Calvinism and Arminianism are both wrong!

[Jim Parker]

I wanted to hear what evidence existed for BOTH Arminianism and Calvinism being wrong

Well, that sends us back to your original post.
It's a good one and a challenging one.
I'll get it a go.
Later.

iakov the fool

 

[Jim Parker]

Here's a piece.

Arminianism:
Free Will or Human Ability
Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man’s freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it.

So far, so good. If man were totally unable to repent and believe then the preaching of the gospel would be a useless exercise. The Holy Spirit draws man to the truth (as heard in the preaching of the Gospel) but man must receive it and must persist in following Jesus.

Col 1:21-23 And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight —IF YOU CONTINUE IN YOUR FAITH, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel.

Jas 1:12 Blessed is the man who endures temptation; for when he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him

Rev 2:10 “Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and you will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.

Man’s freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature.

To some extent man’s will is so enslaved.

Ro 6:16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?

The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God’s Spirit and be regenerated or resist God’s grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit’s assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man’s act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner’s gift to God; it is man’s contribution to salvation.

That seems right though the word “contribution” gives me pause. One who correctly identifies the truth and accepts a gift does not actually “contribute” anything to the process. However without those acts of receiving, he will not have eternal life.

Mar 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

Calvinism:
Total Inability or Total Depravity
Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not — indeed he cannot — choose good over evil in the spiritual realm.

Nah…. I don’t buy that.

By this line of reasoning, all who are saved are saved because God chose to save them and all who are damned are damned because God chose to damn them. Since all have sinned (Ro 3:23) and God does not show preference to anyone, (Ro 2:11) the notion that God picks some for salvation and some for condemnation is in direct contradiction to scripture.

Scripture repeated states that it is God’s will that ALL of mankind be saved.

1 Jn 4:14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.

Jn 3:16-17 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

2 Pe 3:9 The Lord is …. not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit’s assistance to bring a sinner to Christ — it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature.

Regeneration does not give man a “new nature.” It restores the original good nature that man had before the fall. God created all things good. (Gen 1:31)

Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God’s gift of salvation— it is God’s gift to the sinner, not the sinner’s gift to God.

The gift of faith is from God but, it must be exercised by man. If faith is something that changes the way a person functions at a core level, then it is not really faith, it is “reprogramming.” If faith makes one operate in a different way, if its urging is irresistible, then it is not faith at all. We would say that such a person had been “brain-washed.”

Scripture indicates that faith must be acted upon in order to be effective. The “acting” is man’s “contribution.”

Mat 9:29 Then He touched their eyes, saying, “According to your faith let it be to you.

Mat 21:21 Assuredly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but also if you say to this mountain, ‘Be removed and be cast into the sea,' it will be done.

Hebrews 11 list people who acted on their faith.

The Calvinist view presents faith as if it were a new program which God downloads into the brains of those He chooses to save but not into those He chooses to sends to hell to be tortured forever by fire because they didn’t do what He made it impossible for them to do by not downloading His “Faith” programming into their CPU.


iakov the fool

 

[atpollard]

Deleted misread post.

 

[Butch5]

This thread was originally CREATED because people kept posting statements like yours in other discussions, but never really offering anything substantive to back up their bold positions. I wanted to hear what evidence existed for BOTH Arminianism and Calvinism being wrong, without crapping all over any other threads. So far, only one real taker who claims that neither properly addresses the issue of "Paul's thorn in the flesh, a messenger from Satan".

Everyone else has preferred to weigh in with either "one side is right" or just present unsupported claims that "both sides are wrong" without any real examples of how or why. If you think you can show where both Calvinism and Arminianism are wrong on any of the points presented in the OP (which is just a summary of what the two views actually believe), I would love to see it.

Sure! Calvinists claim that they are unconditionally elected and that they were chosen before the foundation of the world. There's nothing in Scripture that teaches this. They claim Ephesians 1 yet that passage isn't talking about Calvinists. The Arminian claims that God chose people before the foundation of the world yet it was based on God looking down through the corridors of time and seeing who would choose Christ and then choosing them. However, there is no such thing found in Scripture. Yet, the Arminian's claim is based on Ephesians 1 also.

Calvinists say the Holy Spirit can't be resisted, yet Scripture tells us that the Jews resisted the Holy Spirit.

51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. (Acts 7:51 KJV)

Calvinists and some Arminians say that salvation can't be lost yet Jesus said some believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.

13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. (Lk. 8:13 KJV)

None of the 5 points of Calvinism are stated in Scripture. They're all by way of inference.

 

[Butch5]

Yes! Those horrible theologian people who make it their life's work to study and expound the scriptures and upset all the dilettantes and dabblers who are much more capable than they because they "have the Holy Spirit" which, as everyone knows, no theologian could possible have.

And yes, I was being sarcastic.
It is an example of arrogance on the part of those who despise the work of those who dedicate their lives to the study of scripture along with the original languages and culture in which the scriptures arose. It is arrogant to assume that one is specially anointed with wisdom and understanding by the Holy Spirit and that others, who devote their lives to that same study, because they have Th.D. after their names, do not have any such anointing.

And from some ( not all ) of those same "Holy Spirit led," self-appointed, Bible experts comes some of the most absurd, babbling nonsense. It was just such a self decllared ignorant person who, claiming to be the sole possessor of the "Spirit of prophesy" founded the 7th Day Adventist church from which spun off the Watchtower Society Bible and tract society of Jehovah's Witnesses which was founded by another fraud who had absolutely no theological training.

One wonders how many of the "Spirit led" part-time, unschooled, theologian despising, Bible experts have run across the verse that says, "Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you." (Mat 7:1-2)

But, you are also correct in that some very highly educated, Th.D. theologians have also come out with utter garbage and have influenced, no, "contaminated" and "infected" large sections of the Church with their errors.

Just sayin': let's try to avoid painting with too broad a brush, eh?

And from some we got, Eternal Conscious Torment, the Heavenly Destiny doctrine, the Immortal Soul doctrine, the Pre-Trib doctrine,
Dispensationalism, Just War theory, and so on.

 

[Jim Parker]

And from some we got, Eternal Conscious Torment, the Heavenly Destiny doctrine, the Immortal Soul doctrine, the Pre-Trib doctrine,
Dispensationalism, Just War theory, and so on.

Yeah. That's what I said: "But, you are also correct in that some very highly educated, Th.D. theologians have also come out with utter garbage and have influenced, no, "contaminated" and "infected" large sections of the Church with their errors." (#99)

 

[Jim Parker]

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Piece number 2;

Arminianism:
Universal Redemption or General Atonement
Christ’s redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved but did not actually secure the salvation of anyone. Although Christ died for all men and for every man, only those who believe on Him are saved…… Christ’s redemption becomes effective only if man chooses to accept it.

That seems to me to be what scripture says.

John 3:16-18 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

From this bit of scripture we find that:
(1) God loves the entire world, not selected individuals.
(2) Whoever believes in Jesus can have eternal life.
(3) God didn’t send Jesus to condemn anyone.
(4) Whoever does not believe is condemned to forfeit eternal life.
(5) Having eternal life or the second death is based on belief in Christ or declining to believe.

His death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe,

Disagree with the premise that sinners are "pardoned":

This statement is based on the juridical view of sin and salvation by which sin is a crime against God requiring that the criminal (sinner) be punished. That view comes from the error of Augustine, based on his background in Greek philosophy (particularly Platonic) which infected all of Latin Christianity and, by the scholastic’s application of Aristotelian logic, resulted in the view that sin was a great offense against God which angered Him to the point that it caused Him to demand that His offended dignity be avenged and, therefore, salvation was salvation FROM God who had taken up a vendetta against all of mankind because all sinned against Him and justified His intent to torture every criminal sinner in hell for all eternity.

The vast majority of western Christianity unfortunately holds this view. (Roman Catholic and Protestant.)

… but it did not actually put away anyone’s sins.

Also disagree:

Scripture says; (Heb 9:26) (Christ) then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Calvinism:
Particular Redemption or Limited Atonement
Christ’s redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them.

No way.

Scripture:

John 3:16-17 (again) For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

1 John 4:14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.

His death was a substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners.

Nope: Sin does not have a “penalty.” Paul stated that the WAGES (not “penalty”) of sin is death. This is more of the juridical view of atonement by which it is proposed that God is the creator of death rather than death being the result of removing oneself from intimate connection with the only source of life, the only being Who has life by nature; God the Word made flesh.

Jesus death was substitutionary but he suffered our death which was the "wages" of sin, not the "penalty FOR" sin. By His death and resurrection, Christ saved mankind from permanent, physical death, not from God, Who wanted to torture us in hell forever for having offended His dignity.

John 1:4a In Him was life
Ro 6:23b the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

In addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ’s redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation, including faith which unites them to Him.

Faith is not an active force or glue by which God affixes one to Christ whether we want to be affixed or not. In order for faith to be effective for salvation it must be combined with action. The action does not cause salvation but is necessary for salvation to be completed.

James 2:14-17 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

The form of the question, “Can faith save him?” is such that a “no” answer is assumed.

James 2:18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

James essentially said here, “Talk is cheap.” And “Show me your faith.” The clear indication is that faith without the acts of faith is not really faith.

And, to the notion that works will “automatically” flow from faith because the Holy Spirit will operate the believer like a puppet, I say that God did not create man to be puppets but rather He created man in His image and likeness. God is not someone’s puppet and neither is man God’s puppet.

The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, therefore guaranteeing their salvatio

Since Christ died for all, it would follow from the above statement that all have the gift of faith infallibly applied to them. So, according to scripture combined with that bit of Calvinism, all of mankind would be saved.

1 Cor 5:14-15 For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died; and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

iakov the fool
(beaucoup dien cai dau)


DISCLAIMER: By reading the words posted above, you have made a free will choice to expose yourself to the rantings of iakov the fool. The poster assumes no responsibility for any temporary, permanent or otherwise annoying manifestations of cognitive dysfunction that, in any manner, may allegedly be related to the reader’s deliberate act by which he/she has knowingly allowed the above rantings to enter into his/her consciousness. No warrantee is expressed or implied. Individual mileage may vary. And, no, I don't want to hear about it. No sniveling! Enjoy the rest of your life here and the eternal one to come.