Okay, exactly how many of us have gone over to the dark side?

[Jugglin'5]

Why do you assume that a lot of non-Calvinists don't know or understand what they believe?

 

Like I mentioned to Colleen before, maybe it is a regional thing. In my neck of the woods very, very few people know what it is. Reformed people are a teensy minority of Protestants.

[NevadaRabbit]

I was intrigued because I completely agree with both of these points, as stated, and so would be "reformed" by this simple definition, but obviously not by the complete meaning as understood and practiced by the folks posting here.

 

I read this thread out of curiosity, and was trying to be cute with my reply (reformed but not calvinist, since others had said calvinist but not reformed), but I realize it is rude to be flippant with other's beliefs and I am sorry for intruding on your discussion like this!

 

No offense taken here; I didn't think you came across flippant.

[CAMom]

On the choice issue...None of my Reformed friends have presented this analogy although they are probably all aware of it...:)

 

Ephesians 2:1-3 says that were dead in our trespasses and sins. We weren't wounded or ill, but dead.

 

If I were to set foot in a graveyard with a "magic medicine" that could bring the dead back to life and started "preaching" to those in the grave that all they had to do was make the choice to take the medicine, how many of them would respond? None because dead people cannot choose life.

 

As the Ephesians passage points out, we are spiritually dead (this is from the moment we are conceived as all died in Adam at the moment of the first sin). We have no ability to choose life because dead people can't choose.

 

The Ephesians passage goes on..But God, being rich in mercy....made us alive together with Christ...

 

So, in my above analogy, it is as if I actually were to go around to each grave and administer the "medicine" to those who were dead to make them alive.

 

Jesus tells us in John 6:37 that all the Father gives to him (in other words, those who He has made alive) will come to Him and He will never cast them out.

 

So, spiritually dead people have no ability to choose spiritual life. Yet God makes some spiritually alive and gives them to Christ in whom they will always be secure.

 

Now, I must get off and get ready. I've got a kid to get to debate camp this morning.;)

[Melissa in CA]

That's me, too. Although I would probably not fit in completely, as I refer to myself as a 4.5 point Calvinist. :) And our church is not part of the EFCA, it's non-denominational.

 

This is what our current pastor calls himself; a 4.5 point Calvinist. The only problem with that position is that if you really study all 5 points you will see that they stand together. To eliminate one, causes the others to crumble in some way.

 

It is not as simple as the acronym TULIP makes it sound: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Persevernce of the Saints. Each point actually means so much more than what the basic acronym states.

 

For example, most 4.5 Calvinists, like our current pastor, claim they hold to all 5 of the points minus the Limited Atonement one. But if you eliminate Limited Atonement then Total Depravity, Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace fall with it.

 

If you have a free sovereign will with the ability to reject or accept the Gospel with said free will, then you are not totally depraved, nor can you in truth really believe in Irresistible Grace.

 

And if you can choose Him without Him first choosing you, or if you think He chose you because He saw through time that you would choose Him, then down falls Unconditional Election as well as Irresistible Grace again.

 

Calvinism really is more complex than most think, which is why Calvinist's usually KNOW what they believe and WHY they believe it. Ask many Christians today what they believe and it is as simple as Jesus, the Son of God, died for my sins and in order to be saved from those sins I have to accept him as my Savior. Mention Calvinism and they look at you like :001_huh: And those who have heard of Calvinism have usually not studied it for themselves and therefore follow the basic mis-assumptions regarding it...such as Calvinists don't believe in evangelism which is very, very untrue. TRUE Calvinists take the bible and sin very seriously. A "Calvinist" who is living like a heathen thinking he can do whatever pleases him...should really rethink his salvation.

 

So all that to say....I personally don't think it is possible to be a 3 point, 4 point, or a 4.5 point Calvinist. :D

[NevadaRabbit]

I remember one time I was at a women's Bible study in a non-denominational church, we were working through Romans. During a discussion on election (I was new to the group and listening not talking) a woman starts laughing and says, "Well, let's not become Calvinists here." :lol:

 

:lol::lol::lol: Those ikky old Calvinists. Romans is one place where it's tough not to line up with Calvin without blacking out big chunks of text!

[mommaduck]

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/arminian.htm

Arminius died in 1609, almost a decade before the controversy over his teachings peaked. That occurred in 1618, when a group of the late professor's followers, known as the Remonstrants, issued a protest in the form of Five Articles to the Reformed Church of Holland. Those articles were condemned by the Synod of Dordt in 1619. The synod's five-point reply was an article-by-article refutation of the Remonstrants. (The position defined by the Synod has come to be known popularly as "the five points of Calvinism," though the five points were actually a response the Arminian Articles. Calvin himself never systematized his doctrine into five points).

 

Karen: I think my response in the Bible study would have been, "Already there, thank you"...or for a southerner, "Bless your heart, I'm already one!" (then smile sweetly) ;)

 

Robin: as a Calvinist, I KNOW I cannot look at a little checklist and say this person is going to hell and that one to heaven...that's in Gd's Hands. Actually, I've been told over and over by my husband's family that I'm going to hell, just because they "know so" (mix of anabaptist, social church goer, and IFCA...so I guess these people think THEY can elect me to heaven or hell, but Gd can't). In fact, I do not believe one has to have all their "doctrinal ducks" in a row to be saved...I believe that is something the Holy Spirit works out in time for each of us.

 

As for the

While there is scriptural support for election, there is also scriptural support for free will.

well, I only agree if you read the "support" for free will while pretending the other Scriptures do not exist. Scripture cannot contradict itself, however one passage can clarify or put into context another passage. Example would be the infamous "God so loved the world"...correct translation/definition of world would be "all nations". He promised that He would save some of all nations, that no nation would be excluded...however this naturally does not meant that EVERYONE within each nation would be saved. When we move onto "whosoever believeth in me", we must ask who are the "whosoever"? The "whosoever" are pointed out in another passage as "all that the Father gives me". The Father must not give Christ everyone to save or all would be saved and hell does not exist. However, if the Father did give all to Christ and we still believe that there will be those that die unsaved, then Christ must have failed in saving all the Father gave him.

 

Anyhow...that's an example of the election debate (wasn't trying to open it up, but rather to show how we look at Scripture...always testing one passage against another).

[Jugglin'5]

That's interesting. I have never heard a reformed person say that (maybe a hyper-calvinist). I have heard people who were against Calvinism teach that as a distortion and parody of what we believe.

 

It is very interesting reading the discussions about election and the great commission. Everyone that I know who attends reformed churches in our area believe in election and do not practice the great commission. I have been told by more than one, "What's the point; God chooses." I was raised baptist but have attended non-denominational churches for years. The one thing that would not enable me to attend reformed churches was this one point. The election issue doesn't bother me as much because I have always believed that the choosing is mutual--God chooses you and you choose to follow. (Many people explain this different ways, even within the reformed community.) But I could never understand it when people would share their faith with their children but not with strangers because "God chooses" and they don't have any responsibility to point the way.

 

I am surprised to hear that some of you take a different view. Very interesting.

 

Paula

[Jugglin'5]

:D...

 

Lutherans are not Arminian and not Reformed, although they are reformed and in fact kicked off the Reformation. Clear as mud? Thought so...

[CAMom]

It is very interesting reading the discussions about election and the great commission. Everyone that I know who attends reformed churches in our area believe in election and do not practice the great commission. I have been told by more than one, "What's the point; God chooses." I was raised baptist but have attended non-denominational churches for years. The one thing that would not enable me to attend reformed churches was this one point. The election issue doesn't bother me as much because I have always believed that the choosing is mutual--God chooses you and you choose to follow. (Many people explain this different ways, even within the reformed community.) But I could never understand it when people would share their faith with their children but not with strangers because "God chooses" and they don't have any responsibility to point the way.

 

I am surprised to hear that some of you take a different view. Very interesting.

 

Paula

 

Spurgeon once said something like, "If God painted a yellow stripe down the backs of the chosen, I would just go around pulling up shirt tails to see who I should preach to. Since He didn't, I'll preach to everyone as if they are chosen."

 

This is the position each Reformed church I've been a part of has always viewed things. We don't have the mind of God so we obey the Great Commision. We realize that we are only the messengers but that God uses the preaching of the Gospel as an ordained vehicle by which He draws people to Himself.

 

:)

[NevadaRabbit]

Sometimes I miss having a good ol' religious debate on whether or not we have free will :D

 

Go here: Pyromaniacs. The blog's writers are Calvinists (not Reformed). Some seriously good stuff there. One of the writers is John MacArthur's long-time editor (and an elder at Grace Comm'ty). They don't bend when it comes to Scripture, they come out hard against seeker and emerging church fads, and you can satisfy your urge to debate, even vicariously just by reading the comments. :001_smile:

[Jugglin'5]

Our church is actually sort of presbyterian, but we are studying the Heidelberg at our Wednesday night home small group meetings "What is you only comfort in lief and death? " It is wonderful and precious.

 

My dh was born into a solid Dutch Reformed family. In fact, I think they've been Reformed for as many generations as anyone can remember, back in Holland.

 

I had never attended church, but was invited to a Reformed church when I was about 15 years old. It's where I met my dh, and I've never wanted to stray (either from the husband, or the denomination, lol!)

 

Reformed beliefs seem logical and correct to me, though there are some things about the church that I think aren't strictly the right way to do things.

 

We started out as CRC, but ended up RCUS when we moved about 18 years ago.

 

So...do any of you have dc memorizing the Heidelberg Catechism?

[NevadaRabbit]

I don't understand... if you believe there is no element at all of choice, what do you say when sharing the gospel? Is there never a point when you would encourage a person to choose to repent and follow God? (Even when knowing that it is God who enables the person to make that choice.)

 

I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God gives the growth. 1 Cor 3:6-7

[Rosy]

Just to clarify, not everyone who fails to embrace Calvin's five points 100% is by default an Arminian. Those two argued, but it's not like their theologies are the only two out there.

 

Other thoughts (not in response to your post, I'm just saying this here) -

 

While there is scriptural support for election, there is also scriptural support for free will. There is an element of mystery that none of us will comprehend this side of heaven. No matter which you believe, you have to deal with problematic scripture. The only thing I don't like about the division over this issue is when one camp starts accusing the other camp of not being saved. I laughed hard at the funny link in this thread, but even that dipped it's toe into the "we're going to heaven and you're going to hell" arrogance that crops up over this issue. Who am I to judge someone else's salvation? That seems harmful to body of Christ (enemy keeping us divided).

 

Okay, got that off my chest... :)

 

I agree, and I think that's where the cage joke comes into play. In my first few years of being convinced of God's sovereignty in salvation, I saw very little room for man's responsibility/free will, even though they're taught side by side in Romans. I thought that anyone who didn't embrace the doctrine of the depravity of man the way *I* had couldn't possibly know their need for salvation. I've calmed down a bit since then.;) My pastor would never call himself a Calvinist, but he firmly believes and teaches election as well as man's responsibility, and I'm totally comfortable there.

[mommaduck]

I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God gives the growth. 1 Cor 3:6-7

Amen!

[NevadaRabbit]

I think this addresses the age old mystery of the sovereignty of God and man's responsibility. This is where a lot people get tripped up. The Christian's responsibility is to preach God's word - to present the gospel to everyone. Each person then has to decide what to do with that information - to accept it or reject it. We would all most certainly reject it if were not for the Holy Spirit opening our eyes to the truth of the gospel. It is the Holy Spirit who convicts people of their lost state and need for a Savior and yet, there is a choice involved. Therein lies the mystery. Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice and they follow me." Again, we are to tell others of Christ and those who are truly His will hear His voice and follow Him. So it comes down to God drawing us, enabling us to choose Him - otherwise we would not, we could not.

 

Anyone else want to take a stab at it? This is the best I can do.

 

I think you're right on target. We don't know who will accept or reject the gospel; it's our responsibility to spread the word. The Holy Spirit moves where He will, and only a person whose heart has been regenerated (made alive) by the Spirit will understand and accept the gospel. I don't believe we choose whether or not to believe the gospel when we hear it; either the Spirit has opened the eyes of our heart to see, therefore we do believe, or the Spirit has not, and the gospel is foolishness to our ears. What comes next (if we do believe) DOES involve our will, though. Once we've believed on Christ as Savior (because the Father sent the Spirit to draw us to His Son), then we choose whether to walk in light or darkness. We'll battle the flesh all the days of our lives, so every day we choose whether to walk in the flesh or walk in the spirit.

[Jugglin'5]

I though that was a great summing up.:iagree:

 

I think this addresses the age old mystery of the sovereignty of God and man's responsibility. This is where a lot people get tripped up. The Christian's responsibility is to preach God's word - to present the gospel to everyone. Each person then has to decide what to do with that information - to accept it or reject it. We would all most certainly reject it if were not for the Holy Spirit opening our eyes to the truth of the gospel. It is the Holy Spirit who convicts people of their lost state and need for a Savior and yet, there is a choice involved. Therein lies the mystery. Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice and they follow me." Again, we are to tell others of Christ and those who are truly His will hear His voice and follow Him. So it comes down to God drawing us, enabling us to choose Him - otherwise we would not, we could not.

 

Anyone else want to take a stab at it? This is the best I can do.

[NevadaRabbit]

While there is scriptural support for election, there is also scriptural support for free will. There is an element of mystery that none of us will comprehend this side of heaven. No matter which you believe, you have to deal with problematic scripture. The only thing I don't like about the division over this issue is when one camp starts accusing the other camp of not being saved. I laughed hard at the funny link in this thread, but even that dipped it's toe into the "we're going to heaven and you're going to hell" arrogance that crops up over this issue. Who am I to judge someone else's salvation? That seems harmful to body of Christ (enemy keeping us divided).

 

Okay, got that off my chest... :)

 

As the provider of the funny link, I just want to apologize if it crossed the line and offended. It's certainly intended to be tongue-in-cheek, but it's probably only funny to us solid Calvinists. :001_smile:

[Kathleen in VA]

OK, this is not exactly related to anyone's question in particular, but I found it as I was clicking on all the Doctrines of Grace links and it was so beautiful I thought I'd share:

 

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

 

 

Found that at: http://doctrinesofgrace.net/

[NevadaRabbit]

This is what our current pastor calls himself; a 4.5 point Calvinist. The only problem with that position is that if you really study all 5 points you will see that they stand together. To eliminate one, causes the others to crumble in some way.

 

It is not as simple as the acronym TULIP makes it sound: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Persevernce of the Saints. Each point actually means so much more than what the basic acronym states.

 

For example, most 4.5 Calvinists, like our current pastor, claim they hold to all 5 of the points minus the Limited Atonement one. But if you eliminate Limited Atonement then Total Depravity, Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace fall with it.

 

If you have a free sovereign will with the ability to reject or accept the Gospel with said free will, then you are not totally depraved, nor can you in truth really believe in Irresistible Grace.

 

And if you can choose Him without Him first choosing you, or if you think He chose you because He saw through time that you would choose Him, then down falls Unconditional Election as well as Irresistible Grace again.

 

Calvinism really is more complex than most think, which is why Calvinist's usually KNOW what they believe and WHY they believe it. Ask many Christians today what they believe and it is as simple as Jesus, the Son of God, died for my sins and in order to be saved from those sins I have to accept him as my Savior. Mention Calvinism and they look at you like :001_huh: And those who have heard of Calvinism have usually not studied it for themselves and therefore follow the basic mis-assumptions regarding it...such as Calvinists don't believe in evangelism which is very, very untrue. TRUE Calvinists take the bible and sin very seriously. A "Calvinist" who is living like a heathen thinking he can do whatever pleases him...should really rethink his salvation.

 

So all that to say....I personally don't think it is possible to be a 3 point, 4 point, or a 4.5 point Calvinist. :D

 

:iagree: and well said!!

[Robin in Tx]

I only agree if you read the "support" for free will while pretending the other Scriptures do not exist. Scripture cannot contradict itself, however one passage can clarify or put into context another passage.

 

That's pretty much what scholars on both sides of the issue say :). Personal interpretation of the context comes into play every time, and even the most staunch Calvinist pastor I've ever encountered admits that there are a few problems with it (scripture we can't be 100% clear about) but that he feels 100% certain that the calvinist interpretation is the right one. I don't think anyone on EITHER side of the issue "blacks out" or totally ignores entire blocks of scripture (that suggestion is highly offensive and is what I was talking about re: arrogance and divisiveness)... they simply interpret differently, and they do so postrate before the Lord in all humility and love, bathed in prayer. Why we come to different conclusions or interpretations about things like this is a mystery to me, but I refuse to believe that anyone is being less careful, less diligent in their studies, less intelligent, less faithful to Christ when their hearts are convicted to accept or reject a mere man's interpretation of scripture.

[Rosy]

I love that, Kathleen! Thanks for sharing. :)

[OnTheBrink]

An excellent book to read on Calvinsim vs Arminianism is "Doctrines that Divide" by Irwin Lutzer.

[Robin in Tx]

As the provider of the funny link, I just want to apologize if it crossed the line and offended. It's certainly intended to be tongue-in-cheek, but it's probably only funny to us solid Calvinists. :001_smile:

 

Hey, I thought that was so funny I even repped you for it! LOL No, not offensive at all... just using it as an example of how far some people take it (because there are plenty who believe that, and they aren't kidding at all).

[Jugglin'5]

I don't understand... if you believe there is no element at all of choice, what do you say when sharing the gospel? Is there never a point when you would encourage a person to choose to repent and follow God? (Even when knowing that it is God who enables the person to make that choice.)

 

I would say that preaching the gospel always involves telling someone that they need to repent, believe, and take up their cross and follow Him. Yes, the person would be choosing to do so, because God had chosen him and given him a new heart that now desired to choose God. A sheep desires to eat grass because it is a sheep, if it was something else, it wouldn't desire to eat grass, meat or carrion, or whatever (obviously this analogy is limited).

I guess some of you are further on the Calvinist scale that I am, because it seems strange to me to be bothered by the mere word "choose." I did choose to follow God, but it is God who gave me the ability to do so. I would not have been able to make that choice without Him. It was His work, not mine. Am I missing something?

 

I actually don't disagree with this. Here in the Bible Belt, man's choice has been emphasized for so long, that sometimes it is easy to overreact, I think. When you grow up with a bunch of emotional manipulation to get you to really choose God this time, not like last time, when you didn't really mean it, I think one gets a little jumpy. At least that has been my experience.

 

Erica

:001_smile:

[NevadaRabbit]

I agree, and I think that's where the cage joke comes into play. In my first few years of being convinced of God's sovereignty in salvation, I saw very little room for man's responsibility/free will, even though they're taught side by side in Romans. I thought that anyone who didn't embrace the doctrine of the depravity of man the way *I* had couldn't possibly know their need for salvation. I've calmed down a bit since then.;) My pastor would never call himself a Calvinist, but he firmly believes and teaches election as well as man's responsibility, and I'm totally comfortable there.

 

The juxtaposition of God's sovereignty and man's free will in Romans is not attached to the same event, though. God is sovereign in our justification (He chooses and saves whom He pleases - election) but we are then set free from bondage to sin. It is in our sanctification that we must choose whether to walk in the Spirit or in the flesh. Very rough paraphrase of Romans 6: God saved you, freed you from bondage to sin and filled you with the righteousness of Christ (sovereignly). Now go live like it (use your will to live in the new life you've been given)!

[angela in ohio]

It is very interesting reading the discussions about election and the great commission. Everyone that I know who attends reformed churches in our area believe in election and do not practice the great commission. I have been told by more than one, "What's the point; God chooses." I was raised baptist but have attended non-denominational churches for years. The one thing that would not enable me to attend reformed churches was this one point. The election issue doesn't bother me as much because I have always believed that the choosing is mutual--God chooses you and you choose to follow. (Many people explain this different ways, even within the reformed community.) But I could never understand it when people would share their faith with their children but not with strangers because "God chooses" and they don't have any responsibility to point the way.

 

I am surprised to hear that some of you take a different view. Very interesting.

 

Paula

 

 

They have an unfortunate misunderstanding of Reformed theology.

[Kathleen in VA]

I think DoG folks shy away from terms like "choose" and "make a decision for Christ" and the like because when we focus on man's choosing or deciding it has the potential for robbing God of His glory in salvation. Again, we are only able to choose because God regenerates us and opens our spiritual eyes to the truth. As someone else said (sorry, don't know who right off), we are dead. Dead people don't make choices or decisions. I think of Lazarus being dead for three days in the tomb. If he could have chosen to come out of that grave, I'm sure he would have. It wasn't until Jesus called him to come forth that he was able.

[NevadaRabbit]

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. - Mark Webb

 

It was when I understood that, short of God's grace, we all would throng to the gates of Hell, that I finally "got it".

 

The backdrop of the 5 points of Calvinism made Scripture come alive and make complete sense to me. It widens the gap between sinful mankind and holy God; it gives God all the glory and all the credit.

[HappyGrace]

I was brought up in a Methodist church, but it really doesn't matter because it was a church-on-Sundays, do your own thing the rest of the week as long as it's moral type. I even went to Christian camp, etc., but somehow it never affected me-I've always been a Christian, but a believe-it-with-my-head Christian.

 

Now I'm trying to find out which end is up-what I really believe for myself. I read this whole thread, including the links and even all the Amazon reviews for the Amazing Grace DVD, trying to figure out the whole Reformed thing. We are between churches after going for years to a large non-denominational, seeker-friendly church. Dh is basically saved and that's about it-tries to be moral but doesn't read his Bible and he doesn't "live for Christ"-just church on Sundays. Very similar to how I was brought up, and even how I've been for the last 15 yrs (after my college years rebellion... but that's another story.)

 

I just believe the Bible, that's all I know. I want to get closer to Christ and live for Him. I know absolutely nothing about church differences, etc. I'm getting so confused about all the denominations and everything. But I'm very conservative and felt uncomfortable in a seeker-friendly church. I think I must be more toward the Reformed view, but when I read those points this morning, I don't like the limited atonement one. However, I can see how it fits with the other four points, as in, why would He have died for all if only the elect needed it.

 

It's overwhelming to me to try to find a church that's a good fit-it's been a year and a half of searching. I'm wondering if a Reformed church would be a good fit, but I don't know how to find a reputable one in our area. All I want is to serve Christ and be with other conservative believers that feel the same way, and I'm getting so desperately confused. I've been praying night and day for over six months for leading and wisdom. I do think that a Reformed church would tend to be more conservative, and I think I agree enough about what I read about it to tend that way. Can anyone offer any insight on any of this convoluted mess I just wrote?

[HappyGrace]

while I've never used the word "elect", I do believe that because God is sovereign, He always of course knew (omniscience) from before time who would be drawn to Him for salvation. I'm still very unsure on the point that He actually chose or "elected" who those people would be. I've always understood that He created us with free will to choose-that He stood at the door waiting for anyone who would knock. He knew ahead of time who would end up knocking, but he didn't pre-choose the knockers, if that makes sense. I am not a Bible scholar by any stretch of the imagination-feel free to point me to what I may be missing!

[dcjlkplus3]

I became a Christian while going to a reformed church, where I met my husband. 14 years later, we are still there and can't imagine being anywhere else. It makes sense to me.

[Jugglin'5]

happygrace-

Maybe if you said what general part of the country you live in, people could PM you and give you church suggestions.

[NevadaRabbit]

That's pretty much what scholars on both sides of the issue say :). Personal interpretation of the context comes into play every time, and even the most staunch Calvinist pastor I've ever encountered admits that there are a few problems with it (scripture we can't be 100% clear about) but that he feels 100% certain that the calvinist interpretation is the right one. I don't think anyone on EITHER side of the issue "blacks out" or totally ignores entire blocks of scripture (that suggestion is highly offensive and is what I was talking about re: arrogance and divisiveness)... they simply interpret differently, and they do so postrate before the Lord in all humility and love, bathed in prayer. Why we come to different conclusions or interpretations about things like this is a mystery to me, but I refuse to believe that anyone is being less careful, less diligent in their studies, less intelligent, less faithful to Christ when their hearts are convicted to accept or reject a mere man's interpretation of scripture.

 

Since I'm the one who said "blacking out chunks of text" in a previous post, I think you might be referring to me. :001_smile:

 

I believe that Scripture only means what Scripture was intended to mean. Fallen mankind does its best (sometimes) to interpret it, and it is only by the Spirit that we understand it. Even then, we see dimly. Vastly different interpretations of a passage of Scripture means somebody has it wrong. It may not mean that somebody has it absolutely right, either; but I think it is a slippery slope to say that varying personal interpretations are all the result of equal caution/diligence in searching the Scriptures. Scripture doesn't flatly contradict itself. I believe we can be sincere in thinking we've got a portion of Scripture all figured out, but we can be wrong. We won't sort it all out until we are face to face with Jesus (and then it won't matter because it will all be so obvious), but until that time, we should keep our hearts teachable, lay down our pride, seek the wisdom of righteous teachers past and present, seek the Spirit's aid, and be very careful in our handling of Scripture. There is a right way and a wrong way to interpret Scripture, which is not a welcome viewpoint in this postmodern culture, but Scripture warns us over and over of this very thing.

[HappyGrace]

I've always been taught that the Holy Spirit draws you to repentance-and you could choose to ignore it or not. That God does get all the glory for salvation because in His grace He provided Christ as the atoning sacrifice.

 

I can see how believing that you are one of the elect would make you more thankful. I feel like I'm on the cusp of understanding and the things we're discussing here are starting to turn some lights on, but I'm still somehow missing it! And I've lived a very "dead" Christian life all my life-I'm definitely missing something!

[angela in ohio]

It was when I understood that, short of God's grace, we all would throng to the gates of Hell, that I finally "got it".

 

The backdrop of the 5 points of Calvinism made Scripture come alive and make complete sense to me. It widens the gap between sinful mankind and holy God; it gives God all the glory and all the credit.

 

Yes, understanding that we are not "drowning" or "dying" in sin, but are flat-out completely DEAD in sin, and that not one of us deserves anything but Hell, was my first step to understanding Reformed theology.

[Kathleen in VA]

I became a Christian while going to a reformed church, where I met my husband. 14 years later, we are still there and can't imagine being anywhere else. It makes sense to me.

 

I had never heard of the Doctrines of Grace until I met my husband 22.5 years ago. I had gone to many, many churches of all sorts. I had spent some time at an Episcopal convent thinking I might want to be a nun. I went to a Plymouth Brethren church, a Southern Baptist church, a charismatic church - all over the place. It wasn't until I met my husband and he explained those wonderful doctrines that I finally had ALL my questions answered and knew I was hearing truth at last. Those doctrines are the only thing that made any sense at all to me up until then.

 

We were married 22 years ago and have been going to the same church all these years. I've never felt a need to search any place else for anything. With the Doctrines of Grace, God gets all the glory, Christ is magnified and man is not.

 

I am so very thankful that God brought me out of all that confusion and frustration and led me to the man I married and the church I am in now. Such peace - such rest.

[Jugglin'5]

I would just say read the first paragraph of Ephesians 1 and Romans 9 for starters. Romans 9 can seem hard, but as a preacher I like to listen says, "Paul had obviously had this conversation in the back of the church after the sermon before, and has his answer ready". :) Hope this helps. If you want to discuss it further please feel free to PM me, because I am not sure this is the right place for this discussion.

 

while I've never used the word "elect", I do believe that because God is sovereign, He always of course knew (omniscience) from before time who would be drawn to Him for salvation. I'm still very unsure on the point that He actually chose or "elected" who those people would be. I've always understood that He created us with free will to choose-that He stood at the door waiting for anyone who would knock. He knew ahead of time who would end up knocking, but he didn't pre-choose the knockers, if that makes sense. I am not a Bible scholar by any stretch of the imagination-feel free to point me to what I may be missing!

[Rosy]

The juxtaposition of God's sovereignty and man's free will in Romans is not attached to the same event, though. God is sovereign in our justification (He chooses and saves whom He pleases - election) but we are then set free from bondage to sin. It is in our sanctification that we must choose whether to walk in the Spirit or in the flesh. Very rough paraphrase of Romans 6: God saved you, freed you from bondage to sin and filled you with the righteousness of Christ (sovereignly). Now go live like it (use your will to live in the new life you've been given)!

 

I totally believe and agree with that--I was referring to Romans 10. The fact that God called and chose me doesn't negate the fact that I must confess with my mouth "the Lord Jesus" and believe in my heart that God raised him from the dead as a response to His drawing me to Himself.:001_smile:

[NevadaRabbit]

I was brought up in a Methodist church, but it really doesn't matter because it was a church-on-Sundays, do your own thing the rest of the week as long as it's moral type. I even went to Christian camp, etc., but somehow it never affected me-I've always been a Christian, but a believe-it-with-my-head Christian.

 

Now I'm trying to find out which end is up-what I really believe for myself. I read this whole thread, including the links and even all the Amazon reviews for the Amazing Grace DVD, trying to figure out the whole Reformed thing. We are between churches after going for years to a large non-denominational, seeker-friendly church. Dh is basically saved and that's about it-tries to be moral but doesn't read his Bible and he doesn't "live for Christ"-just church on Sundays. Very similar to how I was brought up, and even how I've been for the last 15 yrs (after my college years rebellion... but that's another story.)

 

I just believe the Bible, that's all I know. I want to get closer to Christ and live for Him. I know absolutely nothing about church differences, etc. I'm getting so confused about all the denominations and everything. But I'm very conservative and felt uncomfortable in a seeker-friendly church. I think I must be more toward the Reformed view, but when I read those points this morning, I don't like the limited atonement one. However, I can see how it fits with the other four points, as in, why would He have died for all if only the elect needed it.

 

It's overwhelming to me to try to find a church that's a good fit-it's been a year and a half of searching. I'm wondering if a Reformed church would be a good fit, but I don't know how to find a reputable one in our area. All I want is to serve Christ and be with other conservative believers that feel the same way, and I'm getting so desperately confused. I've been praying night and day for over six months for leading and wisdom. I do think that a Reformed church would tend to be more conservative, and I think I agree enough about what I read about it to tend that way. Can anyone offer any insight on any of this convoluted mess I just wrote?

 

I was in your very shoes not too long ago. Draw near to God; He will draw near to you. Trust. The sad state of the church in America is that so many have bought into the mocha in the lobby and milquetoast in the pulpit dumbing-down trend that we must be extremely careful as we seek a local body. Pray, pray, pray. What are your deal-breakers in a church? Look for a pastor who teaches from Scripture, rather than topic-driven sermons - teaching line by line through a book or passage, rather than "new series on finding joy in marriage starting next week!" Look for a church body who loves to worship and praise. I could talk for hours about this but I've got to get our day going here - I will check back later.

[HappyGrace]

I do believe that once we are saved, we are saved. If we choose then the rest of our lives to live in sin, that is works, and can't change the fact that we're saved. I do believe that we should be showing fruit in our "works" as we grow in Christ, but not showing fruit or even living in sin, doesn't change the fact that we're saved. And this does fit with Reformed, it seems like.

 

And that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" does mean that we're totally lost without salvation, and God does get ALL the glory for salvation because of that. Is that the same thing as believing it total depravity? Because the "all running toward hell" thing seems like we're purposely wanting to go toward hell, but I just believe that the original sin permanently separated us from God unless we choose to accept Jesus and be saved.

 

I'm hoping by writing out what I've always been taught, you can help me clarify if I tend toward Reformed or not!

[Paula in MS]

Okay, I am going to ask a question. A big issue for me with reformed theology revolves around these questions. Does God want everyone to be saved? If not, why not? If so, why does he not choose everyone? Does he really love some people more than others? Does he call everyone but choose those who follow him? I am not trying to irritate anyone here. I promise. :001_smile: Back in college, I really explored this issue a lot and read as much scripture as I could on both sides, but coming from a Baptist background, I could never wrap my head around these issues.

 

Is there another way to approach/think about it? How do you think about it?

 

I promise I'm asking for good reasons. Explain it to me knowing that I was raised Baptist. It is really hard to see things from a different side when you were raised a certain way. In all honesty, what you've been "taught" does influence how you interpret scripture.

 

Thanks in advance for enlightening me,

 

Paula

[Melissa in CA]

When you grow up with a bunch of emotional manipulation to get you to really choose God this time' date=' not like last time, when you didn't really mean it, I think one gets a little jumpy. At least that has been my experience.

[/quote']

 

Ok, this was SO me all my life growing up in church! I can't tell you how many aisles I walked, or how many times I asked Jesus to come into my heart. I mean, did He hear me last time? Did I say it right? Was I sincere enough? I had zero assurance of salvation and was always striving away at being a good Christian so God would perhaps notice me enough to hear my prayers. :tongue_smilie:

 

I had NEVER heard of the doctrines of Calvinism in all my life until 7 years ago. I am now 43. I grew up in church and can never recall a time when I did not know who Jesus was or what He had done; that is a long time to be a Christian and not have heard of such essential doctrines the Calvinists espouse.

 

People seem to think that the doctrines of Calvin were his own made up beliefs, but that is not the case at all. They were written down because a heresy had come up in the Church (Pelagism I think...but don't hold me to that as I am going off memory alone) and the church wanted to have the basic BIBLICAL doctrines in written form to stand against (refute) this heresy. This document, or list if you will, later became known as Calvinism. Calvin did not invent the doctrine. These were the beliefs of the early church fathers.

 

When I came to study these Doctrines my life was completely transformed. I don't consider myself a Calvin follower, I consider myself a follower of Christ. TULIP just lit the path in the right direction. ;)

[Jugglin'5]

It would be too difficult for me to try to answer this in a few sentences so here is a short article that does it well:

 

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/desireallsaved.html

 

 

Okay, I am going to ask a question. A big issue for me with reformed theology revolves around these questions. Does God want everyone to be saved? If not, why not? If so, why does he not choose everyone? Does he really love some people more than others? Does he call everyone but choose those who follow him? I am not trying to irritate anyone here. I promise. :001_smile: Back in college, I really explored this issue a lot and read as much scripture as I could on both sides, but coming from a Baptist background, I could never wrap my head around these issues.

 

Is there another way to approach/think about it? How do you think about it?

 

I promise I'm asking for good reasons. Explain it to me knowing that I was raised Baptist. It is really hard to see things from a different side when you were raised a certain way. In all honesty, what you've been "taught" does influence how you interpret scripture.

 

Thanks in advance for enlightening me,

 

Paula

[Erica in PA]

Right, I agree with you! And the others who have responded under me as well. That is my understanding of salvation/election/free will also. What I don't understand is the offense at the word "choose" as Karen and another person posted-- the other poster (sorry, I forget the name offhand) actually said that her church scribbled off the word "choose" from the VBS materials and wrote in something else! There *is* an element of choice, even though it's God who is behind that choice. I just think unless I am missing something else, it is taking things to an extreme to deny that there is *any* choice at all in following Jesus. There is clearly is a choice to be made, but it is guided by God and impossible without Him. I don't see how singing a song called "I Choose Jesus" could be such a problem.

 

Erica

[Erica in PA]

What do we say? What any Christian says. We don't know who God has chosen, and we don't know how he has ordained for them to hear the Word, that's not our problem. But we have been given the task of telling, so we tell. There is always the time to encourage repentence. Always.

 

Right, I believe in election too. What I am specifically questioning is taking it to the point where you are denying that the word "choice" has any role at all in someone becoming a Christian. If you're not presenting the gospel to someone and asking them to "choose" to follow Jesus, what are you doing?

 

Erica

[Jugglin'5]

Oddly enough, Calvin wrote the Institutes to convince King Francis of France to convert to Protestantism and stop persecuting the Huguenots/Protestants. That particular goal did not meet with success, but it obviously met with success in other ways.

 

St. Augustine was the foe of Pelagius. Reformed people are definitely Augustinian in many ways. Luther was an Augustinian monk. Really, I don't think the early reformers had many differences over the God's sovereignty and free grace. Their differences were more sacramental. The Arminian controversy was later.

 

 

 

People seem to think that the doctrines of Calvin were his own made up beliefs, but that is not the case at all. They were written down because a heresy had come up in the Church (Pelagism I think...but don't hold me to that as I am going off memory alone) and the church wanted to have the basic BIBLICAL doctrines in written form to stand against (refute) this heresy. This document, or list if you will, later became known as Calvinism. Calvin did not invent the doctrine. These were the beliefs of the early church fathers.

 

When I came to study these Doctrines my life was completely transformed. I don't consider myself a Calvin follower, I consider myself a follower of Christ. TULIP just lit the path in the right direction. ;)

[Kathleen in VA]

Okay, I am going to ask a question. A big issue for me with reformed theology revolves around these questions. Does God want everyone to be saved? If not, why not? If so, why does he not choose everyone? Does he really love some people more than others? Does he call everyone but choose those who follow him? I am not trying to irritate anyone here. I promise. :001_smile: Back in college, I really explored this issue a lot and read as much scripture as I could on both sides, but coming from a Baptist background, I could never wrap my head around these issues.

 

Is there another way to approach/think about it? How do you think about it?

 

I promise I'm asking for good reasons. Explain it to me knowing that I was raised Baptist. It is really hard to see things from a different side when you were raised a certain way. In all honesty, what you've been "taught" does influence how you interpret scripture.

 

Thanks in advance for enlightening me,

 

Paula

 

The great wonder is not that God saves some and not others. The great wonder is that God saves any at all. We do not deserve his love or mercy or forgiveness. He has chosen to bestow it upon His own, His "sheep" nevertheless. Why? No answer - only He knows that one. That is why I, for one, am so very, very thankful for my salvation. I do not deserve His love or forgiveness, yet in His great mercy and grace He saved me from eternal punishment in hell anyway. By saving those who least deserve it, He gets the most glory. I cannot glory in my goodness because I have none. I am undone and lost apart from His grace.

 

Don't know if I answered your question - but this is what came to mind. Hope it helped at least a little.

[GraceinMD]

While there is scriptural support for election, there is also scriptural support for free will. There is an element of mystery that none of us will comprehend this side of heaven.

 

The only thing I don't like about the division over this issue is when one camp starts accusing the other camp of not being saved.

 

That seems harmful to body of Christ (enemy keeping us divided).

 

 

Some random thoughts (posted under Robin in TX, because she's "safe" :)!

 

My brother said (disclaimer: went to DTS, and I don't know whether this was original to him, but it helped me!) that the whole predestination/free will debate was like a coin - both sides true, but you can't "see" them both at the same time.

 

Another wise friend said (when I was agonizing over this), "You know, there are a LOT of things in Scripture that I *do* understand and don't do, and should be doing, so I try to concentrate on those rather than getting all exercised about who did what when! God is sovereign." Oh. Yup - that ALSO makes a lot of sense (to me).

 

A previous pastor's wise wife said (same time, when I was agonizing over this - how could some NOT be elect), "It comes down to 'I am not more merciful than God'." Well, I can buy THAT!

 

I became a believer in a Southern Baptist church, but now attend an OPC church. But we sit toward the back. :D

 

I don't know that I'll ever be a "true" Calvinist, but I DO know that God is Sovereign, Just, and Merciful. The more I realize my depravity, the more I see His Goodness (which is NOT to say a staunch Arminian doesn't see that, too!).

 

(I had to laugh when a group of us attended the Billy Graham event in Baltimore a yr or so ago - there was some concern over whether the invitation would be "I Have Decided to Follow Jesus.")

 

Remudamom, thanks for posting. Interesting discussion!

(But now, back to work, and to do the things I KNOW I should be doing. Hmph.)

[VaKim]

Here is a link to a whole pile of NT passages on the sovereignty of God, with commentary, if anyone is interested.

 

http://www.redeemedbygrace.org/showthread.php?t=30

[Rosy]

Okay, I am going to ask a question. A big issue for me with reformed theology revolves around these questions. Does God want everyone to be saved? If not, why not? If so, why does he not choose everyone? Does he really love some people more than others? Does he call everyone but choose those who follow him? I am not trying to irritate anyone here. I promise. :001_smile: Back in college, I really explored this issue a lot and read as much scripture as I could on both sides, but coming from a Baptist background, I could never wrap my head around these issues.

 

Is there another way to approach/think about it? How do you think about it?

 

I promise I'm asking for good reasons. Explain it to me knowing that I was raised Baptist. It is really hard to see things from a different side when you were raised a certain way. In all honesty, what you've been "taught" does influence how you interpret scripture.

 

Thanks in advance for enlightening me,

 

Paula

 

This is how I think about it, based on an article by John Piper (I'll see if I can dig it up--I know I sent it to my anti-Calvinist former pastor many years ago! ;) )--regardless of your take on election, not everyone is saved, right? Some are saved and some are lost. And Scripture says that God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, and that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. But God didn't give everyone an automatic free pass, even though He could have. So you have to believe that God's will in salvation exists on two levels--that God wants everyone to be saved, in a sense, but that only some are--either because God was powerless to stop them from being lost, or because God has purposes in electing some that are impossible for us to understand. A Calvinist believes the latter.