Comments on: Why I Am a Calvinist (Summary & Conclusion)

By: Gino

Gino — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:34:54 +0000

“You might be one of those people who doesn’t want to be referred to as a Calvinist or an Arminian. But the fact is, if you are a Christian at all, you do already affirm the fundamental principle in every one of those truths. You already know in your heart of hearts that you weren’t born again because you were morally superior to your unbelieving neighbors. You were worthy of God’s wrath just like them (Eph. 2:1 3). According to Ephesians 2:4-6, it was God who quickened you and showed you a special mercy—and that is why you are a believer. You already know that in your heart. You don’t really believe you summoned faith and came to Christ in your own power and by your own unaided free will. You don’t actually believe you are morally superior to people who don’t believe. You therefore must see, somewhere in your soul, that God has given you special grace that He has not necessarily shown everyone.”
No Biblicist or Arminian that I know believes that our faith made us in any way “morally superior” to anyone. Our faith is a condition that no human is unable to meet… and to those who are, they are excused (the mentally ill, young children, babies) by the idea that God’s character is too loving and just to damn those who had no real culpability in their actions. We do believe that we were unable to come until the father drew us. But God draws all the world to himself so all are enabled to come to him. This special grace is salvation which is not given on a basis of election as the Calvinist assumes, instead, it’s based on our faith which is our free choice. As for Ephesians 2:1-6, Paul speaks the truth. We were dead until our faith made us alive again, and it is by God’s grace, which sent the Son to die despite our sin, that we are saved.
I believe that God is sovereign in all things… including whether we are free agents or not, and It is my belief that he uses us free agents to accomplish his purposes without nullifying our free agency. He works to our ultimate good everything according to his purposes because he is sovereign, he’s also just, and loving.
I disagree that prayer for anything is Calvinistic because Calvinism argues that God has already fixed his will in a sovereign manner that will not be changed by any prayer. Really it’s anti-Calvinism to pray to God that he will change something. Our prayers are not right if we pray that God would change a person’s heart or that that person would do something. Our prayers are right when we pray that God would do as he promises, to work things together to our good, to draw a person into faith in Christ, not control them and “effectually draw” them. Our prayers are not Calvinistic when we ask God to bring people to salvation, because all that entails is arranging the circumstances of that person’s life and to draw that person to a desire for Christ. Not coerce them into becoming saved by election and effectual calling. We nowhere find either doctrine described in scripture in the way taught by Calvinism.
Ultimately I finish by saying this: I am convinced that Calvinism is a erroneous perversion of the Gospel of salvation. It ultimately makes God culpable for the reprobate. And at best is a character assassination of God.

By: Kevin Rhyne

Kevin Rhyne — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:46:22 +0000

Ray,

And all I have ever wanted to do is to tell as many as possible the saving truth of the gospel and to God goes all the glory, He who blesses us in Jesus Christ with all spiriual blessings.

In that we definitely agree. I look forward to our next discussion.

By: Ray B.

Ray B. — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 12:09:24 +0000

Kevin,
Thank you so much for the time spent in this discussion.
I have answered you about habitual .
I also see a grim picture of anyone who is without Christ. He died for us. Shed His blood. For the whole world. When the glorious gospel is preached and a person’s heart is open, receptive and the word is received with meekness , then that person will respond in obedient faith. I have explained all of this with scriptures.
David was truly repentant . He commented on his own sin but not the sin of the world. He made a personal statement not a statement of universal condition.
I have answered within the text. And all I have ever wanted to do is to tell as many as possible the saving truth of the gospel and to God goes all the glory , He who blesses us in Jesus Christ with all spiriual blessings. Thanks again for the discussion.

By: tc r

tc r — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 04:50:25 +0000

Great thoughts, Kevin.

By: Kevin Rhyne

Kevin Rhyne — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 03:35:59 +0000

Ray, I'm still looking for "habitual" in Eph 2... I don't mean this as a slam, but I have found that those who deny they have a system, bias or tradition are those who are most trapped by one. My goal is to force my head through the sieve of Scripture with as consistent hermeneutics as I humanly can so that my biases, traditions, and systems are challenged, tested, rebuked and conformed to the Word of God. I'm sure you know this, but the basic tenet of Scripture interpretation is that Scripture interprets Scripture. When I look at the totality of Scripture, I see a grim picture of man's desparate state. We are by nature "children of wrath", etc., I gleaned that picture of my own heart long before I even knew what Calvinism was as I was opened to my own need for a Savior. To suppose that we have it in and of ourselves to what God requires of us for salvation is to make the cross of Christ ineffectual...to paraphrase John Owen. What did He purchase? Our faith, our repentance. For whom did He purchase this gift? For the elect, chosen before the foundation of the world, unconditionally and individually. Each one called into the Body of Christ. I do appreciate the discussion, but what bothers me is your failure to engage the text. What does it say? Not, what do I want it to mean? Psalm 51 is a model of true repentance. I do not see David engaging in hyperbole there just because he is sorrowful. He is recognizing his true state before God: sinful, wretched and desparate. He needs God to create in him a clean heart, just like you and I do. A creation cannot will itself to be created. A baby cannot will himself to be born. A dead man cannot will himself to be resurrected. Name for me any other analogy in Scripture concerning regeneration that gives any credit to man for it. We need a new heart because the old one is corrupt...from birth. Only God alone can give it. Any understanding of salvation less than this truth opens the door to boasting by man and steals from God's glory in salvation. If that means I have embraced Calvinism, then so be it. I have embraced the Gospel. My desire is not to win an argument with you. My desire is to see the praise of His glorious grace magnified because it is His work and His work alone. I would love to continue to discuss these things with you, but I gather that you believe we have come to an impasse. Perhaps we have. Feel free to stop in at This Bread Always and comment any time if you'd like. Just be ready to engage the Text. I pray the Lord will open your heart to His blessings to us in Christ of every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blameless before Him, like He did Lydia's.

By: Ray B.

Ray B. — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:40:51 +0000

tc ,
Everything I have written about is from a biblical basis. No human system at all.

By: tc r

tc r — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:46:50 +0000

Ray,
What “nature” means in the text has nothing to do with Calvinism. If what I believe about Eph 2 is Calvinism then I fully embrace it as biblical.

According to Kevin, you are the one who has brought “habitual” to the text to avoid the obvious. What system do you call that? It is not biblical.

By: Ray B.

Ray B. — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:24:52 +0000

tc ,
You have fully embraced Calvinism.

By: Ray B.

Ray B. — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:23:19 +0000

Kevin ,
I already told you what I beleive it means. You hold strongly to total dapravity and believe it is a way of saying we inherit Adam’s sin. That is what you have infused into the text.I do not. All along I have said it depends on how election is defined. There is the difference. However long we continue, it has been a good discussion. Thanks for the dialog.

By: Kevin Rhyne

Kevin Rhyne — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:56:31 +0000

Ray,

You are have infused Ephesians 2 with a “habitual” nature. Where is that in the text?