Calvin vs. Arminius

[larryt]

 

I was never a Calvinist nor am I now a Calvinist.  I did not come to the conclusions about TULIP or DAISY from looking at their doctrine but came to the same conclusions and found out that that is what is taught by Calvinist doctrine.  I have stated several time in this thread that one can preach Calvinism and never preach Christ.  On the other hand  If you preach Christ I have found that the doctrines of Calvinism are all there.

 

One thing I agree with is that Adam was created with a free will, in that it was not subject to bondage in sin.  When he disobeyed though, his will was subjected to the sin nature that permeated his entire being and was no longer "FREE" as many claim.  If you still believe man has a FREE will them you will have to define "free" for me in both:

 

the will is free to....

 

&

 

the will is free from...

 

I have asked this several time and I have not gotten an answer from anyone yet.

 

As I see the freedom ... it is to see truth and lie!

Gen 3:22-23

22 Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us,

to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of

the tree of life, and eat, and live forever" — 

NKJV

Now as we all became sin in Adam all died! However in seeing the truth of this

we became empty of hope in what we had become... yet still seeing the truth

and believing God 'IS' we submitted to The Who of God and was granted

repentance to turn from ourselves by 'death of' and seek His Life (Christ) to

reign in place of our own-> our lives now made dead by The Cross but alive 

in Him...

John 8:31-36

31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, "If you abide in My word,

you are My disciples indeed.  32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth

shall make you free."

33 They answered Him, "We are Abraham's descendants, and have never been

in bondage to anyone. How can You say, 'You will be made free'?"

34 Jesus answered them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is

a slave of sin.  35 And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son

abides forever.  36 Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.

NKJV

Love, Steven

 

Hi Steven

Are you then stating that the natural man is "FREE" to be able to see truth and lies?

[larryt]

 

 

 

 

I 100% reject BOTH of these.

They both go "too far"

They both subject Scripture to WAY to much HUMAN, sinful, fallen "logic."

They both embrace SOME Scriptures, put too much into them, and then largely "dismiss" others because they don't seem to agree.

I think there is "mystery" here - and that's okay. We don't NEED to understand; we NEED to trust/rely.

I don't UNDERSTAND how or why all these things "crank out." God does. That's all that matters.

I believe that because I believe, GOD did that. ALL good things from God. ALL related to salvation is God's doing.

I believe that we are justified by Grace, because of Christ, through faith - and that's ONE inseparable doctrine and article of faith.

HOW GOD does that - I don't know (fully).

I thus reject TULIP and DAISY.

 

Then on to the second point.

 

I reject that.

While I accept the concept of Election, I reject the idea that God gets off and is gloried by seeing people fry for all eternity in hell.

If we believe, it is solely because of God. if we don't, it's soley because of us.

Those in heaven have Christ to thank. Those in hell have self to blame - not God.

I don't thank God for seeing people fry for eternity in hell. And I don't think He smiles or laughs or is pleased with such - I do NOT believe such is His glory and desire.

 

Who said anything about God taking joy in the death of the wicked. You draw a conclusion based on your human logic. God says directly that He takes no joy in the death of the wicked. This is a question of God's sovereignty and not how can we rationalize the scripture to our puny thinking process.

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

grace and peace

 

 

Hi Larry...the Lord bless you and keep you...

 

Larry, you are making a classic "denomination" error...you are (not realizing it as this is how this doctrine is taught...in a series of unrelated pieces taken out of the whole and strung together, Arminians, Catholics, even cults like the UPC...all do this...maybe its a human thing)

 

The whole context in this section of Ephesians 1 ends with verses 13 and 14...which are a summation of what Paul has concluded...Calvinists and most reformed theologians MUST leave the conclusion out because it negates there position....

 

Ephesians 1:13 tells us that after they heard the word of truth, the gospel, they believed,,,then after trusting they received the Holy Spirit of promise. There is a definite sequence here born out in many places. 

 

God speaks to us through the Spirit or the word or by a prophet or Apostle or a preacher or even a friend (faith comes by hearing) and then some people believe (but some will reject - Romans 1). Those that do receive Him are those God fills and seals with the Holy Spirit (in other words they are regenerated after they express their belief)...John 1:12 tells us that "to as many as received Him to them He gave the right to BECOME His children. It is these who will be born from above.

 

Now this does not mean that salvation is not all of grace (thus all of God) because even if one exhibits His sovereignly required response (to turn to, or believe, or accept, or obey), He owes no man anything because all have sinned...So the initiation of the offer is totally by grace....and if one believes God...He saves (totally by grace). This likewise does not mean one is making "belief" a work (Romans 4:2-5). it is not. 

 

Brother Paul

 

Hi Paul,

 

The fact that one believes is the evidence that they are the elect.  Yes it is the hearing of the word that is the impetus of eternal life.  I was chosen unto eternal life before the foundation of the world.  The Father knew me and has always known me as He knows all His elect, His children.

 

You accuse me of a denominational error but I am not sure as to what denomination you are referring to. 

 

I am curious as to how many of the posts you have gone through.  I mentioned in post 1314 about how I came to the conclusions I have come to believe.

 

You will have to define for me what it means to be chosen or elected.  And while you are at it how about "ordained."

 

Ac 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

 

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

 

2Th 2:13 ¶ But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

 

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

 

2Ti 2:10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

 

1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

 

Grace and peace

LT

[larryt]

What an incredibly long and mind-numbingly hard thread this is. But here's my humble bit for what it is worth.

 

I have to reject Calvinism.

If we have no free will and God knows and plans everything, then the fact that I am writing this post is pre-determined. In fact, I might as well just give up and not bother, but if I did, that would be pre-determined too. You could go on and on with this until you ended up bashing your head against a wall. That would be pre-determined too.

 

If it is pre-determined by God who is saved and who isn't  - then that would be cruel and unfair.

Of course, as soon as anyone on this forum claims that anything is unfair then we hear the usual stuff about "it's not unfair if God decides it. We cannot judge things by our own standards. God knows best. We cannot understand God's mind" and so on........ I've heard it all before.

 

God made us in his image. So we do understand some of the things that he does, just not to anywhere near to the same extent.

 

Does God know for certain who is saved and who isn't? He probably has a very good idea.... in fact he probably has an amazingly good idea..... but is he 100% certain? I doubt it. Not because he can't choose who is saved and who isn't, but because he has chosen to give us some choice in the matter.

 

It is not insulting to God to say that he doesn't know everything. He still knows more than anyone or anything ever - and knows more than all beings or all things combined. How could we love him and have a relationship with him if everything was predetermined by him? That wouldn't be love, we would just be robots - Stepford wives programmed to obey him and demonstrate a false affection for him.

 

Is God perfect, yes, but only because nothing is more perfect than him, therefore he defines perfection. So can God defy logic? No he can't, because by definition it wouldn't be logic. Does 2 plus 2 = 4. Yes it does. Can God change that? No, I doubt it.

 

When Christians start saying that God is beyond all analysis it reminds me of how Muslims treat Allah. When Allah does things that are clearly contradictory or illogical then Muslims go all brain dead. No one can understand Allah, they say. This is nonsense clearly designed to make them stop thinking. It's how Mohammed controlled them. His false revelations were clearly ridiculous but by telling Muslims that they were incapable of questioning Allah's logic they became afraid to try and do so.

 

I believe that God is infallible not because he is, but because he defines infallibility. Nothing is as infallible as he is. He never lies and he never forgets, and nothing is more powerful than he is. He is also love and he defines love. The fact that we too are capable of love is because he made us like him. We don't possess all his qualities and we possess not even a miniscule amount of his knowledge or power, but within certain parameters we do have free will. If our salvation is pre-determined, then our free will is worthless and is not really free will.

As for our names being written into the book of life, who is to say that God has even finished the book yet? He probably started writing it along time ago, but I suspect that it has still to be completed.

Hi WillowWood,

 

Yes this is a loonnngggg thread.  I do not agree that it is mind numbing though.  Discussing sound doctrine though is never unpleasant or mind numbing for me as sound doctrine is all about My Lord Jesus Christ.

 

You are yet another one that uses the term "Free Will" but does not define it.  I have asked many that use the term to define what they mean by it.  Check post 1314 above please.  I have already stated my case against free will several times in this thread and defined what I mean by it.  If you believe that man is NOT totally depraved then I can understand how you can come to the conclusion that man has a free will.  If you believe in total depravity then I do not understand how you can find that man has a free will.

 

Grace & Peace

LT

[OakWood]

 

What an incredibly long and mind-numbingly hard thread this is. But here's my humble bit for what it is worth.

 

I have to reject Calvinism.

If we have no free will and God knows and plans everything, then the fact that I am writing this post is pre-determined. In fact, I might as well just give up and not bother, but if I did, that would be pre-determined too. You could go on and on with this until you ended up bashing your head against a wall. That would be pre-determined too.

 

If it is pre-determined by God who is saved and who isn't  - then that would be cruel and unfair.

Of course, as soon as anyone on this forum claims that anything is unfair then we hear the usual stuff about "it's not unfair if God decides it. We cannot judge things by our own standards. God knows best. We cannot understand God's mind" and so on........ I've heard it all before.

 

God made us in his image. So we do understand some of the things that he does, just not to anywhere near to the same extent.

 

Does God know for certain who is saved and who isn't? He probably has a very good idea.... in fact he probably has an amazingly good idea..... but is he 100% certain? I doubt it. Not because he can't choose who is saved and who isn't, but because he has chosen to give us some choice in the matter.

 

It is not insulting to God to say that he doesn't know everything. He still knows more than anyone or anything ever - and knows more than all beings or all things combined. How could we love him and have a relationship with him if everything was predetermined by him? That wouldn't be love, we would just be robots - Stepford wives programmed to obey him and demonstrate a false affection for him.

 

Is God perfect, yes, but only because nothing is more perfect than him, therefore he defines perfection. So can God defy logic? No he can't, because by definition it wouldn't be logic. Does 2 plus 2 = 4. Yes it does. Can God change that? No, I doubt it.

 

When Christians start saying that God is beyond all analysis it reminds me of how Muslims treat Allah. When Allah does things that are clearly contradictory or illogical then Muslims go all brain dead. No one can understand Allah, they say. This is nonsense clearly designed to make them stop thinking. It's how Mohammed controlled them. His false revelations were clearly ridiculous but by telling Muslims that they were incapable of questioning Allah's logic they became afraid to try and do so.

 

I believe that God is infallible not because he is, but because he defines infallibility. Nothing is as infallible as he is. He never lies and he never forgets, and nothing is more powerful than he is. He is also love and he defines love. The fact that we too are capable of love is because he made us like him. We don't possess all his qualities and we possess not even a miniscule amount of his knowledge or power, but within certain parameters we do have free will. If our salvation is pre-determined, then our free will is worthless and is not really free will.

As for our names being written into the book of life, who is to say that God has even finished the book yet? He probably started writing it along time ago, but I suspect that it has still to be completed.

Hi WillowWood,

 

Yes this is a loonnngggg thread.  I do not agree that it is mind numbing though.  Discussing sound doctrine though is never unpleasant or mind numbing for me as sound doctrine is all about My Lord Jesus Christ.

 

You are yet another one that uses the term "Free Will" but does not define it.  I have asked many that use the term to define what they mean by it.  Check post 1314 above please.  I have already stated my case against free will several times in this thread and defined what I mean by it.  If you believe that man is NOT totally depraved then I can understand how you can come to the conclusion that man has a free will.  If you believe in total depravity then I do not understand how you can find that man has a free will.

 

Grace & Peace

LT

 

 

How do I define free will? It means having a 'free will' where not everything is pre-determined. As for total depravity, I never said that I believed in it.

[larryt]

 

 

What an incredibly long and mind-numbingly hard thread this is. But here's my humble bit for what it is worth.

 

I have to reject Calvinism.

If we have no free will and God knows and plans everything, then the fact that I am writing this post is pre-determined. In fact, I might as well just give up and not bother, but if I did, that would be pre-determined too. You could go on and on with this until you ended up bashing your head against a wall. That would be pre-determined too.

 

If it is pre-determined by God who is saved and who isn't  - then that would be cruel and unfair.

Of course, as soon as anyone on this forum claims that anything is unfair then we hear the usual stuff about "it's not unfair if God decides it. We cannot judge things by our own standards. God knows best. We cannot understand God's mind" and so on........ I've heard it all before.

 

God made us in his image. So we do understand some of the things that he does, just not to anywhere near to the same extent.

 

Does God know for certain who is saved and who isn't? He probably has a very good idea.... in fact he probably has an amazingly good idea..... but is he 100% certain? I doubt it. Not because he can't choose who is saved and who isn't, but because he has chosen to give us some choice in the matter.

 

It is not insulting to God to say that he doesn't know everything. He still knows more than anyone or anything ever - and knows more than all beings or all things combined. How could we love him and have a relationship with him if everything was predetermined by him? That wouldn't be love, we would just be robots - Stepford wives programmed to obey him and demonstrate a false affection for him.

 

Is God perfect, yes, but only because nothing is more perfect than him, therefore he defines perfection. So can God defy logic? No he can't, because by definition it wouldn't be logic. Does 2 plus 2 = 4. Yes it does. Can God change that? No, I doubt it.

 

When Christians start saying that God is beyond all analysis it reminds me of how Muslims treat Allah. When Allah does things that are clearly contradictory or illogical then Muslims go all brain dead. No one can understand Allah, they say. This is nonsense clearly designed to make them stop thinking. It's how Mohammed controlled them. His false revelations were clearly ridiculous but by telling Muslims that they were incapable of questioning Allah's logic they became afraid to try and do so.

 

I believe that God is infallible not because he is, but because he defines infallibility. Nothing is as infallible as he is. He never lies and he never forgets, and nothing is more powerful than he is. He is also love and he defines love. The fact that we too are capable of love is because he made us like him. We don't possess all his qualities and we possess not even a miniscule amount of his knowledge or power, but within certain parameters we do have free will. If our salvation is pre-determined, then our free will is worthless and is not really free will.

As for our names being written into the book of life, who is to say that God has even finished the book yet? He probably started writing it along time ago, but I suspect that it has still to be completed.

Hi WillowWood,

 

Yes this is a loonnngggg thread.  I do not agree that it is mind numbing though.  Discussing sound doctrine though is never unpleasant or mind numbing for me as sound doctrine is all about My Lord Jesus Christ.

 

You are yet another one that uses the term "Free Will" but does not define it.  I have asked many that use the term to define what they mean by it.  Check post 1314 above please.  I have already stated my case against free will several times in this thread and defined what I mean by it.  If you believe that man is NOT totally depraved then I can understand how you can come to the conclusion that man has a free will.  If you believe in total depravity then I do not understand how you can find that man has a free will.

 

Grace & Peace

LT

 

 

How do I define free will? It means having a 'free will' where not everything is pre-determined. As for total depravity, I never said that I believed in it.

 

If the will  is free, what is it free from.......     and what is it free to do.......

 

Can the natural man choose to love God all by itself or is it enmity and unable to be subjected to God?

[CaliforniaJosiah]

 

 

 

I 100% reject BOTH of these.

They both go "too far"

They both subject Scripture to WAY to much HUMAN, sinful, fallen "logic."

They both embrace SOME Scriptures, put too much into them, and then largely "dismiss" others because they don't seem to agree.

I think there is "mystery" here - and that's okay. We don't NEED to understand; we NEED to trust/rely.

I don't UNDERSTAND how or why all these things "crank out." God does. That's all that matters.

I believe that because I believe, GOD did that. ALL good things from God. ALL related to salvation is God's doing.

I believe that we are justified by Grace, because of Christ, through faith - and that's ONE inseparable doctrine and article of faith.

HOW GOD does that - I don't know (fully).

I thus reject TULIP and DAISY.

 

Then on to the second point.

 

I reject that.

While I accept the concept of Election, I reject the idea that God gets off and is gloried by seeing people fry for all eternity in hell.

If we believe, it is solely because of God. if we don't, it's soley because of us.

Those in heaven have Christ to thank. Those in hell have self to blame - not God.

I don't thank God for seeing people fry for eternity in hell. And I don't think He smiles or laughs or is pleased with such - I do NOT believe such is His glory and desire.

 

Who said anything about God taking joy in the death of the wicked. You draw a conclusion based on your human logic. God says directly that He takes no joy in the death of the wicked. This is a question of God's sovereignty and not how can we rationalize the scripture to our puny thinking process.

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

grace and peace

 

I agree with Eph. 1:5 which is why I reject TULIPS' double predestination.

[larryt]

 

 

 

 

I 100% reject BOTH of these.

They both go "too far"

They both subject Scripture to WAY to much HUMAN, sinful, fallen "logic."

They both embrace SOME Scriptures, put too much into them, and then largely "dismiss" others because they don't seem to agree.

I think there is "mystery" here - and that's okay. We don't NEED to understand; we NEED to trust/rely.

I don't UNDERSTAND how or why all these things "crank out." God does. That's all that matters.

I believe that because I believe, GOD did that. ALL good things from God. ALL related to salvation is God's doing.

I believe that we are justified by Grace, because of Christ, through faith - and that's ONE inseparable doctrine and article of faith.

HOW GOD does that - I don't know (fully).

I thus reject TULIP and DAISY.

 

Then on to the second point.

 

I reject that.

While I accept the concept of Election, I reject the idea that God gets off and is gloried by seeing people fry for all eternity in hell.

If we believe, it is solely because of God. if we don't, it's soley because of us.

Those in heaven have Christ to thank. Those in hell have self to blame - not God.

I don't thank God for seeing people fry for eternity in hell. And I don't think He smiles or laughs or is pleased with such - I do NOT believe such is His glory and desire.

 

Who said anything about God taking joy in the death of the wicked. You draw a conclusion based on your human logic. God says directly that He takes no joy in the death of the wicked. This is a question of God's sovereignty and not how can we rationalize the scripture to our puny thinking process.

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

grace and peace

 

I agree with Eph. 1:5 which is why I reject TULIPS' double predestination.

 

So how do you define predestination?  It is a biblical term.  How do you define election?  Is election based on something man does or is it based entirely on the will of God?

 

If you are going to discuss this them try to positively state your position.  I have heard all the arguments against my position and have not found any that are able to positively present an alternative.  It is funny how all the debate is centered around showing why the Calvinist position is incorrect and not very much on the pro-Armenian position.

 

You have stated you reject both.  What is your alternative?  Without an alternative your statement is meaningless.

[Walt1093]

I agree with the Arminian position. Why? Because pre-destination nullifies repentance, something that both Christ AND Peter preached.  

 

"There is more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over 99 persons who need no repentance." -Luke 15:17 

 

Why would there be joy in heaven over something that had no chance of being otherwise? I can assure you, there wouldn't be. That would be comparable to a person becoming ecstatic over the fact that 2+2=4. But this doesn't stop here. Apostle Paul places the act of repentance into the hands of the sinner as well, when he made his famous statement: 

 

"I have become all things to all men, so that I might by all means save some"- 1 Corinthians 9:19  

 

How could Paul save anyone by his efforts, if they were pre-destined to be saved beforehand? His statement indicates, by using the term "save", that there is a possibility of reaching hell or heaven for every person born. It is not a pre-determined fate. The major attraction to determinism for Christians is that it makes God sound more powerful, and us sound more weak. It makes it easy for us to give Him the credit for our decision to serve Him, making him sound yet even more powerful. But this is not the case in reality. In the Old testament, God frequently boasted about His servant Abraham, giving the credit to this man for obeying him, rather than taking the credit for himself.

 

“Because Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions”-(Genesis 26:5).

 

You notice here that God did not say, "Because I made Abraham obey me", he said rather: "Because Abraham OBEYED me." This passage shows that Abraham's actions and choices were his own,  and not God's, thus the reason why God honored him.  And what about that verse in 2nd Peter? 

 

"He is willing that none should perish, but that all should have everlasting life."  

 

Really, if I were wanting to debate this, I could go on forever with a personal Bible study that I conducted on free will. But I'm not looking for a debate, so I'm simply giving my personal reasons for believing in the Arminian position.  I believe that ALL who hear Jesus's words and put them into practice are heaven-bound, no matter which side of theological debates they are on.  

[CaliforniaJosiah]

 

 

 

 

 

I 100% reject BOTH of these.

They both go "too far"

They both subject Scripture to WAY to much HUMAN, sinful, fallen "logic."

They both embrace SOME Scriptures, put too much into them, and then largely "dismiss" others because they don't seem to agree.

I think there is "mystery" here - and that's okay. We don't NEED to understand; we NEED to trust/rely.

I don't UNDERSTAND how or why all these things "crank out." God does. That's all that matters.

I believe that because I believe, GOD did that. ALL good things from God. ALL related to salvation is God's doing.

I believe that we are justified by Grace, because of Christ, through faith - and that's ONE inseparable doctrine and article of faith.

HOW GOD does that - I don't know (fully).

I thus reject TULIP and DAISY.

 

Then on to the second point.

 

I reject that.

While I accept the concept of Election, I reject the idea that God gets off and is gloried by seeing people fry for all eternity in hell.

If we believe, it is solely because of God. if we don't, it's soley because of us.

Those in heaven have Christ to thank. Those in hell have self to blame - not God.

I don't thank God for seeing people fry for eternity in hell. And I don't think He smiles or laughs or is pleased with such - I do NOT believe such is His glory and desire.

 

Who said anything about God taking joy in the death of the wicked. You draw a conclusion based on your human logic. God says directly that He takes no joy in the death of the wicked. This is a question of God's sovereignty and not how can we rationalize the scripture to our puny thinking process.

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 1:9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

grace and peace

 

I agree with Eph. 1:5 which is why I reject TULIPS' double predestination.

 

So how do you define predestination?  It is a biblical term.  How do you define election?  Is election based on something man does or is it based entirely on the will of God?

 

If you are going to discuss this them try to positively state your position.  I have heard all the arguments against my position and have not found any that are able to positively present an alternative.  It is funny how all the debate is centered around showing why the Calvinist position is incorrect and not very much on the pro-Armenian position.

 

You have stated you reject both.  What is your alternative?  Without an alternative your statement is meaningless.

 

I define "DOUBLE predestination" as God chose some for heaven AND some for hell.    No, it's not biblical. 

 

Election is the application of the GOSPEL that we were loved as His own before the foundation of the world.

 

TULIP begins biblical enough - but then applies a LOT of fallible, sinful, LIMITED human "logic" in an attempt to have a nice, neat set of doctrines - that conflict with much of Scripture.

Arminianism begins biblical enough - but then applies a LOT of fallible, sinful, LIMITED human "logic" in an attempt to have a nice, neat set of doctrines - that conflict with much of Scripture.

[CaliforniaJosiah]

There are other options that the two "human logic" ones of TULIP and Arminius

 

Here's one other paradigm:

 

TULIP: A Response from Calvinism, Lutheranism and Arminianism


Calvinism has summarized its position in the famous acronym TULIP, and this serves as a useful way to approach the issue (being logical Calvinism is, if nothing else, easy to follow):


T: "total depravity"

Calvinism: Man after the Fall has no ability to cooperate with God's grace in conversion
Arminianism: Man after the Fall can cooperate with God’s grace in conversion
Lutheranism: Agrees with Calvinism on total depravity
Relevant Bible passages: Romans 3:9-20; Gal. 3:22


U: "unconditional election"
Calvinism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation and the others (reprobates) for damnation.
Arminianism: Before the world was created, God foresaw those who would choose Him of their own free will and elected them to salvation
Lutheranism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation but did not reprobate (chose for damnation) any.
Relevant Bible passages: Romans 9:11-13; 1 Timothy 2:3-4; 2 Cor. 5:14-15; Mat. 25:34, 41.


L: "limited atonement"
Calvinism: Jesus only died for the elect, objectively atoning for their sin, but he did not die for the sins of the reprobates.
Arminianism: Christ died to give all the possibility to be saved.
Lutheranism: Christ’s death objectively atoned for all the sin of the world; by believing we receive this objective atonement and its benefits.
Relevant Bible passages: John 1:29; 1 John 2:2; 2 Cor. 5:14-15, 19.


I: "irresistable grace"
Calvinism: In all of God's outward actions (preaching, baptism, etc.) there is an outward call which all receive, yet there is also a secret effectual calling which God gives to the elect alone. This effectual calling alone saves and is irresistable.
Arminianism: God gives in His outward actions the same grace to all; this grace can be resisted by all.
Lutheranism: The question is not answerable; for the elect, grace will irresistably triumph, yet those who reject Christ have rejected that Grace; yet the grace is the same.
Relevant Bible passages: Eph. 2:1-10; Acts 13:48; James 1:13-15


P: "perseverance of the saints" ("once saved, always saved.")
Calvinism: Salvation cannot be lost.
Arminianism: Salvation can be lost through unrepentant sin and unbelief.
Lutheranism: Salvation can be lost through unbelief, but this legal warning does not cancel the Gospel promise of election
Relevant Bible passages: 1 Cor. 10:12. 2 Peter 2:1, 20-22.

 

 

 

Sorry if God doesn't seem to follow YOUR sinful, fallen, LIMITED "logic."   Our "job" is NOT to make God make sense.  Or to "answer" all the issues God does not.   Our "job" is to trust Him and believe all He says.

 

 

 

 

.
.