jesusfreak407 Junior Member Posts: 1 From: Creswell, OR, 97426 Registered: 04-06-2005 |
Hello, I was just wondering what everyone thought about Calvinism. For those of you that don't know it basically questions whether or not we have a free will. It is usually split down into five points, labeld T.U.L.I.P. Total Depravity Most of Calvansim is based off of Romans Chapters 8,9, and 10 where Paul discusses Election. If you want more information go to http://www.mslick.com/tulip.htm I personally don't like Calvinism, at least not all five points. I feel that we do have a free will and that it is ultimately up to us who we follow and how we live our lives. Even though I have an opinion on the matter I understand that it is something we won't understand until we get to Heaven (Like so many other things). Just curious on some opinions. ------------------ |
Briant Member Posts: 742 From: Stony Plain, Alberta, Canada Registered: 01-20-2001 |
Some of my good friends are strong Calvinists, and I greatly respect them. However, in general I disagree with Calvinism. ------------------ |
|
Briant Member Posts: 742 From: Stony Plain, Alberta, Canada Registered: 01-20-2001 |
BTW, welcome to the board!  ------------------ |
Klumsy Administrator Posts: 1061 From: Port Angeles, WA, USA Registered: 10-25-2001 |
there is much truth in calvinism but in fact it has alot of errors due to pretty much human thinking , the logic of men both calvinism and armenianism are true in what they proclaim, but wrong in what they deny. ------------------ |
Max Member Posts: 523 From: IA Registered: 09-19-2004 |
Well, I'm all for free will. I guess that means I don't favor it. However, it does raise some interesting questions. I agree that we will not know until we get to Heaven, and by that time we won't even care about it anymore. ------------------ |
ArchAngel Member Posts: 3450 From: SV, CA, USA Registered: 01-29-2002 |
I don't see how free will works. scientifically: theologically: then there are verse and stuff that seem to point away from free will. ------------------ |
|
Rhyolite Member Posts: 86 From: UK Registered: 08-04-2004 |
"yet not my will, but yours be done" Its worth remembering that ultimatly 'our' wills should be submitted to Gods will. However, it is a very interesting subject which is still 'under debate' in my life! I guess I have calvanistic tendencies and their are many scriptures to support it, but then their are other scriptures with which it does not sit well. I like Klumsy's statement "both calvinism and armenianism are true in what they proclaim, but wrong in what they deny". Because I can not find an answer on one side or the other, I wonder if perhaps the answer is both!? How that could work I do not know, but with God anything is possible. Perhaps our understanding of 'freedom' is flawed - for only a 'slave' is truly free!!! I dunno, just speaking out aloud - I will watch this post with interest Rhy |
|
ArchAngel Member Posts: 3450 From: SV, CA, USA Registered: 01-29-2002 |
there is a big difference between a will and a free will. We all have wills, but are they free? and yes, you hit on a good point, what is freedom? nobody can be free; we can only be free from something or another. ------------------ |
|
nfektious Member Posts: 408 From: Registered: 10-25-2002 |
Be careful that the concept of the words you use are correct in definition and application. Slavery often has negative connotations to it, but that is due to incorrect application of the concept. Not all slavery is "bad". In scripture, we are primarily referred to as servants of God or children of God - not always as slaves. I think the only instance a follower of God uses this term is in reference to himself (I think it was Paul, but forget where). We cannot always understand the things of God until we have experienced them. And we do not have to experience everything of God to trust in Him and know Him (we do this by faith). Our attempts at reconciling in our human mind something God does, which God understands in His infinite wisdom, is futile and vain. But, wanting to understand such things is not wrong of us. We just have to be sure which way we are going in this regard. Many doctrines and philosophies have taken the path of reconciling to a human level God's infinite wisdom - and I would say all have resulted in a flawed (if not failed) perspective of God. At Creation, God wanted us to have fellowship with Him. Today, that is still true. In that sense, all of us were elected to be a part of the family of God. But because sin corrupted that original relationship with God, there has to be a restoration of that fellowship with Him - it is not automatically extended one way or the other, though it is still desired. Thus, God repaired the damage sin did to that relationship through His Son, Christ Jesus. Because God offered us the chance to restore our fellowship together, we have to accept His offer and be willing to take the necessary steps to commune with Him as He originally intended. (Remember, the relationship is based on the spiritual level - not the physical. We receive some physical benefits from a restored spiritual relationship with God, but the objective and focus of the relationship is not physical.) So then we have to choose to restore the relationship with God, and it is this choice that is within our will. God does not force us to choose Him, but He desires that we would. In that sense, our will is free - we do not have an assigned behavior, action, or reaction other than what we choose. Many times the concept of a habit is confused with this. A habit is a behavior that becomes automatic by repetition - but it is initiated by a choice. Each successive incident may cause that choice to be made more easily, until there is seemingly no more thought put into it - but the cycle of such behavior can be broken by an alternative choice. I'd love to chat more on this but I must leave the office. God bless! |
Simon_Templar Member Posts: 330 From: Eau Claire, WI USA Registered: 10-25-2004 |
at one point in my christian quest I leaned strongly calvinist, at the strongest I was a 4.5 point calvinist. I eventually rejected it however because I found its logic to be lacking. Essentially it takes a fairly narrow human conception and then squeezes scripture into it, ignoring, or rationalizing away any bits that don't fit. Calvinism is basicly an extreme form of Augustinian thought. Looking at the 5 points specificly Total depravity - I pretty much always agreed with this one until recently. I think the basic concept is true, that human nature is fallen and is unable to come to God unless God first calls it by the conviction of the Holy Spirit. However, total depravity, based on Augustine's conception of original sin, tend to paint man as a debased animal and as such it denies the greatness and nobility present in human nature simply because of the fact that we are created in the image of likeness of God himself. Even the fall and the wickedness of man can not blot out completely that we bare a resemblance to God. The understanding of the Orthodox church is a little better on this I think.. I probably fall somewhere in the middle. Unconditional election - This basicly states that God calls us not based on any virtue or goodness on our part but simply because in his mercy and wisdom he decided he wanted to. In general I agree with this, however, again the box of the human convention doesn't seem big enough to fit all the scriptures. In the OT there is an example where an infant son of King Ahab is taken (ie God causes his death) because God saw good in the child and did not want him to be corrupted... when taken at face value this seems to present a problem.. and I like to take the bible at face value. Limited Atonement - this one depends on how it is explained.. it can be patently unscriptural or it can be true. If you take limited attonement to mean that Christ only died for those who he had already prechosen.. then its unscriptural because He died once for "all" and no the all doesn't mean all the believers, it means all. However, if you take limited attonement to mean that christ's sacrifice was meant for all but is only EFFECTIVE for those who respond to it, then yes this is true. This is how limited attonement was originaly meant. Irresistable Grace - This point means that when God chooses someone they are going to be saved and have no choice in the matter because they can not resist the grace of God. I think this point is pretty much all wrong. It denies the clear meaning and intent of numerous statements from scripture which of course then must be rationalized to mean something other than what they say. However, It is true that God pursues some people to unbelievable ends.. this would seem however to prove the point that people can resist grace because they resist it for long periods of time. Perseverance of the Saints - this doctrine is more commonly known today as eternal salvation, or once saved always saved (OSAS). It teaches that once you are truly saved it is impossible to fall away and loose salvation. If anyone does fall away then they simply weren't saved in the first place.
Scientificly, Theologicaly, Furthermore, calvinists need to drasticly increase their vision of God's grandure and ability when it comes to this field. My understanding of this concept was actually shaped heavily by J.R.R. Tolkien's Silmarillion and also by my experiences as a role player. God is the ultimate GM (bear with me)He crafts the story, he sets events and yet he allows the players to direct their own courses and choices.. yet every choice they make, he weaves into his story and makes it serve his plot. Tolkien's description of how the One God takes even the actions of his enemies and makes them simply serve him, when his enemy tries to destroy, God takes that and uses it to create something more glorious than anyone had imagined, was great. This is exactly how God works.. he does not need to dictate our actions or our thoughts because no matter what we do, he is big enough to make it into something good, and to fit it into his purpose. ------------------ |
GUMP Member Posts: 1335 From: Melbourne, FL USA Registered: 11-09-2002 |
Of course I believe in free will--Ican't help it! Seriously though, the problem with belief in wholesale predeterminationism is that it often leads to fatalism which is evident in many Islamic countries. |
fingolfin Member Posts: 197 From: IL Registered: 03-19-2005 |
wow, I want to get into a debate about this, but I dunno if I should, I'm pretty much a calvinist, but I'm slightly undecied about a point of it. the only thing I have to say is in response to simon Irrisitable Grace is saying there is free will and there isn't. It's almost a contradiction. But the way it is was explaind to me is that we are deprived so much, so entangled into our sin that we never would have come to God, unless he called us to Him. Because we are sinful in nature we would naturally turn away from God. Our will by nature is sinful. But God calls us out of our sin by revealing His grace to us. This view goes against thinking we in some way "chose" to be saved, and gives God all the glory. However it's very hard for me to understand the issue of free will, and I've given a ton of thought to it, and cannot make up my mind but lean toward it. It seems that if we can choose our salvation it would limit the power of God, he "put's out salvation, and it's just floating there, and all he can do is hope we take it" or "we have free will, but since it would naturally turn away from sin, God in His divine sovereignty called us, by revealing His grace and changed our will so we accept salvation. We change our will, but upon seeing God, we cannot help but choose to follow him. It's just a natural reaction to seeing Him." I dunno if what I just said made sense, but that's pretty much what was explained to me. I still don't totally understand it, but I tend to accept it as making more sense then not. However, this difference in teaching has actually made one of my friends leave our church because he did not belive what was taught. Though I understand his reasons, it saddens me to see divisions caused by differences of oppinions... |
|
Max Member Posts: 523 From: IA Registered: 09-19-2004 |
I believe that we have free will, and the right to choose the grace or not. Think of it this way. If you created something with the purpose of having it love and worship you, would you rather have something mechanical that will always say "I love you" constantly forever, and know that it is only because you programmed them that way? Or would you rather give something the choice to choose you, knowing that their love was real, and true? I would rather have someone love me because they chose to, not because I programmed them to, no? Just a thought from me, I'm not scripture or anything. ------------------ |
|
Klumsy Administrator Posts: 1061 From: Port Angeles, WA, USA Registered: 10-25-2001 |
i agree with alot of calvinism, but also disagree with it alot.. I am a free will man, however i know the depravity of man, and wihtout the help of God, the softening or whatever of mans heart and drawing by the Holy Spirit, man is is not even capible of choosing to follow Christ any more than a newborn is capible of feeding himself, even though he can choose various things (to cry or not to cry , where to look etc ). i know i have free will to sin, for God tempts nobody to sin. i once heard the mystery described like this "there is a door on one side says - whoever wills may enter, and then on the other side.. it said "welcome those were were predestined from before the foundations of the earth" how predestination works, i have no clue, but God knows everything and exists outside of time so it doesn't suprise me. however no matter how much i may believe in "free choice"... once thing humbles me.. is something i had no choice anyway in.. and that is my creation.. i did no choose to be somebody who would end up "choosing" God or having the temprament or circumstances leading towards that.. I could have been born somebody else who would never choose (whether because of election, temprament, circumstances or whatever).. i could have been born Hilter, so despite all my theology or study, it comes down to this for me, and it humbles me, and makes me thankful that God made me me, and even more than that extended his grace and mercy to me in such abundant measures. Karl ------------------ |
|
Simon_Templar Member Posts: 330 From: Eau Claire, WI USA Registered: 10-25-2004 |
Fingolfin, Any fellow Tolkien-o-phile is always welcome to join in the conversation. I actually agree for the most part with what you had to say. The bible is clear that no one can come to God unless God calls them first. Man can not come to repentance unless God calls and convicts the man through the working of the Holy Spirit. Those who take free will to the extreme of believing that they can come to God whenever they feel like it are just as wrong as the opposite extreme. Also, they are dangerously wrong. The bible says to seek God while he may be found. The clear implication is that the chance to repent can be missed, and it may not come again. The bible says of Esau in regard to selling his birthright that he "wept with bitter tears, but found no place of repentance." Repentance is not something we can do anytime we want... God has to grant it to us. However, I also firmly believe that people can refuse repentance when God offers it to them. It is a mistake to believe that people can "choose" to repent, when it comes to repentance and salvation, the only "choice" we have is to submit to God's work, or not to submit to God's work. Its not a positive choice on your part that you went out and looked for.. God has come to you, and you can submit, or you can not submit. I can't remember where it is now, or even what issue it was regarding, but there is a scripture which refers to an event being accomplished by the will of the man involved and by the will of God. This is the truth that both arminians and calvinists miss. Both free will and God's sovereign predestination are true, and they work together. Neither side of the debate can accept this because it seems contradictory to human logic, but its not contradiction, its paradox. It is paradoxical because we can only see the surface of the issue, we can not see the immeasurable mechanisms of God's will and wisdom behind it. What we see working on the surface seems contradictory, but only because we don't and perhaps can't understand the mechanisms that are hidden behind it. Much like the physics of how a bumble bee flies. The refusal to accept a paradox, however, is what has produced both calvinism and arminianism. Christianity has many paradoxes, infact, the paradoxes of the gospel are some of the most beautiful of its teachings. ------------------ |
|
Rhyolite Member Posts: 86 From: UK Registered: 08-04-2004 |
I agree with Klumsy again, especialy his last paragraph. We often like to think of ourselves as being 'our own man', but as Klumsy pointed out, we had no part in our creation and birth. I know many things go into making a man's character, but some of them are determined at birth (some elements of character/personality and also 'situation' such as parents, country, wealth etc). Or perhaps the very way we are created has something to do with our predestination??? I also like Simon's summary. I think this whole area is beyond our comprehension. We have free will (because yes, how else could we truly love God), but we are also predestined. God is just too big for us - He will frustrate the wisdom of the wise! (1 Cor 1:19-20 NIV) For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." {20} Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? Of course, this does not mean we should not contemplate the things of God, doing so helps develop our 'faith'. I also know that the scripture here is referring to the 'cross', but I think it can be applied to other areas too. Actualy, I thought their was another scripture which WAS applied to mans 'general' wisdom - does anybody know it? God Bless, |
HanClinto Administrator Posts: 1828 From: Indiana Registered: 10-11-2004 |
Hey all! Thanks for the great discussion on Calvinism -- a lot of interesting points have been brought up. First clarification: "Calvinist" does not mean "Hyper-Calvinist". A Hyper-Calvinist is one who takes the idea of "no free will" too far and says that "It doesn't matter if I evangelize or not, because everything's foreordained anyway, therefore I have no responsibility". That's flat-out wrong. Just so you know, Calvinism is not the same as Hyper-Calvinism. Second clarification: Regarding the definition of "free will". People might define "free will" as being able to choose between vanilla and chocolate chip. Great, Calvinists have no problem with that, and anyone can see that we have every appearance of choice, will, and desire. The hard part comes "Well can you choose between sinning and pleasing God?". That's the kind of free will that really matters. Can we freely choose to not sin? Of course reprobate men can choose between one kind of sin and another kind of sin -- that's preference (just like ice-cream flavors). But can a sinful man who does not know God simply choose to stop sinning in his life? To analyze this, let's back up a little bit. Everything people do can be categorized into two categories: Pleasing to God, and not pleasing to God (pleasing acts and sin). There is no in-between. Men who are not under the grace of God can do nothing to please God. Every act that they do is therefore sinful. Not every man is under the grace of God. There is a type of grace that is given to all men, but not all men fall under the saving grace that only comes through Christ Jesus. Unless we have forgiveness (covered by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus' blood), we can do nothing to please God. If we agree with all of the above, we can say that all men who have not recieved forgiveness can do nothing to please God. They have no free will to choose to do good -- all they can choose is between evil and evil -- they cannot choose between good and evil. They are slaves to sin, and can do nothing about it in and of themselves. Under this perspective, the only two people who ever had a true "free will" to choose between good and evil were Adam and Eve. Note: This is from a Calvinist perspective, I have many Calvinist friends, and I probably am mostly a Calvinist, but I'm very new to this theology, so I'm not sure if I'm totally a Calvinist or not. I'm just explaining the theology as I understand it. Hope that helps! Please feel free to criticize/correct/comment/flame/whatever. --clint [This message has been edited by HanClinto (edited April 18, 2005).] |
|
Max Member Posts: 523 From: IA Registered: 09-19-2004 |
In Exodus, it says that God hardened the Pharoah's heart, correct? It gave the Pharoah the resolve to chase after the Isrealites therefore sentencing them to death. Did they then have a choice? God was making an example of them, correct? Just something I'd like to point out. ------------------ |
|
fingolfin Member Posts: 197 From: IL Registered: 03-19-2005 |
quote: and see that's what I was tring to say. I belive in all points of calvinism, but this is the hardest point to explain to others. There is free will. There were always be free will. We are never forced to love God, but when he calls us we want Him. It's not like He saw into the future and then "called" the people who he knew were going to believe. But rather in cunjuction with the fact that we chose he also called (us). Yes, Max I wouldn't limit what God can do for His glory. And that's why it would seem that He could change our hearts from rebellion to repentance. But it also makes sense that we choose to repent. Simon has really said what the main problem is the fact that it defys human logic for both to be correct, and that's why there is such a division over this. And that's really sad... |
|
Max Member Posts: 523 From: IA Registered: 09-19-2004 |
Hmmm, I don't think it matter whether or not God chose for us to believe or not, I think we should be happy that we believe. Getting into fights about the little details involved with it seem to water down the experience. ------------------ |
|
HanClinto Administrator Posts: 1828 From: Indiana Registered: 10-11-2004 |
quote: I'd be seriously interested in being pointed to that passage. I seem to remember one where a guy was prophesied to become king, so he therefore went out and did it. Was that Jehu? I think it might have been when Jezebel died -- sheesh. I don't know my first testament like I should. But anyway, if you could point me to that, I'd love to read that passage with that thought in mind. --clint ------------------ |
wlfmachine Junior Member Posts: 7 From: Durham, NC Registered: 04-18-2005 |
I think sometimes we are tempted to humanize God in our thinking. We place him within our bounds of reasoning. How can God control who is saved and who is not (irresistable grace) if we each also have free will? Humanly speaking this is not possible. However God is not limited by human bounds. Humanly speaking how is it possible that God could exist from infiniti past, or that God could exist in three persons but still be one God. Just as Jesus displayed he is not subject to the physical laws of space which we know (He walked on water and He brought men back from the dead) God is not subject to human bounds of reasoning. Each of us has a free will to choose to be saved by Jesus. At the same time God has total control over us. I have faith that though this doesn't fit within human reasoning, God is bigger then that. |
|
Simon_Templar Member Posts: 330 From: Eau Claire, WI USA Registered: 10-25-2004 |
I agree, as I've said, that man can not choose repentance and choose to do good unless God enables him to do so by calling him via the Holy Spirit. This is pretty much undeniably clear in scripture. I do not entirely agree that when God calls us we are unable to resist, or to reject. I do not even go so far as to say that we always have the ability to resist because there are some instances in scripture where God seems to compell people. In my own born again experience, I know I did not make the choice to answer the "alter call" I really had no choice, I was compelled to respond. I don't see this as a universaly true event however, from scripture. Also, the extension of this, the idea of eternal salvation, or perseverane of the saints, is, in my opinion, unscriptural. I do not believe that people lose their salvation through making mistakes. However, I think the bible is clear that people can fall away from the faith and thus lose their salvation through not loving the truth, not being diligent in devotion to obedience. Its not about making mistakes, its about what you believe and where your allegience lies. I also don't believe the doctrine that God gives a general call to all men, but a specific "saving grace" call to those he chooses. If all men are truly without excuse, then all men truly had a chance, at which they had the real ability to seek God and seek to please God. This is not accomplished by saying that all men had a general call but not the saving grace that is really required to enable us to respond to God. Again, along side that is the truth that God seems to pursue some people more than he does others. God is not a respector of persons, but he does favor some people more than others, for his own inscrutable reasons.
------------------ |
|
GUMP Member Posts: 1335 From: Melbourne, FL USA Registered: 11-09-2002 |
http://apologetics.johndepoe.com/foreknowledge.html Briefly goes over various theistic philosophical solutions, even two atheistic beliefs. Though it is slightly out of date because Antony Flew is no longer an atheist. [This message has been edited by Gump (edited May 03, 2005).] |
