For Calvinists: Do you skip evangelizing because God chooses?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

For Calvinists: Do you skip evangelizing because God chooses?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 2 8.7%
  • No.

    Votes: 21 91.3%

  • Total voters
    23
D

Depleted

Guest
This all boils down to what you think, your opinion, and interpretation of scripture...I've read the Bible and studied it and to make a long story short...I go by what I read. Not your opinion or interpretation of what it says and you don't have to go by mine...We are all going to be judged in the the end so I'm not judging you. I'm posting my view and interpretation and you are free to do the same.

Just to be clear though I am not Arminian and I am also not a Calvinist, as you can very well tell.
No, you really don't go by what you read, because I can guarantee you never found anywhere in the Bible that says babies are innocent, nor most of the other junk you've been spouting.
 

preacher4truth

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2016
9,171
2,718
113
How do you know they are outside of Christ?
Oh, so they're born in Christ, eh? That is what you are suggesting. And, you're still begging the question.

Show me a Scripture that denies all the world is lost which includes the whole of mankind regardless of days breathing, or that this declarative statement upon mankind excludes babies, and/or that babies are in Christ, or neutral, until "something else happens." We are shapen in iniquity, that's a plain fact.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
Hmm! So where does it say God wants us to chose him? My Bible says the opposite.

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that remains, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you." John 15:16

I'm still waiting for someone to post the verses that say, "free will." I can't seem to find them in any version on Biblegateway.com.
Whoa! Deja vu/flashback!

Not often do I read a verse on here that I also just read in my studies earlier. (I'm on chapter 15 in John. THICK chapter, full of Jesus words, so looks like I'll be here a while. lol)
 
Sep 6, 2017
1,331
13
0
Join with heaven's Son, and show what love is all about.
 

shrume

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2017
2,193
464
83
Semipelagian. Not much different. (We actually don't have to look up the words, or we wouldn't be using them in the first place.) All in all, you believe there is more than one way to God.
No I don't.

You can get to him through Jesus or by being sinless.
No man is sinless. All men need the salvation offered by Jesus Christ.

You might have "babies are innocent" as a third way.
Babies are not innocent. Because of the sin of Adam, ALL men need salvation.

Often hard to count how many ways Pelagians and semipelagians have. What they really have in common is the belief some, or all, humans will make it to heaven by their own abilities, bypassing God all together.
That is not what I believe.

(And bypassing him in two ways -- that Jesus is the only way, and that heaven, not God, is the goal.)
Jesus Christ is the only way to salvation.
 

1ofthem

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2016
3,729
1,912
113
You're teaching babies are innocent. No biblical proof for that, yet you're teaching it anyway.
Again, I'm not teaching anything...stating my view on it, but you can choose to view how God judges innocent babies and children however you want. We will all know in the end...won't we? I would suggest though you try to use love and kindness to your fellow man, though....I mean because that's what Jesus said to do wasn't it?:)
 
Sep 6, 2017
1,331
13
0
Have a blessed day, my friends, and remember to help those who hurt who can't always help what they do.
 
Jan 21, 2017
647
28
0
Can you find anyone teaching the free will before Pelagius?
Sure. Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Origen, Torah of Moses, Clement of Alexandria etc. Everyone in the early church believed it until Augustine came along. All jews believe so.
Calvinists tend to take their unsystematic theology from romans and completely eviscerate it from what its saying. The reason for this failure is that while these pundits are professional theologians, they dont bother to check out the OT parallels that Paul is using. I've already accepted that some are impossible to reason with, because even after being proven otherwise, they continue quoting romans 3:10 to prove total depravity, thus making scriptures contradict itself (luke 1:6). Basically they throw the entire narrative of the OT out the window, where righteous and wicked are compared over and over. Even in the NT we done seen this, with Cornelius who was a righteous man.

God even told Cain that:

Genesis 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Here is one quote from justin martyr:

[FONT=&quot]"We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man's actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is in our own power. For if it be predestined that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise or the other to be blamed. Unless humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions-whatever they may be.... For neither would a man be worthy of reward or praise if he did not of himself choose the good, but was merely created for that end. Likewise, if a man were evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not evil of himself, being unable to do anything else than what he was made for." (Justin [/FONT]First Apology chap. 43)

[FONT=&quot]Clement of Alexandria "Neither praise nor condemnation, neither rewards nor punishments, are right if the soul does not have the power of choice and avoidance, if evil is involuntary." (Clement [/FONT]Miscellanies bk. 1, chap. 17)
 
D

Depleted

Guest
Oh my...Petticoat Junction. I wasn't for sure which Joe, so I guessed Little Joe from Bonanza.
Better than the Joe that popped into my head.

[video=youtube;_BCWvH2ISyI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BCWvH2ISyI[/video]

 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Oh, so they're born in Christ, eh? That is what you are suggesting. And, you're still begging the question.

Show me a Scripture that denies all the world is lost which includes the whole of mankind regardless of days breathing, or that this declarative statement upon mankind excludes babies, and/or that babies are in Christ, or neutral, until "something else happens." We are shapen in iniquity, that's a plain fact.
I can suggest anything if its just about our theories.

I do not see anywhere in Scriptures that somebody goes to hell for eternity just because he is a human.
Everytime its said its because "all sinned". If somebody cannot sin, he is excluded from this "all" group, logically.

---

You just want from me to prove it to you, I want from you to prove it to me, and its probably leading to the point when we will say "we cannot prove it to the other one, so let us let it be in the opinion area".
 

shrume

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2017
2,193
464
83
Hmm! So where does it say God wants us to chose him?
Deut 30:
15) See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;
16) In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it.
17) But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them;
18) I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it.
19) I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Eze 33:
11) Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

1 Tim 2:
4) Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

2 Pet 3:
9) The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Rom 10:
9) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

My Bible says the opposite.

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that remains, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you." John 15:16
That's talking about Jesus choosing the twelve.

I'm still waiting for someone to post the verses that say, "free will." I can't seem to find them in any version on Biblegateway.com.
Neither will you find the words "permanent salvation". But I think you'd agree the concept is there.
 

1ofthem

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2016
3,729
1,912
113
And Arminius lead millions astray from the word of God and is still doing that.

Considering the Lord forgave David for murdering Uriah, and forgave Paul for murdering Stephen, I think Calvin was forgiven. Arminius? I doubt it, but I don't know if he repented right before he died.
Kinda of double standards being strung out there isn't it? Is Calvin supposed to have been like a new age Paul or something?????

Anyhow, who on here is calling themselves an Arminian...I've not seen anyone on here saying they follow him or even know who he was or what he was all about...Just saying...:)
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Sure. Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Origen, Torah of Moses, Clement of Alexandria etc. Everyone in the early church believed it until Augustine came along. All jews believe so.
Calvinists tend to take their unsystematic theology from romans and completely eviscerate it from what its saying. The reason for this failure is that while these pundits are professional theologians, they dont bother to check out the OT parallels that Paul is using. I've already accepted that some are impossible to reason with, because even after being proven otherwise, they continue quoting romans 3:10 to prove total depravity, thus making scriptures contradict itself (luke 1:6). Basically they throw the entire narrative of the OT out the window, where righteous and wicked are compared over and over. Even in the NT we done seen this, with Cornelius who was a righteous man.

God even told Cain that:

Genesis 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Here is one quote from justin martyr:

[FONT="]"We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man's actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is in our own power. For if it be predestined that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise or the other to be blamed. Unless humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions-whatever they may be.... For neither would a man be worthy of reward or praise if he did not of himself choose the good, but was merely created for that end. Likewise, if a man were evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not evil of himself, being unable to do anything else than what he was made for." (Justin [/FONT][/COLOR][I]First Apology chap. 43)

[/I][COLOR=#000000][FONT="]Clement of Alexandria "Neither praise nor condemnation, neither rewards nor punishments, are right if the soul does not have the power of choice and avoidance, if evil is involuntary." (Clement [/FONT]
Miscellanies bk. 1, chap. 17)
Your quotation from the Bible proves nothing, but I accept that Justin Martyr seems to teach something similar to free will. But we would have to study him more, one sentence can be used in whatever way outside of the context.

He only mentions free choice.
 
Last edited:

1ofthem

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2016
3,729
1,912
113
Correct. But that doesn't answer my question.



And there's what I was looking for. When the Christ was in the garden of Gethsamane, He prayed three times to let this cup pass from Him. What was in that cup that caused Him to pray three times to let it pass from Him, if it was His Father's will?


In the hand of the Lord is a cup full of foaming wine mixed with spices; he pours it out, and all the wicked of the earth drink it down to its very dregs.[Psalm 75:8] Our sins, and conversely His wrath, was in that cup. When the Christ drank of that most bitter cup, He knew that His Father would have to distance(turn His back on Him) Himself from His own Son. It was after He ingested this cup, He was then throttled and killed.

As it says God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.[2 Cor. 5:21] Notice, Paul said God made Him 'to be sin', not a symbol of sin, but sin itself. When He ingested our sins, our sins were imputed to Him, and He stood before God as a guilty sinner. When He stood before God, God saw Him as if it were you or I. He treated His Son no differently. That's because we can read He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?[Rom. 8:32] This shows God's justice in that even when His son stood in our place, God spared Him not.

Now, everything the Christ did, He did for His sheep. When He lived the sinless life, He lived it in their stead. When He died, He died in their place. When He rose from the grave, He rose for them so that they could live again, as Romans 4:25 says, He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. Everything the Christ is, His sheep are. God now sees His elect with the imputed righteousness of the Christ. He sees them as if they had lived the perfect life, as if they have never sinned. God sees us through His Son.

That's why I will defend Calvinism to my death. Everything the Christ did, He did for His sheep. If He lived, died and rose for everybody w/o exception, then everybody w/o exception will be saved. You can not hold to a universal atonement and not be a universalist and remain consistent in your theology.
I do agree with much of what you posted here brother. The main part where I still struggle to see you point is where you said we can not believe in universal atonement with out being a universalist. There are just too many scriptures that say Jesus died for the whole world and for all men's sin for me to disregard. I in no means think that all will be saved so I am not a universalist by any stretch. I just can't find any other meaning to those verses such as 1 John 2:2 and the many other verses that state that he died for all. [h=1]1 John 2:2[/h]
“And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for
the sins of
the whole world.”

In my view, this is the gift of God (grace of God) to anyone who will accept it. He sends out an invitation to all, but we know that not all will accept that invitation. He knows who will and who won't accept him, but I do not believe that he predestined or made that choice for anyone. We become grafted in (elect) when we accept him into our lives. To the gentiles he says he grafted us in...to Israel he says they were cut out because of their unbelief...but if they abide not in their unbelief he is able to graft them back in again.(Romans 11)
 
Jan 21, 2017
647
28
0
Your quotation from the Bible proves nothing, but I accept that Justin Martyr seems to teach something similar to free will. But we would have to study him more, one sentence can be used in whatever way outside of the context.

He only mentions free choice.
The quote proves nothing? Well im done then. Have a good one

The quote proves that Cain was told, if he does well, he will be accepted. And sin is at the door and its gonna be a desire for ya, but you can rule over it.
 

1ofthem

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2016
3,729
1,912
113
You too. Read all the verses in Romans before this and after this, because Paul took 7.5 chapters just to prove absolutely no one can do anything to save ourselves. It's all in God's hands. (The next few chapters explains how it's all in God's hands. The last chapters tell what we are then supposed to do about it, since we ARE the ones God saved.)
Here you go again with I think I saved myself stuff...This is totally untrue and uncalled for...just saying...
 
D

Depleted

Guest
Angela,
almost everything that is commonly said, in normal conversation, regarding the Calvinist/Arminian issue, is just thoroughly steeped in straw men... on both sides.

I certainly wasn't trying to accuse you of anything.
I just think both sides do a poor job of accurately assessing the other side.

I grew up being taught Calvinists were herectics of the absolute worst, and most damnable kind!
And now... I disagree with them a bit... but I quite like them.
: )



Alright, back to the discussion....



1. First of all, people who are not Calvinists aren't automatically Arminian, although that's the label Calvinist apply to anyone who isn't a Calvinist.
Most evangelicals, who are called "Arminian" by Calvinists, DO believe salvation is permanent and eternal, and kept entirely and only by God.

There are some churches which believe you can lose your salvation, but I don't think they are in the majority.

Also, please keep in mind, most evangelicals don't even know what an Arminian is... not until a Calvinist calls them by this name.
And at least 1/2 of what the Calvinist means by this term, is in most cases, incorrect.

(This isn't to say Calvinism is right or wrong... I'm just clearing up some labeling errors.)


2. However, the two camps do have some very major difference over a tiny handful of very small but important points.

ODDLY ENOUGH:
- Both camps believe God is at work in them PRIOR to salvation.
- Both camps believe no one can come to God unless he draws them.
- Both camps believe (for the most part) that salvation is permanent, and eternal, and kept only by God.
- Both camps believe they cannot, and do not, save themselves... despite accusations to the contrary.

So what are the actual differences?

There are a number of small, controversial, and hotly debated issues which are really pretty intricate and nuanced.

- One of the major issues is about the precise millisecond regeneration occurs.
Does regeneration occur a millisecond before accepting christ, or a millisecond after?
This is really the issue we're talking about.
It's pretty intricate, and pretty nuanced.

Here we can get into a long discussion about all the intricacies of prevenient grace.... but when it's all said and done, it's a pretty small and nuanced thing.

- There are some other issues, but the one above is probably the main one.


3. Now, I'm not about to ridicule my good Calvinist brothers because they believe regeneration occurs the millisecond before accepting Christ, and I believe it occurs the millisecond after.

I believe it's a serious theological issue.
I believe it should be studied, and it's a serious thing.
But when it comes to the saved brethren who are beloved of God... I am not personally going to cast any of them off over the disagreement of a millisecond.
: )


4. All of this said, I would still make the point that we should be careful of using personal subjective experiences to support controversial areas of theology.

Huh?

Like this:

A. If you say that you were wicked, and would never have chosen God, and he chose you, and moved in you, and called you to himself, and changed you so that you could accept Christ, and so you KNOW calvinism must be the correct view, well... we can't say you didn't experience this experience during conversion... but it's certainly very subjective.

B. Another Christian can say he was quietly reading the bible, and felt convicted of sin, and knelt down and CHOSE to give his life to christ... and that is his recollection of his own subjective experience.


The two conversion experiences, at least subjectively, were very different.
So do we want to use them as a basis for doctrine?

The subjective experience of your conversion is VERY important for witnessing and counseling.
The subjective experience of your conversion is VERY important for your own life, and spiritual growth.
However, it's probably not put to the best use as the source for intricate points of theology.
Since everyone's conversion experience is different... this just doesn't work reliably.


I like and respect Angela very much.
However, if this were a real debate, and I was an adversary... this would be a weak spot, where her argument could be attacked.


We need to be very cautious about bringing subjective experiences into debate...
even if they are completely valid in other domains.
To be honest, I really don't think nonCalvinists are automatically Arminians. Then again, all Calvinists aren't automatically followers of Calvin. I get tired of being told my views are wrong because Calvin killed people. (Particularly, since the closest I've ever come to knowing what Calvin taught has been presented to me in memes on FB.) Sooooo, I dump them under the bus they've chosen and link them back to James Arminius, because, frankly, they don't even know who he is.

Goose and ganders. (If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.) And, if they ever stop pretending that Calvinism is bad because of Calvin, I'll stop pretending what they believe is bad because of Arminius!

Very rarely do people go with what their real problem is, so I will keep pretending right along with them, until they get tired of having to defend Arminius too. They know what they're doing, and I know what I'm doing. When they get over subjective, maybe we can get down to reality!

I doubt that will ever happen, because the real problem is they want some sayso above and beyond God's sayso. They want to reign, but it's not our reign. God is sovereign!
 
D

Depleted

Guest
I think you're special.
Be careful. He did say he was fessing up to Calvinism so all the bullets go his way. Let us not assume all hit the target. lol
 

1ofthem

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2016
3,729
1,912
113
To be honest, I really don't think nonCalvinists are automatically Arminians. Then again, all Calvinists aren't automatically followers of Calvin. I get tired of being told my views are wrong because Calvin killed people. (Particularly, since the closest I've ever come to knowing what Calvin taught has been presented to me in memes on FB.) Sooooo, I dump them under the bus they've chosen and link them back to James Arminius, because, frankly, they don't even know who he is.

Goose and ganders. (If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.) And, if they ever stop pretending that Calvinism is bad because of Calvin, I'll stop pretending what they believe is bad because of Arminius!

Very rarely do people go with what their real problem is, so I will keep pretending right along with them, until they get tired of having to defend Arminius too. They know what they're doing, and I know what I'm doing. When they get over subjective, maybe we can get down to reality!

I doubt that will ever happen, because the real problem is they want some sayso above and beyond God's sayso. They want to reign, but it's not our reign. God is sovereign!
Looks like you should have read his post before jumping right in and attacking others and calling them Arminians...You proved his point for him...Just saying..
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
The quote proves nothing? Well im done then. Have a good one

The quote proves that Cain was told, if he does well, he will be accepted. And sin is at the door and its gonna be a desire for ya, but you can rule over it.
Yes, it proves nothing:

"And the Lord God said to Cain, Why art thou become very sorrowful and why is thy countenance fallen?
Hast thou not sinned if thou hast brought it rightly, but not rightly divided it? Be still, to thee shall be his submission, and thou shalt rule over him."

Gen 4:6-7