Why Calvinism is a bad thing.

[Diserner]

Calvinism has a lot of good emphases, the sinfulness of man, the greatness of God's holiness, and the need and power of Christ's atonement.

Where Calvinism makes a wrong turn, is deciding how God should run his world, and that it is offensive for God to put his holiness and glory above the well-being of God's creation.

Ironically, this is what the Calvinists generally accuse others of doing, of being "man-centered," and making doctrines around preferences.

But the truth is, Calvinism sacrifices the love of God and the holiness of God, to collapse all that God allows into God's primary desire, for the sole intent purpose of resolving offense and finding security in removing all free will. The fact that God's holiness is more important than my own personal security, and whether God makes sure I'm not a lost person but guarantees everything I selfishly want in salvation, is something my sin nature will never like or agree to.

It is sinful to find our security in attempting to formulate a doctrine that disallows God to sacrifice our personal security for God's own holiness. We can rest in grace and find our security in God's promise, without needing the false security of God desiring and decreeing all evil things and lost souls.

For those Calvinists who defend with doublespeak, I urge them to just be logically consistent, and admit that God does not decree free will choices.

 

[PapaLandShark]

Ironically, this is what the Calvinists generally accuse others of doing, of being "man-centered," and making doctrines around preferences.

Normally I'd insist on someone making claims like this to provide Scripture. But you can't. And you haven't. So I won't since all the "proof" you've provided is opinion.

Now "Calvinists" through the ages have been very particular about how they present their soteriology. You can either choose ( laugh ) to address that here or not. But I'll raise your "'cuz" with a "nuh uh" and this half of a millennium debate will continue on in another forum as stupidly and fruitlessly as in all the others.

 

[Micaiah]

I’m into Bible-ism.

 

[360watt]

Usually folks are divided into either Calvin or Arminian camps.

The entire Christian world is somehow meant to be variations of either of these.

The truth though is there is another option..

Unlike Calvinism..

Salvation that IS by free will, believing Jesus is God, that He died and rose again and that by believing in Him you have eternal life.

Unlike Arminianism.

Salvation can in no way be undone. Not by the person who received it and not by Jesus who promised it.

Read John 3:36, 5:24, 10:28. Plus Romans 10:9-10. Among others.

Predestination is about entrance to heaven pre set for a believer.. not about salvation being pre set for some and not others.

It's also about the destiny of God's churches.

 

[atpollard]

I’m into Bible-ism.

So are the Mormons, JW, Pentecostals, Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists and so was David Koresh.
(It is a meaningless term.)

 

[atpollard]

Everyone hates the term, but few of them are really willing to address the concepts behind the term. For starters lets define "Calvinism" in the narrow sense of "T.U.L.I.P." (salvation only) rather than the broad sense of "Reformed Theology" (which gets into areas beyond salvation).

The fancy term is Soteriology: The study of how people get saved. Let us throw away the "loaded" terms "Calvinist" and "Arminian" that so many want to object to on some semantic basis and use more precise language. There are TWO choices and they are mutually exclusive. You may attempt to present a third choice, but you will fail. [A brief moment to discuss "logic": the choices are "A" or "not A", so if "A" is true, then "not A" must be false and if "not A" is true, then "A" must be false ... it is unavoidable ... both cannot be true and both cannot be false.]

• Choice "A": MONERGISM = God saves people with no outside help [all by Himself, with no cooperation needed from the recipient].
• Choice "not A": SYNERGISM = God saves people through a cooperative effort with the person being saved.

One is true and the other is false. Your and my "opinions" will ultimately count for almost nothing. What God says in His Holy Scripture will count for everything. So which statement is true based on the God presented in the Bible? Starting at least with Paul in Romans and Ephesians, those who embrace the so-called Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) have argued for MONERGISM.

For those whose ultimate complaint is: ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.' ... I invite you to explain SYNERGISTIC SALVATION from scripture without falling into the heresies (as declared by the Church, not me) of Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism.

 

[civic]

Normally I'd insist on someone making claims like this to provide Scripture. But you can't. And you haven't. So I won't since all the "proof" you've provided is opinion.

Now "Calvinists" through the ages have been very particular about how they present their soteriology. You can either choose ( laugh ) to address that here or not. But I'll raise your "'cuz" with a "nuh uh" and this half of a millennium debate will continue on in another forum as stupidly and fruitlessly as in all the others.

I agree its one thing to make an assumption or a claim, its entirely another to back it up with biblical evidence.

 

[civic]

Everyone hates the term, but few of them are really willing to address the concepts behind the term. For starters lets define "Calvinism" in the narrow sense of "T.U.L.I.P." (salvation only) rather than the broad sense of "Reformed Theology" (which gets into areas beyond salvation).

The fancy term is Soteriology: The study of how people get saved. Let us throw away the "loaded" terms "Calvinist" and "Arminian" that so many want to object to on some semantic basis and use more precise language. There are TWO choices and they are mutually exclusive. You may attempt to present a third choice, but you will fail. [A brief moment to discuss "logic": the choices are "A" or "not A", so if "A" is true, then "not A" must be false and if "not A" is true, then "A" must be false ... it is unavoidable ... both cannot be true and both cannot be false.]

• Choice "A": MONERGISM = God saves people with no outside help [all by Himself, with no cooperation needed from the recipient].
• Choice "not A": SYNERGISM = God saves people through a cooperative effort with the person being saved.

One is true and the other is false. Your and my "opinions" will ultimately count for almost nothing. What God says in His Holy Scripture will count for everything. So which statement is true based on the God presented in the Bible? Starting at least with Paul in Romans and Ephesians, those who embrace the so-called Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) have argued for MONERGISM.

For those whose ultimate complaint is: ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.' ... I invite you to explain SYNERGISTIC SALVATION from scripture without falling into the heresies (as declared by the Church, not me) of Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism.

I can also claim you are making a false dichotomy. God in Monergistic in the sense He initiates by His grace and drawing men unto Himself. Man is responsible to place his faith in the Savior, the gospel. God does no believe for man. That in mans responsibility.

Salvation like sanctification is synergistic. Faith is what makes both happen and apart from faith their is no salvation. Yet God comes before faith by His grace, mercy, drawing men to Himself through the gospel.

And not once did Jesus who is the Savior and the very One whom the gospel is about said it was the FAITH that He gave people to believe in Him. He said over a dozen occasions in the gospels it was THEIR/YOUR faith that saved them , healed them, made them well.

Jesus is the standard and His words are spirit, life and truth. The Apostles teaching doesn't contradict Jesus teaching. We start with God/Jesus teaching and understand the rest of Scripture through His teaching. If you are using Paul to contradict Jesus then its your misunderstanding of what Paul said and taught on the topic of faith and salvation.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

I’m into Bible-ism.

Welcome back to the new forum, hope you will enjoy it my friend.

 

[civic]

Usually folks are divided into either Calvin or Arminian camps.

The entire Christian world is somehow meant to be variations of either of these.

The truth though is there is another option..

Unlike Calvinism..

Salvation that IS by free will, believing Jesus is God, that He died and rose again and that by believing in Him you have eternal life.

Unlike Arminianism.

Salvation can in no way be undone. Not by the person who received it and not by Jesus who promised it.

Read John 3:36, 5:24, 10:28. Plus Romans 10:9-10. Among others.

Predestination is about entrance to heaven pre set for a believer.. not about salvation being pre set for some and not others.

It's also about the destiny of God's churches.

Welcome to our new forum and hope you enjoy it here my friend.

 

[Obadiah]

So are the Mormons, JW, Pentecostals, Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists and so was David Koresh.
(It is a meaningless term.)

"I’m into Bible-ism." But it's a pretty cool saying sort of like a bumper sticker. Makes me think of that song I don't care if it rains or freezes as long as I got my plastic Jesus sitting on the dashboard of my car.

But I hear what you're saying, The interpretation of the Bible can be dangerous. Don't drink the Kool-Aid.

 

[PapaLandShark]

I can also claim you are making a false dichotomy. God is Monergistic in the sense He initiates by His grace and drawing men unto Himself. Man is responsible to place his faith in the Savior, the gospel. God does no believe for man. That in mans responsibility.

God is Monergistic. Fixed.
He ( God ) makes certain by His grace. Drawing men unto Himself. Fixed.
Man is responsible for either responding positively or negatively too the Gospel. Outside of the grace of God man will always respond negatively. No free will there. Within the grace of God man's nature has been changed so that he will respond positively and run to God for salvation. No free will there either.

OR you could say that either side of that equation is completely free will but the choosing is determined by the man's nature.

Salvation, like sanctification, is synergistic.

Sez you. And slow down, brother. I'm having to fix your spelling and grammatical errors as well.

Faith is what makes both happen and apart from faith their is no salvation. Yet God comes before faith by His grace, mercy, drawing men to Himself through the gospel.

Now see I'd agree with this except I know you mean exactly the opposite of what the Bible says. Somehow you'll get the cart before the horse. Salvation and the "setting apart" of Sanctification is entirely Monergistic. I'm still not sure why our brothers and sisters in other places go into conniptions about me saying this and pointing too Mortification being synergistic. Whatevah.

And not once did Jesus who is the Savior and the very One whom the gospel is about said it was the FAITH that He gave people to believe in Him. He said over a dozen occasions in the gospels it was THEIR/YOUR faith that saved them , healed them, made them well.

And we know full well that natural man has no "faith" toward God. He must be born again. Born from above. That very birth he has as much control over as his first birth. And that faith is a gift of God...and...blah blah blah. You aren't listening otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Jesus is the standard and His words are spirit, life and truth. The Apostles teaching doesn't contradict Jesus teaching. We start with God/Jesus teaching and understand the rest of Scripture through His teaching. If you are using Paul to contradict Jesus then its your misunderstanding of what Paul said and taught on the topic of faith and salvation.

hope this helps !!!

Paul doesn't contradict Jesus, brother. Your current doctrine does. So for the first and only time, repent.

Love you. Peace out on this topic.

 

[atpollard]

I can also claim you are making a false dichotomy. God in Monergistic in the sense He initiates by His grace and drawing men unto Himself. Man is responsible to place his faith in the Savior, the gospel. God does no believe for man. That in mans responsibility.

Salvation like sanctification is synergistic.

How is it a "false dichotomy" if you immediately champion "not A" (SYNERGISM) as the correct answer?

If "Salvation like sanctification (soteriology) is synergistic", then it cannot be MONERGISTIC (100% of God with no cooperation needed), can it?
Wesleyan Soteriology is a well thought out and thoroughly systematic view of 'How God Saves' that begins with GOD (prevenient Grace), affirms both man's free will and God's gift of grace, and places Christ and His work at the center of our (mankind's) salvation ... it is also SYNERGISTIC and denies that man plays ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIVE PART. Billy Graham was a Wesleyean in his view of Salvation. So it is hardly a position born of apostasy or any similar false accusations.

However, it is SYNERGISTIC and it denies MONERGISM. SYNERGISM does not need to be a 50/50 partnership between Man and God ... God can do 99% of the "lifting" and man provide only 1%: That is still not 100% of God (the definition of Monergism).

 

[praise_yeshua]

God is Monergistic. Fixed.

Monergism is nothing more than a English word defined by men.

Salvation is BOTH monergistic and synergistic. It is madding to see each side take such a dogmatic position that they can't see the Truth.

 

[praise_yeshua]

How is it a "false dichotomy" if you immediately champion "not A" (SYNERGISM) as the correct answer?

If "Salvation like sanctification (soteriology) is synergistic", then it cannot be MONERGISTIC (100% of God with no cooperation needed), can it?
Wesleyan Soteriology is a well thought out and thoroughly systematic view of 'How God Saves' that begins with GOD (prevenient Grace), affirms both man's free will and God's gift of grace, and places Christ and His work at the center of our (mankind's) salvation ... it is also SYNERGISTIC and denies that man plays ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIVE PART. Billy Graham was a Wesleyean in his view of Salvation. So it is hardly a position born of apostasy or any similar false accusations.

However, it is SYNERGISTIC and it denies MONERGISM. SYNERGISM does not need to be a 50/50 partnership between Man and God ... God can do 99% of the "lifting" and man provide only 1%: That is still not 100% of God (the definition of Monergism).

Simple answer, Only God can save. However, there is no effort or value in "asking" God to save you. There is no merit to be found in begging another to assist you. Beggars are not God. They are beggars.

The "math" you're using is too simplistic to consider the obvious.

 

[PapaLandShark]

Monergism is nothing more than a English word defined by men.

Well...until God or the Angels give us a dictionary we are stuck with things defined by men. /rolls eyes

Salvation is BOTH monergistic and synergistic. It is madding to see each side take such a dogmatic position that they can't see the Truth.

Sure. You go. I think the "madding" struck prior to your trying to make salvation both monergistic and synergistic.

Are we having fun yet?

 

[PapaLandShark]

Simple answer, Only God can save. However, there is no effort or value in "asking" God to save you. There is no merit to be found in begging another to assist you. Beggars are not God. They are beggars.

Do you read what you write? Try it. Out loud.

Maybe this makes sense to you but it's a mystery to the rest of us mortals.

The "math" you're using is too simplistic to consider the obvious.

Logic is logic. Math is math.

The obvious is generally simple ( as well as correct ) as shown by Occam's Razor. So...I think you have been staring at the back of your own head for too long.

 

[atpollard]

Simple answer, Only God can save. However, there is no effort or value in "asking" God to save you. There is no merit to be found in begging another to assist you. Beggars are not God. They are beggars.

The "math" you're using is too simplistic to consider the obvious.

Who is begging?

• [2 Corinthians 4:3-4 NASB20] 3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they will not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
• [Ephesians 2:1-3 NASB20] 1 And you were dead in your offenses and sins, 2 in which you previously walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3 Among them we too all previously lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the rest.
• [Romans 1:21 NASB20] 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their reasonings, and their senseless hearts were darkened.
• [Romans 3:11 NASB20] 11 THERE IS NO ONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NO ONE WHO SEEKS OUT GOD;
• [John 3:3 NASB20] 3 Jesus responded and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Is it these ...

• blind
• unbeleaving
• dead
• children of wrath
• futile in reasonings
• darkened of heart
• NON UNDERSTANDING
• NOT SEEKING

... who have somehow magically given birth to themselves?
Are THESE the people "begging" for God to save them?

 

[PapaLandShark]

How is it a "false dichotomy" if you immediately champion "not A" (SYNERGISM) as the correct answer?

If "Salvation like sanctification (soteriology) is synergistic", then it cannot be MONERGISTIC (100% of God with no cooperation needed), can it?
Wesleyan Soteriology is a well thought out and thoroughly systematic view of 'How God Saves' that begins with GOD (prevenient Grace), affirms both man's free will and God's gift of grace, and places Christ and His work at the center of our (mankind's) salvation ... it is also SYNERGISTIC and denies that man plays ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIVE PART. Billy Graham was a Wesleyean in his view of Salvation. So it is hardly a position born of apostasy or any similar false accusations.

However, it is SYNERGISTIC and it denies MONERGISM. SYNERGISM does not need to be a 50/50 partnership between Man and God ... God can do 99% of the "lifting" and man provide only 1%: That is still not 100% of God (the definition of Monergism).

A soteriology that is not 100% Monergistic is in error. 50% Synergistic or 99.999999999% Monergistic equals the same amount of "wrong".

It's just man begging to have just a little bit of power...just a touch. C'mon man just let me have something to boast about!

Nope. Might as well leave "Wesleyan Soteriology" and head on over to the RCC now. The end result is exactly the same. A man centered theology.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Well...until God or the Angels give us a dictionary we are stuck with things defined by men. /rolls eyes

You're the one pretending man got it right. They didn't. I don't need someone to define theology for me. I can that on my own.

Who's servant are you?

Sure. You go. I think the "madding" struck prior to your trying to make salvation both monergistic and synergistic.

Are we having fun yet?

We can discuss the qualities of either teaching and determine the truth. If you do this, I'm certain you will see that salvation both. Not either or.

Every heard of a false dichotomy?