More Free Will Notes
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
27 February 2010
Sleep Like A Calvinist
The following is not meant to be an attack on Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church, just an observation on how some pastors take an otherwise
good message and ruin it by interjecting a personal and non-biblical opinion which sadly detracts from it.
Recently I watched a video titled "Am I Elect?" in which Mark Driscoll answered the following text message question, "A friend heard this
sermon and is doubting her faith. I think it's an attack from Satan how can I encourage her?"
Driscoll’s response was "Revelation 12:10 says that Satan is the accuser of the children of God and he accuses them day and night.
Satan loves to get Christians to doubt in the goodness of God."
So far so good, I agree with this initial response, it is absolutely correct.
But then he adds a hypothetical question that was not asked in the text message, "Some of you may be here asking this question 'Am I Elect?’
The Bible does say that we should work out our salvation with fear and trembling. We should ponder whether or not we do know
Jesus...I will say this: you know you are elect if you care about it..."
When Driscoll states how Satan tries to get people to doubt their salvation I am in agreement. Satan spiritually attacks all believers; my guess is
he doesn't have to waste his time on non-believers.
What I object to is Mark Driscoll turning this into a veiled attempt to work Calvinism into the discussion. All believers are the elect, however
when a Calvinist starts talking about “the elect” he is referring to those who were predestined to accept Jesus. The second part of his statement
where he says ‘if it bothers you’ then you are one of the elect is unbiblical and unsupported by the scriptures. It is opinion. I am not saying it’s
wrong. I am saying he should not make the statement with absolute authority. It may be true at times and at other times it may not be. There are
people who because of spiritual attacks doubt their salvation that truly are saved, but there are people who doubt their salvation for good reason,
they have never accepted Jesus and think they are saved by being a good person or all roads lead to home.
Driscoll's response is a Calvinistic Kum-baya good feeling, almost New Age, answer. Driscoll then says "If you love Jesus then you are one of
the elect." Again no disagreement from me here except I don't think Mark Driscoll and I have the same understanding of the elect.
To say "Oh, if it troubles you then you are one of the elect" may or may not be true, but it has nothing to do with Calvinism, which he
specifically injects a few moments later in the video. The elect are not those who were predestined to believe in Jesus as their Savior but are
those who heard about Jesus and came to accept Him as Lord and Savior, period. All believers are the elect. This has nothing to do with
Calvinism one way or the other except that Calvinism teaches a person is one of the elect before he accepts Christ as Lord and Savior while
those in the non-Calvinist camp teach that a person becomes one of the elect when they accept Jesus as Lord and Savior. See http://www.
freewill-predestination.com/election.html.
Where I really lose Mark Driscoll is at the end of the video. Driscoll states "if your friend is struggling with this what I would encourage her
to do is to not look at her sin, but to look at her Savior, and to not listen to Satan's accusations, but to listen to God's word and to
search her heart to see if she does love Jesus and if she does she should sleep like a Calvinist."
Once again I agree with the first part of his answer, but I disagree with him when he gets into the weeds. I am glad that I DO NOT “sleep like a
Calvinist.” The sad truth is John Calvin doubted his salvation, even his own last will shows he lacked assurance of his salvation. R.C. Sproul
admitted he was “terrified” when he wondered if perhaps he was “not one of the redeemed.” Why did they doubt? They doubted because
Calvinism teaches that God gives some people “false salvation.” The Calvinist wonders "How do I know if I have saving salvation or if I
have been given false salvation?" Apparently one can’t know, until the end of their life and then examine their works. How would you like to
be on your death bed wondering, “Did I do enough to know that I am one of the elect? What if it was not enough? What if I was given
false salvation because God doesn't want me in heaven?” Again, I am thankful that I don’t sleep like a Calvinist; I wouldn’t wish that on
anyone. For more on Calvinism and assurance of salvation read http://www.freewill-predestination.com/works.html.
Mark Discoll went to the opposite extreme of what Calvin believed, claiming matter of factly that if you are concerned about your salvation then
you are one of the elect. The implication being, if you are one of the elect, you are a Calvinist. But Driscoll is just as wrong as John Calvin.
One other thing… if Mark Driscoll believes in Calvinism then his earlier statement “Satan loves to get Christians to doubt in the goodness of
God” is either meaningless or he does not believe what he is saying. After all if a person’s actions are predetermined by God then Satan has no
effect one way or the other in getting a person to doubt God. Gee isn’t that comforting and reassuring?
It is such a shame that Mark Driscoll took a legitimate concern and provided an otherwise excellent answer and then ruined it by putting a
Reformed Theology spin on it to advance the Calvinist cause.
9 January 2010
Is It Really True That All You Have To Do Is Believe?
"...Now, some people say well yes, but if you even believe, then you can take credit for believing, therefore God must regenerate you first and
make you believe. There is no work in believing. There is no credit to me. If I believe something that is true, do I get any credit for the truth that
I believe and that faith is not a work? Very clearly the Bible distinguishes it. For example, Romans 4:5, Paul says, “Now, to him that worketh
not, but believeth….” So, believing is not a work, it is nothing that I can take credit for..."
Source: Dave Hunt's Search the Scriptures Daily Program #0801d: http://www.thebereancall.org/node/836
Yep, claiming that believing is earning your salvation is like me believing the winning team actually won the Super Bowl and therefore I had a
hand in the event because I accepted it as truth…
28 December 2009
Disproves Total Depravity
7 December 2009
Experiencing God Day By Day by Henry Blackaby
Devotion for Thursday, December 03, 2009 http://www.christianbook.com/html/devotion/experiencinggodblackaby_64.html
1 November 2009
There is no denying that God is in complete control. However some people think that means God "causes" everything to happen. The fact is while
He is in indeed control, God lets things happen that He did not cause to happen. Some things He approves of while other things He does not
approve of, yet still allows to happen. God allows things to happen because we live in a sin filled fallen world and he gave us free will, but He's
still in control.
24 October 2009
Ironside on Calvinism
"Turn to your Bible and read for yourself in the only two chapters in which this word predestinate or predestinated is found. The first is Romans
8:29-30, the other chapter is Ephesians 1:5 and 11. You will note that there is no reference in these four verses to either heaven or hell but to
Christ-likeness eventually. Nowhere are we told in scripture that God predestinated one man to be saved and another to be lost. Men are to be
saved or lost eternally because of their attitude towards the Lord Jesus Christ. Predestination means that someday all the redeemed shall become
just like the Lord Jesus"
"D.L. Moody used to put it very simply the elect are the 'whosoever wills' the non-elect 'whosoever wont's'. This is exactly what scripture
teaches, the invitation is to all, those who accept it are the elect. Remember, we are never told that Christ died for the elect".
"Whosoever means, whosoever." Only a biased theologian, with an axe to grind, could ever think that it meant only the elect."
--H.A. Ironside
http://www.thebereancall.org/node/8145
6 October 2009
There is an old familiar illustration which says that the same sun will melt the wax but harden the clay. It is the character of, or the condition of, the
element and not the sun that melts the wax and hardens the clay. God is not going to harden you. He did not harden Pharaoh's heart. Pharaoh
already possessed a hard heart, and God only brought that fact out into the open.—J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible commentary on Luke.
10 July 2009
Today is the Reformed Theology crowd is celebrating the 500th birthday of John Calvin. At least it's just candles that are burning today...
On the Calvinist websites I've looked at all of Calvin's admirers are claiming there would have been no Reformation without men like Zwingli,
Luther and Calvin. How little trust in God these people have. Also they ignore the fact that there several facets to the Reformation, see Radical
Reformation vs Magisterial Reformation
The truth is Christians had opposed the errors of the Catholic church for centuries, people who had never belonged to the Roman or Eastern
Church. Even within the Roman Church (or out of) many years before "the Reformation" Christians were trying to reform the Catholic church, so
lets not give Luther or Calvin all the credit. The trail was already blazed.
3 July 2009
Present at the Synod of Dort in 1618 was Bishop John Davenant (1572-1641) from England who said:
2 July 2009
OK, so you're to blame if God predestines you for hell. That's confusing and God is not the author of confusion.
Contrast this to H.A. Ironside:
27 June 2009
Calvinists say regarding free will "if you have the ability when you are lost to accept Jesus, then you can reject also Jesus after you're saved"
which nullifies "you can’t lose you salvation” and “once saved always saved.”
Actually that's a pretty lame argument because I could just as well say, "Since God is sovereign over all, that even though God determines who
will be saved, that because He is Sovereign, God could change His mind and decide that someone who was saved is no longer saved, no longer
one of the elect, "for His own good pleasure."" Where is the eternal security in that?
26 June 2009
I have added a new page that explains how the doctrine of predestination is a doctrine of works, see Predestination & Assurance of Salvation.
It's deals with the Calvinistic notion of God having two conflicting wills (God wants everyone to be saved but still predestines some for hell)
and how, according to John Calvin, God gives some people false faith so that you cannot know if you are one of the elect or not.
5 May 2009
Note: my commentary for 3 May will be more meaningful if you have already read John Calvin: The Unchanged, The Golden Rule, and Radical
Reformation vs. Magisterial Reformation.
3 May 2009
Calvinists and Reformed Theology purposely and completely sweep the negative aspects of the lives and doctrine of men like John Calvin and
Martin Luther under the rug, and nearly out of history. The non-Calvinists are told they are too critical, focusing on the wrong things and ignoring
the accomplishments and contributions of “the Reformers.”
Let me tell you about a man who was not born into wealth or privilege and was a decorated war veteran, in fact he was twice decorated for
bravery. Due to his humble beginnings he got into politics from the ground floor, he had a gift for winning people over to his side. This man
became a great orator and bestselling author; he had a sense of history and vision that others not dare dream. This man took action that brought
a nation that was mired in total economic ruin, chaos and world-wide depression and restored it to order and prosperity and in doing so
prevented Communism from taking over his adoptive country and the rest of Europe. This man changed the outlook of the country from being
beat down and transformed it to where it was proud again, full of hope and optimism for the future. This man built modern highways, got the
trains running on time again and improved national security by rebuilding a shattered and demoralized military. This man even became the head of
the church and installed like minded church leaders to ensure continuity and prevent division, bickering, and needless dissention. This man wanted
other countries to experience the great things his country benefited from and brought them into the fold, after all fewer borders would ultimately
ensure true peace.
Admittedly this man took exceptionally strong, you could even say harsh, measures to deal with those who obstructed his plans for the nation and
purged those who were a drain or contaminant on society. But you have to remember things had been so horrible before he came along that we
must overlook some of these things and not judge him by today’s standards. The important thing is to not focus on the negative parts of this man's
life but to build on the parts he got right. After all, as demonstrated above, Adolf got a lot of things right… didn’t he? Of course I don't believe
this but am using it as an illustration.
The whole point here is when you cast your lot with someone and their beliefs you cannot ignore the harmful actions of these men. Many today
tell you what a great biblical exegete John Calvin was and quietly go to great lengths to hide the dark side of John Calvin and those like-minded.
Defenders of John Calvin claim if you reject Calvinism you reject the gospel. Some in Reformed Theology are even trying to recreate John Calvin’
s Geneva in Florida, yet many would be followers have no idea what life was like in John Calvin’s Geneva.
It always astounds me when I hear people proudly proclaim, “I am a Calvinist” or the less bold who say, “I am a Calvinist, but not a Five Point
Calvinist” or "I'm not a hyper-Calvinist." Why be any kind of Calvinist? I follow the Lord Jesus and no other. Calvinism or Reformed Theology
explain or add absolutely nothing to the gospel of Christ that I cannot get from reading the scriptures, heeding the nudging of the Holy Spirit, and
believing, without the help of John Calvin or Reformed Theology who claim, “if you’re not a Calvinist you can’t understand the gospel.” There is
no risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you focus solely on the scriptures and have nothing to do with Calvinism or Reformed
Theology and what they bring to the table as the basis for explaining the gospel or for developing, defending, and enforcing doctrine.
30 April 2009
Extremes
On the one side you have Universalism that says Jesus died for the sins on everyone and that everyone is saved when you believe on him or not.
On the other side you have Calvinism and Reformed Theology that says Jesus died only for a few select people that were predetermined to
be saved and everyone else was created specifically to spend eternity in hell.
The truth is Jesus died for all, but every person has to make a personal decision to repent and accept God's free gift. God wants a saving
relationship with every one.
21 April 2009
Anyone who has read my whole website knows I have recommended to material from Ray Vander Laan and others who do a wonderful job of
explaining Jesus and His ministry in context of First Century Judaism that we with our Greek thinking overlook or just don't get and unfortunately
miss. There are so many things that we read in the Bible and miss the significance of. The following is just one of many example (Vander Laan is
by no means suggesting we need to become Jewish first, he merely uses these things as illustrations). At the last Passover Seder (which we call
the Last Supper) that Jesus celebrated before his crucifixion the Bible tells us:
Most of us assume that Jesus is just alluding to the blood that would be shed on the cross for the remission of our sins, and that much is true. But
for first century Jews it had additional meaning, something they would have recognized. The following is from the April 1999 Focus on the
Family Magazine:
His Body His Blood by Ray Vander Lann
In the first century, when a young Jewish man reached marrying age and his family selected an appropriate wife for him, the young man and his
father would meet the young woman and her father to negotiate the "bride price," the figurative cost of replacing a daughter. The price was
usually very high.
With negotiations complete, the custom was for the young man's father to pour a cup of wine and hand it to his son. His son would turn to the
young woman, lift the cup and hold it out to her, saying, "This cup is a new covenant in my blood, which I offer to you." In other words, "I
love you, and I'll give you my life. Will you marry me?"
The young woman had a choice. She could take the cup and return it and say no. Or she could answer without saying a word-by drinking the
cup, her way of saying, "I accept your offer, and I give you my life in response."
On the night of the Last Supper, Jesus and His disciples sat together celebrating Passover. The disciples knew the liturgy very well; they had
celebrated Passover all their lives. When it came time to drink the third cup of wine, the cup of redemption, Jesus lifted the cup as the disciples
would expect and offered traditional Seder thanks, which are used to this day: "Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, for
giving us the fruit of the vine."
And then He offered it to them but said something they probably didn't expect: "This cup is a new covenant in my blood, which I offer to you."
There are many meanings to that statement, but one of them, in common, ordinary language, was, "I love you, and the only picture I can think
of that will describe the power of my love for you is the pure love of a husband for his wife."
It's hard to know what those disciples thought that night. Maybe a few chuckled a bit at the picture of Jesus making a marriage proposal, which
must have seemed totally out of place in a Passover Seder. And yet, they may have understood Jesus' willingness to die, be buried, and
eventually raised to say, "I love you, and as my Father promised your fathers, I'll pay the price for you."
Whenever Christians celebrate the Lord's Supper, we must be mindful of Jesus' offer. He still says, "I love you." He still says, "I offer you my
life. Will you be my bride?" The taking of the cup is a solemn moment, for it is in that moment that one looks to the Heavenly Father and says,
"Yes, I accept your love, and I give you my life in response."
also see by Ray Vander Laan:
Marriage Customs http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=1608
Wedding Plans http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=2096
Jesus the Bridegroom http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=2097
Seder and Marriage http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=1642
Also see “Echoes of His Presence” by Ray Vander Laan, Zondervan Publishing House, 1996, Chapter 2, p. 15
I'm not suggesting that Dr. Tverberg is on one side or the other in the debate over Predestination and Free Will. I just like the articles:
Here's some good and enjoyable reading that has nothing to do with the Calvinism vs. Free Will debate. These books put many of the things we
read in the Bible that seem mundane, inconsequential or unimportant in context of first century Judaism and Christianity. If you like Ray Vander
Laan you'll enjoy these. These are not mystical Kabbalah type books.
Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective - David Bivin & Roy Blizzard
New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus: Insights from His Jewish Context - David Bivin
Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus: How the Jewishness of Jesus Can Transform Your Faith (Hardcover) -Ann Spangler & Lois Tverberg
Who is this god of this age blinding the minds of unbelievers? John Calvin, Boettner, Palmer, Pink, and Sproul got it wrong.
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of
the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the
cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great
love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions--it is by grace you have been saved.
Ephesians 2:1-5
Ah! But you say, "what about Mark 4:12, John 12:40, Romans 11:8-10?" Those types of arguments were covered in my link to Romans
Chapter 9, Because God is sovereign, He can use everything for His purpose, even what the god of this age intends for our harm.
11 February 2009
26 January 2009
Is God the Cause of sin?
Despite the honesty of Calvinism by these men, many in Reformed Theology are not willing to concede/admit that Reformed Theology teaches
God actually created sin or causes man to sin. Yet, all Calvinists, whether they know it or not, do believe that God created sin and that He causes
man to sin.
who accept His gift of salvation.
the logical conclusion of Reformed Theology is that God created sin and caused the people He specifically created to sin in order that He could
send them to their predestined place in eternity.
the lost to sin to ensure they ended up in their proper place. Therefore to be a Calvinist and/or believe in predestination, a Calvinist has to believe
(perhaps subconsciously) that God created sin and causes man to sin.
The Bible tells us not only that God hates sin but also that Satan tempts us and causes us to sin…
16 November 2008
Cafeteria Calvinists
The hyper-Calvinist says that God loves only the Elect and created the non-elect for the sole purpose of sending them to hell for His glory. A
hyper-Calvinist is simply an honest Calvinist. Nothing more and nothing less.
Martin Luther, and John Calvin, not someone who came along afterwards and changed or added to what the founders of this doctrine espoused
and drawing logical conclusions (in other words connecting the dots). To deny hyper-Calvinism (that is true Calvinism) is to claim that it is
extreme. Calling the founders of Calvinism extremists or hyper is like calling Mohammed a radical or extremist Muslim. How can it be hyper
or extreme anything when the very words and arguments of the founders are used?
mean they agree a lot with Calvin but not that certain people were predestined for hell. Others when they say they are not hyper-Calvinists mean
that God does predetermine who will be saved but reject the idea that God causes starvation, rapes and murders or deviant behavior in people.
Regardless of what they mean, when they deny they are hyper-Calvinists they consider themselves to be moderate Calvinists.
For some, the moderate Calvinist says God loves everyone, but still sends those who are not the Elect (that He predestined) to hell for eternal
torment and damnation. That difference is just splitting hairs as the end result is the same. A moderate Calvinist is basically uncomfortable with the
idea that God created some people whom he doesn't love, after all God is love. I haven't met a true moderate Calvinist yet who didn't revert
back into hyper-Calvinism when backed into a corner.
between moderate and four-point Calvinists. The distinctions presented here are my own, based on discussions with Calvinist friends and reading
Reformed Theology websites, and are used here for the sake of illustration and discussion.
Someone who claims they are a Calvinist but who rejects one or more petals of TULIP. It's not always the same petal that is removed. One petal
that is perhaps most often removed by four-point Calvinists is “Limited Atonement”, the idea that God only wants a certain number of people
saved and the rest were specifically created to spend eternity in hell. Like a person walking down a cafeteria line, some four point (and even three
point) Calvinists may reject limited atonement or other petals (depending on what they find distasteful or objectionable)of TULIP, that is to say
Calvinism.
destroy it and so, if they want to be honest about their position, they must revert back to hyper-Calvinism, or reject Calvinism altogether.
or Augustine to determine doctrine or explain Biblical principles to us. Just because a broken clock is correct twice a day doesn’t mean we
should set our own clocks by it.
Knock knock (no joke)
5 Nov 2008
If we have to give an account for our actions then clearly we are responsible for our actions and obviously have free will. If our actions were
predetermined we would not be responsible for them.
So how can one “contend for the faith” if, as Reform Theology insists, that faith was arbitrarily given or withheld according to God's “good
pleasure”?
they were written of beforehand. The word ordained is prographo, meaning "to write beforehand." It simply means that other writers
had sounded the warning about apostates. —J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible
Sovereignty: “Causes” vs. “Uses”
actually limits God's sovereignty.
things for His purpose and glory.
limited, threatened or compromised. God is always in control and this is a good example of how even with free will God's sovereignty is not
threatened but actually demonstrates just how Sovereign He is.
is sovereignty.
can only accomplish His will by predetermining, before time, every action every person makes, even sin.
every action of every person and decides in advance who will fry and who will not, that is not sovereignty.
always accomplished. That is sovereignty!
If God predestined some specifically to sin and bound them for eternal damnation then He would have done so because He took pleasure in it,
not out of some unknowable sense of justice or holiness. This is not the God of Abraham, it is the god of Islam, who according to the Koran,
created sin.
Genesis tells us God did not create sin. Everything He created was and is good, though Reformed Theology tells us only God can determine what
is good and we should not presume to determine for God what is good and what is evil.
and does not resort to trickery. God is extremely clear about what he wants for us and what He expects of us. Isn't that wonderful?
therefore, it wouldn't be sin would it?
The Unpardonable Sin
Reformed Theology talks about "irresistible" Grace, yet that doesn't quite square "the unpardonable sin" which is rejecting the call from the
Holy Spirit.
"The unforgivable sin of speaking against the Holy Spirit has been interpreted in various ways, but the true meaning cannot contradict
other Scripture. It is unequivocally clear that the one unforgivable sin is permanently rejecting Christ (John 3:18; 3:36). Thus, speaking
against the Holy Spirit is equivalent to rejecting Christ with such finality that no future repentance is possible. 'My spirit shall not
always strive with man,' God said long ago (Genesis 6:3). ...In the context of this particular passage (Matthew 12:22-32), Jesus had
performed a great miracle of creation, involving both healing and casting out a demon, but the Pharisees rejected this clear witness of
the Holy Spirit. Instead they attributed His powers to Satan, thus demonstrating an attitude permanently resistant to the Spirit, and to
the deity and saving Gospel of Christ"
[Henry M. Morris, The Defender's Study Bible (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Bible Publishers, 1995), emphasis added.]. www.christiananswers.
net/q-eden/unpardonablesin.html
I just read on a Reformed Theology website an article warning how the spread of Islam in Europe was going to overtake Europe if people didn't
"do" something to stop the spread.
Theology or Predestination after all, because if he did whether Europe is taken over by Islam or not would mean that the outcome was
predetermined and that we can't "do" anything to combat it because it is God's will.
have a choice to make!
God uses Christians to appeal to nonbelievers
Paul tells us:
If we have no choice in accepting or rejecting God's salvation then why is God using Christians to make His appeal to non-believers? If it's
already been determined then no appealing is required. So once again we see that we do indeed have free will to accept or reject God's gift of
salvation.
Calvinists "GOTCHA" Questions
He want to do that?"
other side can use the limitation in their favor.
complicate a simple issue by oversimplifying the issues. "GOTCHA" questions are carefully skewed to give a limited response.
the questions the way the Scribes and Pharisees anticipated (as those who are responding to Calvinists challenges should not be coerced into
doing either); rather they gave a reasoned response that basically rephrased the issue correctly.
The questions should be “Who gets credit for your salvation?” and the answer is God because Jesus died and paid the price for my sin.
Looking for credit for the decision on my part is silly as a decision is required. Getting "credit" is not the issue. Yet Calvinists will always claim
that “accepting” is “earning.” See further explanation in b.
decision to make. If I refused the line the fault of my death would be mine… unless you're a Calvinist in which case it wouldn't be my fault
because I had no choice (though Calvinists will still tell you it was indeed your fault even though you had no choice to grab or not to grab the line,
your fate was already decided.)
In Matthew 14:28-31 Peter did not walk on the water by his own power, but by the power from Jesus. Peter was doing fine until he took his
eyes off Jesus and his doubt got the better of him. Peter was saved (from drowning) after he called out to Jesus. Jesus was there all the time and
available.
This is an either/or question that seeks to distract from the real issue. They go hand in hand and cannot be separated. God approaches everyone
and everyone has the same decision to make, to accept God's gift or not.
Calvinists are asking the wrong questions purposely to create confusion and doubt.
Nothing.
b. Did God create sin?
c. Why did God create man?
d. Did God create "sinful" man?
No. Man was created in God's image, therefore He would not have created sinful, evil men, unless you're willing to say that is God's image too,
something I'm not willing to do. The Bible tells us:
Sin is a consequence to allowing free will, and because God loved man so much He provided for man's salvation.
e. Do people ever do things that God tells them not to do? If so what is the result? Reward or punishment?
Death is the result of sin and disobedience and entered God's creation when Adam and Eve disobeyed God.
Some who follow Reformed Theology say “who are we to say what's good and what's not? If God makes us do something it is not for us to
decide if it's good or not.” In effect they tell us if God caused us to do something (sin) then it must be a good thing....
plan for us. It is our instructions for living in this world.
Living in a fallen world
I've heard many people at church mention after they have recovered from a cold or flu that it was OK to be sick because God caused it to
happen for a reason. They will tell you the “only” reason they were sick was because it was God's will. That is indeed a possibility, sometimes
illness is a means God uses to get our attention and coax us into a certain place or action. But it is also a possibility that their cold or flu, or even
something serious like cancer or a woman being raped is not caused by God but is sometimes merely the result of living in a fallen world.
[Now notice that all things are working together for good for them "who are the called" ones, and it is "according to his purpose." This is
something that is hard for a great many people to swallow. "The called" are those who not only have received an invitation, they have accepted it.
—J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible]
I have benefited from calamitous events that I don't think that God caused, the events could have been the result of living in a fallen world or by
my poor choices. But because God is all-powerful, thankfully, He is able to use the worst of events for His glory and our good.
Testing
The purpose of our lives on earth is to glorify God and part of that involves having a personal relationship with Him, just as it will be in heaven.
could also call it a refining process, like gold and silver, to get rid of impurities so that it does not enter heaven…
the test. Put another way some people in the exact same situation reject God and some realize their dependence on Him. Both were given the
same opportunity.
their need for God. Yet others pass this test and always realize their need for God. According to Jesus this is the hardest test and yet people jest
that this is the test they would rather face. Perhaps. But viewed from the standpoint that it's eternity, not our brief time in this life, that we're talking
about maybe we should think twice about desiring this test.
every person attending was probably a Calvinist to some degree. Belief in inerrancy, substitutionary atonement, divine omniscience and
the perseverance of those who accept Christ all owe something to Calvinism.”
died or his erroneous doctrine, absolutly nothing. We owe it to God the Father for creating us and loving us and giving us free will, we owe God
the Son for taking on our sin and we owe the Holy Spirit and the scriptures God gave us to guide us. Our understanding of the nature of God is
not in any way dependent or "owed" to Calvinism. I'd say that every person attending that conference probably believed in free will deep down
because Calvinists spend so much time trying to “convince” everyone they are right and you can't convince someone unless they have free will."
In everything I've read Mohler brushes off the negatives of John Calvin and says "yeah, but he gave us this....!" Calvin gave us nothing but bad
doctrine, I owe Calvinism nothing.
Disobeying God
To me the definition of “sin” * is being disobedient to God. Being disobedient or being obedient means we have free will. After all if we are
predestined to sin then we are in fact obeying God and therefore we are not being disobedient and if we're not disobedient then we are not
sinning.
not to do, who are we to say it's bad? They will tell you if God caused us to do something He commanded us not to do then it is not bad but is in
fact good. Oy vey! How's that for convoluted reasoning?
God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their
own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.
Romans 10:1-4
God has already determined who will be saved." He did however say that it was Christ that makes us righteous "for everyone who believes."
It is Christ's death, burial, and resurrection that makes us righteous. But we have to believe it in order to take advantage of it. Then Paul
continues: For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture
says,
It doesn't get much clearer than this. We have a choice to make from our heart and the Lord's blessing are available "to all who call on him" again
based on what is in our heart. We can harden our heart or we can open it to God.
On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther nailed his "The Ninety-five Theses" to the door of the Wittenberg Castle Church. This was indeed a
historically significant event. However, many people think that Martin Luther started the Reformation but as you can see in Dave Hunt’s article
the efforts to reform the church and keep it on the right track had been an going activity well before Martin Luther:
_______________________________________________________
Too often a pastor will come into a new church by hiding their true doctrine and agenda with the intent to "slowly bring the congregation
along" to the idea of Reformed Theology, or in other words Calvinism. A hidden agenda is disingenuous and deceptive at best. When directly
asked about their position they dance around the issue and claim "I believe in the sovereignty of God" and avoid using the words "Reformed
Theology" or "Calvinism" or "predestination". Well, I too believe in the sovereignty of God, so it is a moot point. The other answer given is "I am
not a Five Point Calvinist." What does that mean? Explain why you are any sort of Calvinist at all, there are Calvinists today who believe that if
you deny Calvinism you deny the Gospel. If you have to dance around a direct question and parse your words, is that not being deceptive?
Come on men, "Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'". If you have to hide your true convictions and intentions there is something
inherently disturbing about that.
In 2004 baptistfire.com Dr. Paige Patterson, president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary said:
Dr. Danny Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, made a similar point in SBC Life:
Sleep Like A Calvinist
The following is not meant to be an attack on Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church, just an observation on how some pastors take an otherwise
good message and ruin it by interjecting a personal and non-biblical opinion which sadly detracts from it.
Recently I watched a video titled "Am I Elect?" in which Mark Driscoll answered the following text message question, "A friend heard this
sermon and is doubting her faith. I think it's an attack from Satan how can I encourage her?"
Driscoll’s response was "Revelation 12:10 says that Satan is the accuser of the children of God and he accuses them day and night.
Satan loves to get Christians to doubt in the goodness of God."
So far so good, I agree with this initial response, it is absolutely correct.
But then he adds a hypothetical question that was not asked in the text message, "Some of you may be here asking this question 'Am I Elect?’
The Bible does say that we should work out our salvation with fear and trembling. We should ponder whether or not we do know
Jesus...I will say this: you know you are elect if you care about it..."
When Driscoll states how Satan tries to get people to doubt their salvation I am in agreement. Satan spiritually attacks all believers; my guess is
he doesn't have to waste his time on non-believers.
What I object to is Mark Driscoll turning this into a veiled attempt to work Calvinism into the discussion. All believers are the elect, however
when a Calvinist starts talking about “the elect” he is referring to those who were predestined to accept Jesus. The second part of his statement
where he says ‘if it bothers you’ then you are one of the elect is unbiblical and unsupported by the scriptures. It is opinion. I am not saying it’s
wrong. I am saying he should not make the statement with absolute authority. It may be true at times and at other times it may not be. There are
people who because of spiritual attacks doubt their salvation that truly are saved, but there are people who doubt their salvation for good reason,
they have never accepted Jesus and think they are saved by being a good person or all roads lead to home.
Driscoll's response is a Calvinistic Kum-baya good feeling, almost New Age, answer. Driscoll then says "If you love Jesus then you are one of
the elect." Again no disagreement from me here except I don't think Mark Driscoll and I have the same understanding of the elect.
To say "Oh, if it troubles you then you are one of the elect" may or may not be true, but it has nothing to do with Calvinism, which he
specifically injects a few moments later in the video. The elect are not those who were predestined to believe in Jesus as their Savior but are
those who heard about Jesus and came to accept Him as Lord and Savior, period. All believers are the elect. This has nothing to do with
Calvinism one way or the other except that Calvinism teaches a person is one of the elect before he accepts Christ as Lord and Savior while
those in the non-Calvinist camp teach that a person becomes one of the elect when they accept Jesus as Lord and Savior. See http://www.
freewill-predestination.com/election.html.
Where I really lose Mark Driscoll is at the end of the video. Driscoll states "if your friend is struggling with this what I would encourage her
to do is to not look at her sin, but to look at her Savior, and to not listen to Satan's accusations, but to listen to God's word and to
search her heart to see if she does love Jesus and if she does she should sleep like a Calvinist."
Once again I agree with the first part of his answer, but I disagree with him when he gets into the weeds. I am glad that I DO NOT “sleep like a
Calvinist.” The sad truth is John Calvin doubted his salvation, even his own last will shows he lacked assurance of his salvation. R.C. Sproul
admitted he was “terrified” when he wondered if perhaps he was “not one of the redeemed.” Why did they doubt? They doubted because
Calvinism teaches that God gives some people “false salvation.” The Calvinist wonders "How do I know if I have saving salvation or if I
have been given false salvation?" Apparently one can’t know, until the end of their life and then examine their works. How would you like to
be on your death bed wondering, “Did I do enough to know that I am one of the elect? What if it was not enough? What if I was given
false salvation because God doesn't want me in heaven?” Again, I am thankful that I don’t sleep like a Calvinist; I wouldn’t wish that on
anyone. For more on Calvinism and assurance of salvation read http://www.freewill-predestination.com/works.html.
Mark Discoll went to the opposite extreme of what Calvin believed, claiming matter of factly that if you are concerned about your salvation then
you are one of the elect. The implication being, if you are one of the elect, you are a Calvinist. But Driscoll is just as wrong as John Calvin.
One other thing… if Mark Driscoll believes in Calvinism then his earlier statement “Satan loves to get Christians to doubt in the goodness of
God” is either meaningless or he does not believe what he is saying. After all if a person’s actions are predetermined by God then Satan has no
effect one way or the other in getting a person to doubt God. Gee isn’t that comforting and reassuring?
It is such a shame that Mark Driscoll took a legitimate concern and provided an otherwise excellent answer and then ruined it by putting a
Reformed Theology spin on it to advance the Calvinist cause.
9 January 2010
Is It Really True That All You Have To Do Is Believe?
"...Now, some people say well yes, but if you even believe, then you can take credit for believing, therefore God must regenerate you first and
make you believe. There is no work in believing. There is no credit to me. If I believe something that is true, do I get any credit for the truth that
I believe and that faith is not a work? Very clearly the Bible distinguishes it. For example, Romans 4:5, Paul says, “Now, to him that worketh
not, but believeth….” So, believing is not a work, it is nothing that I can take credit for..."
Source: Dave Hunt's Search the Scriptures Daily Program #0801d: http://www.thebereancall.org/node/836
Yep, claiming that believing is earning your salvation is like me believing the winning team actually won the Super Bowl and therefore I had a
hand in the event because I accepted it as truth…
28 December 2009
Disproves Total Depravity
- "If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give
the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!" Luke 11:13
7 December 2009
Experiencing God Day By Day by Henry Blackaby
Devotion for Thursday, December 03, 2009 http://www.christianbook.com/html/devotion/experiencinggodblackaby_64.html
- Wishing to Be Healed
When Jesus saw him lying there, and knew that he already had been in that condition a long time,
He said to him, "Do you want to be made well?” - John 5:6
Jesus asked a man a question that appears to have had an obvious answer! He came upon a man who had been lame for thirty-eight years
and who was sitting beside a pool of healing. Jesus asked him if he wanted to be healed. Why would Jesus ask such an obvious question?
Perhaps the answer was not so clear. Bartimaeus was blind, yet when he cried our for Jesus to have mercy on him, Jesus asked what he
wanted Him to do (Mark 10:51). It would have seemed apparent that the foremost concern of a blind person would be to receive sight.
There were times, however, when Jesus considered it important for people to verbalize their need and specifically ask Him to heal them.
Just because we are spiritually sick, or just because we are near a place of healing, does not necessarily mean we want to be made well.
We may attend church regularly, but choose to remain sinful. Our generation has taken many of the activities that the Bible identifies as sin
and has labeled them as addictions or character flaws or the result of an abusive upbringing. We act as if having an addiction is sufficient
excuse for disobeying God's commands. As Christians, we are no longer helpless victims of our sin. There is no sinful habit or past hurt
that is beyond the healing touch of our Lord.
Have you gone year after year without receiving spiritual healing? God is capable of freeing you, but you may have become comfortable in
your sin. You may not want to be healed. If you really want to receive spiritual health, God can give it today. He wants you to ask Him.
1 November 2009
There is no denying that God is in complete control. However some people think that means God "causes" everything to happen. The fact is while
He is in indeed control, God lets things happen that He did not cause to happen. Some things He approves of while other things He does not
approve of, yet still allows to happen. God allows things to happen because we live in a sin filled fallen world and he gave us free will, but He's
still in control.
24 October 2009
Ironside on Calvinism
"Turn to your Bible and read for yourself in the only two chapters in which this word predestinate or predestinated is found. The first is Romans
8:29-30, the other chapter is Ephesians 1:5 and 11. You will note that there is no reference in these four verses to either heaven or hell but to
Christ-likeness eventually. Nowhere are we told in scripture that God predestinated one man to be saved and another to be lost. Men are to be
saved or lost eternally because of their attitude towards the Lord Jesus Christ. Predestination means that someday all the redeemed shall become
just like the Lord Jesus"
"D.L. Moody used to put it very simply the elect are the 'whosoever wills' the non-elect 'whosoever wont's'. This is exactly what scripture
teaches, the invitation is to all, those who accept it are the elect. Remember, we are never told that Christ died for the elect".
"Whosoever means, whosoever." Only a biased theologian, with an axe to grind, could ever think that it meant only the elect."
--H.A. Ironside
http://www.thebereancall.org/node/8145
6 October 2009
There is an old familiar illustration which says that the same sun will melt the wax but harden the clay. It is the character of, or the condition of, the
element and not the sun that melts the wax and hardens the clay. God is not going to harden you. He did not harden Pharaoh's heart. Pharaoh
already possessed a hard heart, and God only brought that fact out into the open.—J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible commentary on Luke.
10 July 2009
Today is the Reformed Theology crowd is celebrating the 500th birthday of John Calvin. At least it's just candles that are burning today...
On the Calvinist websites I've looked at all of Calvin's admirers are claiming there would have been no Reformation without men like Zwingli,
Luther and Calvin. How little trust in God these people have. Also they ignore the fact that there several facets to the Reformation, see Radical
Reformation vs Magisterial Reformation
The truth is Christians had opposed the errors of the Catholic church for centuries, people who had never belonged to the Roman or Eastern
Church. Even within the Roman Church (or out of) many years before "the Reformation" Christians were trying to reform the Catholic church, so
lets not give Luther or Calvin all the credit. The trail was already blazed.
3 July 2009
Present at the Synod of Dort in 1618 was Bishop John Davenant (1572-1641) from England who said:
- It may be truly said before Augustine and Pelagius, there was no question concerning the death of Christ, whether it was to be extended to
all mankind, or to be confined only to the elect. For the Fathers…not a word (that I know of) occurs among them of the exclusion of any
persons by the decree of God. They agree that it is actually beneficial to those only who believe, yet everywhere confess that Christ died in
behalf of all mankind…
Augustine died in AD 429, and up to his time, at least, there is not the slightest evidence that any Christian ever dreamed of a propitiation
for the elect alone. Even after him, the doctrine of limited propitiation was but slowly propagated, and for long but partially received.
2 July 2009
- “It is your decision to choose or reject Christ, but it is not of your own free will.”
John H. Gerstner, A Primer on Free Will, (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1982, 10.)
OK, so you're to blame if God predestines you for hell. That's confusing and God is not the author of confusion.
Contrast this to H.A. Ironside:
- “The gospel preacher can declare without any kind of mental reservation the blessed fact that whosoever will, may take the
water of life freely (Revelation 17:22). This is not at all a question of being allowed to take Christ as Savior. It is an earnest
entreaty to do so.”
27 June 2009
Calvinists say regarding free will "if you have the ability when you are lost to accept Jesus, then you can reject also Jesus after you're saved"
which nullifies "you can’t lose you salvation” and “once saved always saved.”
Actually that's a pretty lame argument because I could just as well say, "Since God is sovereign over all, that even though God determines who
will be saved, that because He is Sovereign, God could change His mind and decide that someone who was saved is no longer saved, no longer
one of the elect, "for His own good pleasure."" Where is the eternal security in that?
26 June 2009
I have added a new page that explains how the doctrine of predestination is a doctrine of works, see Predestination & Assurance of Salvation.
It's deals with the Calvinistic notion of God having two conflicting wills (God wants everyone to be saved but still predestines some for hell)
and how, according to John Calvin, God gives some people false faith so that you cannot know if you are one of the elect or not.
5 May 2009
Note: my commentary for 3 May will be more meaningful if you have already read John Calvin: The Unchanged, The Golden Rule, and Radical
Reformation vs. Magisterial Reformation.
3 May 2009
Calvinists and Reformed Theology purposely and completely sweep the negative aspects of the lives and doctrine of men like John Calvin and
Martin Luther under the rug, and nearly out of history. The non-Calvinists are told they are too critical, focusing on the wrong things and ignoring
the accomplishments and contributions of “the Reformers.”
Let me tell you about a man who was not born into wealth or privilege and was a decorated war veteran, in fact he was twice decorated for
bravery. Due to his humble beginnings he got into politics from the ground floor, he had a gift for winning people over to his side. This man
became a great orator and bestselling author; he had a sense of history and vision that others not dare dream. This man took action that brought
a nation that was mired in total economic ruin, chaos and world-wide depression and restored it to order and prosperity and in doing so
prevented Communism from taking over his adoptive country and the rest of Europe. This man changed the outlook of the country from being
beat down and transformed it to where it was proud again, full of hope and optimism for the future. This man built modern highways, got the
trains running on time again and improved national security by rebuilding a shattered and demoralized military. This man even became the head of
the church and installed like minded church leaders to ensure continuity and prevent division, bickering, and needless dissention. This man wanted
other countries to experience the great things his country benefited from and brought them into the fold, after all fewer borders would ultimately
ensure true peace.
Admittedly this man took exceptionally strong, you could even say harsh, measures to deal with those who obstructed his plans for the nation and
purged those who were a drain or contaminant on society. But you have to remember things had been so horrible before he came along that we
must overlook some of these things and not judge him by today’s standards. The important thing is to not focus on the negative parts of this man's
life but to build on the parts he got right. After all, as demonstrated above, Adolf got a lot of things right… didn’t he? Of course I don't believe
this but am using it as an illustration.
The whole point here is when you cast your lot with someone and their beliefs you cannot ignore the harmful actions of these men. Many today
tell you what a great biblical exegete John Calvin was and quietly go to great lengths to hide the dark side of John Calvin and those like-minded.
Defenders of John Calvin claim if you reject Calvinism you reject the gospel. Some in Reformed Theology are even trying to recreate John Calvin’
s Geneva in Florida, yet many would be followers have no idea what life was like in John Calvin’s Geneva.
It always astounds me when I hear people proudly proclaim, “I am a Calvinist” or the less bold who say, “I am a Calvinist, but not a Five Point
Calvinist” or "I'm not a hyper-Calvinist." Why be any kind of Calvinist? I follow the Lord Jesus and no other. Calvinism or Reformed Theology
explain or add absolutely nothing to the gospel of Christ that I cannot get from reading the scriptures, heeding the nudging of the Holy Spirit, and
believing, without the help of John Calvin or Reformed Theology who claim, “if you’re not a Calvinist you can’t understand the gospel.” There is
no risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater if you focus solely on the scriptures and have nothing to do with Calvinism or Reformed
Theology and what they bring to the table as the basis for explaining the gospel or for developing, defending, and enforcing doctrine.
30 April 2009
Extremes
On the one side you have Universalism that says Jesus died for the sins on everyone and that everyone is saved when you believe on him or not.
On the other side you have Calvinism and Reformed Theology that says Jesus died only for a few select people that were predetermined to
be saved and everyone else was created specifically to spend eternity in hell.
The truth is Jesus died for all, but every person has to make a personal decision to repent and accept God's free gift. God wants a saving
relationship with every one.
21 April 2009
Anyone who has read my whole website knows I have recommended to material from Ray Vander Laan and others who do a wonderful job of
explaining Jesus and His ministry in context of First Century Judaism that we with our Greek thinking overlook or just don't get and unfortunately
miss. There are so many things that we read in the Bible and miss the significance of. The following is just one of many example (Vander Laan is
by no means suggesting we need to become Jewish first, he merely uses these things as illustrations). At the last Passover Seder (which we call
the Last Supper) that Jesus celebrated before his crucifixion the Bible tells us:
- In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for
you…” Luke 22:20
Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it."This is my blood of the covenant, which is
poured out for many," he said to them. Mark 14:23-24
Most of us assume that Jesus is just alluding to the blood that would be shed on the cross for the remission of our sins, and that much is true. But
for first century Jews it had additional meaning, something they would have recognized. The following is from the April 1999 Focus on the
Family Magazine:
His Body His Blood by Ray Vander Lann
In the first century, when a young Jewish man reached marrying age and his family selected an appropriate wife for him, the young man and his
father would meet the young woman and her father to negotiate the "bride price," the figurative cost of replacing a daughter. The price was
usually very high.
With negotiations complete, the custom was for the young man's father to pour a cup of wine and hand it to his son. His son would turn to the
young woman, lift the cup and hold it out to her, saying, "This cup is a new covenant in my blood, which I offer to you." In other words, "I
love you, and I'll give you my life. Will you marry me?"
The young woman had a choice. She could take the cup and return it and say no. Or she could answer without saying a word-by drinking the
cup, her way of saying, "I accept your offer, and I give you my life in response."
On the night of the Last Supper, Jesus and His disciples sat together celebrating Passover. The disciples knew the liturgy very well; they had
celebrated Passover all their lives. When it came time to drink the third cup of wine, the cup of redemption, Jesus lifted the cup as the disciples
would expect and offered traditional Seder thanks, which are used to this day: "Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, for
giving us the fruit of the vine."
And then He offered it to them but said something they probably didn't expect: "This cup is a new covenant in my blood, which I offer to you."
There are many meanings to that statement, but one of them, in common, ordinary language, was, "I love you, and the only picture I can think
of that will describe the power of my love for you is the pure love of a husband for his wife."
It's hard to know what those disciples thought that night. Maybe a few chuckled a bit at the picture of Jesus making a marriage proposal, which
must have seemed totally out of place in a Passover Seder. And yet, they may have understood Jesus' willingness to die, be buried, and
eventually raised to say, "I love you, and as my Father promised your fathers, I'll pay the price for you."
Whenever Christians celebrate the Lord's Supper, we must be mindful of Jesus' offer. He still says, "I love you." He still says, "I offer you my
life. Will you be my bride?" The taking of the cup is a solemn moment, for it is in that moment that one looks to the Heavenly Father and says,
"Yes, I accept your love, and I give you my life in response."
also see by Ray Vander Laan:
Marriage Customs http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=1608
Wedding Plans http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=2096
Jesus the Bridegroom http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=2097
Seder and Marriage http://www.followtherabbi.com/Brix?pageID=1642
Also see “Echoes of His Presence” by Ray Vander Laan, Zondervan Publishing House, 1996, Chapter 2, p. 15
- _______________________________
I'm not suggesting that Dr. Tverberg is on one side or the other in the debate over Predestination and Free Will. I just like the articles:
- Jesus’ Most Radical Teaching by Lois Tverberg
Gracious, Compassionate, Slow to Anger by Lois Tverberg
Here's some good and enjoyable reading that has nothing to do with the Calvinism vs. Free Will debate. These books put many of the things we
read in the Bible that seem mundane, inconsequential or unimportant in context of first century Judaism and Christianity. If you like Ray Vander
Laan you'll enjoy these. These are not mystical Kabbalah type books.
Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective - David Bivin & Roy Blizzard
New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus: Insights from His Jewish Context - David Bivin
Sitting at the Feet of Rabbi Jesus: How the Jewishness of Jesus Can Transform Your Faith (Hardcover) -Ann Spangler & Lois Tverberg
“Those, therefore, whom God passes by he reprobates, and that for no other cause but because he is pleased to exclude them
from the inheritance which he predestines to his children…” John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, III:xxiii,
"Even the fall of Adam, and through him the fall of the race, was not by chance or accident, but was so ordained in the secret
councils of God." Lorraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination p. 234, 1932
"God fore-ordains everything which comes to pass....God initiates all things, regulates all things...." Arthur W. Pink, The
Sovereignty of God (Baker Book House, 1984), 240
- “All things that happen in all the world at any time and in all history—whether inorganic matter, vegetation, animal, man
or angels (both good and evil ones-- come to pass because God ordained them, Even sin- the fall of the devil from heaven,
the fall of Adam, and every evil thought, word, and deed in all of history.”
- "It is even biblical to say that God has foreordained sin.”
- "No, he has foreordained everything 'after the counsel of his will': the moving of a finger, the beating of a heart, the
laughter of a girl, the mistake of a typist -- even sin."
“…God desired for man to fall into sin…God created sin.” R.C. Sproul, Jr., Almighty Over All, 1999
"I believe that nothing happens apart from divine determination and decree. We shall never be able to escape from the doctrine
of divine predestination - the doctrine that God has foreordained certain people unto eternal life". Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-
1892)
The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ,
who is the image of God. 2 Corinthians 4:4
Who is this god of this age blinding the minds of unbelievers? John Calvin, Boettner, Palmer, Pink, and Sproul got it wrong.
What a sublime and horrible description of Satan! He is indeed the God of all that believe not, and works in them with
inconceivable energy.—Wesley's Commentary
- "Satan is the god of this age". —J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible
"In whom the god of this world, etc.—We see here that those whose minds are blinded, are they who believe not; and because
they believe not, their minds continue in darkness, and are proper subjects for Satan to work on; and he deepens the darkness,
and increases the hardness. But who is meant by the god of this world? It is generally answered, the same who is called the prince
of this world, John 16:11. But the question recurs, who is the prince of this world? and the answer to both is, SATAN." —Adam
Clarke's Commentary
- Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. "All this I
will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me." Matthew 4:8
- I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold on me... John 14:31
- This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. In
them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
"'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people's heart has
become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'"
- But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. Matthew 13:13-16
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of
the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the
cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because of his great
love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions--it is by grace you have been saved.
Ephesians 2:1-5
Ah! But you say, "what about Mark 4:12, John 12:40, Romans 11:8-10?" Those types of arguments were covered in my link to Romans
Chapter 9, Because God is sovereign, He can use everything for His purpose, even what the god of this age intends for our harm.
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around
them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and
turn aside to myths. 2 Timothy 4:3-4
11 February 2009
- “Not called!" did you say? "Not heard the call," I think you should say. Put your ear down to the Bible, and hear him bid you go and pull
sinners out of the fire of sin. Put your ear down to the burdened, agonized heart of humanity, and listen to its pitiful wail for help. Go stand
by the gates of hell, and hear the damned entreat you to go to their father's house and bid their brothers and sisters, and servants and
masters not to come there.
And then look Christ in the face, whose mercy you have professed to obey, and tell him whether you will join heart and soul and body and
circumstances in the march to publish his mercy to the world."
26 January 2009
Is God the Cause of sin?
- Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531) was the leader of the Protestant Reformation in Switzerland, and founder of the Swiss Reformed Churches.
Zwingli viewed God as the cause of all human sin. A Reformed Theology website said, “Zwingli’s understanding of predestination as
indistinguishable from providence, logically inclines him to the conclusion that God is the cause of human sin.” (1)
This view is still held today by many in the Reformed Theology camp:
"Even the fall of Adam, and through him the fall of the race, was not by chance or accident, but was so ordained in the secret
councils of God."
Lorraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination p. 234
“All things that happen in all the world at any time and in all history—whether inorganic matter, vegetation, animal, man or
angels (both good and evil ones-- come to pass because God ordained them, Even sin- the fall of the devil from heaven, the fall
of Adam, and every evil thought, word, and deed in all of history.” Edwin Palmer, The Five Points of Calvinism, 1999
"It is even biblical to say that God has foreordained sin.”
Edwin Palmer, The Five Points of Calvinism, 1999
"No, he has foreordained everything 'after the counsel of his will': the moving of a finger, the beating of a heart, the laughter of a
girl, the mistake of a typist -- even sin."
Edwin Palmer, The Five Points of Calvinism, 1999
"God fore-ordains everything which comes to pass....God initiates all things, regulates all things...."
Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God (Baker Book House, 1984), 240
"God desired for man to fall into sin, God created sin."
R.C. Sproul, Jr., Almighty Over All
Despite the honesty of Calvinism by these men, many in Reformed Theology are not willing to concede/admit that Reformed Theology teaches
God actually created sin or causes man to sin. Yet, all Calvinists, whether they know it or not, do believe that God created sin and that He causes
man to sin.
who accept His gift of salvation.
the logical conclusion of Reformed Theology is that God created sin and caused the people He specifically created to sin in order that He could
send them to their predestined place in eternity.
the lost to sin to ensure they ended up in their proper place. Therefore to be a Calvinist and/or believe in predestination, a Calvinist has to believe
(perhaps subconsciously) that God created sin and causes man to sin.
The Bible tells us not only that God hates sin but also that Satan tempts us and causes us to sin…
…in Him is no sin… the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God
appeared for this purpose, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:5-8
- Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith
1 Peter 5:8-9
16 November 2008
Cafeteria Calvinists
The hyper-Calvinist says that God loves only the Elect and created the non-elect for the sole purpose of sending them to hell for His glory. A
hyper-Calvinist is simply an honest Calvinist. Nothing more and nothing less.
Martin Luther, and John Calvin, not someone who came along afterwards and changed or added to what the founders of this doctrine espoused
and drawing logical conclusions (in other words connecting the dots). To deny hyper-Calvinism (that is true Calvinism) is to claim that it is
extreme. Calling the founders of Calvinism extremists or hyper is like calling Mohammed a radical or extremist Muslim. How can it be hyper
or extreme anything when the very words and arguments of the founders are used?
mean they agree a lot with Calvin but not that certain people were predestined for hell. Others when they say they are not hyper-Calvinists mean
that God does predetermine who will be saved but reject the idea that God causes starvation, rapes and murders or deviant behavior in people.
Regardless of what they mean, when they deny they are hyper-Calvinists they consider themselves to be moderate Calvinists.
For some, the moderate Calvinist says God loves everyone, but still sends those who are not the Elect (that He predestined) to hell for eternal
torment and damnation. That difference is just splitting hairs as the end result is the same. A moderate Calvinist is basically uncomfortable with the
idea that God created some people whom he doesn't love, after all God is love. I haven't met a true moderate Calvinist yet who didn't revert
back into hyper-Calvinism when backed into a corner.
between moderate and four-point Calvinists. The distinctions presented here are my own, based on discussions with Calvinist friends and reading
Reformed Theology websites, and are used here for the sake of illustration and discussion.
Someone who claims they are a Calvinist but who rejects one or more petals of TULIP. It's not always the same petal that is removed. One petal
that is perhaps most often removed by four-point Calvinists is “Limited Atonement”, the idea that God only wants a certain number of people
saved and the rest were specifically created to spend eternity in hell. Like a person walking down a cafeteria line, some four point (and even three
point) Calvinists may reject limited atonement or other petals (depending on what they find distasteful or objectionable)of TULIP, that is to say
Calvinism.
destroy it and so, if they want to be honest about their position, they must revert back to hyper-Calvinism, or reject Calvinism altogether.
or Augustine to determine doctrine or explain Biblical principles to us. Just because a broken clock is correct twice a day doesn’t mean we
should set our own clocks by it.
Knock knock (no joke)
- Jesus said:
"So I say to you: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone
who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. Luke 11:9-10
Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him, and will dine with him,
and he with Me. Revelation 3:20
5 Nov 2008
- So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Romans 14:12
If we have to give an account for our actions then clearly we are responsible for our actions and obviously have free will. If our actions were
predetermined we would not be responsible for them.
- Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort
you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in
unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness,
and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. Jude 1:3-4
So how can one “contend for the faith” if, as Reform Theology insists, that faith was arbitrarily given or withheld according to God's “good
pleasure”?
they were written of beforehand. The word ordained is prographo, meaning "to write beforehand." It simply means that other writers
had sounded the warning about apostates. —J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible
Sovereignty: “Causes” vs. “Uses”
actually limits God's sovereignty.
things for His purpose and glory.
limited, threatened or compromised. God is always in control and this is a good example of how even with free will God's sovereignty is not
threatened but actually demonstrates just how Sovereign He is.
is sovereignty.
can only accomplish His will by predetermining, before time, every action every person makes, even sin.
every action of every person and decides in advance who will fry and who will not, that is not sovereignty.
always accomplished. That is sovereignty!
- Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from
their ways and live? Ezekiel 18:23
If God predestined some specifically to sin and bound them for eternal damnation then He would have done so because He took pleasure in it,
not out of some unknowable sense of justice or holiness. This is not the God of Abraham, it is the god of Islam, who according to the Koran,
created sin.
Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt
anyone. But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives
birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death....Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and
receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls. James 1:13-15;21
Genesis tells us God did not create sin. Everything He created was and is good, though Reformed Theology tells us only God can determine what
is good and we should not presume to determine for God what is good and what is evil.
and does not resort to trickery. God is extremely clear about what he wants for us and what He expects of us. Isn't that wonderful?
therefore, it wouldn't be sin would it?
The Unpardonable Sin
Reformed Theology talks about "irresistible" Grace, yet that doesn't quite square "the unpardonable sin" which is rejecting the call from the
Holy Spirit.
- "...I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit
will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." Mark 3:28-29
"...And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be
forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." Matthew 12:31-32
"...Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not
believed in the name of God's one and only Son ." John 3:18
John the Baptist said, "...Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath
remains on him." John 3:36
"The unforgivable sin of speaking against the Holy Spirit has been interpreted in various ways, but the true meaning cannot contradict
other Scripture. It is unequivocally clear that the one unforgivable sin is permanently rejecting Christ (John 3:18; 3:36). Thus, speaking
against the Holy Spirit is equivalent to rejecting Christ with such finality that no future repentance is possible. 'My spirit shall not
always strive with man,' God said long ago (Genesis 6:3). ...In the context of this particular passage (Matthew 12:22-32), Jesus had
performed a great miracle of creation, involving both healing and casting out a demon, but the Pharisees rejected this clear witness of
the Holy Spirit. Instead they attributed His powers to Satan, thus demonstrating an attitude permanently resistant to the Spirit, and to
the deity and saving Gospel of Christ"
[Henry M. Morris, The Defender's Study Bible (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Bible Publishers, 1995), emphasis added.]. www.christiananswers.
net/q-eden/unpardonablesin.html
I just read on a Reformed Theology website an article warning how the spread of Islam in Europe was going to overtake Europe if people didn't
"do" something to stop the spread.
Theology or Predestination after all, because if he did whether Europe is taken over by Islam or not would mean that the outcome was
predetermined and that we can't "do" anything to combat it because it is God's will.
have a choice to make!
God uses Christians to appeal to nonbelievers
Paul tells us:
We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be
reconciled to God. 2 Corinthians 5:20
If we have no choice in accepting or rejecting God's salvation then why is God using Christians to make His appeal to non-believers? If it's
already been determined then no appealing is required. So once again we see that we do indeed have free will to accept or reject God's gift of
salvation.
Calvinists "GOTCHA" Questions
- No (I don't beat my wife anymore).
He want to do that?"
other side can use the limitation in their favor.
complicate a simple issue by oversimplifying the issues. "GOTCHA" questions are carefully skewed to give a limited response.
the questions the way the Scribes and Pharisees anticipated (as those who are responding to Calvinists challenges should not be coerced into
doing either); rather they gave a reasoned response that basically rephrased the issue correctly.
The questions should be “Who gets credit for your salvation?” and the answer is God because Jesus died and paid the price for my sin.
Looking for credit for the decision on my part is silly as a decision is required. Getting "credit" is not the issue. Yet Calvinists will always claim
that “accepting” is “earning.” See further explanation in b.
- That's like saying if I am drowning in a violent storm and a rescuer throws me a line that I get credit for the rescue for grabbing and holding
on. I could have very well have said, “I can get back to shore on my own” and refused to take what was offered, drowning in the process.
decision to make. If I refused the line the fault of my death would be mine… unless you're a Calvinist in which case it wouldn't be my fault
because I had no choice (though Calvinists will still tell you it was indeed your fault even though you had no choice to grab or not to grab the line,
your fate was already decided.)
...And Peter answered Him and said, "Lord, if it is You, command me to come to You on the water." So He said, "Come." And
when Peter had come down out of the boat, he walked on the water to go to Jesus. But when he saw that the wind was
boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink he cried out, saying, "Lord, save me!" And immediately Jesus stretched out His
hand and caught him... Matthew 14:28-31
In Matthew 14:28-31 Peter did not walk on the water by his own power, but by the power from Jesus. Peter was doing fine until he took his
eyes off Jesus and his doubt got the better of him. Peter was saved (from drowning) after he called out to Jesus. Jesus was there all the time and
available.
This is an either/or question that seeks to distract from the real issue. They go hand in hand and cannot be separated. God approaches everyone
and everyone has the same decision to make, to accept God's gift or not.
- See c. above.
- See c. above.
- No, it is the Calvinists saying that God can only accomplish His will by controlling every action which denies and limits God's sovereignty.
Knowing that God accomplishes His will while allowing us free will shows how all powerful He really is.
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
Romans 8:28
Calvinists are asking the wrong questions purposely to create confusion and doubt.
Nothing.
God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. Genesis 1:31
b. Did God create sin?
- Sin entered the world when man disobeyed God.
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because
all sinned. Romans 5:12
c. Why did God create man?
- God created man for a relationship with Him. God did not say “I created some for a relationship and some merely to send to hell.” Man
was created in God's image, therefore He would not have created sinful, evil, men, unless you're willing say that is God's image too. I'm
not willing to do that.
God created man in his own image... Genesis 1:27
d. Did God create "sinful" man?
No. Man was created in God's image, therefore He would not have created sinful, evil men, unless you're willing to say that is God's image too,
something I'm not willing to do. The Bible tells us:
God made mankind upright, but men have gone in search of many schemes. Ecclesiastes 7:29
Sin is a consequence to allowing free will, and because God loved man so much He provided for man's salvation.
You are not a God who takes pleasure in evil; Psalm 5:4
The LORD loves righteousness and justice Psalms 33:5
e. Do people ever do things that God tells them not to do? If so what is the result? Reward or punishment?
Death is the result of sin and disobedience and entered God's creation when Adam and Eve disobeyed God.
"...Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you should not eat?" Then the man said, "The woman whom
You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate." And the Lord God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?"
The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."" Genesis 3:11-13
This is what the LORD says...For they have forsaken me ...They have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as
offerings to Baal--something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind. Jeremiah 19:1-5 (also see Jeremiah 7:30-31)
Some who follow Reformed Theology say “who are we to say what's good and what's not? If God makes us do something it is not for us to
decide if it's good or not.” In effect they tell us if God caused us to do something (sin) then it must be a good thing....
plan for us. It is our instructions for living in this world.
Living in a fallen world
I've heard many people at church mention after they have recovered from a cold or flu that it was OK to be sick because God caused it to
happen for a reason. They will tell you the “only” reason they were sick was because it was God's will. That is indeed a possibility, sometimes
illness is a means God uses to get our attention and coax us into a certain place or action. But it is also a possibility that their cold or flu, or even
something serious like cancer or a woman being raped is not caused by God but is sometimes merely the result of living in a fallen world.
- And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
Romans 8:28
[Now notice that all things are working together for good for them "who are the called" ones, and it is "according to his purpose." This is
something that is hard for a great many people to swallow. "The called" are those who not only have received an invitation, they have accepted it.
—J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible]
I have benefited from calamitous events that I don't think that God caused, the events could have been the result of living in a fallen world or by
my poor choices. But because God is all-powerful, thankfully, He is able to use the worst of events for His glory and our good.
Testing
The purpose of our lives on earth is to glorify God and part of that involves having a personal relationship with Him, just as it will be in heaven.
could also call it a refining process, like gold and silver, to get rid of impurities so that it does not enter heaven…
the test. Put another way some people in the exact same situation reject God and some realize their dependence on Him. Both were given the
same opportunity.
their need for God. Yet others pass this test and always realize their need for God. According to Jesus this is the hardest test and yet people jest
that this is the test they would rather face. Perhaps. But viewed from the standpoint that it's eternity, not our brief time in this life, that we're talking
about maybe we should think twice about desiring this test.
every person attending was probably a Calvinist to some degree. Belief in inerrancy, substitutionary atonement, divine omniscience and
the perseverance of those who accept Christ all owe something to Calvinism.”
died or his erroneous doctrine, absolutly nothing. We owe it to God the Father for creating us and loving us and giving us free will, we owe God
the Son for taking on our sin and we owe the Holy Spirit and the scriptures God gave us to guide us. Our understanding of the nature of God is
not in any way dependent or "owed" to Calvinism. I'd say that every person attending that conference probably believed in free will deep down
because Calvinists spend so much time trying to “convince” everyone they are right and you can't convince someone unless they have free will."
In everything I've read Mohler brushes off the negatives of John Calvin and says "yeah, but he gave us this....!" Calvin gave us nothing but bad
doctrine, I owe Calvinism nothing.
Disobeying God
To me the definition of “sin” * is being disobedient to God. Being disobedient or being obedient means we have free will. After all if we are
predestined to sin then we are in fact obeying God and therefore we are not being disobedient and if we're not disobedient then we are not
sinning.
not to do, who are we to say it's bad? They will tell you if God caused us to do something He commanded us not to do then it is not bad but is in
fact good. Oy vey! How's that for convoluted reasoning?
* Sin ... is violence and lovelessness toward other people, and ultimately, rebellion against God.
Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology
* Sin is "any want of conformity unto or transgression of the law of God" (1 John 3:4; Romans 4:15), in the inward state and habit of the
soul, as well as in the outward conduct of the life, whether by omission or commission (Romans 6:12-17; 7:5-24). It is "not a mere
violation of the law of our constitution, nor of the system of things, but an offence against a personal lawgiver and moral governor who
vindicates his law with penalties. Easton's Bible Dictionary
April 16, 2006
God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their
own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.
Romans 10:1-4
God has already determined who will be saved." He did however say that it was Christ that makes us righteous "for everyone who believes."
It is Christ's death, burial, and resurrection that makes us righteous. But we have to believe it in order to take advantage of it. Then Paul
continues: For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture
says,
"Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is
Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
Romans 10:10-13
It doesn't get much clearer than this. We have a choice to make from our heart and the Lord's blessing are available "to all who call on him" again
based on what is in our heart. We can harden our heart or we can open it to God.
- ______________________________________
On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther nailed his "The Ninety-five Theses" to the door of the Wittenberg Castle Church. This was indeed a
historically significant event. However, many people think that Martin Luther started the Reformation but as you can see in Dave Hunt’s article
the efforts to reform the church and keep it on the right track had been an going activity well before Martin Luther:
June 2000 Newsletter: A Great Betrayal
Hunt, Dave June 1, 2000
“...For 1,000 years before Luther, Europe saw persecutions, burnings and drownings of evangelical Christians who had never
been Catholics and were not called Protestants. That term would only later be attached to those excommunicated from the
Church for protesting its evils. A movement among priests and monks calling for a return to the Bible began many centuries
before Luther. Priscillian, Bishop of Avila, could be called the first Reformer. Falsely accused of heresy, witchcraft, and
immorality by a Synod in Bordeaux, France in A.D. 384 (seven of his writings which refute these charges have recently been
discovered in the University of Wurzburg library in Germany), Priscillian and six others were beheaded at Trier in 385 and many
martyrdoms followed. Jumping ahead to the late 1300s, John Wycliff, "morning star of the Reformation," championed the
authority of the Scriptures, translated and published them in English and preached and wrote against the evils of the popes and
transubstantiation. Jan Hus, a fervent Catholic priest and rector of Prague University, was influenced by Wycliff.
Excommunicated in 1410, Hus was burned at the stake as a "heretic" in 1415 for calling a corrupt church to holiness and the
authority of God's Word.
Such early reformers set the stage for Martin Luther's Reformation. Luther himself said, "We are not the first to declare the
papacy to be the kingdom of Antichrist, since for many years before us so many and so great men...have undertaken to express
the same thing so clearly...." For example, in a full council at Rheims in the tenth century the Bishop of Orleans called the Pope
the Antichrist. In the eleventh century Rome was denounced as "the See of Satan" by Berenger of Tours. The Waldensians
identified the Pope as Antichrist in an 1100 treatise titled "The Noble Lesson." In 1206 an Albigensian conference indicted the
Vatican as the woman "drunk with the blood of the martyrs," which she continued to prove...”
_______________________________________________________
Too often a pastor will come into a new church by hiding their true doctrine and agenda with the intent to "slowly bring the congregation
along" to the idea of Reformed Theology, or in other words Calvinism. A hidden agenda is disingenuous and deceptive at best. When directly
asked about their position they dance around the issue and claim "I believe in the sovereignty of God" and avoid using the words "Reformed
Theology" or "Calvinism" or "predestination". Well, I too believe in the sovereignty of God, so it is a moot point. The other answer given is "I am
not a Five Point Calvinist." What does that mean? Explain why you are any sort of Calvinist at all, there are Calvinists today who believe that if
you deny Calvinism you deny the Gospel. If you have to dance around a direct question and parse your words, is that not being deceptive?
Come on men, "Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'". If you have to hide your true convictions and intentions there is something
inherently disturbing about that.
In 2004 baptistfire.com Dr. Paige Patterson, president of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary said:
- When you are called to a church, be sure that you are a man of integrity and you disclose your full theological position to the
church to which you are called. Many a church has called a pastor only to find, only to discover, a couple of years in, that he is
determined to take the church in the direction of a Calvinistic church. He never told them that up front. He may even have
deliberately misled them. One of my sorrows in hiring professors across these years is that I've often asked that question and
gotten a misleading answer and found out later that this man was in the classroom perpetuating the system of Calvinism.
Dr. Danny Akin, president of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, made a similar point in SBC Life:
- Act with personal integrity in your ministry when it comes to this issue. Put your theological cards on the table in plain view for
all to see, and do not go into a church under a cloak of deception or dishonesty. If you do, you will more than likely split a
church, wound the Body of Christ, damage the ministry God has given you, and leave a bad taste in the mouth of everyone. Let
me give an example. I am pre-tribulational/premillennial in my eschatology. It would be inappropriate for me to interview with a
church and continue the discussion if I discovered that it was committed to an amillennial position.
Now, let me address our topic. If a person is strongly committed to five-point Calvinism, then he should be honest and
transparent about that when talking to a church search committee. He should not hide behind statements like "I am a historic
Baptist." That statement basically says very little if anything and it is less than forthcoming. Be honest and completely so. If it is
determined you are not a good fit for that congregation, rejoice in the sovereign providence of God and trust Him to place you in
a ministry assignment that is a good fit. God will honor such integrity.
Pastors, when looking for a church home be honest when asked (and if you're not asked bring it up) and don't dance around the
question. Otherwise it makes you dishonest and a liar. And please, don't make us have to guess where you stand.
_______________________________________________________
References:
1. http://www.alliancenet.org/pub/mr/mr98/1998.06.NovDec/mr9806.faj.zwingli.html
- _______________________________________________________
http://www.freewill-predestination.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|