Imagine you are a child on Christmas morning, and your father has just placed a gift in your lap to open. As you open it, you quickly realize it is not anything you asked for — yet it is the most interesting and delightful toy you have ever seen. In fact, after all the gifts have been opened, it is your favorite present of all. Did your father force you to like the gift, as if you were a robot?
Did he make you enjoy that gift against your will? But in his wisdom, as he planned for Christmas day, he predetermined to give you that gift out of his gracious love for you, his child. And it was precisely in the giving of the gift that he also gave you the desire for, love of, and joy over the gift.
This is how Calvinists make sense of Ephesians , which talks about faith being a gift from God, not something that originates inside us. God gives us faith in Jesus, but when God gives us that gift it is genuinely our faith — we are doing the believing, out a will that has been renewed by the transforming power of the Spirit. But if God did not give us the gift of faith, we would never believe from hearts. By now, you can probably guess which side of the debate I fall on!
But I do think it is important for Calvinists to be charitable towards our Arminian brothers and sisters, and vice versa. Because of their emphasis on free will, many Calvinists say that Arminians are necessarily man-centered, not God-centered. The most important thing is that all are constantly going to the Scriptures to gain our understanding on this and every doctrine. We need to Scripture to inform and reform our framework, and not force Bible verses into our own framework.
Eric: A good brief summary on Calvinism and and Arminianism but illustrations attempting to describe spiritual truths we cannot understand this side of heaven are always inadequate. We must be careful in what appears to be a good interpretation of the illustration. All illustrations carry predetermined meanings. A case in point is the one used about a gift from father to child at Christmas.
Who is the father? Salvation is of the Lord from first to last. These events all take place in time and space. But preceding them all is what God determined in eternity past. Ephesians tells us that God chose elected certain ones in Christ before the foundation of the world. The Calvinist believes that God's election is unconditional.
That means that almighty God did not base his election upon any good thing such as faith, good works, etc. His election could never be based upon anything inherently attractive or good in fallen man. Every last person that the omniscient God foresaw had inherited Adam's guilt and corruption, was totally depraved, and was choosing to sin.
Hence, every last one of them justly deserved God's holy wrath. God's election is based solely upon his own grace, love, and good pleasure Eph. If God chooses to show mercy to some members of the human race, all of whom justly deserve his judgment, that is grace, and that is his prerogative Rom. Because it depends completely on God, the number of God's elect is certain, definite, and cannot be increased or decreased.
The elect are the Father's gift to Christ. Jesus himself vows that of all the Father gives to him, he will not lose any John Since the elect are sinners both by nature and by choice, and since God is a holy God who will not tolerate sin, but must judge it, a substitutionary atonement needed to be made in order to reconcile God to his elect. And so, the Calvinist does not believe that Jesus Christ died for all men indiscriminately, but that he laid down his life for the elect, his sheep, his church John ; ; Eph.
This explains why the Holy Spirit must do his regenerating work in a person before he is able to repent and believe in Christ.
In his natural, fallen mind, man is hostile toward God Rom. Until the Holy Spirit sovereignly replaces a sinner's heart of stone with a heart of flesh, he will continue to be spiritually impervious to the gospel Rom. The Calvinist believes that every last one of those who were chosen in Christ before time will by the end of time be brought to saving faith and a vital relationship with God through the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ! At this point, the non-Calvinist infers that the impetus and urgency to proclaim the gospel is gone, or diminished at best.
After all, if God knows who is going to be saved, and if he will save his elect no matter what, why waste our time evangelizing? But it is important to recognize that the God of the Bible ordains not only the end salvation but also the means to the end the proclamation of the gospel. The diversity of various Reformed and Arminian groups must also be noted.
Both groups encompass charismatics as well as cessationists, and many other expressions of theological difference. This paper intends to identify in a respectful and irenic spirit the areas of agreement and difference, offering a basis for increased conversation, understanding, and also reasoned disagreement.
Many among us have learned much in study and dialogue with esteemed Reformed teachers and friends whom we appreciate and admire, though we have come to different conclusions on certain aspects of personal salvation. Reformed theology is often called Calvinism, after John Calvin — This designation is not entirely accurate.
Many ideas associated with Reformed thinking find expression in the writings of Augustine more than a thousand years earlier. Thus, much of what is called Calvinism, or Reformed theology, actually developed after Calvin died. The position most typically held in the Assemblies of God is called Arminianism, after Jacobus Arminius — Arminianism would receive further development by John Wesley, and some may be more familiar with and accepting of the Wesleyan rather than the Arminian label.
Arminius had been a student of Beza and was commended by him. In the process of defending Reformed concepts, he ended up disagreeing with Calvin and Beza on the topics of irresistible grace, predestination, and free will. Reformed theologians responded at length at the Synod of Dort about nine years later with a document called Canons of Dort. Not all Reformed scholars agree that these Five Points precisely convey the Canons, but they are a useful framework to express the essential differences between the classic Arminian and Reformed positions.
John and Charles Wesley became prominent supporters of Arminian theology, bringing it into a dominant position in American theology. Even so, Wesley and Whitefield were friends and coworkers, their theological differences notwithstanding. Others are more Reformed, an increasingly accepted position for many younger Southern Baptist pastors.
Reformed thinkers have produced a greater volume of writing, particularly in theology. That is, human experience and our understanding of God and Scripture agree to the point that the Arminian stance does not require the creation of a complex theological system to justify an evangelistic appeal to all persons.
T - Total Depravity: every person is enslaved by sin and unable to choose God. Both Arminian and Reformed thinkers agree on this issue of human inability to save oneself.
No mainline system of Arminian or Wesleyan theology believes that persons are of themselves able to enter into right relationship with Him. U - Unconditional Election: God has chosen from eternity those He will save.
This choice is based solely in His mercy rather than any foreseen merit or faith in those chosen. By not choosing the others, God thus also chooses to withhold mercy from some, effectively condemning them by this choice. All humans will ultimately bear responsibility not only for their condition prior to this response but also for their acceptance or rejection of this enabling grace.
L - Limited Atonement: the death of Christ paid the price only for the sins of the elect. This limitation does not mean that the atonement of Christ is not sufficient to save all, but it is intended only for the elect.
0コメント