Replies

Would it be fair, in your view, for someone antagonistic towards Calivinism to make a ridiculous exaggeration about the consequences of Calvinistic beliefs and claim they were natural consequences of Calvinism?

Hey, it happens all the time. The majority of the venom I encounter comes from the Arminians. They just seem to take rejection of their humanism personally. Calvinists, OTOH, expect to be rejected. The true gospel of Biblical Calvinism is offensive; it divides and drives many away.

It also happens to be true that jude's comment is neither ridiculous or exaggerated. A great many Arminians are frozen by terror with regard to preaching the gospel to the lost. They happen to think that they should get them to a church and let the preacher do it. This way, they will not say anything wrong. Unfortunately, this is not the purpose of the church.

The real problem is in the fact that Arminians truly don't believe that man is dead; they don't realize that dead is hostility to God, not an inability to respond to God. They add to that the fact that they believe God can't interfere because the final choice must be the man's. Therefore, the burden falls upon 2 men to get it all right; one to preach and the other to hear. If one of them messes up, then there is no conversion.

All I can say is thank God for inconsistent Arminians who act like God is sovereign over salvation.

The true gospel of Biblical Calvinism is offensive; it divides and drives many away.

This is so much codswallop as well. Calvinists go out of there way to be offensive and then congratulate themselves on being "oppressed" for God's sake. It speaks to the neurosis that requires constant re-assurance, and the deliverance from consequence that drives the believer.

All I can say is thank God for inconsistent Arminians who act like God is sovereign over salvation.

Ok, then I can guess I can thank God for the inconsistent Calvinists who act like they need to present the Gospel to the lost in order to give them a chance to hear. ;^)