Comments on: Clarifying Calvinism (Part 2)

By: Pete T.

Pete T. — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 19:05:28 +0000

Thank you very much, Phil for your clarification on this matter. It has certainly helped clear up some things in my mind and has encouraged me greatly. My family are all believers in the Lord, and they attend a church that teaches what you might call Arminian doctrine. But, as far as I can tell, they hold to all those foundational truths of which you speak. It’s funny that you mentioned that it often is in an attempt to reconcile God’s sovereignty with human responsibility where the error occurs. I find that to be the case in nearly all my discussions with them. I am so thankful that you have chosen to tackle such a contentious issue, and have done so with gentleness and clarity. Thanks again for your wonderful ministry.

Blessings,

Pete T.

By: Ray B.

Ray B. — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:13:54 +0000

Daniel ,
My point was that faith comes from hearing the word of God. That is the explicit teaching of the verse.

By: Daniel Chaney

Daniel Chaney — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 20:52:20 +0000

Ray,

You quoted the verse containing the words, “Faith comes by hearing” as if it supported your view that anyone has the ability to come to Christ. However, as I have told you before, that is not the explicit teaching of the verse. The explicit teaching is that faith cannot come without hearing. The verse does not say that faith is a necessary result of hearing (for that is explicitly denied by the parable of the sower). The verse also does not say that everyone who hears has the choice to have faith or not. The verse ONLY says that hearing the Word is the method by which God has chosen to impart faith. Whether or not the faith is man’s decision or God’s decision is not the intended meaning of this verse. We must go elsewhere to find the Biblical teaching concerning that issue.

By: Daniel Chew

Daniel Chew — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 07:21:04 +0000

Phil:

Isn’t there a dfference between evangelical Arminianism like that of John Wesley, and the classical Armianism of the Remonstrants like that of Conrad Vorstius?

By: donsands

donsands — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 02:33:04 +0000

Amen. And every blessing, even the trials, are only through His garec, and for Christ’s sake.

have a joyful Lord’s day tomorrow in His grace and love.

By: Ray B.

Ray B. — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:52:57 +0000

The Father gets all the glory for every blessing we have.

By: donsands

donsands — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:09:55 +0000

“Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, BUT of God.” John 1:13

Amen.

“…were by nature children of wrath, even as others. …BUT God, …Even when we were dead in sins, has made us alive, has quickened us, together with Christ”.

“SO THEN, it is not of him that wills, or of him that runs, BUT of God who shows mercy to whom He purposes.”

I agree salvation of a sinner is all of God. He foreknew us, and predetermined us, called us, justified us, and glorified us!

What a Savior! He gets all the glory, and I’ll never understand why he would take this dead sinner and make me alive together with Christ.

Have a blessed Lord’s day tomorrow.

By: Ray B.

Ray B. — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:08:10 +0000

Some who have heard and believe come to the light, desire the light , some hear and do not. Jonh 1 : 10- 13 ; John 3 : 19 – 21 .

By: William du Plooy

William du Plooy — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 03:11:54 +0000

There is ALWAYS a misunderstanding regarding Freewill and the Bondage of our limited FREE Will; which in essence is in bondage to the lusts and desires that are our sins.

We do not deny RESPONSIBILITY; what we argue is that Scripture and forensic experience affirms that our Free Will is limited in it’s inclination toward sin, therfore not desiring or able (Without Devine intervention, mercy and grace) to seek True Righteousness or godliness; but rather that our “FREE WILL” in Spiritual and godliness is enslaved and LIMITED by our sinfulness and our own lusts and desires.

Jonathan Edwards made some wonderful deductions from Scripture and experience as has R.C. Sproul, Martin Luther and countless other Evangelicals; it is that sin is so sinful and that we love it so much (In our natural state) that we cannot free ourselves from it; but that we require a Miracle and Deliverance from that which we will NOT TO DO (Romans 6-8). We find that sin in our very nature compels even a regenerate man to stumble at times when walking according to the flesh and not in the Spirit, who Himself is the power unto salvation by the Gospel and Law preached.

I trust that this makes more clear sense?

By: donsands

donsands — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 00:30:54 +0000

So some sinners love the light, or just don’t love the darkness? They have a bit more light about them, or less darkness than other sinners?

Some sinners do not desire to be a sinner? They desire to be righteous then?