A Baptist View of Free Will

[Pancho Frijoles]

I agree that a heresy goes beyond a doctrinal dispute.

Look at your list.
If I'm jealous,,,am I going straight to hell?
If I'm sexually immoral in some way, am I going straight to hell?
If I get drunk am I lost forever?

Paul was speaking to a way of life.

Yes, that's my point. Heresies are named among a list of immoralities. So heresies cannot be just doctrinal mistakes, but mistakes that lead to a way of life that is opposed to God's way of life.

So, whenever we call a doctrine a heresy, we must ask ourselves: Is this a doctrinal mistake, or is it leading people to a way of life of jealousy, sexual immorality, greed, etc ?

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, that's my point. Heresies are named among a list of immoralities. So heresies cannot be just doctrinal mistakes, but mistakes that lead to a way of life that is opposed to God's way of life.

So, whenever we call a doctrine a heresy, we must ask ourselves: Is this a doctrinal mistake, or is it leading people to a way of life of jealousy, sexual immorality, greed, etc ?

But you're saying that a heresy is immoral.
I've never thought of Calvinism as being immoral.
Those that practice Calvinism are NOT immoral persons.

I believe you're taking this one verse in the NT ...I don't think there are others....
and ignoring the DEFINITION of the word.

You're right.
A heresy in not just a doctrinal mistake...
it's something that takes the person away from the core beliefs of the faith.

Digame Pancho..
que quieres decirme??

Just say what you want to say so we could stop discussing the word
HERETICAL.

 

[Wilber]

Question: What is the definition of heresy?

Answer: When we hear the word heresy, we might conjure up images of medieval torture chambers and heresy trials. There was a period of church history that certainly included those things. If we are not history buffs or religious scholars, we might know that heresy is a bad thing, but still be rather foggy on the details. So, what exactly is heresy, and what does the Bible have to say about it?

A basic definition of heresy, according to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, is “adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma.” A second definition is “dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice.” That’s a good starting point for us. These definitions identify two key elements: a dominant position and a contrary position. With regards to religion, any belief or practice that goes against the official position of the church is considered heretical.

Heresy has existed in every age, but during the 12th century, the Catholic Church took unprecedented action against it. As the power of the Catholic Church increased in Europe, dissenting voices of other Christian groups became more troublesome. Pope Alexander III (1162–63) encouraged informers, so the church could discover evidence of heresy. In 1184 Pope Lucius III issued a decree that a convicted heretic was to be handed over to secular authorities for punishment. Over the next several decades, the church increased the severity of punishment for heresy, ultimately making it a capital offense under Pope Gregory IX. During this time, the Dominicans became the principle agents of the Inquisition, a special court given authority to judge intentions as well as actions. When heresy was suspected in a village, an inquisitor was sent to preach a sermon calling for the villagers to come forward with reports of heresy. This was a “general inquisition” that included a period of grace for anyone who would confess. This was followed by a “special inquisition” that might include coercion, false witnesses, and torture to obtain a “confession.” Those identified as heretics were then ordered to do penance, which might consist of mandatory church attendance, pilgrimage to a shrine, loss of property, or imprisonment. Heretics who refused to repent were sentenced to death. The Inquisition continued in most areas of Europe until the 15th century.

Obviously, the gauge for “heretical” teaching varies according to the established orthodoxy of the day. Any group or individual who differs from another group can technically be called heretical. In Acts 24:14, Christians are called heretics by the Jews. The “heretics” of the Middle Ages were only heretical in that they disagreed with the Catholic Church, not because they held unbiblical doctrines. The Spanish Inquisition executed over 14,000 people, many of them for simply possessing a Bible. Thus, biblically speaking, it was the established church itself that was heretical during the Middle Ages.

Regarding biblical Christianity, what is heresy? Second Peter 2:1 says, “There will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.” From this verse, we see that heresy is anything that denies the teaching of Jesus. In 1 Corinthians 11:19, Paul takes the church to task for having heresies among them—heresies that led to schisms in the body. These verses touch on both aspects of what constitutes heresy in the church: denying the doctrines God has given, and dividing the body He has created. Both of these are dangerous, destructive actions that are soundly rebuked by Scripture. See also 1 John 4:1–6; 1 Timothy 1:3–6; 2 Timothy 1:13–14; and Jude 1.

How does the Bible deal with heresy? Titus 3:10 says, “A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject” (KJV). Other translations say “divisive person,” “factious man,” and “person who stirs up division.” When a person in the church departs from biblical teaching, the correct response is to, first, try to correct him, but if he refuses to listen after two warnings, have nothing more to do with him. Excommunication is implied. The truth of Christ will unify believers (John 17:22–23), but heresy, by its very nature, cannot peacefully co-exist with the truth.

Of course, not every disagreement in the church is heresy. Having a different opinion is not wrong, but when the opinion is divisive or maintained in defiance of clear biblical teaching, it becomes heretical. The apostles themselves disagreed at times (see Acts 15:36–41), and Peter once had to be rebuked for divisive and legalistic behavior (Galatians 2:11–14). But, praise the Lord, through an attitude of humility and submission to the God of truth, the apostles worked through their disagreements and set an example for us.

How do we guard against heresy? Philippians 2:2–3 is a good starting point: “Complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.” As we submit ourselves to the authority of God’s Word and deal with one another in love and respect, divisions and heresies will be diminished.


Got Questions Ministries

 

[GodsGrace]

Question: What is the definition of heresy?

Answer: When we hear the word heresy, we might conjure up images of medieval torture chambers and heresy trials. There was a period of church history that certainly included those things. If we are not history buffs or religious scholars, we might know that heresy is a bad thing, but still be rather foggy on the details. So, what exactly is heresy, and what does the Bible have to say about it?

A basic definition of heresy, according to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, is “adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma.” A second definition is “dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice.” That’s a good starting point for us. These definitions identify two key elements: a dominant position and a contrary position. With regards to religion, any belief or practice that goes against the official position of the church is considered heretical.

Heresy has existed in every age, but during the 12th century, the Catholic Church took unprecedented action against it. As the power of the Catholic Church increased in Europe, dissenting voices of other Christian groups became more troublesome. Pope Alexander III (1162–63) encouraged informers, so the church could discover evidence of heresy. In 1184 Pope Lucius III issued a decree that a convicted heretic was to be handed over to secular authorities for punishment. Over the next several decades, the church increased the severity of punishment for heresy, ultimately making it a capital offense under Pope Gregory IX. During this time, the Dominicans became the principle agents of the Inquisition, a special court given authority to judge intentions as well as actions. When heresy was suspected in a village, an inquisitor was sent to preach a sermon calling for the villagers to come forward with reports of heresy. This was a “general inquisition” that included a period of grace for anyone who would confess. This was followed by a “special inquisition” that might include coercion, false witnesses, and torture to obtain a “confession.” Those identified as heretics were then ordered to do penance, which might consist of mandatory church attendance, pilgrimage to a shrine, loss of property, or imprisonment. Heretics who refused to repent were sentenced to death. The Inquisition continued in most areas of Europe until the 15th century.

Obviously, the gauge for “heretical” teaching varies according to the established orthodoxy of the day. Any group or individual who differs from another group can technically be called heretical. In Acts 24:14, Christians are called heretics by the Jews. The “heretics” of the Middle Ages were only heretical in that they disagreed with the Catholic Church, not because they held unbiblical doctrines. The Spanish Inquisition executed over 14,000 people, many of them for simply possessing a Bible. Thus, biblically speaking, it was the established church itself that was heretical during the Middle Ages.

Regarding biblical Christianity, what is heresy? Second Peter 2:1 says, “There will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.” From this verse, we see that heresy is anything that denies the teaching of Jesus. In 1 Corinthians 11:19, Paul takes the church to task for having heresies among them—heresies that led to schisms in the body. These verses touch on both aspects of what constitutes heresy in the church: denying the doctrines God has given, and dividing the body He has created. Both of these are dangerous, destructive actions that are soundly rebuked by Scripture. See also 1 John 4:1–6; 1 Timothy 1:3–6; 2 Timothy 1:13–14; and Jude 1.

How does the Bible deal with heresy? Titus 3:10 says, “A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject” (KJV). Other translations say “divisive person,” “factious man,” and “person who stirs up division.” When a person in the church departs from biblical teaching, the correct response is to, first, try to correct him, but if he refuses to listen after two warnings, have nothing more to do with him. Excommunication is implied. The truth of Christ will unify believers (John 17:22–23), but heresy, by its very nature, cannot peacefully co-exist with the truth.

Of course, not every disagreement in the church is heresy. Having a different opinion is not wrong, but when the opinion is divisive or maintained in defiance of clear biblical teaching, it becomes heretical. The apostles themselves disagreed at times (see Acts 15:36–41), and Peter once had to be rebuked for divisive and legalistic behavior (Galatians 2:11–14). But, praise the Lord, through an attitude of humility and submission to the God of truth, the apostles worked through their disagreements and set an example for us.

How do we guard against heresy? Philippians 2:2–3 is a good starting point: “Complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.” As we submit ourselves to the authority of God’s Word and deal with one another in love and respect, divisions and heresies will be diminished.


Got Questions Ministries

Thanks Wilber.
The above might be helpful to @Pancho Frijoles .

 

[Dizerner]

I've never thought of Calvinism as being immoral.

All false doctrines are a sin.

Those that practice Calvinism are NOT immoral persons.

Even Calvinists teach that all our thoughts, words and deeds are tainted with sin.

But Calvinism insults the very character of God, saying he is not maximally loving and good, and made people for hell.

This is not to say that despite their sin, they cannot be used by the grace of God, but Calvinism is definitionally immoral.

A heresy in not just a doctrinal mistake...
it's something that takes the person away from the core beliefs of the faith.

The original word had to do with leading divisive factions, so it was as much about behavior as belief.

 

[Johann]

Even Calvinists teach that all our thoughts, words and deeds are tainted with sin.

But Calvinism insults the very character of God, saying he is not maximally loving and good, and made people for hell.

This is not to say that despite their sin, they cannot be used by the grace of God, but Calvinism is definitionally immoral.

I believe the Calvinists are correct on this point; you emphasize God's love while neglecting His wrath. @Dizerner, sinners condemn themselves to hell by their own rejection of God, so do not blame Him-or Calvinists.

Title: The Paradox of God's Love and Wrath: An Exegetical Sermon

Text: John 3:36; Romans 1:18-32; Romans 2:4-5; Exodus 34:6-7

Introduction:
One of the most profound paradoxes in Scripture is the simultaneous love and wrath of God. The Bible declares that "God is love" (1 John 4:8), yet it also reveals that "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (Romans 1:18). How can these truths coexist? Are they contradictory, or do they reveal the fullness of God's character?

I. The Present Reality of God's Wrath (John 3:36, Romans 1:18-32)

John 3:36 states: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." This verse makes clear that the wrath of God is not merely a future eschatological judgment but a present reality.

A. The Abiding Wrath of God

The Greek word for "abideth" (μένει) is a present active verb, indicating a continuous state. This means that unbelievers are currently under divine judgment, not just in the future but now.

This wrath is not irrational rage but God's holy opposition to sin, a righteous and judicial response to rebellion.

B. The Unrighteousness of Man and Divine Judgment

Romans 1:18-32 details how God's wrath is revealed against those who suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Three key points emerge:

Suppression of Truth (Romans 1:18-21): Men reject the clear evidence of God's existence and power, choosing darkness over light.

Idolatry and Corruption (Romans 1:22-25): Humanity exchanges the glory of God for created things, worshipping idols instead of the Creator.

Judicial Abandonment (Romans 1:26-32): God "gives them up" to their depravity, allowing them to experience the full weight of their sin’s consequences.

Thus, the present wrath of God is manifested in His judicial hardening-allowing sinners to pursue their destructive ways as a form of divine judgment.

II. The Love and Goodness of God (Exodus 34:6-7, Romans 2:4-5)

A. God's Love and Mercy in His Self-Revelation

In Exodus 34:6-7, God reveals His character to Moses:

"The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth."

Yet, the passage continues: "Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty."

Here we see the balance: God is both merciful and just.

B. The Goodness of God Meant to Lead to Repentance

Romans 2:4-5 states: "Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath."

God's patience is an act of love, giving sinners time to repent.

However, when rejected, that very patience increases the weight of final judgment.

The unrepentant store up (θησαυρίζεις - "heap up as treasure") wrath against themselves for the day of judgment.

III. The Resolution in Christ: Wrath Absorbed, Love Extended (Romans 5:8-9)

God's love and wrath converge at the cross of Christ. Romans 5:8-9 declares:

"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

"Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."

At the cross:

The justice of God was satisfied, as Jesus bore the full weight of divine wrath (Isaiah 53:5-6).

The love of God was demonstrated, offering salvation to those who believe.

Those who reject Christ remain under wrath, but those who accept Him are reconciled to God (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Conclusion: A Call to Repentance and Faith

The paradox of God's love and wrath is resolved in Christ. To remain in unbelief is to abide under wrath, yet to turn to Christ is to receive mercy. The message is urgent: "Today, if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts" (Hebrews 3:15).

Which reality defines you? The abiding wrath of John 3:36, or the love of Romans 5:8? The choice is before you: repentance leading to life, or hardness of heart leading to wrath.

 

[Dizerner]

I believe the Calvinists are correct on this point; you emphasize God's love while neglecting His wrath. @Dizerner, sinners condemn themselves to hell by their own rejection of God, so do not blame Him-or Calvinists.

Huh?

God's loving only some people under his wrath and God's loving all people under his wrath both include his wrath.

Your point makes no sense at all, and I don't know how to respond.

Nothing I said neglected God's wrath whatsoever.

 

[Johann]

Huh?

God's loving only some people under his wrath and God's loving all people under his wrath both include his wrath.

Your point makes no sense at all, and I don't know how to respond.

Nothing I said neglected God's wrath whatsoever.

I believe I have made myself clear-hence the "Huh?"

J.

 

[Dizerner]

I believe I have made myself clear-hence the "Huh?"

J.

Lol, okay.

Let me explain clearly why Calvinism is insulting to God and demonic:

1. Calvinism expressly teaches that God's divine decree is what determines all choices, so there is no actual free will.

2. Calvinism expressly teaches that God specifically made some people just to go to hell, and that is not maximal love.

Post in thread 'A Baptist View of Free Will'

Monday at 1:28 PM

[WOW, you Arminians serve a MEAN God. ]

This brings out an interesting point. Because unless everyone is OWED a chance under a so-called "Pelagian" type system, people will be offended.

Since Calvinism and Arminianism share the belief that no one deserves the grace of God and all are born sinful and unworthy, both share the understanding that God is inherently offensive to sinful flesh, as Scripture very plainly reveals to us.

So then, what is the difference between the two, if both have a so-called "mean" God?

— Under Arminianism God has a perfect attribute of love...

• Dizerner

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I've never thought of Calvinism as being immoral.
Those that practice Calvinism are NOT immoral persons.

Excellent. I’m glad to hear that, Godsgrace.
I can read the nobility of your heart through the nobility of your words. Then may I suggest not to imply in any way that Calvinists are heretics, since heresy is listed among immoralities… among the fruits of the flesh. That’s what we just read in Galatians: Heretics do not enter the Kingdom of God.

Thousands or millions have been arrested, tortured, beheaded, hanged or burnt at the stake for being heretics.
In our current times, and even in this Forum. some Christians think that Jehovah Witnesses, Muslims, Jews or Baha’is like me who choose to live and die in their respective religion deserve to burn in hell for ever, in indescribable suffering.

In conclusion, “heretic” and “heresy” are terms that we should utter or write with maximal prudence, in attention to the way those terms are used in the Bible, in attention tothose who have been persecuted and killed for 2000 years, and in attention to the feelings of all brothers and sisters at the Forum.

 

[Dizerner]

The Bible plainly tells us ALL humans "deserve to burn in hell for ever, in indescribable suffering," including every Christian that ever lived.

That's why we NEED A SAVIOR. Self-righteous people DO NOT NEED a Savior.

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, (Rom. 3:23 NKJ)

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:19-20 NKJ)

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Lol, okay.

Let me explain clearly why Calvinism is insulting to God and demonic:

1. Calvinism expressly teaches that God's divine decree is what determines all choices, so there is no actual free will.

2. Calvinism expressly teaches that God specifically made some people just to go to hell, and that is not maximal love.

Post in thread 'A Baptist View of Free Will'

Monday at 1:28 PM

[WOW, you Arminians serve a MEAN God. ]

This brings out an interesting point. Because unless everyone is OWED a chance under a so-called "Pelagian" type system, people will be offended.

Since Calvinism and Arminianism share the belief that no one deserves the grace of God and all are born sinful and unworthy, both share the understanding that God is inherently offensive to sinful flesh, as Scripture very plainly reveals to us.

So then, what is the difference between the two, if both have a so-called "mean" God?

— Under Arminianism God has a perfect attribute of love...

• Dizerner

I may agree with you, but I strongly doubt that Calvinists believe that in their heart of hearts. Otherwise they couldn’t sleep at night and would behave as sociopaths. What do you think?

 

[Dizerner]

What do you think?

A "good" moral sinner who tries to always act good is the hardest person of all to save.

They will always think they are better than that "terrible sinner over there" that sins "so much worse."

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

The Bible plainly tells us ALL humans "deserve to burn in hell for ever, in indescribable suffering," including every Christian that ever lived.

That's why we NEED A SAVIOR. Self-righteous people DO NOT NEED a Savior.

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, (Rom. 3:23 NKJ)

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:19-20 NKJ)

Neither Romans 3:23 nor Romans 3:19-20 plainly tell us that “ALL humans deserve to burn in hell forever, in indescribable suffering”
Please Read the passages again.

If you were truly convinced that the Bible plainly tell us that, you would have long ago threw the Bible to the trash can. That would be the moral thing to do.
Since you have not done it, and you are not a sociopath, I suspect you are just confused.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

A "good" moral sinner who tries to always act good is the hardest person of all to save.

They will always think they are better than that "terrible sinner over there" that sins "so much worse."

I agree, but your description probably applies to only a minority of Calvinists.
The majority are no harder to save than you. A pice of cake for God, I would say.
Have you had a Calvinist friend? Somebody you have trusted or loved?

 

[Red Baker]

Thus for all God's attributes to be perfect—not just partially good, but maximally good—only the Arminian God is possible.

I'm thinking do I really want to jump in? Would there truly be any profit doing so? ..................................? Maybe I will later, when I have more time this weekend.

 

[Dizerner]

I'm thinking do I really want to jump in? Would there truly be any profit doing so? ..................................? Maybe I will later, when I have more time this weekend.

Yes, jump in to the maximally great Arminian God.

Let that shallow callous selfish Calvinistic "god" in your own image, just die friend.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I'm thinking do I really want to jump in? Would there truly be any profit doing so? .

No profit at all, @Red Baker
The Arminian God is genocidal, torturing whole religious groups day and night forever, just because of their religion.
In contrast, the Calvinist God is… mmm…wait a second… the Calvinist God loves… mmmm…sorry, I’m just… let me start again…

You will not profit from whorshiping the Arminian God, since he is genocidal, torturing Jews and Muslims day and night, day and night forever, just because of their religion.
On the other hand, the Calvinist God loves all his children and has chosen them from the foundation of the… wait…. I beg your pardon, Something is wrong…I mean… the Calvinist… Oh no… oh no… holy shhh….!!!!!
Can someone help me please?

 

[GodsGrace]

All false doctrines are a sin.

All false doctrine is a sin for the person that believes the false doctrine?
So we're all in sin.
Have we come to a final conclusion as to which doctrines are 100% correct?

Even Calvinists teach that all our thoughts, words and deeds are tainted with sin.

This is common Christian teaching.
I'd say Calvinism goes beyond stating that all our thoughts, words and deeds are tainted with sin..
but agreed.

But Calvinism insults the very character of God, saying he is not maximally loving and good, and made people for hell.

I've been saying this for years now.
Reformed/Calvinist theology changes the very nature of God.
Also because it teaches that God is not maximally good as you've stated...
but because it teaches that God decreed everything from the beginning....
everything includes sin.
Decreeing what each man will do includes sinning.
So it makes God to be a sin decreeing God...the opposite of what the NT (and all the bible) teaches.

This is not to say that despite their sin, they cannot be used by the grace of God, but Calvinism is definitionally immoral.

How is it immoral?
What does immoral mean?
I've just never thought of it in that way.

The original word had to do with leading divisive factions, so it was as much about behavior as belief.

Agreed. A heretical belief DOES take the person away from the core beliefs of our faith.
I just don't understand what this has to do with behavior...
UNLESS
you're referring to OSAS.
This doctrine can lead to bad, ungodly behavior because it teaches that a person can live a life of sin and still be saved.

 

[GodsGrace]

No profit at all, @Red Baker
The Arminian God is genocidal, torturing whole religious groups day and night forever, just because of their religion.

Haven't been following along...sorry if I'm misunderstanding.
Your post was just above mine that I just posted.

WHY are persons always referring to Arminius?
WHY am I always being called an Arminiun?
WHO was Arminius and WHY must I know about him?

Wouldn't it be nice if we all stopped using this terminology...
You're into terminology....maybe it could start with YOU?

In contrast, the Calvinist God is… mmm…wait a second… the Calvinist God loves… mmmm…sorry, I’m just… let me start again…

The opposite of Calvinism is not Arminiunism....it's called orthodox Christianity, mainline Christianity
OR something else, but NOT arminiumism.

You will not profit from whorshiping the Arminian God, since he is genocidal, torturing Jews and Muslims day and night, day and night forever, just because of their religion.
On the other hand, the Calvinist God loves all his children and has chosen them from the foundation of the… wait…. I beg your pardon, Something is wrong…I mean… the Calvinist… Oh no… oh no… holy shhh….!!!!!
Can someone help me please?

I'll help you.
According to Calvinists God loves ONLY those that He has chosen.
They don't seem to understand verses THAT JESUS spoke, such as
John 3:16
FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD.....

According to them...the world does not include everyone but just those God chose from the beginning.