Unconditional Election - Affirmed

This is a repost before I nail a tough subject that will bring much debate and comments from a lot of people, which if kept charitable, will be a great time of discussion. Til then.

This doctrine is one that I have not always subscribed to. It is one that I was never even taught until about 8 years ago. It was one that I would have probably laughed at before then and scoffed at. I always thought that I was in control of my destiny, that I was the one who in control of my actions that I was the one who chose the paths on which to walk. So, naturally when it came to salvation I thought it was I who chose God and at times I thought how lucky He was to have me on His team. This doctrine has been debated all the way back to Augustine and Jerome against a man named Pelagius, it was the doctrine that is said to be the foundation of the reformation against the Catholic church in the 16th Century, it is what defined the Protestant movement and again is what was attacked by a man named James Arminius and what has been defended by men like Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Owen, John Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon, R.C. Sproul and John MacArthur. This doctrine is one where we must lean completely on Scripture as our entire conscience fights against it. Even our society would tell us it isn’t true, and they do this every time they tell us that “You can do anything you set your mind to” or “you choose your destiny.” So, this doctrine is one where we need to put away your old inclinations and just hear Scripture, listen to what it says plainly for this was Paul’s prayer at the beginning of Colossians:

For this reason also, since the day we heard of it, we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding,so that you will walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please Him in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God;
Colossians 1:9,10


We are going to study what it means to be chosen of God and look at some key words to describe what this means:
1. Importance of the words: Foreknew, foreknowledge, foreknown, foreordain
2. Importance of the word: Predestine
3. Importance of the words: chosen or elect

Importance of the word foreknew, foreknowledge, foreknown, foreordain

The first word that comes with much debate and is at the real root of this debate is the word foreknown. Some say that this word means that God foreknew whether man would choose Him or not and based on those actions of belief, God elected those to salvation. So God looked through the portal of time and saw those who would choose Him and then He elected them or chose them unto salvation. The other view, the one that I hold to, is that God’s foreknowledge is much more intimate, much more thorough than just someone’s actions but that God foreknew you in a way to where He foreknew you as a person not just merely your actions. Let’s look at the first part of our text to understand this, Romans 8:28-30.

And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

So, the question here is what did God foreknow in this passage? Does it say anything about God foreknowing anything about actions? Now, understand we do know that God knows everything, but what does God foreknow in this passage? It points to Him foreknowing the person, not their actions. There are three times that God’s foreknowledge is mentioned in verb form, here in Romans 8:29, also in 1 Peter 1:20 and also in Romans 11:2, so let’s look at these as well to get a well informed prospective.

God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel?
Romans 11:2

If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth;
knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.
1 Peter 1:17-21

So, the three times that God’s foreknowledge is mentioned in the verb tense we have that God foreknew what? The person or persons, but now what does the word actually mean. For this, we need to break the word down. The word in the Greek means to “know beforehand, or to predestine” but what about this word “know?” Is it just merely having knowledge about something or someone or is there something more here.

The word “know” or “knew” is a very intimate word to the both the Hebrews and Greeks. The word actually is used to describe that Adam and Eve knew each other and then their son Cain was born in Genesis 4:1. If the word merely meant to know about someone, then we have a true miracle of birth in Genesis 4:1 instead of the obvious reality that to “know” for the Hebrews was a very intimate term between two persons.

We also see this intimate relationship in John 10:14

“I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me,
even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.
For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again.
John 10:14-17

So does God just merely “know” of Christ? Or is this an intimate relationship between the two?

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
And before you were born I consecrated you;
I have appointed you a prophet to the nations.”
Jeremiah 1:5

This knowledge or to know is also shown in Matthew 7:22,23; 1 Corinthians 8:3, 2 Timothy 2:19; Exodus 2:25; Galatians 4:9

When you think of the word predestine what do you think of? The word means exactly what we would take it to mean, the Greek word means “to decide beforehand or predetermine. In the biblical sense it comes with the connotation as God decreeing from eternity past.” There is no way around this word that is used many times in the New Testament. Take a look at these verses and the variety of ways the term is used:

Acts 4:28; Romans 8:29,30, 1 Cor 2:7; Eph 1:5,11

We can see especially in Ephesians that God predetermined His elect to obtain His inheritance, Why or for what cause? For the kind intention of His will. We also see this when David speaks to God in Psalm 139:1-16

So we, see that when we are told that we are predestined by God, that is exactly what is meant, the all sovereign Creator predestines His own, His elect to heaven.

The Importance of the words: Choose and Elect

So, now after seeing the importance of the words foreknow and predestine we come back to the words choose and elect. When God speaks of choosing a people He does it because of His will not ours. We can actually see this all through the Bible. How does God choose people? Does He choose them because they are seeking Him or do they get chosen by the mere fact that God wants to use them? Think of this…

The choosing of Abraham: Genesis 12 says nothing of why He chose Abram He just chose. What is interesting is that after Abram is chosen, the first action after his choosing is a sinful one! God told him to go forth from his relatives and he took Lot and his wife. I think this just shows once again that God chooses weak vessels, gives them faith and uses them for His glory. God does not look to who is strong in faith and hope they will choose Him, that is backwards.

Also, look at others that were chosen:

The choosing of the nation of Israel: Deut 7:6
The choosing of Moses: Exodus 3,4
The choosing of Gideon: Judges 6-8 (Oh Valient Warrior!) where was Gideon at this time? Hiding
The choosing of Jeremiah: Jeremiah 1
The choosing of David: 1 Samuel 16
The choosing of the twelve apostles: Luke 6 (John 15:16; You didn’t choose me; I chose you!)
The choosing of Saul: Acts 9

The Greek word translated “chosen” is eklektos, from the verb kaleo, “to call,” and the preposition ek, “out.” Literally, it means “the called-out ones.” The term is often used in the New Testament as a synonym for Christians (e.g., Col. 3:12; 2 Tim. 2:10; Titus 1:1). The expression “called-out ones” emphasizes that we who are saved are redeemed because of God’s choice, not our own. Jesus told His disciples, “You did not choose Me, but I chose you” (John 15:16). In other words, if you are a Christian, it is ultimately because you were chosen by God Himself, not because of anything you did to get yourself into the Kingdom of God
John MacArthur

So, the words chosen ones or the elect are actually the exact same words in the
Greek and it is referred to 24 times in the New Testament. There is no way
around these simple to understand words. We have been chosen by the all
sovereign God to our position as His chosen people.

1 Peter 2:9 speaks to this specifically:
But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God’s OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;

So when we see this in Colossians 3:12 that we are chosen by God, that is exactly what it means. We did nothing to earn this election, we did nothing to earn this choosing, but He chose us out of the kind intention of His will, not ours.

Conclusion

We have seen that sometimes our earthly view that seems correct is actually just the opposite. We think we chose God but in 1 John 4 it tells us that we love, because He first loved us. Without God foreknowing us, choosing and predestining us, calling us, we would still be lost
and without hope. But, if you believe in Jesus Christ and you believe that He God’s Son who died on the cross and rose again, and He alone is your Lord, than that is shown as proof of your election, because only those who know Christ have been chosen. Just as it says in John 10:26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. Notice, Jesus does not say that because you don’t believe you are not my sheep but those who are not called, who are not chosen by God cannot believe. They cannot be Christ’s sheep.

When I was coming to Christ, I thought I was doing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea the Lord was seeking me.… [Then] the thought struck me, How did you come to be a Christian? I sought the Lord. But how did you come to seek the Lord? The truth flashed across my mind in a moment—I should not have sought Him unless there had been some previous influence on my mind to make me seek Him.… I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me.… I desire to make this constant confession, “I ascribe my change wholly to God.”

Charles Spurgeon

Read More......

Debate is Over

In case you didn't see Nate's comment I will repost it here with some follow up thoughts and guidance for what will still come after this.

Nate's comment:

Hey guys...alright here is the deal. I have already emailed Seth earlier today to inform him of my decision to drop out of this debate. I know it may come as a disappointment to some (very much so to me) but please hear me out. I stated a few days ago that this was originally intended to be only a few emails back and forth between Seth and I discussing Calvinism and my beliefs, not for the intent of changing our views necessarily (though that wasnt out of the question) but more as clarification because Seth seemed like he thought Dr. Goetsch painted Calvinists all wrong and it appeared to me that Seth and many others on here painted fundamentalists (in no way Arminian) wrong. Thats really what has evolved into this large scale debate...which is ok. The problem is, I have nowhere near the time to put into this what I need to, and seemingly every night I am spending hours reading posts and responding, as well as studying and its kinda wearing me out. I have certainly had much more to answer than Seth. This is not only difficult to do because of a hectic schedule outside of this debate, but it has also led to very little time to spend with my family just about every night. I can't do that anymore, it just doesnt seem right.

I am truly sorry for those who are disappointed and wanted to see this debate continue. Trust me, I love debating and arguing, and I didn't even get to my good points yet!! =) But alas, my set up with Seth was to probably go a week or two...and it has already been almost two weeks and we are still discussing total depravity. Hopefully you guys understand.

Let me also add that it has become increasingly clear that no one is going to change their position. You all seem pretty entrenched in Calvinism and I couldn't believe more in my beliefs. The biggest problem I have ever had with any Calvinist is when I've been told that evangelism is not really necessary. It was nice to hear from everyone on here that evangelism is important to them. To me, that is without a doubt the biggest issue. Also, I'm sorry for any comments that were deemed offensive...they were not meant to be so. With that, I bid you all farewell. I thanked Seth for his participation and I will thank you all too for your participation and for caring about God's word and the things of God as much as I do. I consider you all brothers in Christ, no matter what our disagreement on these issues. And I do sincerely feel bad for backing out, as I dont consider myself a quitter. But I just figured better early on than in the middle when this already commanding an overwhelming amount of my time, more than I really can give.

Thanks guys, hopefully you all understand. Seth, thanks for opening your blog to those who dont believe like you do.

God Bless

Nate


The one thing that I do want to point to, that I emailed Nate about, is the fact of us being Calvinists who evangelize.

Here was my email to Nate:

I would also ask you to know that if you believe that Calvinism has no reason to invoke evangelism (which is really, in the end fatalism), you need to use the same logic with your own beliefs. Which would mean me telling you that if you believe one can "resist" God's effectual call, then I could as easily draw the conclusion that if you don't resist and you do believe you have something to boast about. Which would be a work, and then you have a works based salvation. I could also say that if you believe in free will that you also need to take that to the end and say that God cannot know the future and you become an open theist. But, I don't believe either of those to be true.

There is a line that people cross (hyper Calvinism/fatalism and Open Theism) but all Calvinists and all free will people don’t cross that line and neither should act as though the other will ultimately end up there. If you believe it about the opposing side, you must use that same logic with your own belief system. This is actually what made me stop saying that all free willers have to end up as Open Theist, because I am no fatalist, but figured I had to end up there being that is the danger of Calvinism. Does that make sense?

I have actually challenged my Calvinist friends, including some "high ranking" ones (whatever that means) that we can not say that Arminians, or free will believers, are open theists, because once we do that we must come to the conclusion that Calvinism will come to be fatalism.

So, just because a belief in theology can lead somewhere, does not mean that is where it HAS to lead. This has taken some time for me to mature in this area...

Usually these Calvinists will say that Arminians are not saved and that Calvinism is the only true Gospel (whatever that means) but know that historical Calvinism was not this way. Just look at Whitefield and Wesley.

End of email

The one thing to note that I find very interesting is that Nate did not want to continue because he could see that none of us were going to change:

"Let me also add that it has become increasingly clear that no one is going to change their position. You all seem pretty entrenched in Calvinism and I couldn't believe more in my beliefs."

This is going to sound rude, but it is really just an observation. Is this not the thinking of ALL free willers? "If I don't see it working, then I will either give up, or change my style to try and get them to change." This is the danger. That it is what I do, how I present, my style that changes or convinces people. Not God. Calvinism on the other hand, knows that we must merely honor God and His message, and it is His work, not our own that brings about change. I honestly believe that we take a higher and stronger stance on Isaiah 55:11 and lean on that more than we lean on the outward appearance of belief. We understand that all we are, are seed planters, not the cause of growth. We are patient farmers.

So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.
Isaiah 55:11

What I am going to do is continue to post on the 5 points of Calvinism and hopefully will come to some good conversations throughout these days.

Soli Deo Gloria

Read More......

Definitions Please

I asked Nate to give me some exegesis and like anyone on the opposite side of the fence, we never feel as though they did a good enough job. Not saying this is just myself, but I am sure that I have not live up to my side of the bill either, in Nate's mind, with some of my exegesis. What I would like to do is have us ALL define some words. So, if you can, even if you agree with some of the definitions presented, all define these words so that we can see where each of us are coming from. Try and make it pretty short and sweet. Nate: if you would like to add some words in here, feel free to have us define them as well. Here goes:

Determine

Ordain

Foreknowledge

Predestine

Elect

Divine Purpose


How I define.
Determine: When I say that I am "determined" or that I "determined" to do something, this means that I will carry out that "plan" whatver that plan is. If I say that I determined to get back at a co-worker then I will do whatever I can do so. If I am a determined individual, then I am one who will do whatever I need to, to accomplish something. Take this to God. He is called omnipotent. So when He determines something for His purpose, it will come to pass. If He falls short in His determination how can I call Him omnipotent?

Ordain: To me this one is pretty simple. If I ordain something, or better yet, a President or King ordains something, they put something into place for whatever purpose they intend to follow through with. Again, if God ordains something, it cannot fail. Cause, well, He is God. "The President ordained the troops to attack Iraq."

Foreknowledge: This one is a little more tricky. At first glance, to us humans, this simply means to know beforehand. Easy. But wait. Then you see how the word "know" is used in the Bible. Such as, "Adam knew Eve..." then they had a son. Hmmmm...know is something more in the Hebrew culture. Christ also uses the term know in the same instance when He says "I know my sheep and my sheep know me." Then He says to those going to hell, "Depart from Me for I never knew you." Does this mean that Christ had no knowledge of them? Does the sheep reference simply mean that I know who Christ is and He happens to know who I am? Of course not. So, if we reference foreknowledge, with the strength of "know" being intimate, we can say that God "fore-loved" or had some type of intimacy with certain things and people (depending on the verse)

Predestine: Pretty straight forward here. To determine beforehand. One's path is already chosen. This word has never been used, to my knowledge, in secular or Christian writings to ever mean anything besides to determine beforehand.

Elect: Comes alongside the word "choose." So when we elect a president, we choose that President. Of course, we choose based on who that person is, or because of that person's works or actions. Since God is not a respector of persons, He chooses or elects much differently than we do. Of course, we can choose or elect something also, without a real reason. (not applying this to God) I can choose one cup over another to drink out of without really caring. So, not all our choices are based on previous knowledge or conceived knowledge. Not going to deal with the biblical reasons for this word quite yet. But, the decision of the choosing and electing, unless coerced, lies only in the hands of the one doing the electing, not the thing or person being elected.

Divine Purpose: If I tie in all the other words, predestine, ordain, elect, foreknowledge and take them to pertain to God, then I would say that the divine purpose, which is higher than our ways and sometimes a secret, is accomplished through all those other means. Making each of those individual words vital to understand and vital to be carried out. If any of these steps along the way go "wrong" or not according to plan, the divine purpose will not be accomplished. Kind of like the thought of the "butterfly effect". The divine purposes of God cannot be thwarted as find out in Job 42. There are many purposes but there is one above all others: God's glory to be exalted. That is the highest and everything else is literally dung compared to this one.


Alright. Let's hear from everyone else. What do you guys think?

Read More......

Total Depravity - Affirmed

When we look at total depravity, I am going to really try to defend the position and what we mean, as Calvinists, when we speak of total depravity. Most have commented on Nate's post and there is some great positions being posited on people's positions, so I encourage you to read Nate's post and the comments as well. What I will try and do is answer as much as possible on the affirmation on the Calvinistic confirmation of this most important understanding of anthropology and hamartiology, and focus little attention on Nate's post, although naturally, refutation will take place in the flow of this post.

I do believe that one's approach and definition of this subject, will guide the understanding of their view on soteriology, so as Nate spoke, and also others throughout the years, total depravity is really where the debate needs to start. When a Calvinist states that man is totally depraved, they mean that the man's nature is completely corrupt, perverse and sinful throughout. This "total" is NOT a means to say that every man is as evil as they could possibly be. I have heard R.C. Sproul say that even Hitler didn't murder his mother. So, we are speaking here of man's total inability of spiritual good. The word "total" is speaking of the total corruption because of sin and it extends to every part of a man, his body and his soul and has affected his mind, will, etc.



As a result of this, man is completely unable to do anything spiritually good. Man is so spiritually bankrupt that he can do nothing pertaining to his salvation, unless first regenerated by the Spirit of God. What this does NOT mean is that man can do no good on a human level of interaction. We have all seen Mother Teresa, Bill Gates and Gandhi and asked ourselves, "How can someone say that they are doing nothing good?" When the Calvinist speaks of man doing nothing good, we are speaking of the spiritual deadness not the standard that man imparts to one another. There are two things to consider when speaking of good; there is the outward good and the inward good. The outward good, is keeping the commands of God. When one does not lie, cheat, steal, murder or slander these are outwardly good, and, we as man, can see this good. But, the most important, according to Christ himself, is the inward good of intentions of the act. This inward good is pit against the perfection of the Father who is holy and undefiled by sin. Even Christ says: you shall not murder (outward good), but I say that even if you are angry with your brother you have already murdered in your heart. (spiritual depravity compared to God's holiness)

So, that is the overview of this view, now I want to show the Scriptural proof of this thought of us being completely depraved and dead in our sin.

Even though Nate has tried to escape the subject of death in the garden (even telling us to throw out Romans 5), it is very clear that Scripture warrants that in the garden, not only physical death was to come to pass, but on that DAY spiritual death happened.

Genesis 1:31a tells us that when God was done creating He said:

God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good.

So, we see first that God describes His creation as being "very good." We then have the command of God about the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God says this:

but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Genesis 2:17

Notice that God tells Adam that IN THAT DAY you shall surely die. If God is speaking only of a physical death here, you would think God to be a liar, for in that day Adam did not die, for he continued to live. On the contrary, you would think that if God was speaking of a spiritual death that we would have some proof in the Bible. Here is where Nate said to throw out Romans 5 because it NEVER speaks of a spiritual death, but I would have to completely disagree. Look at Romans 5:12,18

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.

Romans 5:12,18

Notice that through the one sin, CONDEMNATION happened and through on act of righteousness there resulted justification of LIFE to all men. Does any think that justification means simply a physical life? Or is Paul telling us that through sin we have all died, spiritually, but through Christ we have all been brought justification of SPIRITUAL life. The Greek word here for "condemnation" (katakrima) means a "damnatory sentence."

I believe just through this one verse (there are others) we can see that Adam literally died on THAT DAY, spiritually.

You would also think that if this truly happened that there would be some "fallout" because of this death of sin. Which, of course, we have. God goes from calling His creation, "very good" to now the first murder happening in Genesis 4:8 and then we have the Nephilim in Genesis 6 and then finally God simply states:

Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Genesis 6:5

And just so that you don’t get the idea that this was only pre-flood and things were differently afterwards Genesis 8:21 states again:

the LORD said to Himself, “I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth;

The Greek word used here for “intent” means “framework or purpose.” So the framework and purpose of man’s heart is to do evil, not good.

But what happened? How did God go from saying that man was created good to saying that he was framed, inclined and purposed for evil?

Sin. What was the punishment for that sin? Genesis 2:17 states that if they ate from the tree that would “surely die” and every since then people have responded and taught like the devil taught when he said in Genesis 3:4, “You surely will not die!” To say that we have not died, to be honest, is how SATAN HIMSELF RESPONDED!

To continue in thought on the deadness of man you would then expect the rest of the Bible to teach it, and it very explicitly does. You really have to do some dancing to try and reinvent what the word, "dead" means.

I will quote my good friend Josh here:

We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.
1 Jn 3:14.

-Passed from death to life is pretty clear here.

But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel- 2 Tim 1:10

-Christ did not abolish physical death, and the spiritual death that is abolished is not your definition of the second death in Revelation, it is the human condition of spiritual death from birth. Notice the antithesis is bringing life though the light of the gospel.

I would have to agree with Josh here, it is very clear why Christ came: to abolish our spiritual death. Look at on of the most popular verses in evangelism:

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life.
Romans 6:23

This part is going to get lengthy, but I hope that the vastness of it will help one understand that this doctrine is not just found in one part of the Bible, but the Bible is filled with this doctrine. I will link the Scripture references instead of writing them all out.

As we have already stated, Adam's sin caused death to the whole human race (Romans 5:12) and so we also see in Ephesians 2:1-3 and Colossians 2:13 both telling us of this deadness in our sin.

David confessed that he, and other men, were born into sin: Psalm 51:5; 58:3

As a result of this sin in the garden man has been darkened to the truths of God and our hearts and minds are corrupt and evil: Gen 6:5; 8:21; Ecclesiastes 9:3; Jeremiah 17:9; Mark 7:21-23; John 3:19; Romans 8:8; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Eph 4:17-19; 5:8; Titus 1:15.

Not only this but we are actually slaves to sin, under Satan's control and told that we are children of Satan: John 8:44; Eph 2:1,2; 2 Timothy 2:25,26; 1 John 3:10; 1 John 5:19; John 8:34; Romans 6:20; Titus 3:3

I will repost a little from what I did in my opening here. Unlike Nate, I believe that Romans 3 is a perfect example of us before we are with Christ, before we are regenerated, and that is that "no one is good, no one seeks for God, that we have become useless" and that Romans 8:8 tells us that "no one in the flesh can please God." These apply to us. Nate tried to go back to Psalm 14 to say that this is talking about the fool, but before we are in Christ, are we not all fools? We are called children of the devil (John 8:44), children of wrath (Eph 2:3); haters of God, slaves to sin (John 8:34); and Ephesians 4:17-19 describes those without Christ as futile of the mind, darkened, excluded, and hardness of heart. Does not 1 Corinthians 2:26,27 tell us that we were fools? The point is that before you are in Christ you are a fool! After Christ, you are only a fool to the world, but in reality you are the wisest because God has given you the wisdom from above. (James 3)

This is all because we are totally depraved of any spiritual good. God explicitly tells us that

For all of us have become like one who is unclean,
And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment;
And all of us wither like a leaf,
And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Isaiah 64:6

Everything that we would see as "righteous" God sees as literally a bloody "menstrual rag." Even Job tells us:

Who can make the clean out of the unclean? No one!
Job 14:4

Do you see this? Job actually starts this chapter off by saying that man from woman is "...full of turmoil (or trouble)"

Jeremiah continues in this understanding of the complete depravity of man:

Can the Ethiopian change his skin
Or the leopard his spots?
Then you also can do good
Who are accustomed to doing evil.

Jeremiah 13:23

It is almost embarrassing how many verses speak about the complete evilness of man's nature. Nate and I said at the beginning of this discussion that we must both come to the fullness of Scripture to see how our theologies "play out" and I would have to say that the Calvinist doctrine takes the full of Scripture to describe our condition, while it is not easy to hear, it is definitely truth.

Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness?
Romans 6:16

Notice that if you are a slave to sin that is whom you obey, you are one or the other, not both. If you are evil's slave then you must obey your master. How do we ever come out of our depraved mind to follow Christ? How can we obey our Master who calls out to us: Repent! It can only happen by God's grace, through regeneration and the effectual call, but that is for later in our debate.

I believe that Matthew 23:27,28 allow us to understand fully what we see while we are here on this earth. Nate said that Jesus never speaks of total depravity, yet Jesus does and I will give you one example and leave you with this. While we see others as doing good, like I said outwardly, God's standard, which is perfect, is to judge us inwardly.

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. So you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.

Matthew 23:27,28

May we never underestimate our sin, but may we hate it and try to rid ourselves of it. When one underestimates sin, they will only be more liable to fall into it.

Soli Deo Gloria

Read More......

Total Depravity - Opposed

By Nate Asper

Alright, now it all starts for real. The actual debate. Let me restate for those who have not kept up with everything that I am opposing Calvinism but am absolutely NOT and Arminian. There are more views than just those two.

Realize also that the Calvinist doctrine rises and falls on Total Depravity.

I believe a mountain of evidence exists to show why we are not totally depraved. Again, we are keeping this debate as short as possible while trying to cover a lot of ground feel free to comment though Seth and I may move along before all comments get answered. Thanks to all for your interest and participation. There are certainly less productive things one could do with their time than search the scriptures. This post may be lengthy, though I see Total Depravity as the key to this whole debate so trust me, shorter posts will follow!

Basically a quick definition of Total Depravity as I understand it. Man, after the fall, is no longer capable of believing the gospel. He cant repent as he is "dead." He cannot choose God, save for God's irresistable grace. I think this is the basic idea. Now, there is so much wrong with this that it may take me a while to sift through it, so bear with me. Let's start in Genesis. Adam and Eve sin and God gives his curses. Earlier, he states that "in the day ye eat thereof, thou shalt surely die." After the sin, God further explains his judgments. He touches only on the aspects of physical death, a "return to the dust." He also guarded the tree of life so they could not live forever. Now, if they had been rendered spiritually dead, wouldnt this appear somewhere in the curses. If this Calvinist doctrine is true, then God does not even come close to telling man the whole truth. Throw out Romas 5 as well, since their is absolutely no mention of spiritual death here. "Death passed upon all men." True, though based on what God said we have to say this a physical death. I know you all want to claim the spiritual death here, but to say so is only possible when one reads ideas into the text.


Now, let me clarify a few things. I do believe spiritual death has its roots in the garden of Eden. I believe that spiritual death is important, but we need to look closely and take things within their context. I have heard scores of Calvinist use the "corpse" logic when explaining total depravity. Dead people cannot respond to life saving medicine and so on.
Likewise, the spirtually dead cannot respond to the gospel without a miracle. A quick side note...please stop using this analogy!! It is so bad. Remember, a corpse also cannot respond to poison. Or a gun shot. A spiritual corpse would not then be completely immoral, but rather, completely ammoral. The truth is, we are not spiritually dead but we have a sin nature. The innocence of man was lost when he ate of the fruit. We are born sinners. The Bible says we are sinners from the womb. Paul states several times (many in Rom. 6) that we are "slaves to sin." Now we cant be slaves and be dead. We are born slaves to sin because of our sin nature.
Remember, take the Bible in its full context. Dont jump on the Eph. 2:1 bandwagon too quickly because you ingnore too many other scriptures that use metaphors that would contradict your conclusions. These must work together, and I will show you how during this argument.

Let's take a look at spiritual death. What is it? Well, spiritual death does indeed exist though it is referred to as "the second death" in Revelation 20:14. Spirtual death and physical death work together. When we physically die, we will face judgment for our earthly actions. Those who have not accepted Christ will be cast into the lake of fire...the second death...spiritual death. Spiritual death is an eternal death. The concept taught is two deaths for the unsaved, one for the saved. Otherwise we would certainly read "third death" in Revelation. The original spiritual death, the physical death and the final spiritual death of being cast into hell.
Spiritual death occurs after death though it is a sentence from birth. This is very very important to understand. We are born sinners which carries a payment. This is where Romans 6:23 comes in. Earlier in Rom. 6 we were "slaves to sin" then freed, and finally we read "the wages of sin is death."
Spiritual or physical? Well, both. The bigger issue though is certainly spiritual death, though neither can be escaped. We will all die physically, and all have since being denied the tree of life. That is a given. But not all will die spiritually, which is why this verse is so vitally important.
The wages of sin is death...eternal separation from God in hell. Wages of course, speaks of a payment or penalty. What we earn, so to speak. When we are born in our sin nature, we are automatically sentenced to death (I'm talking spiritual death). That is the meaning of Eph. 2:1 when we were "dead" in trespasses and sins. We certainly were, in that we were sentenced to eternal death because of our sins. We are as prisoners on death row. We often refer to these sentenced to death as "dead men" or "as good as dead."
You must understand the metaphor and how it relates to the other scriptures.
Biblical understanding of spiritual death clearly teaches that it occurs after physical death as the end result of sin. It is the wages. The payment. It is a simple concept really. We all sin and those who have accepted Christ have His righteousness and he sacrificed his perfect blood to atone and satisfy the debt. We are "pardoned." Those who have not accepted are unable to offer any sufficient atonement for their sins. Their sentence has never been pardoned and the end result..."execution."
Spiritual death and eternal separation from God. I love the way James puts it in 1:14-15 when he says that "lust when it is conceived brings forth sin.
Sin, WHEN IT IS FINISHED, bringeth forth death." It is so clear biblically that death is bot a CONDITION of sin but a RESULT of sin. I must move on.

Total Depravity also makes it impossible to follow scriptural commands. God "commands all men everywhere to repent." How can a perfectly just God lay forth such an unreasonable demand? Many Calvinists have told me that a command does not necessarily imply the ability to keep it. Flawed thinking.
If God gives a command and then threatens to punish those who do not comply that absolutely implies the ability to obey. Remember, perfectly just. The Calvinist should find this a rather vexing situation. Man is so corrupt and unable to repent, yet God then somehow justly punishes man for doing what he is from birth unable to do. This certainly is out of line with God's character.

Even more condemning to total depravity is that Jesus appears to not believe it. In Mark 4:11-12 Jesus speaks in parables as a judgement against the obstinate Jews. They kept his message from being understood by them lest "they might turn and be forgiven." Had they heard the gospel preached
clearly, they might have repented. Jesus also "marvelled" at the unbelief
of his listeners in Mark 6:6. Had he believed in Total Depravity, this would be no marvel to the Son of God at all.

The Bible also teaches about the conscience being seared and the heart being hardened. Paul referes to it when he states that when people who repeatedly sin "sear" their conscience. In I Tim. he is referring to unsaved false teachers. Total depravity would seem to teach hardness of heart from birth but the Bible says it is a consequence of repeated sin. Eph. 4:19 says that they are "past feeling" and have given themselves to greediness and uncleanness.

I will start to conclude by looking at few scriptures. I always hear John
6:44 from Calvinist and that men are only saved when God draws them. They make a point of the Greek word meaning "dragging." This is quite contrary to Calvinist doctrine though if through the irresistable grace the sinner immediately comes willingly. Context context context. Read vs. 45. Every man that hears the teaching and learns of it, comes to God. He is "drawn"
by the Holy Spirit's power which accompanies the Word of God. It seems clear that an "inner miracle" is not what is being talked about here, but rather men come to God when they listen and respond to the gospel's ministry. I Pet. 1:23 and James 1:18 also show that these two men believe that salvation comes through the Word of God, not an "effectual call" or "inward miracle." That is what Paul is saying when he says "faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. "

I suppose I should wrap it up here. I dont want to go on and on forever, as I want this to be educational and profitable rather than repetitive and tedious. Let me finish by saying this. Take your eyes off the five points of Calvinism for a minute and just look at the gospel. Dont look at with the intention of molding into a philosophical view but rather take it at face value. Total Depravity seems to only function if man is spiritually dead from birth. That is obviously not the case. To believe so is to willingly be fooled in my opinion. The teaching on this is very clear. I often here Calvinists say that we need to take the Bible in its full context and let the bible interpret the Bible. I totally agree. Just make sure you practice this. To believe total depravity and spirutal death from birth is a clear disregard for the context of the Bible.

Until next time...God Bless

Nate

Read More......

Why Do Calvinists Evangelize?

The question has been posed to a lot of us by our friends and brothers, Nate and Adam, so I figured I would take a short post to explain, "Why Calvinists Evangelize." Nate and Adam are not saying that Calvinists DON'T evangelize, but they are simply asking, "Why do we evangelize?" I will have to say that Dominic Bnonn Tennant had a great, succinct reason for the Calvinist evangelistic reasons. Here is his comment fully:

Calvinism does not contradict itself here; you have simply misunderstood the process of causation. God will save his elect; and evangelism is the means by which he will do this. To therefore say that evangelism is unnecessary to election in a Calvinistic framework is a contradiction in terms. The two are causally related by God's decree. No doubt God could save people apart from evangelism, but he does not. Your objection makes no more sense to the Calvinist than if you had proposed that we need not eat, since God will sustain our bodies. Of course, God does indeed sustain our bodies; but he uses food as the means to do this.

We learn that in Romans 10:17 the means by which people are saved:

So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ

Just as Mr. Tennant has stated, God's elect will come to Christ and all of them will be saved. Not more, not less. We see this in many places but there is a great look at this in Revelation 13:8

All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.

Revelation 13:8

Notice when the book of life was written: before the foundation of the world. So how will these, who are written in the book of life, come to salvation? Again, John 6:44 tells us what happens that we don't see, and that is that God draws every one of His elect to His side, and Romans 10:17 tells us in what fashion this happens: through the preaching of the Gospel. There is no where in the rest of the Bible that is mentioned where someone comes to Christ by any other fashion, but by the drawing of God by the preaching of the Gospel.

We see this happening many times in the word of God. Whether it is with the apostles, especially Peter and his sermons, or Philip and the eunuch. But, the main way that we see both of these, the drawing and the Gospel preached, shown is in Lydia's conversion in Acts 16:14

A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.

This is very specific on how this took place. Paul preached, God drew or opened, and Lydia responded.

So, the point is that we find that just because we are told that God has determined His elect, that He does the drawing, does not mean that this excludes us from preaching the gospel.

But why does the Calvinist preach the Gospel? Is it just "empty lip service" that we do because we are supposed to? The answer is that we preach the same reason that an Arminian preaches or anyone who claims to be a follower preaches the Gospel: Because we love Jesus Christ who died for us.

We preach because, like the blind man that was made to see and went and proclaimed what Christ had done, we, yes even as Calvinists, cannot help but go and proclaim what God has done for us through Jesus, His Son. The blind man said exactly what should be said today:

He then answered, “Whether He is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.”
John 9:25

I do not know exactly how all this "goes down" but the one thing that I do know is that I was once dead but I am now alive. Praise God. I love my God and I want all to know about His forgiveness because I want to see them saved, that is WHY I preach. God has ordained the gospel to save and He uses us useless humans to do this. He uses my imperfect words to proclaim His perfect salvation, how could I keep my mouth shut about this?

I do feel as though the Calvinist has a huge advantage over the Arminian, or libertarian free will thinker. The Calvinist knows that there is no one in heaven and no one in hell because of what I have done. Now, will I have to pay for my disobedience? Yes, I do believe this. Will I be rewarded for my obedience? Yes. But, I also do not believe that if I run into an atheist apologist and I can't answer his questions appropriately that I am going to be the one sending him to hell. God is not in heaven thinking, "well, if you would have just said this, that atheist would have come to Me." Even more powerful? Look at Matthew 11:20-24

Then He began to denounce the cities in which most of His miracles were done, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had occurred in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. "Nevertheless I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you. "And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will descend to Hades; for if the miracles had occurred in Sodom which occurred in you, it would have remained to this day."Nevertheless I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you."
Matthew 11:20-24

Simply notice that God DOES know what would have saved some of the people from going to hell, yet He withheld these miracles from them for His will. Just notice again: For if the miracles had occurred in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. So, God says that they would have repented had He shown them the same miracles, but chose not to. Interesting insight from Christ.

I know that if I preach the gospel exactly as it has been handed down then I do not have to worry about changing it to make it more appealing, nor do I have to worry that I did not give a full explanation that WOULD have turned that person to Christ. This is the reason why Calvinists have always been such great evangelists, because of their belief that the Gospel is the ONLY way that one will be saved, so there is no twisting it, there is no dressing it up, there is just the old fashioned preaching of it to the lost so that they will be saved, or so God's will is accomplished.

The Calvinist can also have full confidence that if he truly preaches the gospel and goes through his whole life with very little fruit of seeing people saved, his life is still a "success" because he lived out the calling that God called him to. So, no matter if he is a Peter or a Jeremiah, the Calvinist can rest that he has taken the word which was handed down once and for all, and contended for the faith. It is not about numbers, but it is about obedience to the calling. And the obedience flows from a love of our God, because He has saved us with His own blood.

Again, why do we preach the Gospel?

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Romans 5:8


Soli Deo Gloria.

Read More......

Calvinism Affirmed - Part I

First, I would like to thank Nate, once again, for wanting to discuss what I believe is a very important topic. We are going to discuss many things through the posts and also through the comments, which have already started, and where I believe most of the learning will happen. I have tried to read each comment thoroughly so that I can have those comments in mind as I give my brief overview of salvation. Again, this is brief, as Nate did, and I will exegete and explain more as we get into the actual five points.

As for Adam's comment that it is the Calvinist who likes to debate and not focus on other things, remember this was Nate's idea and I think we all need to think on these things for we are told to. Evangelizing is what we should all do, but it is not the only thing we are called to do.

As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ,
Ephesians 4:14-15

The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.
2 Timothy 2:2

holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.
Titus 1:9

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.
2 Timothy 2:15



Second, I am a Calvinist, there I said it...almost like an alcoholic. I also adhere to the Five Solas of the Reformation (click here for my posts on this subject) meaning that I totally deny the Roman Catholic faith and their understanding of justification and sanctification. Of course that is not all I deny based on the Five Solas but that is the start. I grew up in a Southern Baptist household (most of my mom's side of the family are SBC pastors, and so was my father) so for most of my life I was a hybrid of Arminian and Calvinist doctrine, more on the Arminian side, but nevertheless I was not totally in either camp.

For me, the turning point came in reading Jonathan Edwards' "Freedom of the Will" where I started to question my upbringing in the knowledge of Scripture. I started down the road of continually asking myself, "prove it." And when I said that, I meant to "prove it" only by Scripture and trying to throw out everything I had learned both emotionally and exegetically. This will probably happen for the rest of my life, but I thank God that He has answered my prayers in bringing me closer to Him through the study and walking in the Word of God.

Before I start, I do want to address some things that Adam has asked about to clear the air, so to speak. For one, I love preaching the Gospel to the lost. I don't want to "toot my horn" here but I just get tired of this characterization of Calvinists. So, if you would like hit the label "Evangelism" and take a look where we have been. I am not a "beacon" for the Calvinist faith in this area, but to say that Calvinist doctrine drives the person to not evangelize is a misnomer that usually comes from the opposition that has very little knowledge of the history or theology of Calvinism. I can say this because I have seen it from those who know little about Calvinism, but I have also seen that those who know much of Calvinist doctrine, yet oppose it, will NOT deny that true Calvinist are also great evangelists. Look to Roger Olson's book, "Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities." Dr. Olson is an Arminian, and of course denies Calvinism, but doesn't deny the impact that Calvinist have had in saving souls. If one would like to read more on this subject just read biographies of Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Bunyan, George Whitefield, Asahel Nettleton, Charles Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, John Gresham Machen, A.W. Pink, John MacArthur and many, many more. They were all men who were/are Calvinist with a focus on world missions and evangelism, not because they were "supposed to" but because they loved the Lord their God with all their heart and desired to see people saved.

Okay, enough of the "rant." Here is my overall view of salvation.

I believe that all one must do is repent and believe and they will be saved. I believe that true repentance is the first fruit of salvation and then much more fruit will follow. (John 15) I believe as James teaches us that faith without works is a dead faith, so the true faith, given by God (Phil 1:27) is a working faith. Again, Piper said it best:

I do not believe in salvation by faith plus works, but salvation by faith THAT works.

I do agree with the Word of God that "whosoever will" call upon the Lord will be saved, all that thirst may come, all who seek the Lord will find Him, but this leaves out an important facet of the equation which Jesus Christ Himself shows us in John 6:44 and that is, "How does one seek, thirst, or will to come to God?" Jesus answers this question, which we will get more in detail when we come to irresistable grace, but Jesus says:

No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.

Unlike Nate, I believe that Romans 3 is a perfect example of us before we are with Christ, before we are regenerated, and that is that "no one is good, no one seeks for God, that we have become useless" and that Romans 8:8 tells us that "no one in the flesh can please God." These apply to us. Nate tried to go back to Psalm 14 to say that this is talking about the fool, but before we are in Christ, are we not all fools? We are called children of the devil (John 8:44), children of wrath (Eph 2:3); haters of God, slaves to sin (John 8:34); and Ephesians 4:17-19 describes those without Christ as futile of the mind, darkened, excluded, and hardness of heart. Does not 1 Corinthians 2:26,27 tell us that we were fools? The point is that before you are in Christ you are a fool! After Christ, you are only a fool to the world, but in reality you are the wisest because God has given you the wisdom from above. (James 3)

I would also like to address quickly the usage of Nate's analogy with the term "gift." I will make this a simple decree: be careful in using analogies and applications that are not in the Bible. If you start doing this than can't we also say that since God is a Father, that all the traits of a father then apply to God? No, because God is eternal, He is not a man, He does not lie, He cannot change. Even though all these WOULD apply to earthly fathers. Just as these don't apply to God, then neither can we make an analogy of how WE see gifts given out, and how God gives the gift of salvation, unless stated specifically in the word of God.

So, salvation is attained through the election of God, predestination, gospel call, inward call, regeneration, conversion (faith and repentance), justification, sanctification and glorification. Of course, as we see it in our eyes, we repent and believe and that belief results in works. But, how it actually works, "behind the scenes" is a completely more complex amount of events.

Couple more things and I will end with this "overview." I believe that we are completely dead in our sins before Christ and that this happened in the garden with Adam's sin. If one does not believe that this was a spiritual death then one has to interpret Genesis 2:16,17 in a very interesting way, for it states:

The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Genesis 2:16-17

Notice that the text specifically states, "in the day that you eat...you will surely die." Adam did not die physically the DAY he ate, but he did die spiritually the DAY he ate. Also, this is reiterated in Romans 5, which the entire chapter speaks of only a spiritual death and spiritual restoration.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.

Romans 5:12,18

If Adam's sin did not pass on the spiritual death, this passage makes no sense, because this passage specifically speaks of "condemnation" in verse 18 and throughout the text. So because of our death in sin (Eph 2:1, Colossians 2:13) we must be regenerated to be brought from life to death. We must be called by Christ, just as He did Lazarus, to "come forth" before we can come from our grave to the knowledge of our Christ. This is how we cross over from fool to heir, death to life, natural man to spiritual man, flesh to spiritual, all so that we can now please God through His Spirit.

Again, I really appreciate Nate and his coming to have this discussion. I hope that this is a good discussion between men who love God and desire to uphold the word of God and preach the Gospel to a dying world.

Read More......

Calvinism Opposed - Part I

This is an overview of Nate's view of Salvation. Again, he will be taking the side opposed to Calvinism, while Seth from Contend Earnestly is taking the affirmative. - Seth

By Nate A.

Let me preface my comments by saying that I am not a Calvinist nor an Arminian. I would consider myself a zero point Calvinist and I find many flaws in the Arminians doctrine as well. That said, here is how I see salvation laid out in the Bible:

Sin first entered the world through Adam's sin in the Garden of Eden. After that, death passed upon all men. Man was incapable of attaining eternal life in heaven because sin separated them from God. God sent Jesus to the earth to be the pefect blood sacrifice that would atone for the sins of the entire world. I believe this atonement was made complete when Jesus cried on the cross: "It is finished."

Jesus has done his part but man also bears some responsibility if they wish to attain salvation and eternal life in heaven. Repeatedly, scripture states that "whosoever believeth in him" or "whosover shall call upon the name of the Lord" shall receive this free gift of salvation. These comments point out a couple of things. First, salvation is not by works but of faith and faith alone. Eph. 2:8-9 tells us that we are saved by grace through faith. When the Philipian jailier asked Paul "What must I do to be saved?"


Paul responded "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved."
Nothing else was added. The second thing I notice is that salvation is available to all. This is one place where I feel Calvinisim fails. We will get into this much more specifically later on, but there are numerous places in scriptures where we see that anyone who wishes to be saved can be saved.
God even assures us that we will find him, when WE seek with all of our heart. I certainly do not believe that man can save himself or that man plays any part in the saving process. Jesus did it all and it was finished on the cross. Atonement was made for all.

Romans and Ephesians both speak of salvation as a "gift." This gift was made available to everyone because of Jesus' sacrifce and paying the penalty for our sins. He took our punishment upon him and in turn offered us his righteousness. Many people have refused to accept this free gift that God offers. Many people have also accepted. The difference between them, from what scripture appears to say, is not elect vs. non elect but rather a repentant attitude and accepting of the gift versus a willful rejection of Jesus' sacrfice. Let me give an illustration of how I believe this works.
Lets say that I have a gift for you. All you have to do is come over and get it. Its a really nice gift and I'm sure you would like it. And its very easy to attain, just come over any time and get it. This is what God has offered us. However, many people choose to never come over and get their gift. Its theirs. Its paid for. It even has their name on it. But until they come over and get it, it is not accepted. Salvation is the same way. God does not go out and hand the gift to some and not to others.
Remember, we are saved by his grace through faith, not the other way around.
Providing the gift is gracious, but going out and handing it to someone requires no faith. God has made salvation so simple that even a young child can understand the gospel. But it does require faith, a child like faith we are told. People sometimes will say that if God offers me this gift and it requires some effort on my part to go and get it, doesnt that mean I am doing something to achieve salvation? No. By us going to God to recieve our free gift, that in no way means that we then somehow paid for that gift or did anything to deserve it. Faith is how we respond to God. Without faith, it is impossible to please God.

That is where I will leave it for now. I will get into things more specifically once we tackle the five points of Calvininsm. This is just an overview of salvation and how I see it in the Bible. The goal of this whole discussion on Calvinism is not to offend or see who knows more about the Bible, it is to see what the Bible says on these issues. I dont want to twist the scriptures to get them to say what I want nor do I believe thats what Seth wants either. But we do have some differences of opinion and it is always good to have our beliefs challenged.

God Bless

Nate

7-19-07

Read More......

Calvinism "Debate"

I have been emailed by someone who has asked me to engage in an email discussion on Calvinism and the doctrines of grace. I thought that I would go ahead and publish our discussions on the blog so that we could get some interaction and also to keep us both held accountable to our discussions so that no misrepresentations, or little of them, will take place.

Nate will be starting us off to show his views on salvation and the like, basically as an overview and then I will give my overview of the same subject.

After we engage in this, we will then discuss our thoughts on the five points of Calvinism. I hope this will be engaging and informative.

Read More......