Replies

By attacking all points of TULIP, you've also attacked Lutheranism and other confessional Protestant churches.

We Lutherans have our strongest disagreements with our Calvinist brothers and sisters on unconditional election and limited atonement, not to mention the nature of the Lord's Supper -- in, with, under -- though I imagine we'd both disagree with your position for some of the same reasons.

Everything boils down to two main areas of scripture: law and gospel. Law tells us what to do. Gospel tells us what has been done for us in Christ's life, death, and resurrection. Nobody is saved under the law since we cannot keep it. Only gospel saves, for the sake of Christ's work alone.

You've certainly pointed out some important verses with respect to total depravity (or inability). The thing is, you don't find many instances of people responding to such calls to salvation in the Scripture under the law. The verses you use are all law: do this, do that, you come to Me. You only find people responding as a matter of gospel. "No man cometh to the father but by me," and "No man cometh unless the Holy Ghost draw him," and "No man sayeth Jesus Christ is lord but by the Holy Ghost." If you get law and gospel wrong, everything else will be wrong. On this our churches agree.

As I noted, we disagree with our Calvinist brethren about election and predestination -- but to a degree. We, too, agree the Bible contains doctrines of election and predestination. They're both good Bible words and sound doctrine. So don't be too excited because we both disagree with you.

As for our differences, the scripture does not say, "God is not willing that the elect should perish..." but rather than ANY. Nor does the Bible say, "For God so loved the elect," rather he loved the world. We accept that grace is available to both the elect (who were predestined) and to those who aren't (though we disagree that they're predestined to hell). The Calvinist position is, we believe, an attempt to rationalize incongruent teachings from Scripture rather than leaving it to the unsearchable knowledge and purposes of God.

I hope you noted that I still refer to Calvinists as my brethren. They truly are. They believe and trust in Christ alone for their salvation, and they're drawn to faith by the same Holy Spirit working through word and sacrament. BTW, sacraments are all gospel. Your position is most likely that they're all law, which is why we would disagree with your views about them. Let me know if you'd like to discuss the matter fully so you can understand our position accurately.

Let me also remind you that Calvin and his colleagues, like Luther and his colleagues, faced penalty of death for proclaiming salvation by grace alone through faith alone for the sake of Christ alone. I urge you to read the Belgic Confession, the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Heidelberg Catechism to see what Calvinists believe and confess and then decide if Calvinism is of the Bible or of man. Though I'm not Calvinist, I know the answer's not man.

"Officially", Lutherans are "single" predestinarians. They believe, just like Calvinists do, that the "elect" are ~unconditionally~ predetermined to salvation.

On the other hand, while Calvinism believes that God "predestined" to "pass over" the reprobate, the "official" Lutheran position believes that the reprobate are not predestined to condemnation at all (passively or actively).

That being said, Luther, himself, was a Double Predestinarian.

It was the later Lutherans who denied the predestination of the reprobate.

Now, however, many Lutherans deny Reformational predestination all together.

Therefore, ~historically~, the main difference between Lutherans and Calvinists was on the nature of the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper and not predestination.

Jean

By attacking all points of TULIP, you've also attacked Lutheranism and other confessional Protestant churches.

You mean Reformed churches don't you?

We Lutherans have our strongest disagreements with our Calvinist brothers and sisters on unconditional election and limited atonement, not to mention the nature of the Lord's Supper -- in, with, under -- though I imagine we'd both disagree with your position for some of the same reasons. Everything boils down to two main areas of scripture: law and gospel. Law tells us what to do. Gospel tells us what has been done for us in Christ's life, death, and resurrection. Nobody is saved under the law since we cannot keep it. Only gospel saves, for the sake of Christ's work alone.

Amen.

You've certainly pointed out some important verses with respect to total depravity (or inability). The thing is, you don't find many instances of people responding to such calls to salvation in the Scripture under the law. The verses you use are all law: do this, do that, you come to Me. You only find people responding as a matter of gospel. "No man cometh to the father but by me," and "No man cometh unless the Holy Ghost draw him," and "No man sayeth Jesus Christ is lord but by the Holy Ghost." If you get law and gospel wrong, everything else will be wrong. On this our churches agree.

As did Arminius (who was also Reformed)

His only difference was that man had the ability to reject grace as well as accept it.

Thus, 'election' was based on this 'foreseen' acceptance of grace.

As I noted, we disagree with our Calvinist brethren about election and predestination -- but to a degree. We, too, agree the Bible contains doctrines of election and predestination. They're both good Bible words and sound doctrine. So don't be too excited because we both disagree with you.

Amen!

Both words are good Bible words, and they refer to a Christian who is predestinated to be conformed to the image of Christ (Rom.8).

No one is Predestinated for salvation or damnation.

As for our differences, the scripture does not say, "God is not willing that the elect should perish..." but rather than ANY. Nor does the Bible say, "For God so loved the elect," rather he loved the world. We accept that grace is available to both the elect (who were predestined) and to those who aren't (though we disagree that they're predestined to hell). The Calvinist position is, we believe, an attempt to rationalize incongruent teachings from Scripture rather than leaving it to the unsearchable knowledge and purposes of God.

Amen!

The purpose of which is to keep eternal security, which need not be based on unconditional election, but on unconditional love (Rom.8) after one is saved.

I hope you noted that I still refer to Calvinists as my brethren. They truly are. They believe and trust in Christ alone for their salvation, and they're drawn to faith by the same Holy Spirit working through word and sacrament. BTW, sacraments are all gospel. Your position is most likely that they're all law, which is why we would disagree with your views about them. Let me know if you'd like to discuss the matter fully so you can understand our position accurately.

Yes I would like to discuss your views on the 'sacraments' which imply some infusion of grace.

Luther rejected Augustine over his usage of Sacraments as opposed to unconditional election (sovereign grace).

We Baptists have two ordinances adult Baptism by immersion and the Lords supper.

Let me also remind you that Calvin and his colleagues, like Luther and his colleagues, faced penalty of death for proclaiming salvation by grace alone through faith alone for the sake of Christ alone.

Which is very admirable, but on the other hand they also sought death on those who disagree with them (Luther rejoicing when he heard of Zwingli's death) and Calvins actions in Geneva.

I urge you to read the Belgic Confession, the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Heidelberg Catechism to see what Calvinists believe and confess and then decide if Calvinism is of the Bible or of man. Though I'm not Calvinist, I know the answer's not man.

The issue is not a confession but what does the Scripture say (Sola Scriptura).

That was what the Reformers were fighting against in the first place, traditions and confessions replacing the teachings of the Bible.

The problem was that they did not go fall enough and get rid of everything that did not line up with the Scriptures.

Feel free to post me on any Lutheran doctrines, as I am always interested in learning what you believe and why (even though I may disagree with it)

T - Total Inability; Nonsense, you must come through Christ to God, not through God to Christ.

U - Unconditional Election; Free will doesn't exist, eh? Then why all the effort to redeem sinners?

L - Limited Atonement; He died for the sins of the world. Take that how you want it.

I - Irresistible (efficacious) Grace; God forces people to be saved, that's new. Then faith and/or works are unnecessary.

P - Perseverance of the Saints."; Whatever.

These are the five points of Calvinism