Why I Am a Calvinist (Part 2)
March 21st, 2007
. . . and why every Christian is a Calvinist of sorts.
(By Phil Johnson)
Part II: Spurgeon: “Calvinism IS the Gospel”
There are, these days, quite a few self-styled Calvinists who disagree with my assessment of Arminianism and insist that Arminianism entails an absolute denial of certain fundamental gospel truths. Those wishing to make that argument will invariably quote a famous statement by Spurgeon, taken from the chapter in his autobiography titled “A Defence of Calvinism” in which Spurgeon said this:
I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor.
I absolutely agree with what Spurgeon says there, in the sense that he meant it. And the context of that statement explains clearly what he meant. He was pointing out that the principle at the heart of all gospel truth is the same principle that drives Calvinism: “Salvation is of the Lord.” Salvation is God’s work; it’s not something we do for ourselves. That’s the truth he was defending.
Spurgeon was not saying that we ought to use the five points of Calvinism the way Campus crusade people use the “Four Spiritual Laws.” He wasn’t saying that all you ever talk about is the doctrines of election and reprobation you are faithfully preaching the gospel and the whole counsel of God. Unfortunately, I think that’s what a lot of careless Calvinists think Spurgeon meant when he said “Calvinism is the gospel.”
But if you read Spurgeon’s whole article on Calvinism, he makes very clear what he meant. In fact at the beginning of that very same paragraph—as his preface to remarking that “Calvinism is the gospel”—he wrote this:
“Salvation is of the Lord.” [Jonah 2:9.] That is just an epitome of Calvinism; it is the sum and substance of it. If anyone should ask me what I mean by a Calvinist, I should reply, “He is one who says, Salvation is of the Lord.” I cannot find in Scripture any other doctrine than this. It is the essence of the Bible. “He only is my rock and my salvation.” Tell me anything contrary to this truth, and it will be a heresy; tell me a heresy, and I shall find its essence here, that it has departed from this great, this fundamental, this rock truth, “God is my rock and my salvation.”
Did Spurgeon believe Arminianism was in error? Absolutely. So do I.
Did he believe it was damnable error? Absolutely not, and he made that clear, too.
At the peak of the Downgrade Controversy, some of Spurgeon’s critics accused him of being driven by a doctrinaire Calvinist agenda. It’s not really Modernism that Spurgeon hates, they said. It’s anything that departs from his old fashioned Calvinism. This whole controversy is a furtive campaign against Arminianism. That’s what really has Spurgeon bugged. He thinks modern Christians aren’t Calvinistic enough.
Spurgeon replied in The Sword and the Trowel with a paragraph that said this:
Certain antagonists have tried to represent the Down Grade controversy as a revival of the old feud between Calvinists and Arminians. It is nothing of the kind. Many evangelical Arminians are as earnestly on our side as men can be. We do not conceal our own Calvinism in the least; but this conflict is for truths which are common to all believers.
In another place, he was even more explicit:
We care far more for the central evangelical truths than we do for Calvinism as a system; but we believe that Calvinism has in it a conservative force which helps to hold men to the vital truth, and therefore we are sorry to see any quitting it who have once accepted it.
So he had a bone to pick with people who once affirmed the doctrines of grace and had now abandoned Calvinism in favor of new ideas that smacked of Socinianism. But he regarded evangelical Arminians as his true brethren and fellow soldiers—as long as they affirmed the doctrine of justification by faith, the principle of sola fide, the absolute authority of Scripture, the penal aspect of Christ’s atonement, and other essential gospel truths.
Speaking of Arminians in particular, he said:
Those who hold the eternal verities of salvation, and yet do not see all that we believe and embrace, are by no means the objects of our opposition: our warfare is with men who are giving up the atoning sacrifice, denying the inspiration of Holy Scripture, and casting slurs upon justification by faith. The present struggle is not a debate upon the question of Calvinism or Arminianism, but of the truth of God versus the inventions of men. All who believe the gospel should unite against that “modern thought” which is its deadly enemy.
So Spurgeon did not regard Arminians as hell bound heretics. He regarded them as brethren. Did he think they were in error? Yes? Were they guilty of gross inconsistency in their own theology? He would have answered emphatically, yes. Was their main error significant? Spurgeon did not shrink from referring to it as “heresy”—meaning unorthodox doctrine, heterodoxy, serious error. But he was very careful to make clear that he did not regard Arminianism per se as damnable heresy or utter apostasy from essential Christianity. Virtually all mainstream Calvinists from the time of the Synod of Dort until now would agree with him on every count.
For example, Gordon Clark, one of the highest of high Calvinists, said this with regard to whether Arminians are authentic Christians or not:
An Arminian may be a truly regenerate Christian; in fact, if he is truly an Arminian and not a Pelagian who happens to belong to an Arminian church, he must be a saved man. But he is not usually, and cannot consistently be assured of his salvation. The places in which his creed differs from our Confession confuse the mind, dilute the Gospel, and impair its proclamation.”
Which is to say that Arminianism is inherently inconsistent. Arminians technically affirm the fundamental, essential truths of the gospel. Then they try to build a theology on top of that which is totally inconsistent with the solid foundation they have affirmed.
I agree with that assessment of Arminianism. It’s an attempt to reconcile the sovereignty of God with human responsibility—and the Arminian method of reconciling those two truths involves a view of human free will that is inherently inconsistent with certain gospel truths every Arminian actually affirms.
In some posts yet to come, I will explain further why I believe that is the case.
These two posts have been fantastic.
They present the Gospel, “That salvation only comes from the Lord” and the obvious links Calvinism has with this simple yet profound statement.
This however is done in all humility and grace, unlike the aggressive spirit evident in many hyper-Calvinist writings.
Thank you.
MDM
[...] Phil Johnson (http://www.sfpulpit.com) posts part two of his series on why he is Calvinist, and why every Christian is a calvinist of sorts. [...]
Phil:
“But he regarded evangelical Arminians as his true brethren and fellow soldiers—as long as they affirmed the doctrine of justification by faith, the principle of sola fide, the absolute authority of Scripture, the penal aspect of Christ’s atonement, and other essential gospel truths.”
Very well said, and a needed reminder today, when so many irrelevant fights are picked among bretheren. Certain fights do need to be fought, as we well know, but not here, IMO. Your statement above is one true Arminians and sincere Calvinists can and should fully embrace. The spirit of Spurgeon (and dare I say George Whitfield?) lives on in such a sentiment.
I agree wholeheartedly Phil, but I still worry.
I’m just a barely educated layman, but I worry for my Brothers who lay claim to Arminian theology on one point in particular. If you believe that you can lose your salvation, then are you trusting in Christ for your salvation?
I mean I know this is really basic to most of you, but thats why I’m voicing it here. I love these people, and I worry for them. And for all the wonderful zeal I see from my Arminian brothers in regards to evangelism, reading the Word, and prayer there is always a worry that if you believe that you can sin bigger than Christ can atone for, can you be saved?
Semper Reformata
Lee
That’s some encouraging counsel. Thanks.
I have some friends and dear brothers and sisters in Christ, who are not Calvinists. They believe salvation is eternal, and when God calls you and regenerates you, then you will never, nor could ever, be lost again.
And I also know Christians, who believe there will be Christians who become lost again, but usually these same Christians, who believe this, do not think it will ever be themselves.
Thanks for this good and edifying teaching.
But he(Charles Spurgeon) regarded evangelical Arminians as his true brethren and fellow soldiers—as long as they affirmed the doctrine of justification by faith, the principle of sola fide, the absolute authority of Scripture, the penal aspect of Christ’s atonement, and other essential gospel truths.
Very pointed, yes?
For those that have spoken with or read words written by individuals that profess to be believers that also point to Free Will(that includes ability to sin to the degree of regressing to again being in Adam), it should cause dire concern when those same individuals reflect on the desire to obey the Lord in what they do because they want to go to Heaven. Does that speak to anyone else that these individuals have a Jesus and gospel but not Who/which saves?
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matthew 7:13-14
[...] (By Phil Johnson, Pulpit Magazine) [...]
Brethren,
I just read parts 1 and 2 of this subject. I have some thoughts I want to share, but first a little background. I was raised SBC until I moved away from home as a 20-year-old college junior in 1967. I was confronted with the reality of a devoted Christian life by reading David Wilkerson’s The Cross and the Switchblade. As most of you probably know, he was/is an AoG minister. I committed my life to Jesus in January, 1968, after an AoG meeting. I claim that as my regeneration or born again experience. I consider my SBC childhood to be a time of learning about Jesus and the gospel, but not actually knowing Him. As you can probably imagine, I have done much studying on the issues of receiving the Lord, our position in Christ, the life of discipleship and what happens when/if a believer backslides.
Another twist to this story is that I stopped seeking God when I was 29 because of some severe disillusionment with some events in my life. After 23 years, God sovereignly drew me back to Himself through some events which have some unique marks of God’s foreknowledge and sovereignty. I’ll skip the details and offer some thoughts about what I have read on parts 1 and 2.
1. Phil, you left out Rom 8:29 when you quoted Rom 8:28 and 30 in part 1. Verse 29 deals with God’s foreknowledge which some interpret as preceding God’s predestinating. My Zondervan Study Bible note on verse 29 offers it as an alternative belief differing from ‘God’s choosing us by His grace, before the foundation of the world’.
2. The story of Pharaoh in Exodus is interesting in this regard. The first mention of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart is in Ex 4:21 which says, …’the Lord said…but I will harden his heart…’ The comment on that verse says that there are nine times where the Bible says that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart and nine times where it says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. I find that to be a pretty balanced presentation of the subject of God’s sovereignty vs. man’s free will.
3. How does the issue of prophecy fit into this discussion? Cyrus was called by name in Isaiah years before the fall of Babylon. I’ve heard that Alexander the Great left Jerusalem alone because the Jewish priests showed him how Daniel had prophesied his rise to power. Matt 26:24 says ‘The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed: it had been good for that man if he had not been born’. I find more satisfaction by resting in God’s foreknowledge of these events, not in the extreme position that all men are destined by some Power outside of themselves to perform already-forecast events.
4. I alluded in my introduction to my backslidden years because I want to share how I have come to see the issue of salvation. I’m not going to list a series of proof texts because I’ve seen over the years that discussions of this nature seem to inevitably end up there. Salvation is a matter of which man are we in–Adam or Jesus. At a certain point in time, every believer was placed into Jesus by an act of the Holy Spirit. Each of us can look back to before that time and see the working of the Spirit in preparing our hearts to believe on the Lord which enabled the Spirit to place us into Jesus. Two situations which I use to describe the nature of becoming a believer are sitting on a couch or getting onto a boat. The Amplified Bible goes to great pains to demonstrate that the word translated ‘believe’ means much more than mental assent–it means to cling to, adhere to, rely on.
Col 2:6 says, ‘As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him’. I take this to mean that the believers had a previous experience of receiving the Lord, but that Paul was now engaged in speaking about their life subsequent to believing on/receiving the Lord. The success of a believer’s walk is one of the most paramount issues in the NT epistles. I’ll go back to the picture of sitting on a couch as a demonstration of our walk. We find our initial rest by putting our entire weight on the couch. We might call that regeneration/born again. However, we can spend our entire time on the couch examining it to see if the construction is sound which can give us an insecure feeling instead of ‘rest for our souls’.
In my examples of the boat/couch, I still have the freedom to completely abandon my position on the couch (in Christ). However, there are serious Biblical questions as to whether one who abandons his position in Christ can ever reclaim it. I claim to be an example of a disobedient son who was brought to the end of himself and graciously welcomed back into fellowship with my Lord in 1999. Could I have ever reached the point of denying my regeneration experience? Scripturally, I would say yes, but in my particular case I didn’t. I attribute that to God’s longsuffering, mercy, grace, etc.
Some believers may say that I’m using belief as a work, but that was my point in discussing the word which is translated as ‘believe’. It is an action word which implies the use of man’s will and determination, not simply a mental agreement to a plan of salvation or act of Jesus.
5. I guess the biggest part of this question to me has to do with the success of the walks of believers. I’ve had about 15 years total of active Christian fellowship with primarily AoG, SBC, Jesus people and charismatics with much reading of books and the internet. I’ve seen discipleship demonstrated by people in many camps, but I’ve also seen backsliding (or lukewarmness) demonstrated as well. It would be easy to say that a person’s doctrine is key, but that is too simplistic. Paul said in Romans that he was accused of teaching that believers should sin so that the grace of God could more abound and he warned the Galatians not to use their liberty for an occasion of the flesh. I’ve seen ‘Arminianists’ who might share the Lord because of fear, but I’ve also seen people who have moved from Arminian leanings into Calvinistic points who have thrown off every restraint they were walking in.
I want to apologize for the length of this post, but I hope those who read it can sense that I’ve spent much time wrestling with some of the ramifications of this question. I would welcome any person who wants to do some dialogue. My email is jetaylor47@yahoo.com
CB
Phil,
You listed in your first post about reading Older works on Calvinism.
Could you please list a few for me. I have the Ages Library for Spurgeon (your site is great by the way!!!), Calvin, Owen, Pink and Edwards.
I love the posts!!!
DKS
Dear CB,
I would direct your attention to a good website that deals with all of the doctrines of grace from a reformed point of view: http://www.monergism.com/
Read some of the good articles there. It’s a well-organized site.
Blessings to you as you study God’s Word.
I am a Southern Baptist. I always thought that SB’s were Calvinist. After reading many blogs in recent months, I find that the Reformed, Grace, and others consider the SBC borderline heretics.
I’m not even sure I fit into Calvinist group anymore.
I believe that no one comes to God unless the Spirit draw him. I believe that Salvation is by grace, not works. I do not believe that acceptance of so great salvation is considered a “work”. Repentance is also something we do. It is necessary for salvation. We do it, not God. I do not believe that God controls everything about our lives. Adam and Eve made choices, God allows choices. He is ultimately in control as he powers the universe, our heartbeat. He can do anything, anything He desires. I will never say that a young child getting run over by a car was God’s will. I believe prayer can change outcomes. I believe that God can make good happen out of bad.
What am I?
What exactly is an Arminian? No one seems to say.
Dear Liz,
There is much variety within the SBC, as ther is in other Baptist groups. You’ll find some SBC pastors who lean moe toward Calvinism and other more toward Arminianism. I doubt if most of our Reformed brethren would consider the SBC heretical as a general rule.
By “Grace” I assume you are speaking of the church John MacArthur pastors? If so, they do not consider the SBC heretical.
By the way, you can do a Wikipedia search of the terms Calvinism and Arminianism and get a good overview of what each teaches. But you’ll find some variety in each group.
Maybe this will help, also, concerning Arminianism?
http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Arminianism/
And on Calvinism?
http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Calvinism/
Liz:
“I will never say that a young child getting run over by a car was God’s will. I believe prayer can change outcomes. I believe that God can make good happen out of bad. What am I?”
You’re biblical, Liz. That’s the right thing to be.
“Repentance is also something we do. It is necessary for salvation. We do it, not God. I do not believe that God controls everything about our lives.”
Calvinists, I would think, for the most part, believe God controls everything about our lives, but we are not “robots”, (as some non-calvinist refer to calvinist).
And repentance is a gift from God, as is faith.
And yet, we are one day going to be commended by God for our faithfulness to Him, though it was all his grace.
He gets all the glory! And he sovereignly desires to share that glory with us, His elect.
This is humbling, because we have nothing to do with it; absolutely 100% pure grace. But nonetheless, our Father in heaven, and the Lord Jesus Christ shall commend us for serving Him.
we worship and serve an incredible Lord! What a Savior we do have!
I am a Calvinist, though I never really use that phrase very much. I will in order to let people know where I’m coming from, and I don’t mind the term.
I have some amazing friends, and brothers and sisters in Christ, who are not Calvinists, who serve the Lord with great love and fervant faith in His truth.
We have our heated discussions for sure. And that’s one way the Lord matures us.
I hope i didn’t take this post down the wrong path.
God bless you Liz.
Some one asked me these questions, how would any of you respond?
Why seperate the sovereignty of God and the free will of man and destroy one or the other? Whay can’t we leave both in tact?
This person went on to say that: The end is certain and the means is necessary.
In other words they believe that nothing can seperate you from the love of God, we must also observe the means, which is to continue in the faith.
So are they a Calvinist or Armenian?
Eddie
Exceptional work on these Phil. Must reading. This is you at your best. Its why we love ya bro.
Liz said:
“I will never say that a young child getting run over by a car was God’s will. ”
If God allows it, how is it not part of his will. He could have stopped it? Why didn’t he?
Was it God’s will that Job’s family die? Was it God’s will that he recieve boils. He didn’t do any of these things, but was it his will? He allowed Satan to work it. Did God not will it?
Did God not will Paul to be beaten and to suffer in jail, shipwrecks, going days without meals, sleeping in the wild, being bitten by snakes? When Jesus appears to Ananias and tells him to go to Paul and nurse him, does Jesus not say, “I’ll show Paul how much he must suffer for my name?”
Our “Concerned Brother” makes a great point about Romans 8:29. If God has perfect knowledge of the future and he allows some to go to hell, does he not will them to go to hell. Why does he not do more to save them?
If God’s predestining is dependent on his foreknowledge that we will believe, why did God CHOOSE Israel in the Old testament. What is the point of that choosing. How does God choose Jacob and not Esau (Romans 9) where Paul Says he chooses not based on their works?
I ask these questions not to be antagonistic, but to show that there are many tough questions. These questions are why we have various views. Let Scripture speak where it speaks.
May God’s grace be with us all as we listen to God’s Speaking
Thoughtful writing on this subject Phil. This is an issue that I believe will not be resolved until we see Christ face to face. I’ve heard and read many learned men debate each side of this…with little common ground. I love a quote from one of A.W. Tozer’s biographies. It’s regarding a young man getting ready for Bible college and getting Tozer’s advice on this issue. Here’s the excerpt…
***************************
I was preparing to go to Nyack College. Before I left there was one burning question I had in mind, and I went to Dr. Tozer and said, “Could you give me some advice concerning the problem of Calvinism versus Arminianism?”
And I’ll never forget the advice he gave me. At the time I thought it was rather inconclusive and not too helpful. But I listened carefully. He said, “My son, when you get to college you’re going to find that all of the boys will be gathered in a room discussing and arguing over Arminianism and Calvinism night after night after night. I’ll tell you what to do, Cliff. Go to your room and meet God. At the end of four years you’ll be way down the line and they’ll still be where they started, because greater minds than yours have wrestled with this problem and have not come up with satisfactory conclusions. Instead, learn to know God.”
“In Pursuit of God” – The Life of A.W. Tozer, James L. Snyder p132
Shawn,
Very wise words, thanks for sharing!
Eddie
If God is omniscient and omnipotent, then anything that occurs must be in line, at the very least in some way, with his will. Although we cannot fully grasp this, if God knows the position and movement of every molecule, and if he knows the end from the beginning, and if no one can stay his hand, and if he knows our thoughts before we think them, how is it that anything – an earthquake, a phone call, a sleepless night, a crime, a “good deed,” or anything at all occurs against the counsel of his will? Some, seeing this dilemma, say that god is not all-powerful. Other say he is not all-knowing (open theists, for example). Others assert that he is not all good. The problem of evil or suffering in a world ruled by an omnipotent and omniscient god poses all sorts of problems for us.
However, I have come to believe that God has given us enough in His word to realize that he uses suffering for the sanctification of his children and for examples of judgment on this fallen world. Why did the tower fall on those people? Was it because they were “worse” sinners than the rest? No, but it served as an example – unless you repent you will all likewise perish. Job shows us that God does not owe us explanations. God does what He does according to his own counsel – and who are we to object?
I believe that all things are brought about to bring maximum glory to God. Even our salvation is a by-product of that goal. The angels have no chance to repent. God is not willing that any should perish – yet some do. Why? Both Arminians and Calvinists limit the scope of this verse – Arminians because of a commitment to man’s free will, Calvinists because of a commitment to God’s glory. Why aren’t all saved? So that God’s full nature can be fully displayed – his love and mercy upon those objects of mercy, his justice and wrath upon those objects of wrath.
I was an arminian for years. Then, someone showed me some verses that seemed to imply it wasn’t all about human free will. I literally wanted to vomit. But, since once you see truth you can’t un-see it, I had to pursue this to see where it lead. It took four years, but I am convinced that “Calvinism,” at least as expressed in the 5 points refuting the 5 points of Arminius’ followers, represents the Biblical truth. Truth really does set you free …
God does all things according to his own will, and no one can object or claim unfairness with Him. It’s true, but it is not easy to accept.
“My son, when you get to college you’re going to find that all of the boys will be gathered in a room discussing and arguing over Arminianism and Calvinism night after night after night. I’ll tell you what to do, Cliff. Go to your room and meet God. At the end of four years you’ll be way down the line and they’ll still be where they started, because greater minds than yours have wrestled with this problem and have not come up with satisfactory conclusions. Instead, learn to know God.”
Who am I to argue with AW Tozer?
But to pursue God apart from engaging our minds is to pursue him as half a being. We are to love God with our whole being. Learning about God from His Word is part of our relationship with Him. I doubt AW would have said that a husband should not know any facts about his wife. Knowing facts is woefully inadequate if that’s all there is, but part of a real relationship involves knowing facts. And the study of God will lead to hard questions that are worth pursuing because they help us to know God as He truly is. I wonder how many times we worship a god more of our own making than conforming our thoughts about God to what He has revealed about himself. I have found very few people whose relationship with God I admire who do not know a lot of “things about Him.” We show God we value Him by taking the time to pursue the hard questions about Him. And who knows that God won’t grant someone in this time the “biblical truth” on this matter in such a way that this issue actually gets settled in Christendom?
Liz:
A quick series of what an Arminian is and holds to. I do not agree with all that the Armiian holds to, but the following 5 points will define Arminianism, IMO, fairly.
LM
Free-Will or Human Ability Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man’s freedom. Each sinner posses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man’s freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God’s Spirit and be regenerated or resist God’s grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit’s assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man’s act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner’s gift to God; it is man’s contribution to salvation.
Conditional Election
God’s choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world was based upon His foreseeing that they would respond to His call. He selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel. Election therefore was determined by or conditioned upon what man would do. The faith which God foresaw and upon which He based His choice was not given to the sinner by God (it was not created by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit) but resulted solely from man’s will. It was left entirely up to man as to who would believe and therefore as to who would be elected unto salvation. God chose those whom He knew would, of their own free will, choose Christ. Thus the sinner’s choice of Christ, not God’s choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
Universal Redemption or General Atonement
Christ’s redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved but did not actually secure the salvation of anyone. Although Christ died for all men and for every man, only those who believe on Him are saved. His death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe, but it did not actually put away anyone’s sins. Christ’s redemption becomes effective only if man chooses to accept it.
The Holy Spirit Can Be Effectually Resisted
The Spirit calls inwardly all those who are called outwardly by the gospel invitation; He does all that He can to bring every sinner to salvation. But inasmuch as man is free, he can successfully resist the Spirit’s call. The Spirit cannot regenerate the sinner until he believes; faith (which is man’s contribution) proceeds and makes possible the new birth. Thus, man’s free will limits the Spirit in the application of Christ’s saving work. The Holy Spirit can only draw to Christ those who allow Him to have His way with them. Until the sinner responds, the Spirit cannot give life. God’s grace, therefore, is not invincible; it can be, and often is, resisted and thwarted by man.
Falling from Grace
Those who believe and are truly saved can lose their salvation by failing to keep up their faith, etc. All Arminians have not been agreed on this point; some have held that believers are eternally secure in Christ – that once a sinner is regenerated, he can never be lost.
Each of the five defintions above are taken from The Five Points of CALVINISM: Defined, Defended, Documented. David N. Steele and Curtis Thomas,
Fiund in an Appendix in, Romans: An Interpretive Outline. p. 144
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., Phillipsburg, N.J.
LM
http://www.indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com
What an interesting and informative discussion. Thanks Lou for the explaining of the 5 points of Arminianism. I’ve been saved now approximately 2 1/2 years, and I’m still trying to figure out whether I had the choice to believe or whether I was predistined. Very thought provoking.
God bless,
Jeff
AW Tozer and Ed’s response…
I believe what Tozer was trying to get across is that some questions lead more to arguments and unjustified dogmatism than what Scripture supports. They are questions that lead to endless debating with no conclusion, because God has simply not given us complete information about them. Obviously he was not stating that a relationship with God should be without knowledge.
However he was saying don’t argue about “how many angels can fit on the head of a pin,” or “can God create a rock bigger than he can lift.”
In this thread we see thorough logic and support for Calvinism….on another site we could find similar cases for Arminianism – written just as logical and supported with much Scripture.
I think it’s fascinating that the camps in this particular debate cling to the names of the men associated with the position. If the point is to look and see what Scripture says about it why not use the terms “Sovereignists” and “Free-Willers” or “Predistinists” and “Whosoever’s”. The fact that men’s names are attached with the positions means that no common ground will be found.
The real issue is that Scripture does talk about the Sovereignity of God and it also teaches the free will of man. I believe Tozer’s point would be forget what diehard proponents of each say and look at the text in context to discover the truth.
Calvinists believe they can make it to the end of life and see they have a false faith, were never really elect, and go to hell. Arminians believe they can die and go to hell if they don’t continue to believe.
I see no difference. Both are saved by faith plus works. Neither one ever was saved. Neither one has simple Assurance. Neither one has believed (been convinced of) the saving message. They think they must believe and do a hundred other things, and live a certain way to make it to heaven.
I think the Bible teaches over, and over and over, especially in the Gospel of John, that if a person believes in Christ for eternal life (once), then they have it. If they have no simple assurance, they do not believe the Gospel. Period. It does not matter what else they do for the rest of their life. They can be sure they are going to heaven because of that one act of faith in the promise of eternal life from Christ plus nothing else.
Calvinists and Arminians are both wrong on being sure of their salvation and what it takes to get to heaven. Neither are going there if that is what they have always believed. The only way they can get to heaven is by Faith Alone, in Christ Alone, nothing more, nothing less, nothing else. Period.
Don
Host of GES Webboard
John 6:47 – Verily, Verily I say unto you, He that believeth on me HATH everlasting life.
I “hath” it. Do you?