The Invention of Irresistible Grace

[Vince]

Jacob Arminius, a brilliant Calvinist scholar, began studying Scripture on his own, and was amazed to learn that the grace of God is given to all men, that all men are called to repentance, and that God wants all men to be saved. He also learned that God elects (chooses) to save all who believe, but He does not elect anyone to repent, to believe, to accept Christ, or reject Christ.

And Arminius had discovered a fatal philosophical flaw in Calvinism that proved that the system could not possibly work. In blending the pagan philosophy of unconditional election with Christianity, St. Augustine had taught that since man is dead in trespasses and sin, he cannot respond to God. This contradicted Scripture, which gives three instances of Jesus speaking to a dead person, who both heard and obeyed Him.

St. Augustine taught that God gave grace only to the elect, which contradicted the Biblical teaching that the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. And here, both St. Augustine and John Calvin had made a fatal error.

Since man could not respond to God at all, the elect couldn't respond to God's grace. Period. The system can't work. Period.

 

[glorydaz]

Jacob Arminius, a brilliant Calvinist scholar, began studying Scripture on his own, and was amazed to learn that the grace of God is given to all men, that all men are called to repentance, and that God wants all men to be saved. He also learned that God elects (chooses) to save all who believe, but He does not elect anyone to repent, to believe, to accept Christ, or reject Christ.

And Arminius had discovered a fatal philosophical flaw in Calvinism that proved that the system could not possibly work. In blending the pagan philosophy of unconditional election with Christianity, St. Augustine had taught that since man is dead in trespasses and sin, he cannot respond to God. This contradicted Scripture, which gives three instances of Jesus speaking to a dead person, who both heard and obeyed Him.

St. Augustine taught that God gave grace only to the elect, which contradicted the Biblical teaching that the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. And here, both St. Augustine and John Calvin had made a fatal error.

Since man could not respond to God at all, the elect couldn't respond to God's grace. Period. The system can't work. Period.

It is, indeed, a fatal error. Being dead in trespasses and sins DOES NOT mean man is dead and can't respond to the grace of God. I'll use my analogy of the baby, again. The mother picks him up, and places him in a highchair. The tempting odor of oatmeal wafts through the air....she puts the spoon near the baby's mouth. He can turn his head away, or take a bite. The baby is not dead, as some would say. He is simply willful and controlled by his feelings and needs.

The grace of God is given to all men...Jesus on the cross is God's grace. He died for mankind. Partaking of the free gift is what man can either accept or reject. God prepares the food, brings man to the table, entices him to eat....He does everything but force man to take a bite.

I risk using such a simple analogy because, in spite of the scoffing that may come, it paints a clear picture of what some find so difficult.

 

[Drew]

In blending the pagan philosophy of unconditional election with Christianity, St. Augustine had taught that since man is dead in trespasses and sin, he cannot respond to God. This contradicted Scripture, which gives three instances of Jesus speaking to a dead person, who both heard and obeyed Him.

As my old friend mondar knows, I do not believe that grace is irresistable. But I do not think the above is a valid argument against the irresistable grace position.

I am fairly confident that mondar and others would respond with the assertion that these people who were raised from death were part of the elect who cannot resist grace, whether above ground or 6 feet under.

 

[Vince]

Actually, it is Scripture, not philosophy, that provides the basis best for the rejection of Calvinism. But the fact that the system can not possibly work will come up later with the philosophy of irresistible grace.

 

[Drew]

Actually, it is Scripture, not philosophy, that provides the basis best for the rejection of Calvinism. But the fact that the system can not possibly work will come up later with the philosophy of irresistible grace.

OK, please explain to me actually how the "raising of the three dead people" disproves irresistable grace.

For the sake of the discussion I will take the position of the "Calvinist" and make the following argument:

1. All men are born with no internal capacity to embrace God; (I believe Cavinists believe this);

2. Some men are born "pre-destined" to have that incapacity overcome by the irresistable grace of God who calls them to repentance by "overcoming" their innate incapacity to embrace God (I believe Calvinists also believe this);

3. Therefore, each of the three men "called to life" must have been part of the "elect" - those, as per item 2, who are saved in spite of their being entirely dead.

By the way, I do not believe in irrestistable grace, but I do not see how the "three dead people" argument has any legs.

 

[Joe67]

John 5:28-29
28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. KJV

Those who are damned will come forth but not by their choosing and will.

Joe

 

[mondar]

As my old friend mondar knows, ......

LOL, I am honored Drew.

 

[glorydaz]

God, in His great mercy, sent His Son...that whosoever believeth in Him might have eternal life.
All day long, God stretches forth His hand calling all men to repent and come to Him.

But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

Some resist the call..."ye would not".

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation for every one that believes.
Faith comes by hearing the Word of God...It's the power of the Word that works on man's heart to believe. Are all willing to forsake all and follow the Lord? Are all willing to repent? Although God stretches forth His hand...all day long, many "will not".

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

 

[Vince]

Since irresistible grace does not exist, it has nothing to do with the dead. Both St. Augustine and John Calvin taught that since man was dead in trespasses and sins, he could not respond in any way to God. They also taught that God gives grace only to the elect, in order for them to be saved.

Arminius discovered a philosophical flaw in their system: since man cannot respond at all to God, the elect cannot respond at all to God' grace. Calvinism cannot work.

 

[Vince]

Under the teaching and preaching of Arminius, revival broke out in the Netherlands. Free of Meni's doctrine of unconditional election, members of the Dutch Reformed Church swarmed to God and His Word. Pastors and churches proclaimed God's call for all men to come to Him, and many of them did.

Persecution broke out, with recorded instances of arrested pastors being released because the magistrates themselves had accepted the Word of God and would not persecute fellow Christians.

We do not know the name of the man who invented irresistible grace, only that he invented it sometime in the early 1600's. It is not found in the Bible, no church father believed in it, no church council believed in it, and no Protestant Reformer believed in it. Neither the Catholics, the Orthodox, nor the Protestants believed in it. Meni, St. Augustine, and John Calvin had not believed in it. Humorously enough, even the Dutch Reformed Church did not believe in it.

Irresistible grace is not a theological doctrine. It is not based on Scripture, nor is it based on a misunderstanding of Scripture. It is a philosophical concept, invented in the early seventeenth century to patch a fatal flaw in Calvinism.

 

[Joe67]

Job 33:14-18
14 For God speaketh once, yea twice, yet man perceiveth it not.

15 In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed;

16 Then he openeth the ears of men, and sealeth their instruction,

17 That he may withdraw man from his purpose, and hide pride from man.

18 He keepeth back his soul from the pit, and his life from perishing by the sword. KJV

Joe

 

[mondar]

We do not know the name of the man who invented irresistible grace, only that he invented it sometime in the early 1600's.

If you did a little reading about what really happened, you might know where the term "irresistible grace" came from.

 

[Vince]

Faced with the prospect of the Dutch Reformed Church turning from Calvin's Institutes (which can't work) to the Word of God, the leaders realized that it was time to use force. "Persecution" has a dirty ring to it, so a trial had to be staged first. Unlike a real Church Council, the Council of Dort would place only Calvinists as leaders. They would bring in Calvinists from other nations to make it appear to be a real Church Council, but the combined judge and jury would be stacked.

Arminians would be permitted to present their verses one at a time, and one by one those verses would be rejected on the basis of "the whole of Scripture." The verdict, which had already been finalized, would then be announced.

And, knowing all this, the Arminians agreed. Because they had a plan of their own, and they intended to win.

 

[mondar]

Faced with the prospect of the Dutch Reformed Church turning from Calvin's Institutes (which can't work) to the Word of God, the leaders realized that it was time to use force. "Persecution" has a dirty ring to it, so a trial had to be staged first. Unlike a real Church Council, the Council of Dort would place only Calvinists as leaders. They would bring in Calvinists from other nations to make it appear to be a real Church Council, but the combined judge and jury would be stacked.

Arminians would be permitted to present their verses one at a time, and one by one those verses would be rejected on the basis of "the whole of Scripture." The verdict, which had already been finalized, would then be announced.

And, knowing all this, the Arminians agreed. Because they had a plan of their own, and they intended to win.

LOL, why are you Jihadist Arminians always so eager to build conspiracy theories about things?

 

[Vince]

With the court stacked against them, the guilty verdict already finalized, and the Calvinists planning to kill them afterward, how did the Arminians expect to win?

With years of revival behind them, the Arminians had learned a few things:

The Word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword. Many of the judges were actually decent men and genuine Christians. Once they were taught the Word of God properly, many Calvinists had turned away from Meni's doctrine of unconditional election and accepted the Word of God. The Arminians expected this to happen during the trial.

Knowing that the judges had already decided to reject God's Word one verse at a time, citing "the whole of Scripture," the Arminians adopted a different strategy. They would attack Calvin's entire system as a unit.

Would it work? The judges thought so, so they banned the Arminians from participating in their trial.

 

[francisdesales]

Faced with the prospect of the Dutch Reformed Church turning from Calvin's Institutes (which can't work) to the Word of God, the leaders realized that it was time to use force. "Persecution" has a dirty ring to it, so a trial had to be staged first. Unlike a real Church Council, the Council of Dort would place only Calvinists as leaders. They would bring in Calvinists from other nations to make it appear to be a real Church Council, but the combined judge and jury would be stacked.

Arminians would be permitted to present their verses one at a time, and one by one those verses would be rejected on the basis of "the whole of Scripture." The verdict, which had already been finalized, would then be announced.

And, knowing all this, the Arminians agreed. Because they had a plan of their own, and they intended to win.

LOL, why are you Jihadist Arminians always so eager to build conspiracy theories about things?

 

[Vince]

It is bad enough that history records that the Council of Dort wasn't really a Church Council, that it was called to stop a revival, and that the trial of the Arminians was rigged. But if history had also recorded that the Arminians won...

The trial was held by the Calvinists, who made up 100% of the panel of the judges, the prosecution, the defense, and the witnesses for both sides. They piled up Scripture that didn't really teach Calvinism (I have five verses and you have three, so you must be wrong). Verses used by Arminians were presented one at a time, and each one was rejected on the basis of "the whole of Scripture." They announced that the Arminians were actually Catholics (If you believe true doctrine "A," you must believe false doctrine "B;" therefor, true doctrine "A" must be false.) And they taught the recently-invented philosophy of irresistible grace.

St. Augustine had taught his disciples that they were to kill those who disagreed with them, and now, having found the Arminians guilty, the Calvinists went to the government.

 

[francisdesales]

St. Augustine had taught his disciples that they were to kill those who disagreed with them, and now, having found the Arminians guilty, the Calvinists went to the government.

Citation, please, before you spread scandalous libel upon a man who cannot defend himself.

Regards

 

[Adullam]

Some people find God's grace irresistable! :yes

 

[Vince]

St. Augustine had taught his disciples that they were to kill those who disagreed with them, and now, having found the Arminians guilty, the Calvinists went to the government.

Citation, please, before you spread scandalous libel upon a man who cannot defend himself.

Regards

Hmmm. Tough one. I know I read it somewhere over the years, so I tried to find it.

I had no difficulty finding how Augustine blended polytheism into Christianity by having us worship dead saints. And it was easy to find how he blended idolatry into Christianity by teaching that the statues we were to pray to only reminded us of these saints.

There was no problem finding his teaching that Christians are to reject God's Word when it disagreed with Augustine, and it was equally easy to find John 8:47 "He who is of God hears God's words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God."

Likewise, it was easy to find his blending the Menichaen doctrine of a powerful priesthood into Christianity be teaching that if the priest didn't baptize your baby, it would go to Hell.

As far as killing those who disagreed with Augustine's teachings, the search got tougher. There is no problem finding his teaching that Christians are to practice persecution. The Inquisition quoted Augustine to justify torture and killing. Augustine personally supervised riots against his opponents and personally organized pograms against Jews, knowing that people were going to be killed in these activities. He taught that since it was right for the government to use torture, it was even more right for the Church to use it. There is no problem finding articles explaining that the New Testament and the early Church taught freedom of religion and that it is Augustine who blended persecution into Christianity with moral arguments. And it wasn't too hard to find articles with his teaching that Christians should kill people in warfare in order to spread the power of the Church.

To be fair, St. Augustine emphasized torture over murder as a means of spreading his doctrines. But he did teach, and personally organize, killing as a means of spreading his message.