What is Reformed Christianity?

[Melissa in CA]

Your question is a bit difficult to answer in just the way it is posed. A "reformed believer" will have the assurance that he is one of the chosen or he will not consider himself a believer in the first place. Before he experiences salvation, however, he may be sitting in a pew for years and yet not believe. In that case, he won't consider himself to be a believer. I think I know what you're getting at though - maybe - not altogether sure. I can only speak for myself but I imagine my experience is fairly common among reformed believers.

 

My understanding that God elected me or chose me came only after I was saved. Until I was saved, I would have considered salvation something I needed to do - a choice I must make. I only realized that it was God who chose me when I looked back on my salvation experience.

 

Very often before one is saved, there is the sense that we must choose God. We are called by a preacher to surrender to Christ, to follow Him, to choose Him. We feel at the moment of this calling that we have done that - chosen Christ. It is only afterwards, upon reflection, that we see the hand of God pulling us, directing us, wooing us to Himself and then we readily acknowledge that without God's working in us we could not possibly have chosen Him. We see this only after we are saved. When we do see it, we are even more amazed at the love and mercy and grace of God and we sense all the more our unworthiness and inability to please Him apart from Christ. This then causes us to love Him all the more. We recognize how very spiritually dead we once were and realize that it is God and God only who has regenerated our lifeless spirit - just as Jesus brought Lazarus back to life. We see that, just as we played no active part in our physical birth, we played no active part in our spiritual birth. We realize there is no good thing in us that God should choose us, but realize that for His own purposes He has and we rest in that.

 

It isn't as if we are sitting there listening to a preacher and thinking, "I am one of God's chosen so therefore I must be a Christian." It is rather more like "I am such a sinner and in need of a Savior. Oh, God have mercy on me." Then, as we read His word (see the first chapter of Ephesians for example) we recognize that, actually, it was God who knew before the foundation of the earth was laid, that we were His. It is a bit of a mystery and shall remain so until we are face to face with Him.

 

That said, it is possible to lack assurance regarding one's election and salvation. That lack of assurance is usually the result of a direct act of disobedience to what we know to be God's will - or in other words, sin. Sinning, especially if it is the kind of sin we imagine to be great, will cause a believer to doubt his salvation and lead to depression and anguish of soul. Then you could say there are times throughout a believer's life that he does not "feel" saved and lacks assurance that he is one of God's chosen or elect. Nevertheless, a true believer will eventually come full circle, as it were, and will by necessity come to a point of sorrow and repentance (this is the P part of TULIP). It is faith in Christ's righteousness, His perfect life, not our own, that causes us to cry out to Him for mercy and forgiveness. When we remember that we are nothing apart from Him, that our hope lies only in His finished work on the cross on our behalf and His resurrection from the dead and conquering of sin and death, then we regain that sense of assurance. Assurance comes from resting in Christ's righteousness. Does that make sense?

 

Excellent as always, Kathleen. :D

[sassenach]

I just want to reenforce what others have already said, but with much more detail. Calvinism does not equal reformed. Calvinism= TULIP, Reformed= 5 Solas. There is overlap there, or more accurately there are complimentary beliefs there, but they are not the same. I am reformed, but not a Calvinist.

[Crimson Wife]

I just want to reenforce what others have already said, but with much more detail. Calvinism does not equal reformed. Calvinism= TULIP, Reformed= 5 Solas. There is overlap there, or more accurately there are complimentary beliefs there, but they are not the same. I am reformed, but not a Calvinist.

 

Accepting the 5 "solas" makes one a Protestant Christian, but there are many, many Protestants who are not Calvinists. My mom's whole side of the family is Protestant, but, as mentioned previously, they most certainly are NOT Calvinists.

[Penny]

Here is a debate of this issue posted on the Christian Research's website:

 

http://www.equip.org/articles/the-divine-sovereignty-human-responsibility-debate

 

I am not reformed. It seems to me to make a mockery of most of the Bible where God calls men to himself.

 

In Matthew 23:37, Jesus says:

 

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling...."

 

I believe Jesus meant what he said here. I don't see how a Calvinist could read this scripture and interprete it, but would like to know!

 

Also, without true free choice, in the Calvinists view, our Lord becomes the author of evil. This cannot be.

 

However, this not a salvation issue. This is an argument among Christians.

[campmom]

Well, I'm not a theologian or an expert on Calvinism, but I do know that Spurgeon, a Baptist, believed in TULIP but did not believe in much else of what Calvin taught. When I think of Calivinists I think of Presbyterians, infant baptism, and dominion theology. .

 

this is something I have never understood could someone explain dominion theology?

 

thanks

[Kathleen in VA]

You're right - I don't know enough about India.

 

The UK: not many Christians and, of them, most attend churches which would not fit the description of reformed. Is it possible to be saved through a church which is not reformed? So, for example, one attends a non-reformed church, following the scriptures to the best of one's abilities, but believing (because one has been so taught) that salvation comes through a personal choice, rather than God's election. Because that belief is mistaken, by reformed standards, does that mean that the faith is also mistaken and therefore not from God? Or does God choose people who subsequently end up in the 'wrong' churches or no church at all?

 

Thanks again,

 

Laura

 

God can save anyone, anywhere. Martin Luther was a Roman Catholic monk when God opened his eyes while he was reading Romans 1:17 - The just shall live by faith. It is God's word - scripture - that is truth. God's means for reaching the lost is His word. It is the Holy Spirit who regenerates man and He can do that, through the preaching of God's word (heard or read), anywhere.

 

I believed for a very long time that I had made a personal choice without the aid of God, although I probably wouldn't have explained it like that. I subscribed to Billy Graham's magazine Decision. I attended many Arminian churches from late high school age through college and a bit after. It wasn't until my husband (future husband then) explained the Doctrines of Grace to me that I suddenly realized that, yes, it had been God's work all along.

 

It really comes down to what you are putting your faith in. Are you putting your faith in keeping the law, being good, doing good works? That's what the Pharisees were doing and it was not enough. The point of the law was to point us to Christ - to show us our need for a Savior. The law makes us aware of our sinful condition and our complete inability to keep it. It should cause us to feel lost and without hope and it is very often at that point that the Holy Spirit opens our eyes to see the sufficiency of Christ's atonement for our salvation.

 

When we get to the end of ourselves, when we realize no matter how hard we try we simply cannot be sinless in thought, word and deed, we sense our undone condition and cast ourselves on God's mercy. Our only hope is what Christ has done on our behalf - our only hope is being born again in Christ. We feel convicted of our sin and turn from it in repentance. Our faith then switches from our own goodness to the righteousness of Christ.

 

He lived the perfect, sinless life that we can never achieve. Our confidence is no longer in our own ability to keep the law, but rather in Christ's perfect life, his sacrifice on the cross on our behalf and his resurrection from the dead. The whole point of the beatitudes was to point out that our problem is our heart condition. Christ said that unless our righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees (outward works) we would not see the kingdom of Heaven. He meant unless our hearts are regenerated by the Holy Spirit and we are clothed in Christ's righteousness (not our own) we are without hope. It is faith in Christ, in His finished work on the cross, that is the key - not the church one attends.

[ma23peas]

I struggled with this word years ago...I have agreed within myself to not make it an issue...I have a strong personal and biblically directed belief as do my friends who are reformed...to me it boils down to a splitting of beliefs...but we share the SAME path to salvation..what happens after that and the understanding of how you got there does not dispute your salvation...I think the only difference is that for those that are not of reformed thinking..evangelism plays a much stronger role in how they experience their faith...

 

Tara

[LAmom]

I think we're getting tripped up in the two "reformations" -- England's and Europe's. England: Henry VIII (b/c the pope wouldn't facilitate yet another one of his marriages) the King began the ANGLICAN church and this split off the the CATHOLIC church. Anglicans (comparatively to USA Episcopal) are not reformed.

 

Reformed denominations: Presbyterian (PCA), Presbyterian (USA)---which PCAs loudly proclaim their difference from as USA is FAR more liberal / less conservative, Reformed Baptist Churches, OPC, and some non-denomination churches. You'd have to see where a particular church falls regarding two major doctrines: covenantal vs. dispensationalism

and whether they ascribe to the doctrines of grace (election) as these are the two HALLMARKs of reformed believers.

 

Reformed Christians (which is not the term we use to describe ourselves -- we would say that we are Christians. Theologically we would say that we assent to the doctrines of Grace (clearly delineated by John Calvin thus the name "Calvinist").

 

We are characterized by adherence to COVENANTAL theology and to the doctrines of grace (election/acromyn TULIP summarizes these doctrines).

T == TOTAL DEPRAVITY

U == UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION

L == LIMITED ATONEMENT

I == IRRESISTABLE GRACE

P == PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS

 

Calvinists came out of the EUROPEAN REFORMATION. Recall Martin Luther's posting his 95 Thesis on the doors of the Catholic Church.

Thus the birth of Lutheranism.

Are reformed Christians LUTHERANS? NO because Calvinists felt that Lutherans did not go far enough in their departure from the Catholic church.

 

I would recommend the book "What is Reformed Theology?" by R. C. Sproul.

 

Some well known believers who ascribe to the doctrines of grace:

John Piper

Jonathan Edwards

Charles Spurgeon

John Knox

The Puritans

Hudson Taylor

John MacArthur (although MacArthur does not hold to covenantal theology; he's a dispensationalist).

 

There are two main deviations among reformed believers:

those who hold to covenantal theology and those who hold to dispensationalism.

 

Reformed believers are protestants (along with other well-known protestant denominations: Baptist, Independent Baptist, Methodist, Assembly of God, Pentecostal). (Mormons aka "Latter Day Saints" and Jehovah's witnesses are not protestants and are tooooooooo different from any protestant religion in their theological tenets especially regarding the NATURE of GOD to be remotely similar).

 

I know this sounds tough to get, but it's really not that tough once you sit down and read a short book such as Sprouls.

 

Just for food for thought: look in the Bible at John 17:9.

Why doesn't Jesus pray for ALL the world?

 

There are MANY examples of such in the Scriptures (like Romans chapters 5 - 14). I find that reformed theology treats these passages much more EASILY than other denominations.

 

I'm leaning toward TOG b/c I've heard it is reformed.

I doubt the 5 points of calvinism are discussed much within the TOG curriculum.

 

Good luck sorting through all this info.

 

 

:iagree: R.C Sproul is helpful to read. Also, I enjoyed this book: http://www.heritagebooks.org/products/Living-For-God%27s-Glory%3A-An-Introduction-to-Calvinism.html

[Meriwether]

We believe in His realized redemptive death, and we understand the faithful truth that Christ did not die in vain for any man, thus He couldn't have died for every man or indiscriminately for all mankind. The wages of sin is death, and He died for the sins of His People who were known only to God from before creation. They are those who were pre-determined to be saved, for His own purposes. His death was sufficient for His people, that every sin that went to the cross with Him, was atoned for, providing a "real" true redemption of man from those sins (Matthew 20:28; John 10:15, 26; 17:9).

 

I had previously understood that, in the Reformed tradition, God is believed to choose whom to save. I hadn't quite put that together with the idea (which follows logically) that Jesus' death only cleared away the sins of those chosen people.

 

How do Reformed believers feel about the possibility that they might not be among the chosen?

 

Laura

 

My question is similar to this. How can Reformed believers bear the thought of having children that might not be chosen? If I didn't believe God offered salvation to each of them, I would have never had children. My children may make choices that break my heart. They may reject God. But God reject them? I cannot fathom it.

[LAmom]

I just want to reenforce what others have already said, but with much more detail. Calvinism does not equal reformed. Calvinism= TULIP, Reformed= 5 Solas. There is overlap there, or more accurately there are complimentary beliefs there, but they are not the same. I am reformed, but not a Calvinist.

 

 

Hmmm, my head is spinning a little. I am getting all confused. :001_huh: I have a hard time believing you can be called reformed and not be Calvinist...

 

http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Reformed-Theology/Essays/

[LAmom]

My question is similar to this. How can Reformed believers bear the thought of having children that might not be chosen? If I didn't believe God offered salvation to each of them, I would have never had children. My children may make choices that break my heart. They may reject God. But God reject them? I cannot fathom it.

 

 

This is a good question. Having 4 children myself, I have thought about this. I could not bear the thought of them not being of the elect--God creating them, me loving them, and then them spending eternity in hell.

 

Acts 2 tells us that the promise (of the covenant) is for us and for our children. We can take comfort in this fact that God deals with his elect in this way.

 

Of course, if one of my children does not grow up to have faith and be a believer, I take comfort in a sovereign God who does all things for his glory and works all things out for the good of the those who love him.

 

It is something that should be studied prayerfully. Like in above post, I recommended Dr. Joel Beeke's book on this. It would be very helpful. :)

[Kathleen in VA]

My question is similar to this. How can Reformed believers bear the thought of having children that might not be chosen? If I didn't believe God offered salvation to each of them, I would have never had children. My children may make choices that break my heart. They may reject God. But God reject them? I cannot fathom it.

 

There are some things that are beyond our knowing on this earth. The Bible tells us that God is holy, merciful, loving, and just. He never does anything contrary to His character. We can trust in His perfect wisdom to work out His perfect will. He never does anything wrong or unjust so we simply trust Him.

 

ETA: God does offer salvation to our children in that they can hear the gospel preached to them. It is not God who does the rejecting. All men are responsible for their eternal condition. Here is a quote that may explain the doctrine of election a bit better:

 

After giving a brief survey of these doctrines of sovereign grace, I asked for questions from the class. One lady, in particular, was quite troubled. She said, 'This is the most awful thing I've ever heard! You make it sound as if God is intentionally turning away men and women who would be saved, receiving only the elect.' I answered her in this vein: 'You misunderstand the situation. You're visualizing that God is standing at the door of heaven, and men are thronging to get in the door, and God is saying to various ones, 'Yes, you may come, but not you, and you, but not you, etc.' The situation is hardly this. Rather, God stands at the door of heaven with His arms outstretched, inviting all to come. Yet all men without exception are running in the opposite direction towards hell as hard as they can go. So God, in election, graciously reaches out and stops this one, and that one, and this one over here, and that one over there, and effectually draws them to Himself by changing their hearts, making them willing to come. Election keeps no one out of heaven who would otherwise have been there, but it keeps a whole multitude of sinners out of hell who otherwise would have been there. Were it not for election, heaven would be an empty place, and hell would be bursting at the seams. That kind of response, grounded as I believe that it is in Scriptural truth, does put a different complexion on things, doesn't it? If you perish in hell, blame yourself, as it is entirely your fault. But if you should make it to heaven, credit God, for that is entirely His work! To Him alone belong all praise and glory, for salvation is all of grace, from start to finish. - Mark Webb

 

clarification

Edited August 2, 2010 by Kathleen in VA

[littleWMN]

My question is similar to this. How can Reformed believers bear the thought of having children that might not be chosen? If I didn't believe God offered salvation to each of them, I would have never had children. My children may make choices that break my heart. They may reject God. But God reject them? I cannot fathom it.

 

:iagree:

[sassenach]

Accepting the 5 "solas" makes one a Protestant Christian, but there are many, many Protestants who are not Calvinists. My mom's whole side of the family is Protestant, but, as mentioned previously, they most certainly are NOT Calvinists.

 

Yes.

[sassenach]

Hmmm, my head is spinning a little. I am getting all confused. :001_huh: I have a hard time believing you can be called reformed and not be Calvinist...

 

http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Reformed-Theology/Essays/

 

Recently, Calvinism has kind of taken over the title of Reformed, but Reformed= the 5 Solas. That's it. And a person can most certainly be aligned with the 5 Solas and not be aligned with Calvinism.

[LAmom]

Recently, Calvinism has kind of taken over the title of Reformed, but Reformed= the 5 Solas. That's it. And a person can most certainly be aligned with the 5 Solas and not be aligned with Calvinism.

 

So then, would you say you are ?? Not Calvinist (i.e. reformed and protestant) but ______? Just interested. :)

[chris's girl]

I cannot agree that the scenario with God offering grace to all but saving only some is Biblical. This makes God a respector of persons, which He says quite clearly (I believe in Romans 2:11) that He is not. Choosing "this one and that one" is the definition of favoritsim.

[chris's girl]

Also, just to be clear, just because one does not believe in the 5 points does not mean they believe that salvation is in any way a work of man. It is clearly God's grace that saves us by the finished work of Jesus on the cross. We can do nothing to earn it. But God does call all men to repent and believe on the name of Jesus. Is this a "work"? No, it is obedience. Everyone is saved the same way--by grace through faith, not by faith through grace. We are saved by obedience to God's call to repentance and belief, just like God says "IF thou shalt confess and believe".

[Kathleen in VA]

I cannot agree that the scenario with God offering grace to all but saving only some is Biblical. This makes God a respector of persons' date=' which He says quite clearly (I believe in Romans 2:11) that He is not. Choosing "this one and that one" is the definition of favoritsim.[/quote']

 

God is not a respecter of persons in the sense that he does not favor one socio-economic group over another (this is the what is meant in James, Chapter 2). However, He does show mercy on some and not on others. He has created some for His mercy and some for His wrath. See Romans, Chapter 9. Here is an excerpt:

 

[13] As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

[14] What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

[15] For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

[16] So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

[17] For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

[18] Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

[19] Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

[20] Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

[21] Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

[22] What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

[23] And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

 

It is difficult for our finite minds to comprehend why God would choose some and not others, but the Bible is very clear that He does. He chose the Israelites to be His people in the Old Testament. Many other nations were excluded from His mercy when He did that. Even so, there were some in these other nations that He plucked out of the fire - Rahab, for example - while the vast majority of them perished apart from His love and mercy.

 

We must be very careful not to let our human intellectual limitations or emotional sympathies (both of which are affected by our fallen sin nature) shape our understanding of God's character. Even though it may seem unjust to choose some and not others, we are also told in the Bible that God is all-wise, all-loving, and completely and altogether just. His ways are not our ways; His thoughts are not our thoughts. We may not understand them; indeed we cannot. Nevertheless, we must submit to them regardless of our fully comprehending them or not.

[Laura Corin]

God can save anyone, anywhere. Martin Luther was a Roman Catholic monk when God opened his eyes while he was reading Romans 1:17 - The just shall live by faith. It is God's word - scripture - that is truth. God's means for reaching the lost is His word. It is the Holy Spirit who regenerates man and He can do that, through the preaching of God's word (heard or read), anywhere.

 

 

It would seem that this would have been patchy over history - quite limited up through the middle ages, then spreading wider. Do you think it was God's plan that salvation would spread out through the world with the Bible? So in the early days after Jesus' death only those in Europe and the Middle East would have the possibility of salvation?

 

Thank you for continuing to explain, Kathleen. I'm becoming a lot clearer on the whole issue.

 

Laura

[Kathleen in VA]

It would seem that this would have been patchy over history - quite limited up through the middle ages, then spreading wider. Do you think it was God's plan that salvation would spread out through the world with the Bible? So in the early days after Jesus' death only those in Europe and the Middle East would have the possibility of salvation?

 

Thank you for continuing to explain, Kathleen. I'm becoming a lot clearer on the whole issue.

 

Laura

 

This is one of those questions that I do not feel qualified to answer. I know that God communicated to the world before Jesus was born through His prophets. He spoke to some directly - Adam, Noah, Moses, Joshua, Job, etc. Hebrews, Chapter 1 says that now God has spoken through His Son, who is described in John, Chapter 1 as "the Word." There is mystery here - concepts we cannot truly comprehend and will only know when we are in heaven. Today most Christians believe that God communicates through His written word, the Bible. Keep in mind, though, that God is not limited by anything.

 

I cannot state with any certainty what God's plan is or was in times past as far as who He had chosen to be saved. Only God knows His plan. I can observe and draw conclusions, yes, but to know His plan fully is beyond my comprehension.

 

As I stated in my post to "chris's girl" God does choose some and not others. He created some as vessels of mercy and others as vessels of wrath. To our human, finite understanding this seems perhaps harsh and unloving. Nevertheless, the Bible clearly teaches that God is a loving, merciful God and that He is completely wise and just. He never does anything against His character; He never does anything wrong. How do we reconcile these seemingly opposing ideas then? I don't think we can this side of heaven. God created the world - it is His to do with as He pleases. Does that make Him a capricious, arbitrary God? By no means. It only reveals our own limitations as humans. To this we must bow to His sovereignty. We must be very careful not to shake our fist at Him and demand to know why. If God were comprehensible to me, in my fallen, sinful state, then He would be an awfully small God. I must accept that there are things I simply will not understand and trust that what the Bible says about God is true whether it suits my likings or not.

 

It does appear that throughout history God has left some in the dark while He has been gracious to others. Do I understand this? Only so far as I know that He does all things for His glory and rightly so. Again, He is the First Cause, the creator and sustainer of the universe. He holds it all together by His will and power. He is perfectly justified to do whatever He wills. He determines the number of beats all men's hearts will have and the number of breaths each will take. He alone knows the why; He alone knows what is "fair." Again, His ways and thoughts are not ours - He is Almighty and Sovereign over all creation. I am mere man. He has chosen to reveal Himself to some and not to others. I am not in a position to question His ways. I am a creature; He is the creator.

Edited August 2, 2010 by Kathleen in VA

[chris's girl]

Hmmmm....I don't recall using my own logic, but Scripture. My own logic means nothing if it doesn't agree with the Word of God, which is why I have been very careful to quote or reference Scripture.

I completely disagree that "socio-economic status" is what He meant by "respector of persons". The word in the original is simply "person". Not "a person's status".

God did choose Israel to be his chosen people, but not all of them were saved. He did not choose them to exclude all others from salvation. There were plenty of people that heard about the God of Israel and trembled and wanted to join with Israel. He chose Israel as the people He would bring the blood line of Jesus through, but even Israel He gave a choice of obedience of disobedience to. I am on my phone so cannot look up the reference, but I believe it was under Moses that the nation of Israel was pleaded with to "choose life" when they had a choice of blessing or cursing, death or life. God was telling them He wanted them to choose life and blessing. Joshua told them "choose ye this day whom ye will serve". If the children of Israel, God's *chosen* people, had a choice between blessing and cursing, and who they would serve, then surely everyone does.

As far as "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated" that was for the purpose of the birthright blessing. I believe that Esau was saved during the time that he and Jacob were apart because he showed forgiveness, brokeness and love towards Jacob when they came back together. Only God could have worked that kind of change in his heart.

No, God's ways are not our ways, but He does want us to understand Him, otherwise He wouldn't have authored the Bible. It is not at all clear that God chooses some over others. The Bible says "He made Himself the propitiation for our sins. And not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world"." He made himself a ransom for all"" For God so loved the world" " He is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance".

God says He created Hell for the Devil and his angels. If he created people for Hell then it would follow that He would not have said He created it especially for the Devil. God cannot tolerate sin, and yet, creating people who have no choice but to go to Hell means He preordained that they would sin, meaning, like a pp said, He would be the author of evil.

God tells us in His Word that the sin of unbelief is what sends people to Hell, not not being chosen.

[Melissa in CA]

Any questions about Calvinism and/or reformed theology always end up in some form of a debate. I have decided to 'sit this one out' because I just don't have the energy to debate my beliefs on this board once again. Do a search, you'll find many threads with all of the same questions and answers.

 

I would like to say though that there are many very Godly theologians who also believe in the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) as we do, so truly, there is much scriptural backing. This is not an arbitrary or strange doctrine, it has been around for many, many, many years. "Free will" is actually the newer doctrine.;)

 

If one is seriously interested in learning what we believe and why we believe it, there are many wonderful books that will explain it perfectly well. There is MUCH misunderstanding and misinformation about the Doctrines of Grace, which I see displayed by some of the questions [always] asked. If you're willing to learn about it from a reputable source, not someone trying to dispute it, you will come away with a clearer, more accurate, understanding...whether you then believe it or not is up to you...but do yourself a favor and actually learn it. Many argue against it out of ignorance. I am not saying that to be inflamatory, just that your questions and comments clearly show that you have not studied the Doctrine for yourself, yet you still feel qualified to dismiss it as unscriptural. :confused:

 

John 3:16...yes, God so loved the world that He sent His Son and whosoever shall believe will be saved...but the question is HOW they come to believe. An Arminian comes into the scripture with their preconceived free-will choice saying we choose to believe, the 'Calvinist' with God's Sovereign choice, saying it was God who chose before the foundation of the world. The Scripture itself does not say HOW one comes to that place of belief, just that those who believe will be saved. Arminians bring up John 3:16 all the time, but it proves nothing. :confused:

 

Ugh, I could go on with other scriptures brought up, but I refuse to get sucked into this! :lol: No comment, no comment, no comment! :D

 

Unlike me, Kathleen is always so very gracious in her answers on this subject. Thank you Kathleen for your willingness to share your faith. You are a true sister of the heart and one I would absolutely love to have coffee with someday. :001_smile:

[chris's girl]

The reason I bring up John 3:16 is because it states that God loves the WORLD. A God who loves the world does not create the majority of it with no other choice but to fill up Hell.

I actually HAVE studied this subject, and come across the same assumptions from friends who are Calvinists all the time: that I must believe I save myself (or at least performed a work for it), that I am an Armenian, that I am ignorant of the Scriptures because I am not a Calvinist, that I am relying on my own human logic because I do not agree with them, etc. It truly is exhausting.

I too am going to bow out of this discussion because I have been over it so many times and HAVE had many inflammatory things said to me and about my beliefs, which are firmly rooted in God's Word. They are not my own opinion. I did not decide "I think God gives us choice" and THEN read the Scriptures. Those who believe the TULIP are not the only ones capable of reading the Scriptures for what they are and coming to a conclusion of what God is telling us. There are many Godly theologians on the opposite side of Calvinism, also. They cannot just be dismissed as ignorant.

[Crimson Wife]

I cannot agree that the scenario with God offering grace to all but saving only some is Biblical. This makes God a respector of persons' date=' which He says quite clearly (I believe in Romans 2:11) that He is not. Choosing "this one and that one" is the definition of favoritsim.[/quote']

 

:iagree: I have a *huge* problem with the divisive "holier-than-thou" attitude that goes along with the notion of "limited atonement" and "the elect". Why would Christ tell the Apostles to go and spread the Good News if it only applied to a few predestined individuals?

[i.love.lucy]

:iagree: I have a *huge* problem with the divisive "holier-than-thou" attitude that goes along with the notion of "limited atonement" and "the elect". Why would Christ tell the Apostles to go and spread the Good News if it only applied to a few predestined individuals?

I'm sorry it seems that you have met people with this attitude. Most I have met are truly humbled by God's grace in choosing us to be saved.

 

We are to spread the Good News because it's not up to us to know who God will call to Himself. There is no mark on our foreheads so that we will all know who is a Christian already and who will eventually become one. He uses his people as instruments of His glory and part of that is obedience to the biblical mandate to spread the Word.

 

I have a *huge* problem with the thinking that if we can't understand why God would have chosen to do something, well then He must not have meant it that way. Who are we to think we have Him all figured out? We know the way to Him is narrow, but the way to Hell is wide. That's clear to me that few will accept and trust in Him, and many will not.

[chris's girl]

And I have just become keenly aware of how the Devil himself uses issues like this to make it appear to a board of mixed believers and unbelievers that Christians eat their own. I know debate was not the OP's intent, but that's how these kinds of discussions seem to always end up. :)

Because of this I wish I could delete my prior post, not because I feel I said anything wrong, but for the sake of testimony heated doctrinal debate probably does not belong on a board like this.

[Laura Corin]

This is one of those questions that I do not feel qualified to answer.

 

Laura

[i.love.lucy]

And I have just become keenly aware of how the Devil himself uses issues like this to make it appear to a board of mixed believers and unbelievers that Christians eat their own. I know debate was not the OP's intent' date=' but that's how these kinds of discussions seem to always end up. :)

Because of this I wish I could delete my prior post, not because I feel I said anything wrong, but for the sake of testimony heated doctrinal debate probably does not belong on a board like this.[/quote']

You know, you're right. While I think it's good to be able to articulate our beliefs, I would definitely argue in an anonymous venue like this a lot more than I would in person. I really do believe in the unity of the body of Christ and don't wish to be devisive! :grouphug:

[Melissa in CA]

I too am going to bow out of this discussion because I have been over it so many times and HAVE had many inflammatory things said to me and about my beliefs' date=' which are firmly rooted in God's Word. They are not my own opinion. I did not decide "I think God gives us choice" and THEN read the Scriptures. Those who believe the TULIP are not the only ones capable of reading the Scriptures for what they are and coming to a conclusion of what God is telling us. There are many Godly theologians on the opposite side of Calvinism, also. They cannot just be dismissed as ignorant.[/quote']

 

I think perhaps you misunderstood? :confused: I was not calling one who does not believe as I do ignorant. There are definitely many respected bible teachers who do not believe in all, or some, of the Doctrines of Grace....my own pastor being one of them...but I still respect and love him like a brother in Christ. I, in no way, consider him 'ignorant'.

 

What I meant by ignorant, is being ignorant of what most 'Calvinists' truly believe. I say most, because in every 'religion' there are those who are extremists. Are there some Calvinists who do not believe in evangelism, for example?....yes! Are there some who think they are better than most because they are chosen?...yes! But, that is not most Calvinists. Actually, not any Calvinists that I know. :confused: In fact, if history serves me well, almost all of the great evangelists of old where Calvinists. And I know a LOT of "free-will" believers who look down on unbelievers because they have not made that right "choice."

 

And in regards to the scriptures, if one has truly studied Calvinism from a reputable source (Sproul, Horton, Storms, White, etc.) one will not bring up scriptures that are clearly and articulately handled by almost every book written by a Calvinist. What I find though, is that when someone wants to study Calvinism, they instead read books by those trying to debunk it, and instead of becoming more knowledgeable about what we TRULY believe, they stay ignorant.

 

I hope that makes sense. I was in no way calling anyone who does not believe as I do, ignorant. :001_huh: Only that there is a permeating ignorance populated in regards to Calvinism...or what I like to call the Doctrines of Grace. ;)

[Guest]

And I have just become keenly aware of how the Devil himself uses issues like this to make it appear to a board of mixed believers and unbelievers that Christians eat their own. I know debate was not the OP's intent' date=' but that's how these kinds of discussions seem to always end up. :)

Because of this I wish I could delete my prior post, not because I feel I said anything wrong, but for the sake of testimony heated doctrinal debate probably does not belong on a board like this.[/quote']

 

 

I am really sorry that I asking this question here. I should have just googled it, and searched for the answer on my own. I saw people discussing that the authors of Tapestry of Grace are reformed believers (which I already knew), and I thought since I was considering using it again I wanted to know what that meant. I have used Tapestry before and LOVED it. I had no idea this was a heated issue. I just thought since it was already being discussed a little on another post, I could get the answer to my question quickly here. Also, it is sometimes easier to read someones post here, than to try and make sense of a huge internet article. Sorry again to everyone:grouphug:.

[Rebecca77]

Here's a link to a fun debate, explaining both sides, between James White and Michael Brown.

 

MP3 File

http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20100325.mp3

[Melissa in CA]

I am really sorry that I asking this question here. I should have just googled it, and searched for the answer on my own. I saw people discussing that the authors of Tapestry of Grace are reformed believers (which I already knew), and I thought since I was considering using it again I wanted to know what that meant. I have used Tapestry before and LOVED it. I had no idea this was a heated issue. I just thought since it was already being discussed a little on another post, I could get the answer to my question quickly here. Also, it is sometimes easier to read someones post here, than to try and make sense of a huge internet article. Sorry again to everyone:grouphug:.

 

No need to apologize!! You asked an honest question and got honest answers. These threads just always explode into a life of their own after a while. We tend to be rather passionate about what we believe. ;):D

[mhg]

My thanks also to Kathleen and Melissa as you have summem up what I've been too (lazy) to write. I had posted this "treatise" below several days ago then edited it off as it was just too long and seem too rant-like.:rant: But, one of you sent me a message to repost it, so I'll cooperate. Here goes:

 

For what (likely little) it’s worth, I’ll share my quick testimony of how I came to embrace the doctrines of grace. I was raised Southern Baptist (father was Southern Baptist preacher with MDiv --- so I knew my SB theology growing up and was firmly grounded in my beliefs). I went to a Southern Baptist college for two years (before transferred to another univ) and this is what happened while there. I fell in love with a young man then (we'll call him DAVE for this email/discussion). Dave and I courted for months and became serious enough to discuss marriage after we finished school. What we loved most about one another is our love for the LORD and how easily we talked/meshed; we both loved the Lord and talking about God's Word / theology. Dave led Bible studies (now he's a pastor of a large church in AZ). Anyway....months into our courtship I noticed that other guys would call him CALVIN at the cafeteria which puzzled me, and so I asked him why and he said it was b/c he was a Calvinist. Now….some would ask, “How could you date a guy so seriously and not know this?†Well, once you believe this doctrine it truly becomes no big deal (you don’t harp on it). As I am now --- I don’t constantly refer to the doctrines of grace….as there’s no need to hash this issue out continually. It's a settled issue/belief. "Dave" explained why they called him Calvin/what this meant (as I had never heard of it) and we left cafe and had a 4+ hour discussion about it. He and his 5 siblings grew up traveling/singing as his dad was a Southern Baptist preacher/evangelist and they had always been Calvinist (another case that you can attend a non-Calvinist denomination and be Calvinist. (FYI: SB Churches were mostly Calvinists until the 1940s). After our LONG discussion I told him that we had to BREAK UP as I could never marry him with such different religious views (and wouldn't raise my kids to believe this either). You have NO idea how hard this break up was on us both as, again, we were in love and discussing marriage by then. I broke it off but I was still curious because what he said made more sense than anything I had ever heard. He went book by book of the bible and showed me the MANY references to this doctrine throughout. Now the reason many of the passages seemed "new" to me is that when you grow up in a non-reformed church, it seems that these "difficult" passages are RARELY preached on or discussed b/c they AREN'T EASY to make sense of as an arminian. He and I remained "broken up" yet I began to attend his (and his siblings') Bible study (for 12 weeks march – may) on the book of Romans until that May (I moved out of state end of May). I filled up two 5-subject notebooks studying this doctrine before that May and two more once I moved out of state. I studied it THOROUGHLY and continued to do so (study) for months after I left that college. All this time he and I aren't together (that's how serious I TOOK marrying someone with same theological beliefs). So MONTHS later, I -- on my own --- came to thoroughly embrace and believe this doctrine (and made SURE my motives weren't about resuming my relationship). At the end of all this time when Dave contacted me (as I told him to give me some time and to lay off the heart strings until then), I told him I was a Calvinist and.....won't go into details here .... but that the LORD was not giving me a peace about our resuming our relationship as I had, within that 6 months, surrendered to foreign missions which wasn’t his direction. So we didn’t get back together, and many months later, God sent me my present hubby who God clearly had in mind for me who also was being led to the foreign mission field. When I met him (present hubby) he was already a Calvinist.

 

So....WHAT’S MY POINT? That when I first heard this doctrine it was so offensive to me then that I broke up with the then love of my life. I felt so strongly against it that I went this extreme in my opposition. But, I know that once I truly UNDERSTOOD the doctrines (which you can’t learn from a homeschool discussion board), I look back amazed that I disdained it as, once understood, I now see God as FAR more merciful and compassionate as a Calvinist as I ever did before becoming one. And, as far as humility, Calvinists are some of the most merciful, compassionate, and humble folks I’ve ever met. (The tone is clear in Tapestry of Grace, for example). Calvinists are some of the most strong supporters of the spread of the gospel, as we ALSO believe that IT IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION.

 

I know what it's like to be fighting this and I've been there with the same questions (I identify with CHRIS and posed the same type questions).

 

I would encourage a believer/inquirer to deal with all passages in the Bible and not attempt to dismiss them with John 3:16 and the like. Please…when dealing with verses like John 17:9, then prayerfully deal with it and don’t cite other verses as if to somehow correct Jesus’ statement because John 17:9 is JESUS’ PRAYER --- it’s WHAT HE PRAYED TO HIS FATHER. You can’t say (tacitly or otherwise), “Jesus, that sure sounds exclusive…..don’t you recall, Jesus, that you’re going to inspire John to write verse 3:16 to say….â€. We have to deal honestly with ALL of Scripture like the verses Kathleen mentioned. Calvinism deals with them much more easily.

 

How do you explain verses that clearly say that Judas was chosen before his birth to be a son of perdition to carry out the will of God? Do you simply refer to John 3:16 and other verses that discuss God’s compassion?

 

Why did Jesus repeatedly verbalized HIS decision to NOT reveal Himself to certain people and hushing the demons up to not reveal His true identity? He constantly “HID†the message from some and not to others. Why?

These are two little examples of a Bible chalked FULL of these type of passages.

 

I AM IN NO WAY SAYING THAT IF SOMEONE LIKE CHRIS WERE TO JUST STUDY IT THAT SHE’D COME TO EMBRACE IT. NO NO NO. There are many intelligent Christians who disagree with the doctrines of grace. They are no less saved than I am and God is just as happy with them and they fellowship with Him just as I do. There are volumes of books written on BOTH sides of this camp and plenty of intelligent/sincere/Godly people on BOTH sides of the camps. My parents are not Calvinists and it’s no biggie at all. However, I believe that it isn’t fair to KNOCK Calvinism until you’ve studied it sincerely. And, I’d recommend doing this if for no other reason than learning about it for the sake of understanding a different view. For those interested, some good books are “Easy Chair Hard Words†or “What is reformed theology?†or one of Piper’s books on the subject I know there’s a chapter on it in “The Pleasures of God†by Piper but I’m pretty sure he has an entire book or two on the subject.

 

As for the elect feeling a sense of privilege/special....I’d say we feel amazed at God’s grace for saving wretches/worms like us. There are plenty of humble Calvinist out there such as Charles Spurgeon, John Piper, Mary Slessor of Calabar(my favorite....I can aspire, I can aspire:glare:....), Hudson Taylor, Amy Carmichael, William Carey, John Paton, Jim and Elizabeth Elliot, George Mueller to name a few.

 

When a Southern Baptist (which is what I was raised-- thus my referring to this particular denomination) looks at the verses that say man is spiritually DEAD, what they usually mean is that the DEAD person just had a heart attack and still has a weak pulse and just needs some CPR to resuscitate them; and, if they did CPR and the person lived they’d give glory to the CPR process (the gospel) the same as a calvinist would. But a Calvinist sees that person as completely DEAD (dead as a corpse in the grave for a decade) --- that person has NOTHING inside with which to work with (faith). I was DEAD in my sin; no arrthymia, no weak pulse -- Dead as a Doornail! No gospel CPR (presented by any person or pastor, or from a good sermon presentation of the gospel/a heart-tugging solo, etc.) will WORK to raise a dead person from the grave. If God raises this person from the dead (spiritually), it is as real as Him calling Lazarus (myself) from the grave. Lazarus(I) had NOTHING to do with it. My faith (this calling me out of the grave) was entirely His doing/gift. I didn’t respond to it as a dead person. He brought me back to life so to speak and I THEN saw HIS work/His Hand/His Grace. Once we are made alive in Christ (renerated/given spiritual LIFE), THEN are we able to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in HIS work of sanctification (but sanctification is not regeneration). I'm heading off to bed :auto: now; (did I hear you say, "thank heavens!"? :lol:).

Edited August 9, 2010 by mhg
too long of an entry

[Aloha2U]

Can anyone explain what Reformed Christianity is? How would this point of view change the way a curriculum comes across?

 

TIA!

 

I just came across the following stated elsewhere and being reminded... I thought I should share it here.

 

With any book/curriculum you always have to check things out - be a Berean!

 

[Acts 17:10] And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. [11] These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

 

As you may already know, to be a "Berean" is to check things out for oneself against what Scripture says. We all need to be Bereans, eh? Not just accept that what the book or the pastor or the Bible study leader or whatever or whoever says. And we need to model this and teach it to our children too.

 

HTH too!

 

:001_smile: Melissa

[johnandtinagilbert]

Amen, Melissa.

[angela in ohio]

I am really sorry that I asking this question here. I should have just googled it, and searched for the answer on my own. I saw people discussing that the authors of Tapestry of Grace are reformed believers (which I already knew), and I thought since I was considering using it again I wanted to know what that meant. I have used Tapestry before and LOVED it. I had no idea this was a heated issue. I just thought since it was already being discussed a little on another post, I could get the answer to my question quickly here. Also, it is sometimes easier to read someones post here, than to try and make sense of a huge internet article. Sorry again to everyone:grouphug:.

 

You have nothing to apologize for. You didn't start a debate; someone else did.

[angela in ohio]

And I have just become keenly aware of how the Devil himself uses issues like this to make it appear to a board of mixed believers and unbelievers that Christians eat their own. I know debate was not the OP's intent' date=' but that's how these kinds of discussions seem to always end up. :)

Because of this I wish I could delete my prior post, not because I feel I said anything wrong, but for the sake of testimony heated doctrinal debate probably does not belong on a board like this.[/quote']

 

I think it shows the unbelievers that we aren't all the blind unreasonable sheepish fools they sometimes think we are; that God gave us the ability to reason and expects us to read, discuss, learn, grow. My faith is also such that I believe that any little thing someone says on an internet board cannot be more powerful than the Word of God. I have been a very active participant in past threads just like this, and I could share stories of those who came to a stronger faith and understanding through them. :001_smile: I think bickering is in bad taste, but reasoned discussion is appropriate.

 

You can delete your previous post, but it will still show up in the posts of those who quoted it.

[angela in ohio]

:iagree: I have a *huge* problem with the divisive "holier-than-thou" attitude that goes along with the notion of "limited atonement" and "the elect". Why would Christ tell the Apostles to go and spread the Good News if it only applied to a few predestined individuals?

 

Because He told them to. :001_smile: That's the same reason I spread the Good News, because it is a part of God's plan, whether we understand it or not.

 

There are those who act as if they are holier-than-thou; I do get that, and it's a shame. But you can't assume that all of the Reformed faith feel this way. With a true understand of the Reformed faith, the opposite happens. I believe God chose me, not for anything I have done or any choice I have made, not because I was smart enough to choose Him or even knew enough to do so (I was dead in my depravity, not just sick or dying, but dead,) and that makes me fall on my face in Humility every day. :001_smile:

[angela in ohio]

OP, read what Kathleen has said and mhg's excellent post. There is a lot of false info in this thread about the Reformed faith (I'm not even speaking of those who disagree with it, just of those who are defining it incorrectly.)

[HS Mom in NC]

I didn't read the responses.

 

Reformed Theology is a wide reaching bunch, but I think the most consistent issues among them (I'm not one) are their replacement theology, Calvinist views on predestination, and dominion theology.

 

In a nutshell, replacement theology is the view that the Church is the "New Israel" and that God has rejected literal Israel as His chosen people and that all the blessings and the covenant with literal Isreal in the OT now applies to the Church. (By literal Israel I mean the descendants of Abraham through Isaac, through Jacob- commonly known today as Jewish people.)

 

In general they tend to go for a "bring in the kingdom" sort of view of Jesus' return because of their dominion theology views, but I'm not completely sure that is true of all of them.

 

People often mistakenly assume Reformed Christians are the only ones with 5 point Calvinist views of predestination, but I am a "leaky" dispensationalist (along with most of my Independent Baptist church members) with strong 5 point Calvinist views and we don't buy replacement theology or dominion theology.

 

It's hard to pigeon hole a handful of denominations that are made up of millions of people with pin point accuracy, so my statements should be taken as generalizations with the understanding that there are variations.

[melmichigan]

(Mormons aka "Latter Day Saints" and Jehovah's witnesses are not protestants and are tooooooooo different from any protestant religion in their theological tenets especially regarding the NATURE of GOD to be remotely similar).

 

Could someone please explain what this means, especially the "NATURE of GOD" part?

[just Jenny]

So glad this post came back up-I am glad that people are willing to talk about their faith and ask questions.

 

One of the key doctrinal issues that I see between reformed and non-reformed doctrine today is whether or not man has free-will to choose God or not. Of course, the issue is really, what does the Bible say?

 

Both Martin Luther (see "The Bondage of the Will"), and Calvin believed that Man is dead in his transgressions and sins (Colossians 2:13-14).

 

I believe this too, because this is what I understand the Bible to teach.

 

Referring to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, God warned Adam and Eve “ in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.” (Genesis 2:17) Adam and Eve ate, and yet they walked out of the garden. We know that God does not lie, so they had to have died that day: they died spiritually.

 

Satan’s lie to them was “you will not surely die.” And it is a lie that continues on today in the form of the belief that man is not truly spiritually dead, or at least not totally…that he can somehow effect some positive change in his spiritual condition-and gain favor towards God.

 

But God says clearly that, “…those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8: 6-8)

 

I am impressed at how when we read Bible passages about Salvation, we see that the subject of the sentence is God who is doing the action-and the sinner is being acted upon. Like Ephesians chapter 2, if you read it, consider what it is saying about who is doing the saving.

 

I hope that everyone will take the time to prayerfully consider this issue.

 

Read the Bible asking God to reveal Himself to you. He does.

 

I had never heard of Election until I went as a missionary to Brazil. There, the man who is now my husband told me about it. I started reading the Bible with the question: Is this true? I started in John and the passages just leapt out at me. John 1:12-13 for starters, “But as many as received Him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

 

This is such excellent news for the despairing sinner-like I was two years ago when God saved me! I was afraid, because I knew that I could not even muster up the faith to trust in God for salvation. I was very religious and proud of my works. When God calls though, He brings us to our knees before Him. He is so good and so merciful. Praise the name of Jesus!

 

Only Jesus saves!

Edited August 6, 2010 by just Jenny
adding a few further thoughts :)

[Melissa in CA]

I didn't read the responses.

 

Reformed Theology is a wide reaching bunch, but I think the most consistent issues among them (I'm not one) are their replacement theology, Calvinist views on predestination, and dominion theology.

 

In a nutshell, replacement theology is the view that the Church is the "New Israel" and that God has rejected literal Israel as His chosen people and that all the blessings and the covenant with literal Isreal in the OT now applies to the Church. (By literal Israel I mean the descendants of Abraham through Isaac, through Jacob- commonly known today as Jewish people.)

 

In general they tend to go for a "bring in the kingdom" sort of view of Jesus' return because of their dominion theology views, but I'm not completely sure that is true of all of them.

 

People often mistakenly assume Reformed Christians are the only ones with 5 point Calvinist views of predestination, but I am a "leaky" dispensationalist (along with most of my Independent Baptist church members) with strong 5 point Calvinist views and we don't buy replacement theology or dominion theology.

 

It's hard to pigeon hole a handful of denominations that are made up of millions of people with pin point accuracy, so my statements should be taken as generalizations with the understanding that there are variations.

 

Yeah, I'm in the dispensationalist Calvinist John MacArthur camp...though I thoroughly love reading books by RC Sproul, Michael Horton, and the like. I don't at all agree with dominion theology, and frankly have never even heard the term, "replacement theology." ;):D

[angela in ohio]

So glad this post came back up-I am glad that people are willing to talk about their faith and ask questions.

 

One of the key doctrinal issues that I see between reformed and non-reformed doctrine today is whether or not man has free-will to choose God or not. Of course, the issue is really, what does the Bible say?

 

 

Both Martin Luther (see "The Bondage of the Will"), and Calvin believed that Man is dead in his transgressions and sins (Colossians 2:13-14).

 

 

I believe this too, because this is what I understand the Bible to teach.

 

 

Referring to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, God warned Adam and Eve “ in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.†(Genesis 2:17) Adam and Eve ate, and yet they walked out of the garden. We know that God does not lie, so they had to have died that day: they died spiritually.

 

Satan’s lie to them was “you will not surely die.†And it is a lie that continues on today in the form of the belief that man is not truly spiritually dead, or at least not totally…that he can somehow effect some positive change in his spiritual condition-and gain favor towards God.

 

But God says clearly that, “…those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.†(Romans 8: 6-8)

 

I am impressed at how when we read Bible passages about Salvation, we see that the subject of the sentence is God who is doing the action-and the sinner is being acted upon. Like Ephesians chapter 2, if you read it, consider what it is saying about who is doing the saving.

 

I hope that everyone will take the time to prayerfully consider this issue.

 

Read the Bible asking God to reveal Himself to you. He does.

 

I had never heard of Election until I went as a missionary to Brazil. There, the man who is now my husband told me about it. I started reading the Bible with the question: Is this true? I started in John and the passages just leapt out at me. John 1:12-13 for starters, “But as many as received Him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.â€

 

Excellent! :hurray: