Am I asking for argument? If so, someone let me know.
Sunday night, we went to the Watts' house to say goodbye to the Carlsons. While we were there, we revisited an earlier conversation. Emily had said that alot of people had questioned her about the doctine of election. So we spent some time talking about it, and looking up in the Bible passages that could support it.
We never really got to finish the conversation, but I've been thinking alot about what we said. I really wanted to talk about this on blog. So here goes.
As a calvinist I believe in the five doctrines of grace: 1) Total Depravity; 2) Unconditional Election; 3) Limited Atonement; 4) Irresistable Grace; 5) Perseverence of the Saints
I believe that before God created the world, He elected those who he would save. When Jesus died on the cross, He offered to all who would believe on Him would go to heaven. But, man cannot choose Christ of His own power. It's his own descision, but man won't choose God unless God changes his heart first, and God changes the hearts of men who he has elected. Man is naturallly sinful. No man can or would come to Christ of his own power. If we believed that when Christ died, He died for whoever would let Him into their heart, then Christ failed. Because if Christ died for all, and only some would choose him, hen Christ's death wasn't perfect. It would mean He didn't save all He died for, but He did. Christ's death on the cross is complete. He died for His elect people. And His elect people will go to heaven.
A Bit About Me
- MJ
- Washington, United States
- I'm me. I'm nothing without the sovereign, saving grace of God and the perfect work of Christ. I want to live to serve Him. I love my family and friends. And I think "About Me"s are pretty much impossible to write ;-)
25 comments:
I think you're right, Michaela. And the more I think about this, the more convinced I become that it's impossible to be only partly one or the other here. Both views reflect an underlying view of God- Calvinism's being that He is in complete control and we are essentially puppets in His hands, and Arminianism's being semi-deistic. Perhaps neither views are completely acurate pictures of God, but I don't think you can seperate the five points of either side.
If God is holding out salvation, and I become saved at the moment I choose to reach out and take it, doesn't that mean my salvation is based on my FREE WILL or HUMAN ABILITY? (I'm not yelling, I just don't know how to do italics, lol) And if it's my choice, not God's, can't anyone make that decision, resulting in UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION or GENERAL ATTONEMENT? And if I can choose to accept the Holy Spirit, I must also be able to choose to RESIST Him, right?
And doesn't it follow that if I choose to take my salvation, it's my grip on God that keeps me saved rather than God's grip on me? And if that's the case, can't I let go, resulting in FALLING FROM GRACE?
*shutter*
Yeah, I'm a calvinist. :-)
not that that has anything to do with this discussion or anything.
*headdesk*
continue as though I don't exist, please. :-D
I'll be back later to reply to this but I don't have time to give it the proper attention now :-)
Okay,
Here I am to put in my two cents.
As Emily could tell you, I've debated both sides of this agrument many times but that's irrevelent. I would call myself a Calvinianist. There are inherrent flaws with both Calvinism and Arminianism that make them crumble when checked against the Bible. The biggest problem with Calvinism is the idea of election. If God elected who's going to be saved before the beginning of time and Christ only died for the elect than 1) Why does John 3:16 say for God so love the WORLD... and more importantly, election removes the need for evangelism.
If God has already decided whose going to be saved and who won't than it is going to happen 100% for sure because otherwise God would be wrong and well... that would be a small problem. This means that it doesn't matter if we evangelize or do what Matthew 28:16 says because people will be saved whether or not we evangelize to them. That's a huge theological problem.
The problem with Arminianism however is the idea that one can lose their salvation. This is so unbiblically supported it's not even funny so I won't bother giving it much thought.
I would like to point out this fact however. These reason why Calvinism and Arminianism are direct opposites of each other is because they were designed to be that way by men. Calvinism was a break off from the teachings of the Catholic Church. Arminianism however was a direct break off of Calvinism and thus they engineered their points to directly contradict Calvinism's.
So bottom line, neither Calvinism or Arminianism is right. I've talked with Em J about this and I believe that there is an undiscoverd "belief" that perfectly coinicides with the Bible that mankind purely hasn't discovered yet. There are just as many biblical references that support Calvinism as there are Arminianism and since the Bible can't contradict itself there must be another explanation.
Well I guess that was more than two cents but I'd love to hear what your opinion of this is MJ!
Ryan
I don't completely agree with you, Ryan. Man chooses to come to God, but he only chooses because God makes him choose. Or maybe I should say gives him the will or the power to chose.
God commands us to spread the gospel throughout the world (evangelize). Man won't become a Christian if he's never heard the gospel. So Christians go to other countries to spread it. Why? Because God told them to (not personally, through the Bible) You see, it's all part of God's plan. God planned that these men would spread the Gospel in the first place. But a man could go somewhere and preach to a whole bunch of men who are not elect, who would never become Christians.
Or are you talking about evangilizinge as in going door to door, handing out tracks about how Jesus loves you, come to our church (sorry, that was rude and critical), and telling little kids the story of Jonah? That's another subject.
I'm just talking about what the Bible says. To go therefore and make disciples of all the nations. I've heard what your saying about how God planned to use these people to evangelize and that's how the "elect" are saved. The problem with that is that if I am the mediator to an "elects" salvation then if I choose not to talk to that person I'm changing God's plan and that's saying He's not God. The Bible doesn't call us to just go preach the Bible, it says to make disciples. That means are goal is to try and lead every person we encounter to Christ. Granted that won't happen because of free will but we are still called to do it. We're not called to just mindlessly wander around preaching even though we know God's already saved who He's going to. That would be fairly pointless.
I believe the crux of this specific matter is this. MJ, what do you believe is the extent of man's free will? Does it include salvation or does free will just mean I can choose whether to brush my teeth in the morning or not? How big is the "fish bowl" that our free will swims around in?
Looking forward to discussing this more. Man, if I had a dollar for everytime I get in one of these debates...
Okay, about evangelism. God commands us (not us women, you know what I mean) to go spread the gospel throughout the nation. So we do. Do we need any better reason than that? If so, let me put it this way. Look at Romans 10:13-15:
13 For "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." 14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tiding of good things!"
The man who never hears the gospel WILL NEVER BE SAVED. Romans states it so plainly. And if they never hear the gospel, then they won't be Christians, I suppose you could go further to say that those people aren't the elect. See, it all makes sense!
Man's free will is a hard topic. I'm sure I could just ask my dad, and he could make me understand it so plainly.
If you have a chance, please read Romans 9 slowly and carefully. It explains the doctrine of election so plainly. People don't want to see it so plainly, because they don't want to believe it. If they can call it complicated or confusing, they can say they don't really understand it, or are understanding it wrong.
I will comment about man's free will as soon as I can.
Alright, man's free will. You want to defend man's free will by logic, but give me some scripture that defends man's free will. The Bible leaves some things unnanswered, mysteries you might call them (generic you). So if you want to address the topic of free will, give be scripture to base it off of. Maybe instead of man's free will, it's "man's free responsibility". Just a thought. I need to think about it. I'll come back with more.
Okay, I'm sorry but what you said in an early post is heresy. You said that there is no way for a person to be saved unless they hear the gospel. May I remind you that thousands upon thousands of people were saved before the Gospel was ever written. Also, I personally hate this argument but I think it applies. What about the native in Africa? If the only way for a person to be saved is to hear the Gospel then does that just mean God basically said, "Forget Africa."? The argument is used so much but it makes a point here. God does not only reveal himself through the Bible but through his creation as well. That's why everyone is accountable for their sin. Whether they've heard the Gospel or seen a bird they have been given the knowledge that there is a higher being out there and it's up to them to decide what to do with that knowledge.
Secondly, It's not that people don't want to see the doctrine of election so plainly it's the fact that it's not that simple. The Bible does NOT inherrently support election throughout. There are many verses that contradict election. So please don't say that people are just ignoring election because they don't want to believe. This point is debated because both sides have the Bible on their side.
Okay as far as free will goes. The Bible does not directly state anywhere much about man's free will. However, this is where we use indirect reasoning. God gave man free will because why else would Adam and Eve have sinned? God abhors sin and would not plan for it to happen but he gave man a choice and He knew how man would choose. I am going to use logic to defend this because God is a very logical God. Heck He invented logic! Here's my question to you. If man does not have free will over salvation, then what is the significance of Jesus Christ dying? If we don't have a choice than why did God provide someone for us to put our faith in. Jesus says, "I am the way the truth and the life NO ONE comes to the father except through me." If that's the case that is specifically implying that one has a choice to follow Christ or follow himself.
The Bible is not just black and white. You can't base everything you know about it just off the direct verse. You have to look at the context and in many cases use indirect reasoning. The same way the Bible doesn't talk specifically about drugs it doesn't talk specifically about Free will. But through indirect reasoning we can see that drugs are bad because our body is a temple and free will over salvation exisits because we had the free will to sin in the first place.
This is all really hard. It is probably one of those things that we will never agree on. However . . .
About John 3:16, God so loved that world that He gave His Son that some may be saved instead of all of us going to Hell like we deserve.
One of the main things about the doctine of election is, if man chooses to "except God" than God is ultimately not in control. We all believe that God is all powerful, but how can He be if man decides if they are saved? Of course God has already chosen.
And although you directed your question about Why did Christ die on the cross if men were already chosen, I'm going to somewhat answer it. First I turn the question around to you: Why did Christ die on the cross if men already had a choice? If man decides if they are saved, then Christ dying on the cross was pointless. It didn't do anything. They don't need him.
And in answer to your question. God saved us, but we still can't aproach Him. After all, He is God. We need Christ as a mediator. We can not come to God without Christ. So, we could not come to God unless Jesus died on the cross for us.
If Christ die for whoever who would accept Him, then His work was incomplete. It would mean Christ died for all, and only some became Christians. But no!!! That's why Christ's death on the cross is so perfect, complete, so glorious! He died for His elect people. Let's say someone "let" Christ into their hearts. They might truly be Christians, but they are confused ones. THey wouldn't have let Christ into their hearts in the first place if Christ hadn't changed them first.
Ryan: No, no, no. The Bible does support the doctrine of election, though I fear this is where we agree to disagree. Perhaps now I must just declare what I believe and walk away.
The general revelation (i.e. the creation) does leave everyone accountable and guilty for their sins, but a man can't see a little birdie and through it become a Christian. They MUST hear the gospel. See Romans 10 again.
I repeat what I said in my third to last paragraph...
Okay I agree that you can't be saved by just creation alone. That's for sure. And I'll let that point die where it stands.
And for the record MJ I have read Romans 9 and I'm am oh so quite familiar with the doctrine of election. I've studied it, written about it, debated it and been taught it since I was young. My church is Calvinist but I disagree about this whole election/free will thing.
Most of what you've said so far does have biblical support and is fairly logically sound. What I have to question is where does evangelism fall then? You've said that God uses the evangelism to save elect but if that's the case, are we just mindless puppets that do whatever God commands. God doesn't exercise that kind of control over us. If he did, there wouldn't be sin because all we'd be able to do is brush our teeth and go about our lives without any control over salvation or anything spiritual.
Christianity is not just a one time event. It's a lifetime of the pursuit of God (Thank you A.W. Tozer). Since this is the case if God controls our salvation, he controls our pursuit of Him and then we are nothing more the animals. Animals can decide what they eat or drink but they can't decide whether to follow God or not. Doesn't that make you think at all? What is our purpose here in life if we don't have control over the one thing that makes life worth living? Namely, our salvation and our savior Jesus Christ.
Seriously, I'm not uneducated when it comes to this topic so you can throw any verse you want at me and I guarantee i've heard it. I've done this I encourage all of you to as well. Take a step back from what you've grown up believing and compare it against the Bible. Don't just blindly follow something but look at both sides of the issue and figure out which one is more biblically supported. I'm not trying to convert anyone I just want you guys to evaluate it. Use Biblical exegesis, not isogesis.
Alright, I see your point about man's free will. I'm going to go read up about it, and let you know what I find. I plan to look at some things Spurgeon, and a couple other men wrote.
How can you not believe election when it's so plain? I don't understand you. If you want logic, there's enough of that to go around, though not everything can be argued out. We can't understand everything, since we are finite beings. If you want Biblical proof, then look in the Bible. You say you know most of those verses that support election, and the ones you say don't support election. (The Bible does not contradict itself.)
So I shall return with what I've found on the man's free will.
I have returned, sooner than I expected.
To read what I just read go to:
http://the-highway.com/Myth.html
Once you read it we can continue our argument- I mean debate. Thanks
It's as though God is the king of a vast kingdom, and down on the battle field are thousands upon thousands of unsaved people dying of their wounds (or sins, for the sake of analogy). And God has his army of beleivers, and he says to them: "Before this battle began, I put a mark on a certain amount of those wounded. I'm not going to tell you what that mark is, and you won't be able to recognize it. But I want you to all go down there and start giving my medicine to the wounded. It is a special kind of medicine, for it can only heal those who have the mark and will be useless on those who do not have it. Of course you won't get everybody, and you'll proububly end up giving medicine to thousands upon thousands of the wounded that do not have the mark. But when you give the medicine to those who do have the mark, I will heal them and they will get up and begin helping you distribute the medicine. Once you have given medicine to all the wounded men with marks, I will call them and you all together and let the rest perish."
So what are you going to do, Ryan, look at God and say, "WHAT DO YOU MEAN, I don't even get to know who has the marks? what's the point in that? forget it, I'm not going out there to heal anybody!"
No, I know you Ryan, you would jump up, grab your medicine, and start distributing faster than most other people.
That's my view of evangelisim. We, in and of ourselves, can't do anything. We can just keep distributing the gospel around to as many people as we can, happy in the knowledge that we are obeying God's comission to us and hoping (praying) that we will hit a few of the elect and be the means God uses to give them the gospel which will save them.
Good analogy, Em. You could just say God commands us to spread the gospel. So we do it. No questions asked.
Who are we to question God's will and purpose?
Okay... Deep breath.... ahhh...
Okay I appologize. I became a little too heated during this debate and I ask for forgiveness. We do need to remember through this that this is a good debate because it's a pursuit to draw closer to God's will. So I appologize for losing focus of that. I typically don't.
I agree Em J. That's a great analogy and a very biblical one at that. I'm sorry if I came across this way but I in no means am questioning God. I am to finite a being to ever begin to comprehend God. The more I learn, the less I really know. This issue just really hits home for me because evangelism and discipleship are so important to me because I've seen people screw up their lives and people i really care about get hurt because they weren't discipled or never were witnessed to. These are two of my greatest passions and so I don't take them lightly.
I concede to Em J's explanation. I agree and I think that clears it up a lot. I've been trying to figure this out for a long time and you really cleared it up Em J. Thank you. The little sis has surpassed her brother in wisdom and knowledge and I'm so proud of you. I still have some doubts about election but I will consent.
Life has just been so... well... crappy, hectic, and confusing lately, I'm getting hung up on things like this that I shouldn't and I appologize.
I am going to retire to my bedchambers but to all of you, Em J, Michaela, and Eowyn I thank you for putting up with me.
Happy to do it! I enjoyed this conversation/debate (or whatever you call it) Off to Camp Hope! Got to go!
I'm back from Camp Hope! It was great, but I'll tell that story another time.
Ryan, I hope I haven't been rude or critical at all in this debate. If so, I apologize. I think this conversation is done, and it's about time to make another post...
wow, Ryan, that meant so much. *hugs* gosh, when do we go back in time to when everything was perfect again?
what i really really still fail to understand is that i believe that god is outside of time, like cs lewis did.
and if he is really outside and above time, then there is no before the creation of the world for god. the parameters of our language and mind bind him to making chronology out of it, even in the bible.
but if you really believe god is outside of time, then there cannot be any moment that exactly god predestined us. he is in control, but it's like he's moving along with us at every moment of our lives.
it is a mystery and paradox so profound and unscalable by our minds, that god is this powerful entity stretching infinity.
i love your analogy, though, emily.
practically, i am an arminian, for the most part.
i just can't go either way, it doesn't make sense somehow with my view of god. i'm not sure my view is consistent either, i could easily be swayed by a strong voice, i guess.
Very interesting discussion. I was really inpressed with your knowledge, MJ. Good job!
I would like to comment on the subject but I'm afraid I would start another heated discussion.
Either way, good discussion!
Ok, haven't read any of the huge list of comments here (sorry) and probably no one is reading these anymore anyway.
I really struggled with the Calvinist thing last year - some of you remember that interesting discussion! I've come to realize now that it's just the was it was worded, or how I interpreted it, that made it seem weird. I made it seem like favoritism to me, and the Bible is very clear that God doesn't show favoritism.
So I talked myself through it with my parents officiating (lol) and finally came to realize that:
Yes, we are totally depraved. No arguing there. Where I got tripped us was when God CHOSE us. It made it seem like He chose us but not others. What I've come to realize is that God does not show favoritism - He knows who will choose Him and who will reject Him.
But I don't know that I completely agree that we are powerless to choose God on our own. The Bible says that every human's heart has a yearning in it for the Kingdom, so essentially God changed our hearts toward Him when He created them. Plus, wouldn't Jesus have died even if it would only be to save one person from eternity in Hell? That's how much He loves us!
So I would have to disagree with that last part. Christ did not save all of mankind - He gave all men the opportunity to be saved, but at the same time He knew who would choose Him and who wouldn't (His elect).
Now I will procede to read the rest of the comments.
Ok, Em - I don't totally get the difference between free will and free choice yet. We can CHOOSE to accept or reject God, it's not so much that He makes us choose or not choose Him, as that He knows if we will or not. At least that's how I see it.
Ryan - I agree with most of what you said, except that sin was a part of God's plan. I do believe in free will, but I also think that God knew how Adam and Eve would choose, and put sin into his plan for Satan's ultimate defeat, because Satan could not be defeated if mankind had no need for Jesus. Not saying that Jesus couldn't defeat Satan without man sinning...I don't think.....
Wait wait wait!!! NOT God so loved the world that He gaave His only son that SOME might be saved. That WHOSOEVER believes in Him should be saved! WHOEVER calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved. ANYONE!!!!!!
I'm really sorry if I'm touching on a sensative topic, and you don't have to answer if you don't want to, but what seems to be the problem with female missionaries?
If we choose to accept God, He is still in control because He gave us the ability to choose Him or not choose Him.
Christ died on the cross to be a Mediator. But we have to CHOOSE to use Him as a Mediator, to be acceptable in God's sight. That is essentially how He saves us. We choose to have God look at us through Christ as His children, rather than as sinful men, and then God will accept us.
I'll continue this later...
Ok, I guess the first thing that jumped out at me on that article thingy he said, but then kinda skimmed over. Look up the word "will" in the dictionary, then look up the word "do." There's a HUGE difference. We totally have the free will to choose whatever we want to do, but it's the doing part that, as the article said, we can't always execute. The will can't actually ACCOMPLISH anything, so I don't like the way he talks about the will as both wanting something and making it happen. The will can long for anything outside of God's plan, but the will can't do those things.
What I keep coming back to in my mind is this: God has placed in our hearts a longing and a yearning for Him. This is why someone would choose something against human nature - because part of God's divine nature is in us, reaching out for Him. We can therefore choose to follow our human natures, or choose to follow our desire for God. This is a conflict within us, and some choose each way.
So yes, I agree that only through God can our hearts be changed towards Him, but I cannot agree that He only gives this change, this desire, to a certain few. That again comes back to favoritism, which God never shows.
"And it shall come to pass that whoever will call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." This is available to all people, to choose for Christ or against Him, but only through Him is it available.
BUT EMILY!!!!!! (yes, I guess but is my favorite word of the discussion...) How could God (who is totally and completely unbiased) choose to give this mark to some people and not others? I believe not that He choose them, but that He knows who they are. That's essentially the only difference I can see between our points of view.
Oh my goodness...lots of comments and I don't even know if mine made any sense at all. I apologize two dozen times if they don't, if I seemed rude or abrupt or upset at all (I totally know what you mean Ryan, being called to mission work myself I hate looking at it in any way that makes it seem useless). I just commented my thoughts as I read all of yours, so even though to me they are organized, they may be totally scrambled.
If anyone cares to continue/has any thoughts on what I wrote, I'm happy to keep talking since I just jumped in (sorry again!). I'm also really glad we've had this discussion more than once even, because my viewpoint has changed also. It's probably one of those things that will never totally be solved, because of course we are finite and can never even come close to wrapping our minds around God, but I think just from getting away from as many biases as I can and going straight to the Bible has really helped me in seeing what I know to be true from what I read there.
Continue? Not continue? and I really know absolutely nothing about Arminianism....
Post a Comment