately a smokescreen from the enemy.

The whole topic is from the enemy.

That is what it actually factually observably undeniably irrefutably says. I did not read that into the op.”

Ok – so lets assess your logical process. The first line above is unequivocally what the OP “says”. On this we agree.

But then your second line removes the hedged language. The “I believe”. This speaks to the author's intent. You have turned the sentence into an arrogant truth claim, but the “I believe” indicates that the author was only presenting an idea for discussion. So removing it is a misrepresentation.

In your third reiteration, you remove “ultimately a smokescreen”. The term “ultimately” is another hedging word – indicating that the claim is not related to the whole topic, but only to a particular root of the topic. The word “smokescreen” is a metaphor for deception – indicating that the author thinks the actors are being unintentional in their participation.

So yes, if you reword the statement, you can make it say whatever you want it to say – i.e. a blunt truth claim (an attack) against the “Cal vs Arm” discussion. But the original statement (as written) is simply an expression of concern that some Christians are being deceived into an unbalanced focus on this debate – presented for discussion.

Then you interpret the claim even further – as an attack against every Christian whose theology falls within the “Cal vs Arm” spectrum. E.g. when you apply it to all “Cals and Arms combined”. So not just the discussion, and not even the people involved in the discussion, but everyone whose beliefs fall within that discussion – even if they have no personal involvement in the discussion. That is something you completely read into the statement.

 

“ We must beware grabbing hold of a doctrine to convince us of our salvation.

I wholeheartedly agree! But who does that? Do you know anyone who grabs hold of doctrine to convince themselves of their salvation?”

It happens. There are people who get so caught up in particular doctrines that they think only those who agree with them are saved. It's thankfully not typical, but also not all-that uncommon.

 

“Do you see any evidence provided to show someone in Christianity grabs hold of doctrine to convince themselves of their salvation”

OK – so a measured response would be to say that you disagree with the OP's claim that those in the “Cal vs Arm” discussion are doing this. And then ask if the author has “any evidence” that this is occurring. This would be a fair way to address the actual topic of the OP.

 

“I didn't read anything other than what is actually factually observably undeniably irrefutably stated”

Well I read the same thing and came to a different conclusion about what the OP meant – to the point where I was legitimately surprised by how aggressively you responded.

 

“And as I told you earlier: it is a very simple matter to redeem; just reword the opening sentence or three”

I don't think you have established your interpretation of the OP sufficiently enough to demand such a rewording. When someone like me (who doesn't really care about the topic – and therefore has no agenda either way) reads the OP differently to you, perhaps you need to consider the possibility that your interpretation of the OP was influenced by personal sensitivities.

 

[AnOrangeCat]

5 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

You know, the answer is yes, we can miss the boat! I do not care that much about the arguments of Dutch reformers, so much as what the Bible says.

I am not Arminian or Calvinist, as I do not get my theology from them. I believe what I believe, because of things that James, Peter, Paul, John, and especially Jesus said, and they never heard of Calvin or Arminius.

I'm completely with this. The Bible is in inspired Word of God. Anything else is just a manmade interpretation that may or may not be on target to whatever degree.

[Gideon]

7 hours ago, Josheb said:

In all my many years arguing soteriology as both an Arm and a Cal I rarely have I ever heard or read one tell the other they were not saved. Worthy has a Soteriology board and I perused the posts. I will concede I did not read every post in every op but neither did I find posters telling each other they were not saved. So at best we've got another red herring. 

I've already posted several verses pertaining to what scripture says about doctrine. Our calling does entail getting our doctrine right. Paul wrote the Corinthians appealing to them not to disagree but be "united in mind and conviction," but he also wrote, "For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you." 

Perhaps, Gideon, you have an op planned on how to discern those approved by God apart from getting our doctrine right.

 

 

You seem determined to cherry-pick points from my OP to argue about, while seemingly strangely quiet about the main singular point of my post. 

Let me clarify for you. 

It was not to disparage either Calvinism or Aminianism.

It was not to disparage seeking to have correct doctrine. 

So what exactly was I trying to get across? 

It was to point out that having Christ in us is supposed to bring forth Christ's character in us. This is how we KNOW we are in Him, because we do not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. Instead, We bring forth spiritual fruits. 

In some, I suspect their immediate reaction to this is most likely outrage, thinking I am preaching legalism, and thus casting doubt upon whether or not we are saved.

Why do our minds go there? Simple. It is because we somehow think that not sinning and bringing forth fruits that reveal Christ's character in us are OUR responsibility. We think, erroneously, that we are to be our own potters. Boy, are we wrong. ?

Why do we continue to languish in sin? Why are there so few fruits in our lives identifying us as His children? Why does the world see us as a bunch of religious hypocrites? The Bible tells us. We are healed, but only slightly. 

Listen. God does nothing half way. He wants to save us to the uttermost. He not only has promised to forgive us, but also to change us, deliver us, free us, transform us, to sanctify us wholly, body, soul and spirit. . He wants to make us branches in Him full of Spiritual fruits. And here is the kicker. HE wants to do it, for He is the only one who can! 

Do I talk about the great lack in the church to disparage my brothers and sisters in the Lord? No! I do so for one reason.... to bless God's children in ways they cannot yet even imagine, but in order to do so,  they must finally be brought to see that something is lacking, something is blocking their transformation. 

Yes, we are new creatures. Yes, we have been delivered from the power of darkness. But if these truths are not actually being manifested in our lives, something is wrong. A roadblock is preventing God from making us overcomers, but until that bothers us,  and we search it out, identify it and remove it, we cannot proceed into the fullness of what God has for us. 

Look, His promises are meant to WORK! Until we believe that, we doom ourselves to lives lived without ever discovering the FREE INDEED Jesus has for each one of us. The fullness of grace's power is far more than we have understood. Yes, grace forgives. But grace also promises to  change us and make us actual overcomers. 

So why, if that is the case, isn't it working? Why are we not being changed and delivered from the power of the enemy?  One reason.

The promises work as we believe them.

Until we get sick and tired of living in defeat with closeness to Jesus only felt in rare instances, such as a great worship service, and our hearts  cry out for the faith that moves His promises  into action, we will remain healed only slightly. But God has assured us that He will respond when we cry out to Him with our whole hearts. You see, even this faith must come from Him. 

Some are ready even now to cry out to Him for such faith. Some will do so later. Some, as I said, will staunchly refuse to believe that God can and will deliver us from evil in this life, content with religious knowledge about God, rather than being possessed wholly by the Lord and seeing their lives changed in ways they simply thought impossible. 

I have no idea who is who. Each one of us must search our own hearts and respond accordingly. My prayer and hope is that all discover the rest that remains for the people of God. 

blessings, 

Gideon

Edited August 7, 2020 by Gideon

[Alive]

I have cleaned up some of the personal attack portions of this that are unimportant to the topic--honestly, these things are so interwoven into the thread responses that it is difficult. I considered just axing the whole thread, but I am going to leave it.

This is going nowhere--

 

[David1701]

45 minutes ago, Gideon said:

You seem determined to cherry-pick points from my OP to argue about, while seemingly strangely quiet about the main singular point of my post. 

Let me clarify for you. 

It was not to disparage either Calvinism or Aminianism.

It was not to disparage seeking to have correct doctrine. 

So what exactly was I trying to get across? 

It was to point out that having Christ in us is supposed to bring forth Christ's character in us. This is how we KNOW we are in Him, because we do not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. Instead, We bring forth spiritual fruits. 

In some, I suspect their immediate reaction to this is most likely outrage, thinking I am preaching legalism, and thus casting doubt upon whether or not we are saved.

Why do our minds go there? Simple. It is because we somehow think that not sinning and bringing forth fruits that reveal Christ's character in us are OUR responsibility. We think, erroneously, that we are to be our own potters. Boy, are we wrong. ?

Why do we continue to languish in sin? Why are there so few fruits in our lives identifying us as His children? Why does the world see us as a bunch of religious hypocrites? The Bible tells us. We are healed, but only slightly. 

Listen. God does nothing half way. He wants to save us to the uttermost. He not only has promised to forgive us, but also to change us, deliver us, free us, transform us, to sanctify us wholly, body, soul and spirit. . He wants to make us branches in Him full of Spiritual fruits. And here is the kicker. HE wants to do it, for He is the only one who can! 

Do I talk about the great lack in the church to disparage my brothers and sisters in the Lord? No! I do so for one reason.... to bless God's children in ways they cannot yet even imagine, but in order to do so,  they must finally be brought to see that something is lacking, something is blocking their transformation. 

Yes, we are new creatures. Yes, we have been delivered from the power of darkness. But if these truths are not actually being manifested in our lives, something is wrong. A roadblock is preventing God from making us overcomers, but until that bothers us,  and we search it out, identify it and remove it, we cannot proceed into the fullness of what God has for us. 

Look, His promises are meant to WORK! Until we believe that, we doom ourselves to lives lived without ever discovering the FREE INDEED Jesus has for each one of us. The fullness of grace's power is far more than we have understood. Yes, grace forgives. But grace also promises to  change us and make us actual overcomers. 

So why, if that is the case, isn't it working? Why are we not being changed and delivered from the power of the enemy?  One reason.

The promises work as we believe them.

Until we get sick and tired of living in defeat with closeness to Jesus only felt in rare instances, such as a great worship service, and our hearts  cry out for the faith that moves His promises  into action, we will remain healed only slightly. But God has assured us that He will respond when we cry out to Him with our whole hearts. You see, even this faith must come from Him. 

Some are ready even now to cry out to Him for such faith. Some will do so later. Some, as I said, will staunchly refuse to believe that God can and will deliver us from evil in this life, content with religious knowledge about God, rather than being possessed wholly by the Lord and seeing their lives changed in ways they simply thought impossible. 

I have no idea who is who. Each one of us must search our own hearts and respond accordingly. My prayer and hope is that all discover the rest that remains for the people of God. 

blessings, 

Gideon

I have a very simple message for you, Gideon, from the word of God: if you are born again, then you ARE an overcomer.

1 John 5:3,4 (ESV)

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.
4 For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world— our faith.

[Gideon]

35 minutes ago, David1701 said:

I have a very simple message for you, Gideon, from the word of God: if you are born again, then you ARE an overcomer.

1 John 5:3,4 (ESV)

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.
4 For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world— our faith.

Have you ever read the scripture that tells us

".. but it did not profit them not being mixed with faith in them that heard it"?

The very answer is included in the scripture you offered... and this is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith.

Was the church of Laodecia walking as overcomers? A man walking as an overcomer, when he is tempted, resists satan steadfast in the faith. The result? He does not yield, his shield of faith quenches the arrow meant to cause him to fall, and satan flees from him. 

If we were automatically overcomers, why have the epistles at all? Why encourage us to holiness, to keep our bodies under. Positionally, we are all new creatures. Experientially, how few there are found walking in the benefit of that truth. 

I urge all who are reading this thread, to honestly examine your walk to see if, practically speaking, you are walking with your shield of faith actually protecting you, keeping you from falling, causing you to walk in victory over the world, the flesh and the devil. If not, God desires to make it real for you. 

It is when we tire of assuring ourselves of what God declares, and long for it to become our actual reality, that we shall escape the land of 'healed only slightly', and discover what it is to actually walk in the reality and fullness of 'the glorious liberty of the children of God'. 

blessings to you, David

Gideon
 

 

[Gideon]

7 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Great! If that is true then solution is simple and the matter easily resolved: just reword or remove the first and third statements in the op. Or better yet, say something nice and kind about "the whole of Calvinism vs Arminianism because as far as the subsequent content of the op goes they are in complete agreement. It's a real simple, easily accomplished real solution and you've refused it. I've even offered to remove my dissent when that happens and again I've been repeatedly met with refusal. 

So you can say "It was not to disparage...," but posting the belief the whole of Calvinism vs Arminianism is of the enemy is in fact disparaging. So is implying we're all deceived.

If that was unintended then fix it. 

You are determined to make this a fight, and I will say again, your taking offense is missing the point of this post. God loves all of His children, Calvinists, those who cling to Arminianism, and those who do not even know what these terms represent. He longs to bring every one of them into full liberty from the grip of sin and self ruling the roost. 

That is the purpose of my OP, not to disparage as you have stated many times, but to bless. If any are still walking in bondage to sin, and find satan never flees when they try to resist, then something is wrong, not with the truth of the gospel but with our understanding of it. 

When any of God's beloved children read these words, they can either get offended that my post somehow seems to insinuate that their understanding may be flawed, or, they may fall before God and cry out in prayer..

  "I am your child but I am still missing the HOW of walking in fruitfulness and holiness. I cannot walk in defeat any longer.  I want my life to bring honor to your name. Show me what I lack and set me free indeed as you defined it.... free from committing sin.  Please, dear Father,  do as you have promised and CAUSE ME to walk as your obedient, joy filled child. Amen"

God will resist the proud, but will hear the heart cry of any hungry child wanting bread. Of that we can be assured. 

blessings, dear brother

Gids

[David1701]

1 hour ago, Josheb said:

Baloney! The word "believe" does not speak to the author's intent. 

The word" intent" means "purpose" or "something a person is resolved to do." The word "believe" means "to hold as truth," or "to hold as opinion." So neither definition of belief is identical to the definition of intent. If the sentence was reworded to place the "I believe" at the beginning of the statement the sentence would read, 

I believe the whole topic of Calvinism vs Arminianism is ultimately a smokescreen from the enemy. 

So whether held as an opinion or truth it's a cr@ppy way to begin an op that is not intended to denigrate. Or was it? The dross is made worse because the stated his opinion is wrong. If that sentence had appeared in the soteriology board where Cals and Arms routinely and vigorously debate what has remained unresolved for 500 years it would be different. This Op did not just fall into the General Discussion board. It did not fall out of the Soteriology board. Conscious intentional decisions were made to place this op where it is at, outside of the soteriology board. Why then start by telling every, including the 90% of Protestants who are Calvinist or Arminian that the whole topic in which they believe is from the enemy?

Why do that? 

The answer to that question goes to intent. 

Again I point out this did not happen in a vacuum. Every word of the op was posted with some intent, either consciously known or unawares and scripture is quite clear to say that it is out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (and the fingers type). It was out of the abundance of the heart his fingers began this op saying he believes the whole topic of Cal v Arm is a smokescreen from the enemy.  

So let me point out what has just happened: you've read something into the op that is not written. You say the op is "simply an expression of concern that some Christians are being deceived into an unbalanced focus on this debate," but none of that is anywhere stated in the op. And I'm not sure any progress is gained in this disagreement between the two of us by amending Gideon's motive to say he thinks Cals and Arms are deceived!  How is that any better? The fact is, he did not say he was concerned for Cals and Arms. He did not say Cals and Arms were being deceived. He did not say it was "unbalanced," and as I have already posted both Calvin and Arminius agreed diligence, producing fruit, examining our lives are all necessities. Even if he were correct about some aspect of Calvinism or Arminianism he is not correct about the particulars of the op because Calvin and Arminius agreed. He said he believed the whole topic of Calvinism vs Arminianism was of the enemy. Logic would then dictate anything he believes in agreement with Calvinism or Arminianism is likewise from the enemy! I was not the only one who observed the questionable opening. 

So what by reading into the op things that are not actually written while accusing me of doing the same a problem arises. Under otherwise ordinary and objective circumstances the practice of that which is reportedly disdained is called hypocrisy. Do not be that guy. More importantly, Gideon is quite capable of speaking for himself and he has done so. He does not need you to explain or defend him. Here's what scripture says about what you're doing. 

Proverbs 26:17
"Like one who takes a dog by the ears Is he who passes by and meddles with strife not belonging to him."

Perhaps it is thought because this is a public forum it is okay to speak for another and explain his posts without him. Perhaps the original motive was to provide well-meaning insight and correction for me under the auspices of the "right" to post anything to anyone at anytime as long as it meets the tou. Perhaps it is thought, "I'm gonna argue with Josh as he argues with Gideon and give him a taste of his own medicine." Perhaps the intent is to rescue one brother from another. Perhaps it started out well-intentioned but the moment things not stated in the op were read into it any potential efficacy of good intentions were lost. 

My conflict is with the op and this disagreement is not making it better. Belief is not intent and the dissent is based on things you are reading into the op and the author's intent. 

I have moved on. 

 

Titus 3:9-11
"But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.  Reject a factious man after a first and second warning,  knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned."

So that's what I did. I tried to show him the error of unnecessarily beginning an op with wrongful derision, whether made as a personal opinion or truth statement, or even just a an unintended mistake. I provided evidence the belief is demonstrably incorrect regarding the subsequent particulars of the op, diligence, fruit-bearing, and examination, and I provided a pair of suggestions for how the matter could be resolved. The solution was simple: either remove the derogatory opinion about Cals and Arms or -since Calvin AND Arminius agreed on the matters of diligence, fruit-bearing, and self-examination - say something nice and unifying. And you've read his refusal to do that.  I did so once, twice, thrice. Rebuffed in all three attempts I moved on. I did what I was supposed to do in obedience to God's word.

 

I've moved on. Why haven't you?

I've got three or four posts about later comments made in the op and I have affirmed that which bears integrity with scripture and corrected or refuted that which does not bear integrity with scripture. I have noted where both Cals and Arms agree on several points found in the op. I have provided a quote of the larger 2 Peter 1 text - which is an amazing passage! - to show the reader the necessity of diligence, fruit-bearing and self-examination suggested by Peter.  

That should foster a less divided conversation. 

Josheb, correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you are assuming that the original poster (and some others) have similar accuracy and language ability to yours?  Your analysis of the use of language is very good; but only valid if the poster's use of language is also good.

When I read the OP, I assumed (intuitively, whether rightly or wrongly) a certain looseness, in the use of language, on the part of the poster, and responded accordingly.  Later posts, by the original poster, have strengthened my opinion that we need to grant a certain amount of latitude, where use of language is concerned, and try to get the gist of the intent, which might not be exactly what was posted.