CALVINISM, ARMINIANISM & THE WORD OF GOD A CALVARY CHAPEL PERSPECTIVE

Calvary Chapel ^ | Chuck Smith

[Woodkirk]

Questions: 1] Do Calvinists believe that salvation occurs for the elect before hearing the word of God? 2] Is it true that Calvin claimed that the best way to know if you are one of the elect is to be baptized as an infant?

[xzins]

my #59: pass immediately from death to life.

Shadow, thanks. How do this things slip past the "Microsoft thought checker." I'm sure I'd get rich if I invented one of those that went along with the spell-check.

;0)

[editor-surveyor]

"The Bible teaches that this refers to those who God foreknew as believers. The Bible is consistent with this throughout the New Testament. It is a difficult distinction that many miss, so I must ask you....do you understand my point?"

xzins, I don't think that you understand your 'point.'

That verse makes it plain that there are some who were simply NOT ordained to be saved; do you understand that? - They weren't going to be saved no matter what. - Your point, which appears to be correct, makes you a Calvinist, have you figured that out yet?
Now go back and read P-Marlowe's double-talk in post #52 and see how his ideas differ from yours, and mine.

[editor-surveyor]

"The bible teaches that those who never hear of Jesus are in a different judicial dispensation in the plan of God."

Now xzins, you know the rules here; you can't post something like that wothout posting the scripture reference too ;o)

And the reference is: (______________________)

[xzins]

ES, I think you miss my point. I do understand what you are saying.

The Bible teaches that God predestinated those He FIRST foreknew. He foreknew those would choose to believe in Him. (He knew ahead of time those who would freely choose to believe in Him.) Then he predestinated (ordained) them to life. (In other words, he set in motion his foreknown plan.)

The result is that in this first REAL enactment of what God foreknew prior to setting it all in motion, we freely choose AND we can say that those who choose were predestinated by God's foreknowledge (ordination.)

I want you to understand our view of what the Bible teaches. I am not asking you to believe it. I simply ask if you understand it.

[xzins]

Romans 2:14-16 for starters. Acts 17: 16-23; John 3: 10-21 coupled with John 3:36.

[RnMomof7]

Both "systems" are man made creations which attempt to put God in a box. Both belief systems are wholly unnecessary to anyone's salvation as it matters not one whit "why" we come to Jesus, what matters is "whether" we come to Jesus. Too much emphasis is put on the "how." It is amazing, but one side will challenge the salvation of another simply on the basis that they don't subscribe to the other's "God in a box" theory on "how" they became a believer: "I surrendered to Jesus" "No you didn't because 'surrender' is a work and that means your salvation is of works and not of Grace"

I guess I did not word my question correctly ( and as rush says words mean things:>)

What I meant was ,what difference would the doctrine make in our lives if eithor of us were wrong? On a practical ,real life situation> How would it affect your life IF the Calvinists were correct? How would things "be different" for either of us in the way we live our lives and faith out if the other was correct?

[editor-surveyor]

None of those verses make a dispensational divide in the place which your statement did.

[RnMomof7]

That sounds like a pretty narrow, bigoted club, don't you thi

I think much of the confusion in the church today stems from an overemphasis on one part of the nature of God to the exclusion of others..God is Love, but He is also Justice and Mercy and Holy

So the church assumes that if the only show or talk about the Love of God that more people will be attracted to the Gospel...a false premise IMHO

[xzins]

The bible teaches that: (1) Gentiles are judged by the law written in their hearts (2) God has set a time for judgement (3) We are judged on believing and not believing (4) The definition of not believing is "rejecting." (5) They cannot hear without a preacher.

Rejection is the criteria for lostness. Rejection is an ACTIVE CHOICE or DECISION. It can NEVER be passive.

All of these add to a different JUDICIAL dispensation for those WHO HAVE NOT HEARD.

It is what the Bible teaches.

[Jean Chauvin]

"The Bible teaches that God predestinated those He FIRST foreknew."

"He foreknew those would choose to believe in Him."

These two statements say significantly different things.

What does Romans 8:29 say?

God foreknew people?

or

God foreknew peoples choices?

The former is Biblical, while the latter adds words and thoughts not present in the text (but necessary for the arminian to deny biblical predestination).

In other words, foreknow (proginosko) means to know something before. What does the text say this something is? People? or People's choices? Since 'foreknow' is a verb in this verse, it cannot mean in and of itself 'to pre-know peoples choices'. Logically that is adding unknown words and thoughts to the text. Rather, it is the object of 'foreknow' that identifies what is foreknown. In the case of Romans 8:29 it is simply 'people' and not 'people's choices'. There's a big difference there. The text makes absolutley no hint regarding the choices of people. It simply says God foreknows people. PERIOD!

For example, in another passage of scripture which uses the word 'proginosko' -foreknow- Acts 26:5 -Paul is refering to the Jews who have known him 'for a long time' (NIV) or knew him 'from the beginning' (KJV). In either situation it is clear from the wording of the greek 'foreknew me from the first' that to 'foreknow me' in no way implies that the Jews 'foreknew' Pauls choices before hand. That's simply ludicrous.

Or take 1 Peter 1:19,20
19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

The KJV translates 'proginosko' here as 'foreordained'. According to your logic, then, only Christ's choices were foreordained!?!

The NASB translates this 'He was foreknown'. This, again, simply does not read that God only 'foreknew' Christ's thoughts.

Let's also look at

2 Peter 3:
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

What are we to know before? Choices? Or the things which Peter has outlined in the preceding verses?

Again, it's rather clear that 'foreknow' simply means to 'know before' or to 'pre-know'. There is nothing inherent in that word which precludes one to assume that what is 'foreknown' are only choices. Rather, what is 'foreknown' is identified by the object of the verb. And in the case of Romans 8:29 what does it say that God 'foreknew'? People? or People's choices?

This is basic logic, x. I know you don't like it, but it couldn't be more clear.

Jean

[Matchett-PI]

"The Bible teaches that God created all of us with the ability to make a full, free, knowing, decisive choice following a God-given enlightenment."

See #58 again and follow the link to the Genesis Chapter 3 thread. We already had our "enlightenment" in the garden of Eden before we made our choice and participated in Adam's sin of rejecting the Truth of God and exchanging it for THE lie. It was only after that that our "foolish hearts became darkened".

[the_doc]

Right on the money! If folks would only understand the Fall, they would quit bragging about the freedom of their free will.

Ah, but really understanding the Fall would obviously require regeneration....

(See also John 8 for more insights on Arminianism, of course.)

[Matchett-PI]

"Questions: 1] Do Calvinists believe that salvation occurs for the elect before hearing the word of God? 2] Is it true that Calvin claimed that the best way to know if you are one of the elect is to be baptized as an infant?"

[1] Yes. You surely don't believe that one is able to understand spiritual things without the Holy spirit, do you?

[2] No. Where in the hell did you get that???????

[editor-surveyor]

"All of these add to a different JUDICIAL dispensation for those WHO HAVE NOT HEARD."

That is what our friend Winston Churchill would call a 'construct.'

It's not in the text of God's word, it's in your desire to see unbelievers get a "chance" much like Mormons invented vicarious baptism to give them a "chance."

[xzins]

The bible is the source for the interpretations above on foreknowledge, ordination, and rejection. These are the things I believe and on which I stand. I can do no other, for there is no other interpretation that takes as much scripture into account as these.

They are a better contruct than is the calvinist construct. God has given Chuck Smith a better understanding than he gave to John Calvin. He has also given him a more loving spirit.

[Revelation 911]

Decide for yourself how shallow or deep the man is. I recommend starting with the book of Romans

charitably put - Ive always enjoyed him

[Revelation 911]

So, you are saying that I am not saved? How about Xzins, shadow ace, Wardsmythe, winston churchill, Rev.9:11 and Maestro?

I'll save everyone the trouble with your bait with a loud HA, yeah right ! ;)

[Revelation 911]

Both "systems" are man made creations which attempt to put God in a box. Both belief systems are wholly unnecessary to anyone's salvation as it matters not one whit "why" we come to Jesus, what matters is "whether" we come to Jesus

YES ! YES YES _ WE HAVE A WINNER -

[Woodkirk]

Dave Hunt talking about his new book on Calvinism --

Where in the Bible is anyone saved prior to hearing the word of God? Was Abraham saved before he heard God's Word? And didn't Paul hear from God prior to salvation? Doesn't the faith to believe come by hearing the Word of God?

I do not understand how Calvinists get around this? Abraham believed God's word and it was accounted to him for righteousness? While God's word has to precede belief, didn't belief precede his righteousness?