MUST HEAR: The Sequence of Election by David Cooper

Finally something on this subject that makes sense.

Thank you for posting this.

Also, thank you for the great pictures that you post along with these sermons.

This man is preaching against the fatalistic interpretation of election. Fatalism denies the responsibility of the believer and negates the consequences of ones choices. Most brothers and sisters on SI who do embrace the doctrines of grace do not hold to this interpretation. This is a common misunderstanding that is often leveled at “Calvinists”

Sermons like this often perpetuate a faulty understanding of what many Calvinists (those that embrace the doctrines of grace) truly believe. Do not make the mistake of assuming those you know to be Calvinists, or adherents to the doctrines of grace, subscribe to this understanding. This is exactly why many wish to not use the name “Calvin” when describing their beliefs. I’m glad to hear that this preacher found his way from this erroneous teaching.

The following excerpt may help others understand the more prevalent and balanced beliefs held by “non-hyper” Calvinistic believers.
________________________________________________

Election Is Not Fatalistic or Mechanistic.

Sometimes those who object to the doctrine of election say that it is "fatalism" or that it presents a "mechanistic system" for the universe. Two somewhat different objections are involved here. By "fatalism" is meant a system in which human choices and human decisions really do not make any difference. In fatalism, no matter what we do, things are going to turn out as they have been previously ordained. Therefore, it is futile to attempt to influence the outcome of events or the outcome of our lives by putting forth any effort or making any significant choices, because these will not make any difference any way. In a true fatalistic system, of course, our humanity is destroyed for our choices really mean nothing, and the motivation for moral accountability is removed.

In a mechanistic system the picture is one of an impersonal universe in which all things that happen have been inflexibly determined by an impersonal force long ago, and the universe functions in a mechanical way so that human beings are more like machines or robots than genuine persons. Here also genuine human personality would be reduced to the level of a machine that simply functions in accordance with predetermined plans and in response to predetermined causes and influences.

By contrast to the mechanistic picture, the New Testament presents the entire outworking of our salvation as something brought about by a personal God in relationship with personal creatures. God "destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ" (Eph. 1:5). God's act of election was neither impersonal nor mechanistic, but was permeated with personal love for those whom he chose. Moreover, the personal care of God for his creatures, even those who rebel against him, is seen clearly in God's plea through Ezekiel, "As I live, says the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his evil way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways; for why will you die, O house of Israel?" (Ezek. 33:11).

When talking about our response to the gospel offer, Scripture continually views us not as mechanistic creatures or robots, but as genuine persons, personal creatures who make willing choices to accept or reject the gospel. Jesus invites everyone, Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matt. 11:28). And we read the invitation at the end of Revelation: "The Spirit and the Bride say, 'Come.' And let him who hears say, 'Come.' And let him who is thirsty come, let him who desires take the water of life without price" (Rev. 22:17). This invitation and many others like it are addressed to genuine persons who are capable of hearing the invitation and responding to it by a decision of their wills. Regarding those who will not accept him, Jesus clearly emphasizes their hardness of heart and their stubborn refusal to come to him: "Yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life" (John 5:40). And Jesus cries out in sorrow to the city that had rejected him, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!" (Matt. 23:37).

In contrast to the charge of fatalism, we also see a much different picture in the New Testament. Not only do we make willing choices as real persons, but these choices are also real choices because they do affect the course of events in the world. They affect our own lives and they affect the lives and destinies of others. So, "He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18). Our personal decisions to believe or not believe in Christ have eternal consequences in our lives, and Scripture is quite willing to talk about our decision to believe or not believe as the factor that decides our eternal destiny. - Wayne Grudem

Article continues [url=http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/misunderstandings.html]here[/url]

All Calvinists believe there is no freewill in salvation. A person cannot choose, therefore only God choses those that go to salvation. I disagree with this fully.

Greg, this is simply not true. Neither now nor in history.

Historic Calvinism believes [b]every[/b] decision is made by your will. However, the burden of proof is on the Arminian to prove how a will that is a "slave to sin" can choose God. A free slave is an oxymoron. Lost men [b]freely choose sin[/b], Greg. That is all the depraved will could choose, were it not for our holy, sovereign God's grace in opening our eyes.

Ezekiel 36:26-27 plainly states that a new heart must be given, 2nd Corinthians 4 plainly states that God must say "let there be light" into our souls. When that happens, the person becomes [b]willing[/b] to lovingly believe the Gospel.

So, Historic Calvinist emphasizes the wicked depravity of man. Specifically, they hate God and would rather murder him than submit to him, however, God's unfathomable grace has intervened.

We don't believe man is "wounded in sin" - we believe he is "dead in sin". We don't believe man has astigmatism, we believe he is blind.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

David Copper is simply sharing what all true calvinists believe.

No.

David Cooper is simply sharing what he believes all true Calvinists believe.

God bless you all. I have said enough. I simply desire to promote a better understanding, not debate.

God choses men for salvation.

Which is what the Scripture teaches. And, there is nothing unjust about this. I know you agree that all men deserve hell. If that is the case, there is nothing unjust if God, in his great mercy, chooses to save some. May it drive us to our knees in humble adoration of his undeserved grace.

[i]Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.[/i] (James 1:18)

[i]And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.[/i] (John 6:35-40)

A sound exegesis has yet to be offered for John 6:35-40 that is consistent with the Arminian position.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

sermonindex wrote:

Lost men freely choose sin, Greg.

Brothers,

This is what I am exactly saying. God choses men for salvation period from a calvinistic perspective. The only freewill "before" salvation for a man is to chose sin! Therefore God is the only one that can elect, man cannot elect himself. Therefore God predestinates those he "desires and wishes" to be saved, period. That is Calvinism's election. And yes it is fatalistic. And it does not bring "utmost" glory to God for all men who believe these things are not made holy.

[url=http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/sov.html]The difference between fatalism and what is called compatibilism[/url]

[url=http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm]A Primer on Hyper-Calvinism[/url]

And yes it is fatalistic

Fatalism places the running of the universe into the hands of blind random chance. Calvinists (those that embrace the doctrines of grace) place the running of the universe in the hands of all wise, all loving and all just God. There is a world of difference.

One can call Calvinism deterministic, but not fatalistic.

Pre-destination not Pre-determination. I would hope someone would engage in some good pro calvinistic discussion on this one: I can't choose to accept Christ because of my depraved nature. But when I make a choice to accept Christ, it's then seen as what? I was elected?

sermonindex wrote:

human responsibility

There is simply no "human responsibility" allowed before conversion. If you are not elect all you can choose is evil and therefore your life surely is "fatalistic".

Many Christians from all different theological and philosophical persuasions attack the Calvinistic interpretation of the compatibility of divine sovereignty and human responsibility as espoused in reformed soteriology. The traditional view of freedom in Calvinism is that God can indeed ordain or 'determine' future events, but He does so in such a way that does not violate man's true responsibility. In other words, even though an action may be determined does not annul that fact that when a decision is made it is indeed out of that agent's true moral disposition.

Two camps argue against this: Libertarianism and Fatalism. While many think that the Calvinistic system by logic necessitates a fatalistic view on history it is not the predominant view. There are some who espouse Fatalism which is the view that determinism is incompatible with genuine human freedom, and therefore man's freedom is an illusion. On the other side, metaphysical Libertarianism says that a decision is only free when agents can chose A, B, or ~A/B. They would deny the view that God is a determinative agent in the history of man. Source [url=http://www.imperishableinheritance.com/2006/common-arguments-against-reformed-theology/]here[/url]

There is simply no "human responsibility" allowed before conversion.

They are doing exactly what they want to be doing.

Both of these arguments have been leveled against Calvinism several times on SI. Each time someone, like I am doing now, points out that there is another view that holds credibility and historical significances.

I do not believe Calvinism is fatalistic. I believe it is deterministic, as determined by God. We do not simply wait to see what cards "fate" deals us.

I believe the there is a compatibility of divine sovereignty and human responsibility. I may not understand how it all works, but that makes it no less true.

I have a question.

What about the people that are Calvinists that believe in God and Jesus, but determine themselves to not be one of the elect? Would this not leave them without hope? Would it not cause envy, and bitterness and strife?

I know someone like this. She comes from a strict Reformed upbringing and says that we are all just puppets on a string and that God pulls on the strings just to watch us jump. The closer I get to the Lord, the more this person hates me, and now I think I know why. This is not the way of my Lord - He would not turn away someone that truly wanted to come to Him. But if she thinks He has rejected her, why should she even try?

Edit: Oh, this is horrible. No wonder it has been like trying to talk to a brick wall. No wonder they beat each other up and tear each other down. No wonder it is all about appearances - as if what is on the outside can somehow validate what is missing on the inside. Oh Lord, help me break through. Use me Father - shine forth Thy beautiful Light.

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. [b]All that the Father giveth me[/b] shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:35-40)

A sound exegesis has yet to be offered for John 6:35-40 that is consistent with the Arminian position.

HeartSong wrote:
I have a question.

What about the people that are Calvinists that believe in God and Jesus, but determine themselves to not be one of the elect? Would this not leave them without hope? Would it not cause envy, and bitterness and strife?

I know someone like this. She comes from a strict Reformed upbringing and says that we are all just puppets on a string and that God pulls on the strings just to watch us jump. The closer I get to the Lord, the more this person hates me, and now I think I know why. This is not the way of my Lord - He would not turn away someone that truly wanted to come to Him. But if she thinks He has rejected her, why should she even try?

Edit: Oh, this is horrible. No wonder it has been like trying to talk to a brick wall. No wonder they beat each other up and tear each other down. No wonder it is all about appearances - as if what is on the outside can somehow validate what is missing on the inside. Oh Lord, help me break through. Use me Father - shine forth Thy beautiful Light.

That does sound terrible. I don’t understand any Christian hating another…

One of the worst misconceptions is that Calvinist’s deny human responsibility. That comes from the hyper-Calvinist camp and is just as bad as the other extreme.

Brother Greg,

I don't want to confuse the discussion or be in error, but I think most reformed believers ( I mean most ) believe that salvation is monergistic ( all of God ) and sanctification is synergistic ( done in enablement and help with God but with human responsibility ) Further, sinful mankind behaves wickedly synergistically in the sense they fully cooperate both in desire and deed ( ie., they are responsible ) but not with God but rather with their father the devil by doing his desire and his works.

The bride is tested before she is given to the Groom - just like Rebekah was at the well.

HeartSong,

[i]And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:35-40)[/i]

In this passage, the people are given to Christ before they even come to Christ (believe). There is nothing in this passage about a prior testing before they are considered good enough to give to Christ. It is strictly out of the Father's good pleasure and grace.

So, I assume you mean they are tested as unbelievers in some fashion? If so, it must not be for belief, because they are given to Christ before they believe. What kind of testing do you suppose these unbelievers go through before they are considered worthy (I speak as a fool) to be given to Christ?

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Thanks for the additional info Greg. You mentioned several points that are well worth noting. Much damage has indeed been done by over zealous theologians...of all makes and models.

TaylorOtwell said:
So, I assume you mean they are tested as unbelievers in some fashion? If so, it must not be for belief, because they are given to Christ before they believe. What kind of testing do you suppose these unbelievers go through before they are considered worthy (I speak as a fool) to be given to Christ?

First I was proven, then I was prepared, and then I was given unto the Lord Jesus Christ.

Edit for Clarification: Saying that "the LORD had a hold of my heart a long time ago" is not correct. I turned to God in my sorrow for many years, but the Lord did not have a "hold on my heart" until I came to know the Lord Jesus Christ.

I had to prove if my heart was turned unto obedience. I distinctly remember moments - almost frozen in time - where I knew that my decisions were the making of a contract.

Then either [b]A)[/b] you had a better heart than others who do not choose to turn to God, therefore making the deciding factor in salvation the virtue of man or [b]B)[/b] God gave you a heart that turned to him, which would mean that God sovereignly chose you out of free grace.

If you choose A, could you please reconcile that with Paul's "who made you to differ" question in 2nd Corinthians? Also, since we have nothing that we did not receive, and every good gift is from above, wouldn't you say that God must have given you this heart "turned unto obedience"?

Well, B doesn't make sense because why would He prove that in which He has already decided.

And A is not right either because my heart was desperately wicked - yet I longed for His goodness. I am not sure why it would have to be that my heart was necessarily "better" or that my choices made me more "virtuous." He is giving me a new heart and that is a gift - but I don't think that obedience would be considered a gift.

It was the hopelessness of life contrasted with His beautiful light that made the decisions easy. Obedience was, and continues to be, the desire to be with Him - wanting Him more than these other things that are put before me.

If you will explain to me the "who made you to differ" question in 2nd Corinthians I will try to explain it in the context of what He has shown me.

Thank you for your patience.

Well, B doesn't make sense because why would He prove that in which He has already decided.

B makes perfect sense if you cast aside the notion of the Lord proving unbelievers before giving them to Christ, and embrace the Biblical description of salvation, which is God opening the eyes of the blind, and giving new hearts to the wicked out of his free grace. (Ezek 36:26-27; John 6:35-40; John 6:44; James 1:18; Ephesians 1; Lydia; Paul)

With care in Christ,
Taylor

B makes perfect sense if you cast aside the notion of the Lord proving unbelievers before giving them to Christ . . .

However, I will review the verses you have quoted and pray over the matter - maybe there is something that I am missing.

One can not cast aside what He has shown to be true.

HeartSong,

I'm not sure what you are referring to. Are you saying that you believe God has shown it to be true in your own experience, or you believe it is shown to be true in the Scriptures?

Remember, sister, "all of our works he has done for us" (Isaiah 26:12). If we ever repent, it is God's grace. If we ever believe, it is God's grace. "For it has been granted to you not only to believe..." (Phil 1:29)

With care in Christ,
Taylor

May I humbly state that for myself, I only seek to defend the Scriptural conviction of Reformed belief because it has implications on the Gospel itself.

If justification is truly by faith alone for the sake of Christ's work alone, and if man is unable to believe this apart from the regenerating of his/her heart, then those who believe need not feel depressed and saddened because they are not as holy as others say they should be.

What I mean is that if there is a particular group who thinks that because they avoid certain things such as television, "worldy" dress, and a whole other host of things, they are more "holy" than those who do those things, they are no different than a Christian who thinks they are closer to God because they preserve the environment.

We are close to God by one means: Christ. There is no other mediator. We cannot be more "in Christ" than we are the day we believe and are placed in Him. The rest of our lives however are the process of conforming us to Christ's image and are thus a proof of our new life.

Sadly though there is such a blurring of what the Remonstrants(Arminians)taught and believed that much of what is considered Arminianism today would actually be more Calvinistic than anything.

If one would follow the rational train of thought in the Arminian view, then you could not tell a person to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved". For the true Arminian teaching is that one must work to prove his/her salvation, and can lose it by the neglecting of certain things, or "unconfessed sin". In effect this makes the Gospel, "believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and keep your works right and you will be saved".

But if the Gospel is the good news that Christ has died in the place of sinners and that He saves ALL who come to Him apart from their works, then that truly is good news! And we can rest assured that He who has begun a good work will complete it thus ensuring the process of sanctification will occur as a true believer has the Holy Spirit within and will change that person.

Lastly, I too would like to see someone with an Arminian view deal exegetically with passages such as John 6 and Romans 9 to defend their position as it is through the exegesis of these passages that I have come to the convictions I have now.

Above all though, this is an in house discussion and should not ruin our fellowship at all. Arminians can be Christians just as Calvinists can as the faith we hold in common is enough to build fellowship on.

The difference between the sovereignty of God and fatalism is the difference between God and atheism. - Charles Spurgeon

by jimdied2sin on 2009/1/14 3:23:31

I would like to note the comment made around the 1 hour and 6 minute mark of the recording. It is stated that that a "line has to be drawn" and that they (their teenagers specifically in context) should not have any fellowship or communication with Calvinists, regardless if they are true brethren or not (Paul Washer specifically named and included).

This is so grieving... and is not of God. Though it is the perogative of the eldership of charity to state such things to their young people I wonder why you would promote this carnal dividing of the body of Christ under the guise of "rightly dividing the word of truth".

Greg, something is terribly wrong with this?

In Christ - Jim (a non-calvinist)

yeah.

whoever came up and spoke afterwards basically nulified the sermon(not that I agreed with it anyway). They did precisely what they accused the calvinists of being rigidly dogmatic, as if their way is the only way basically.

telling you church congregation not to mix with calvinist believers because of something as hard to understand as pre-destination is not something of God.

and it's often these lone churches that have such a rigid "we are the only church that preaches the truth and everyone else is wrong" mentality end up weird fringe "christian" sects with strange beliefs.

Brother Taylor wrote:

B makes perfect sense if you cast aside the notion of the Lord proving unbelievers before giving them to Christ, and embrace the Biblical description of salvation, which is God opening the eyes of the blind, and giving new hearts to the wicked out of his free grace.

Your words reminded me of this section of Scripture....

Job 33:14 For God may speak in one way, or in another, [Yet man] does not perceive it.

Job 33:15 In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, While slumbering on their beds,

Job 33:16 Then He opens the ears of men, And seals their instruction.

Job 33:17 In order to turn man [from his] deed, And conceal pride from man,

Job 33:18 He keeps back his soul from the Pit, And his life from perishing by the sword.

Job 33:19 "[Man] is also chastened with pain on his bed, And with strong [pain] in many of his bones,

Job 33:20 So that his life abhors bread, And his soul succulent food.

Job 33:21 His flesh wastes away from sight, And his bones stick out [which once] were not seen.

Job 33:22 Yes, his soul draws near the Pit, And his life to the executioners.

Job 33:23 "If there is a messenger for him, A mediator, one among a thousand, To show man His uprightness,

Job 33:24 Then He is gracious to him, and says, 'Deliver him from going down to the Pit; I have found a ransom';

Job 33:25 His flesh shall be young like a child's, He shall return to the days of his youth.

Job 33:26 He shall pray to God, and He will delight in him, He shall see His face with joy, For He restores to man His righteousness.

Job 33:27 Then he looks at men and says, 'I have sinned, and perverted [what was] right, And it did not profit me.'

Job 33:28 He will redeem his [fn] soul from going down to the Pit, And his life shall see the light.

Job 33:29 "Behold, God works all these [things], Twice, [in fact], three [times] with a man,

Job 33:30 To bring back his soul from the Pit, That he may be enlightened with the light of life.

..............................................

In this section of Scripture we learn of how God dispenses His grace, and then what God requires of man, and then finally for those who repent...they are "enlightened with the light of life."

In Christ
Jeff

Hi Taylor,

Remember, sister, "all of our works he has done for us" (Isaiah 26:12). If we ever repent, it is God's grace. If we ever believe, it is God's grace. "For it has been granted to you not only to believe..." (Phil 1:29)

Just when I thought I had made it around him, I felt a "bump" and I cursed, as I knew that things were about to get out of control.

The next thing I remember is hanging upside down in the cab of my vehicle and sliding backwards at a great speed, with Kansas dirt flying all around me. There was the sound of metal on gravel very close to my ear and I had time to imagine my flesh being ground between the metal and the gravel. It was then that I cried out in terror "O God help me!"

When everything stopped, I remember thinking, "maybe everything is o.k." - but when I opened my eyes, there, right in front of my face, was my wrist bent at kinds of odd angles.

I can not help but think that if I had turned on the "bump," I would not have had to go through the "slide" - and I don't even want to think about what would have happened if I had cursed, rather than prayed, on the slide.

I was moving, and the day before the crash I had "flipped off" the place that I was leaving. This is not something that I typically do - but I had planned it as a retaliation for all of the persecution that I had suffered there. It felt wrong when I did it - but I just dismissed the feeling as I knew nothing of repenting at that time in my life.

This is the hand that was broken before my face. I essentially had no other injuries after going end over end three or four times, and then sideways at least once. My car (which I loved) and all my precious stuff (which I didn't trust the movers with) was a different matter.

Now clearly, it was God's grace that brought me into this situation, as it has led me to where I am now, but all along the way I was making decisions that dictated what would happen next. As a result of my wrist being broken, and being able to tie it back to my sin, I became aware that the Lord wanted my obedience - and that is what I set about to do - be obedient.

Now one could say that He made me obedient at that point - but I disagree. I could have chosen to curse Him as the result of the accident, but instead it caused me embrace Him more because here, for once in my life, was perfect justice.

Now granted the Lord, being omniscient and omnipresent, knew how I would react in all of these things and lined things up accordingly. However, I still could have chosen to rebel - but I chose Him over my things, and my self. There are many more things that happened before I came to Christ but it was an ever increasing path of obedience.

At the time of the accident, I knew nothing of Jesus - the whole ""Jesus thing" (as I called it back then) made absolutely no sense to me at all. But I knew that there was a God and I knew that I wanted more of Him.

I do not know how all of this fits into the Armenian or Calvinist way of thinking, but I have not found anything in scripture to contradict it - even after reviewing the bible verses you quoted, and praying over the matter.

Here is a quote that I ran into as I was looking up the word obedience:
"Voluntary obedience alone can be acceptable to God."

Also in reviewing the Bible verses you quoted:
John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath [u]learned[/u] of the Father, cometh unto me.

Strong's G3129 - manthanō
1) to learn, be apprised
--- a) to increase one's knowledge, to be increased in knowledge
--- b) to hear, be informed
--- c) to learn by use and practice
------ 1) to be in the habit of, accustomed to

One must be obedient in order to learn, and it appears to me that this verse is saying that first we hear, then we learn (of the Father), and then we come (to Christ).

It is frustrating that attacks, misunderstandings and deliberate misrepresentations of the doctrines of grace are continually leveled against those who are convinced Scripture teaches them. Some people say, "Calvinism divides Churches". I disagree. I think people who have a superficial understanding of Calvinism and then spread false notions and misrepresentations about what it teaches to other Christians, thereby causing suspicion and fear of an "enemy" thayt doesn't exist- that is what divides Churches.

If you are not able to give a defence of historic Calvinism, which entails compatibilism, as well as a distinction between GOD's will of decree and HIS will of desire, then you have no right to sumarily pigeon-hole and condemn those who hold to these precios truths.

We should be able to defend a position we disagree with before we attack it. Then we know we understand the position we are attacking. This does not apply to overtly unorthodox vies but to those which are widely held among genuine brothers and sisters within the body of CHRIST.

If anyone is interested in listening, I was humbled to preached a message a few months ago that came from deep in my heart about this topic of election. It's of Romans 9:14-29: just straight talk, no nonsense, no hype, just a burden about this often misunderstood issue. I believe it will be helpful, and so I post it.

[url=http://www.olivetdiscourse.com/audio/Eli%20Brayley%20-%20The%20Potter%27s%20Power%20Over%20the%20Clay.mp3]The Potter's Power Over the Clay[/url]

May God bless.
Your servant,
-Eli

Eli_Barnabas wrote:
If anyone is interested in listening, I was humbled to preached a message a few months ago that came from deep in my heart about this topic of election. It's of Romans 9:14-29: just straight talk, no nonsense, no hype, just a burden about this often misunderstood issue. I believe it will be helpful, and so I post it.

[url=http://www.olivetdiscourse.com/audio/Eli%20Brayley%20-%20The%20Potter%27s%20Power%20Over%20the%20Clay.mp3]The Potter's Power Over the Clay[/url]

May God bless.
Your servant,
-Eli

Thank you brother

May the truth of election as taught throughout the Bible be proclaimed!

May I have permission to make copies and distribute this sermon?

Our beloved host of this site elected to post this message, and let it be, I can see no malice about it. Seeing it in the right perspective, will profit any student of Christian faith.

What does Scripture say?

Job 33:14 For God may speak in one way, or in another, [Yet man] does not perceive it.

Job 33:15 In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, While slumbering on their beds,

Job 33:16 Then He opens the ears of men, And seals their instruction.

Job 33:17 In order to turn man [from his] deed, And conceal pride from man,

Job 33:18 He keeps back his soul from the Pit, And his life from perishing by the sword.

Job 33:19 "[Man] is also chastened with pain on his bed, And with strong [pain] in many of his bones,

Job 33:20 So that his life abhors bread, And his soul succulent food.

Job 33:21 His flesh wastes away from sight, And his bones stick out [which once] were not seen.

Job 33:22 Yes, his soul draws near the Pit, And his life to the executioners.

Job 33:23 "If there is a messenger for him, A mediator, one among a thousand, To show man His uprightness,

Job 33:24 Then He is gracious to him, and says, 'Deliver him from going down to the Pit; I have found a ransom';

Job 33:25 His flesh shall be young like a child's, He shall return to the days of his youth.

Job 33:26 He shall pray to God, and He will delight in him, He shall see His face with joy, For He restores to man His righteousness.

Job 33:27 Then he looks at men and says, 'I have sinned, and perverted [what was] right, And it did not profit me.'

Job 33:28 He will redeem his [fn] soul from going down to the Pit, And his life shall see the light.

Job 33:29 "Behold, God works all these [things], Twice, [in fact], three [times] with a man,

Job 33:30 To bring back his soul from the Pit, That he may be enlightened with the light of life.
.................................................

And also....

Job 36:5 "Behold, God [is] mighty, but despises [no one]; [He is] mighty in strength of understanding.

Job 36:6 He does not preserve the life of the wicked, But gives justice to the oppressed.

Job 36:7 He does not withdraw His eyes from the righteous; But [they are] on the throne with kings, For He has seated them forever, And they are exalted.

Job 36:8 And if [they are] bound in fetters, Held in the cords of affliction,

Job 36:9 Then He tells them their work and their transgressions-- That they have acted defiantly.

Job 36:10 He also opens their ear to instruction, And commands that they turn from iniquity.

Job 36:11 If they obey and serve [Him], They shall spend their days in prosperity, And their years in pleasures.

Job 36:12 But if they do not obey, They shall perish by the sword, And they shall die without knowledge. [fn]

Job 36:13 "But the hypocrites in heart store up wrath; They do not cry for help when He binds them.

Job 36:14 They die in youth, And their life [ends] among the perverted persons. [fn]
.........................................

What does Scripture say?

IN Christ
Jeff

Brother Mahoney said it well. I also have many pentacostle friends who I love in the LORD and enjoy fruitful fellowship with even though I am reformed baptist. They enjoy discussing theology with me more than most of my baptist brothers and sisters! We do evangelism street ministry together and have great love for eachother even though we are diametrically opposed in some areas of our theology.

In my experience the only divisiveness caused by the doctrines of grace comes from brothers and sisters who get bad information about it and then think I am evil because someone misrepresented what I believe. If they are too proud and bigoted to let me explain and clarify the truth about it, then they will be abraisive and not enjoyable to fellowship with.

I have personally had the experience 3-4 times in the last few months of very zealous Calvinists that want to share with you desperately what they believe every conversation.

Brother Greg, you are right about how many Calvinists do want to convince their brothers and sisters about these doctrines. Why are we like that? Please listen to this 4 minute clip where John Piper is asked the question, "Why are Calvinists so negative?" He gives some good answers. He also says that many Calvinists are unconverted. Check it out here:

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/AskPastorJohn/ByTopic/105_The_Doctrines_of_Grace/2765_Why_are_Calvinists_so_negative/

In all we are called to love one another, some doctrines are essential to get right i guess. But we have categories for churches, baptist , pentecostal and ect. We have doctrinal camps arm and cal... ect.

But none of these make a good church that pleases the Lord. The sign is how much we love one another. Any one ever ask any of you that? is that what we ask when we meet a brother for fellowship?

do you love one another in your church?

we do this, we believe this or that, we have the doctrines of grace as belief, we believe this,

do you love one another?

and the fact is, if you are a calvinist, you dont love the Lord any more then the arminian you love the least even if you have right doctrine and can quote scripture like a machine gun. And if you are arminian or finney embracing in doctrines, you dont love the Lord any more then the calvanist you like the least.

I can understand reactions to what it said, i can understand the explanation Greg has given. I have heard well known respected calvanistic preachers say if you dont believe in the doctrines of grace as defined by the tulip you are a heretic.

I have heard preachers very close to Paul Washer say calvinism is the gospel and if you preach any other gospel its a wrong gospel.

so it goes both ways, myself have great appreciation for both Paul Washer and alike preachers of his persuasion doctrinally, and very much also for charity and some of the men preaching there.

I am not calvinist nor an arminian, i know many object to such a statement and say you cant be.

But i can, Jesus was neither, Jesus said no one can come to Him unless the father draws them, and he also said if any man thirst.... That is why we need men who preach the whole of scripture. All verses, not just our favorite one that supports our system or our favorite doctrines.

Its sad that you will rarely hear a calvinist preacher preach that all men can be saved even thou the bible says so, and its rare to hear the other vice versa.

I enjoyed Keith Daniels quote brother kire posted in another thread, about they cant make out your position doctrinally because you preach all the bible all the verses. Can they spot our doctrine? maybe it is because we only preach half the bible?

And its sad when someone tries to persuade other christians to their doctrine more then they try persuade unregenerate men to repentance.

its sad when we try teach others a doctrine that is correct and not how to live a correct holy life.

its sad when we study theological systems and fill us with knowledge instead of being filled with the spirit of love

I learned one thing so far in my short walk with the Lord, The truth will set you free

If you hold to the calvinistic/reformed belief and that is day by day bringing you closer to the Lord, more free from sin , self, and the world and day by day transforming you into the image of Jesus making you meek and lowly and a growing love in your heart to all men then you are right.

If you hold an arminian doctrine and day by day you are being more and more becoming like Jesus and free from sin and self and the world, you are right.

See brethren, one is our teacher Jesus Christ, not arminus or calvin or any other, Jesus is. And the closer we get to the Lord we wil say just as Job said

Job 40:1 Moreover the LORD answered Job, and said: 2 "Shall the one who contends with the Almighty correct Him? He who rebukes God, let him answer it." 3 Then Job answered the LORD and said: 4 "Behold, I am vile; What shall I answer You? I lay my hand over my mouth. 5 Once I have spoken, but I will not answer; Yes, twice, but I will proceed no further."

se God has spoken, he wants all men to repent, and he has elected some, if we teach only one side we are correcting God, we are rebuking the almighty. As i need to take this advice to myself, so many times we need to lay our hands upon our mouths and be silent instead of debating this.

Let us be men of the Word, the whole word not just one side. Is Christ divided?

Thank you for the sermon, it had much good in it

Excellent post my brother.

And its sad when someone tries to persuade other christians to their doctrine more then they try persuade unregenerate men to repentance.

its sad when we try teach others a doctrine that is correct and not how to live a correct holy life.

its sad when we study theological systems and fill us with knowledge instead of being filled with the spirit of love

se God has spoken, he wants all men to repent, and he has elected some, if we teach only one side we are correcting God, we are rebuking the almighty. As i need to take this advice to myself, so many times we need to lay our hands upon our mouths and be silent instead of debating this.

Let us be men of the Word, the whole word not just one side. Is Christ divided?

How true brother. You write what my heart speaks.

Some general observations:

I believe we need to be wary of substituting "sanctification" for a false idea of justification. As I pointed out in another thread, it is possible to be very "sanctified", but be damned because one does not understand or embrace Biblical, Christ-taught justification (Romans 10:4).

Likewise, it is possible to be damned by having a right understanding of justification, but never apprehending by faith the Christ that justifies.

In my opinion, we are on very dangerous ground when we start saying things like: "Person A lived a very holy life, they were separated from the world, that's more important than having the right ideas in your head". The danger is, the Watchtower cult can be very separated from the world - but the Watchtower rejects the Biblical doctrine of justification, thus reject Christ.

Often it is said that to debate and press deep into understanding doctrine is worldly and not really "spiritual". Brothers, what is worldly is embracing a vague, ambigious theology. That's what talk show hosts do. Let us press on to understand the Bible! As we embrace and cherish a Biblical idea of justification, sanctification will increase and flourish.

But, brothers, I warn you in Christ, if we neglect pressing after a Biblical understanding of justification, the revivalism you love today will be the liberalism you hate tomorrow. Once "living a holy life" is elevated over holding Biblical beliefs, you are on a slippery slope to a social gospel with a few Christian elements mixed in. Remember, a social gospel doesn't have to encourage outward sin - it can encourage very a old fashioned lifestyle and still be a social gospel.

We must hold justification and sanctification in their proper order, with a proper understanding of justification giving rise to radical, Christ-exalting sanctification.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Dear brothers and sisters,

While I agree that some of the comments made on the sermon by David Cooper are a concern because of encouraging Christians not to fellowship with other Christians, they err no less than those who would suggest that their form of 'ism' is 'the gospel'

I believe there is a point which Greg has been making which should not be missed. Our passion (my passion); what we devote our time to, should be 'Christ crucified' and not to a particular set of doctrinal beliefs.

When we examine the writings of Paul the apostle, what message did he devote the bulk of his time to, in presenting ?

In Jesus,
John

As we embrace and cherish a Biblical idea of justification, sanctification will increase and flourish.

A holy life is not the means. It is the end.

Quote:"I have heard preachers very close to Paul Washer say calvinism is the gospel and if you preach any other gospel its a wrong gospel."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have heard another preacher say this as well. His name was Charles Spurgeon.

"Calvinism is the Gospel"-Charles Spurgeon.

The doctrines of grace seek to harmonize all the Scripture says about the atonement, justification, regeneration, assurance of faith, etc. Surely no one would deny these things are not encompassed in and around the Gospel. This is why Spurgeon could make such a statement with such authority and conviction.

It may be the case that the arminian misrepresentation and misunderstanding of what the doctrines of grace really are is not the Gospel. If I understood it the way the attackers do, I would attack myself.

int3grity wrote:
Quote:"I have heard preachers very close to Paul Washer say calvinism is the gospel and if you preach any other gospel its a wrong gospel."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have heard another preacher say this as well. His name was Charles Spurgeon.

"Calvinism is the Gospel"-Charles Spurgeon.

The doctrines of grace seek to harmonize all the Scripture says about the atonement, justification, regeneration, assurance of faith, etc. Surely no one would deny these things are not encompassed in and around the Gospel. This is why Spurgeon could make such a statement with such authority and conviction.

It may be the case that the arminian misrepresentation and misunderstanding of what the doctrines of grace really are is not the Gospel. If I understood it the way the attackers do, I would attack myself.

Its not about doctrines of grace as they are called, it is what Jesus said. Jesus dident preach calvinism is the gospel. I cant find one sermon in scripture on it by Jesus, and Pauls letters dont nullify what Jesus said and taught. Jesus said a lot of things calvinist never preach ever. And Jesus preached some things arminians never preach either. Calvinism isent the gospel, its half the gospel

So Spurgeon was half right

It almost seems as if people are blinded from what the Lord says. Brothers, the Lord teaches us salvation through Him, which encompasses free will and election.

To quote a mere man instead of the words of our Lord, has lead many people down a path of destruction before. NO MAN'S theology, no matter how right it may sound, should be quoted over the Lord when it comes to salvation.

"Calvinism is the Gospel"-Charles Spurgeon.

So because Spurgeon said this it is to be considered fact? I would question any Armenian that would say the same thing except placing "Arminianism" in the palce of Calvinism. Men are men. The Lord is the Lord. I choose to listen to the Lord over man.

Miccah wrote:
Men are men. The Lord is the Lord. I choose to listen to the Lord over man.

Amen, the way is narrow and few that find it, some go off to the right (calvinism) some to the left(arminianism) or some go of to signs and wonders, some go of to dead letter. A few stay on the path.

Hebrews 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith........

I would like to respond to a few comments on the debate on "fatalism". Someone will mention that the Calvinistic perspective is fatalistic. Calvinists will respond with an array of alternate terms and an explanation of why Calvinism is not fatalistic. But let's not let the debate be about words. When your average Christian says fatalism, they are using the term in the sense defined in most dictionaries and as commonly used. It merely means a fate, a future, an eternity that one cannot control. Calvinists believe that a person's "fate" is pre-determined by God. Those who do not believe in Calvinism communicate that by saying they do not believe in fatalism. The Calvinist's extended definition of fatalism does not have a lot of meaning for us, because the discussion cannot be just wrangling over words. It is about meaning. For the non-Calvinist, pick whatever words you want, but Calvinism has always been equated with fatalism.

TaylorOtwell wrote:
I know you agree that all men deserve hell. If that is the case, there is nothing unjust if God, in his great mercy, chooses to save some. May it drive us to our knees in humble adoration of his undeserved grace.

I hope we all agree that all men deserve hell. The rest of this paragraph does not line up with my understanding of God. I am open to instruction, and may the adoration of God drive us to our knees, but not based on misinformation.

jimdied2sin wrote:
I would like to note the comment made around the 1 hour and 6 minute mark of the recording. It is stated that that a "line has to be drawn" and that they (their teenagers specifically in context) should not have any fellowship or communication with Calvinists, regardless if they are true brethren or not (Paul Washer specifically named and included).

This is so grieving... and is not of God. Though it is the perogative of the eldership of charity to state such things to their young people I wonder why you would promote this carnal dividing of the body of Christ under the guise of "rightly dividing the word of truth".

Greg, something is terribly wrong with this?

In Christ - Jim (a non-calvinist)

Not saying I agree or disagree with his statement, but anytime a shepherd or a church believes there is harmful spiritual error, why do you say "something is terribly wrong with this"? The Bible itself contains similar warnings. Again, perhaps this man applied those warnings wrongly, but it is not a gross error. I do not think it is a bad thing to warn the church whenever there are concerns. We should not make this statement into more than it was intended to be.

Not to belabor the point, but are there any that will exegete John 6 or Romans 9 in a way that uphold the Arminian position?

I'm just curious to see how you would parse the verbs and work around the language structure to make it fit within the presuppositions of Arminian beliefs.

TaylorOtwell wrote:
A sound exegesis has yet to be offered for John 6:35-40 that is consistent with the Arminian position.

There are many Scriptures that no "system of theology" can explain, whether Calvinism or another.

You are the first person to use the word Arminian in this thread. Why do Calvinists need to set up "two camps"? That is a phrase you find common in Calvinist-dominated threads, and you find it used in this thread. I don't think David Cooper needs to be accused of "causing division". The Calvinists have already done it. I would really enjoy to hear someone of the Calvinist perspective talk more about Christianity and the Bible than Calvin and pre-ordination.

roaringlamb wrote:

Not to belabor the point, but are there any that will exegete John 6 or Romans 9 in a way that uphold the Arminian position?

I'm just curious to see how you would parse the verbs and work around the language structure to make it fit within the presuppositions of Arminian beliefs.

Do you REALLY want to get into proof-texting certain scriptures my friend?

This is the same old debate and I will not partake in it, unless people accept absolutes of mans over the Lords.

tjservant wrote:
Many Christians from all different theological and philosophical persuasions attack the Calvinistic interpretation of the compatibility of divine sovereignty and human responsibility as espoused in reformed soteriology.

Would it be too much to ask of Calvinists to exchange "espousing reformed soteriology" for what Paul calls the simplicity of Christ?

...the way is narrow and few that find it, some go off to the right (calvinism) some to the left(arminianism) or some go of to signs and wonders, some go of to dead letter. A few stay on the path

Are you considering yourself to be one of the "few" that have stayed clear of these numerous pitfalls and is continuing on the correct path?

jimdied2sin wrote:
I agree with you almost 100%, but as my mom taught me, two wrongs don't make a right.

I do not think the issue is about two wrongs. I think it is about that it is impossible to fellowship with Calvinists without having every discussion dominated by (1) election and predestination, (2) Calvin, (3) TULIP, or (4) the errors of non-Calvinists, including how they steal the glory from God and how unlearned they are in real theology.

roaringlamb wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but are there any that will exegete John 6 or Romans 9 in a way that uphold the Arminian position?

I'm just curious to see how you would parse the verbs and work around the language structure to make it fit within the presuppositions of Arminian beliefs.

i know wesley has some good things written on it, you can probably find it easy with a google search. but this is not the point, Calvinist has as many problem explaining some parts of scripture as arminian have, i have seen multitude of words, books almost trying to explain why the word all in scripture dont mean all. Even thou its plainly there.

what we all do wrong is we try fit scripture to doctrine we hold. We will mature in the Lord when we stop that and try it the other way around. See calvinism and arminianism is a "fixed" system of theology, and the verses that dont fit we twist .explain away or just ignore them.

Revelation 22:19 and if any one may take away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the scroll of the life, and out of the holy city, and the things that have been written in this scroll;

do we have no fear of God at all? by reducing the scripture into a "fixed" unchangeable system of doctrines no matter what they are, we are revealing much of our fear of God. We need to see that we need to change perhaps our doctrines so they match the words the book. If it dont fit in your mind or mine thats another thing, the important isent to understand but obey them.

int3grity wrote:
The difference between the sovereignty of God and fatalism is the difference between God and atheism. - Charles Spurgeon

Nice quotation, but it does not mean the same thing to a non-Calvinist as it does to Calvinists who enjoy statements like these. It is just talking past each other. I like Spurgeon a good deal by the way.

tjservant wrote:

...the way is narrow and few that find it, some go off to the right (calvinism) some to the left(arminianism) or some go of to signs and wonders, some go of to dead letter. A few stay on the path

Are you considering yourself to be one of the "few" that have stayed clear of these numerous pitfalls and is continuing on the correct path?

no i have strayed left and right backwards and forwards brother, but i press on. And i trust God will lead me back when i go away from him as he does with his children, the ones who stray left or right. I know God gives light to those who seek it and are open to receive it. Its my prayer i will be such a man.

int3grity wrote:Some people say, "Calvinism divides Churches". I disagree. I think people who have a superficial understanding of Calvinism . . . .

This is where the Calvinist errs greatly. I lack nothing by having a superficial understanding of Calvin or Calvinism. Away with Calvin and Calvinism. I only need Christ and Christianity, and I need no labels or added doctrine to make it special. This arrogant attitude of Calvinism does divide churches.

Josef_Urban wrote:
If Paul Washer, a man whose message and ministry has been promoted by sermonindex, and who was granted a platform to preach at the revival conference, were to download this sermon, and to listen to it, do you think he might possibly get a little hurt or offended that Greg has posted a message urging people not to fellowship with him? Is it really brotherly love to post this? To tell you the truth, I am a little offended at this for the sake of brother Paul, and for the sake of all my brethren who hold to sovereign election.

Surely we all know it was not Greg's purpose to discourage fellowship with Paul Washer? Let's not get off base here. We could dissect every message on this site for one or two statements of error. Greg indicated he appreciated and was offering the general perspective of the message.

sermonindex wrote:
On SermonIndex the fellowship needs to center around CHRIST, the SPIRIT-FILLED LIFE, and other topics of more importance then figuring out every nuance of theology and the mysteries of God.

May this be so. To center around Christ!

Thank you for your efforts, Greg. Keep us all on track and keep the sights on revival through Christ.

Koheleth,

Friend, I think you are turning up the heat in this thread to an unedifying level. I would humbly encourage you to "cool it". I am going to use the term "Calvinist" and "Arminian" simply because it is a quick way to distinguish between two different ways of understanding salvation.

Yes, there are "Calvinist" who cannot speak of anything but Calvinism. However, there are Calvinist that are humble, and seek only to honor Christ and be true to His Word.

This entire thread seems to quickly be turning into one big ad hominem argument.

The bad lives of Calvinists do not discredit Reformed theology, just as the bad lives of Arminians do not necessarily discredit their theology. We have to examine things from the Scripture, and prayerfully exegete the Scriptures to arrive at our understandings of what the Lord has taught and what He hasn't.

We all need Christ and Christianity. But, certainly, we all want the Christ and Christianity of the Scriptures. Therefore, we need to have a Biblically informed understanding of Christ - one that is consistent, rich, humbling, exalting.

We cannot be afraid to dive deep into studying salvation, atonement, propitiation, election, etc. Obviously, as Michael (theopenlife) pointed out in another thread, these things should lead us to Christ Himself in worship and adoration.

We need not equate child-like faith with Scriptural ignorance, or gospel simplicity with Biblical illiteracy.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

TaylorOtwell wrote:
I believe we need to be wary of substituting "sanctification" for a false idea of justification.

You keep repeating this warning in many threads. I don't find it very gracious of you to keep pushing the same point. For myself, I have read and heard the perspective. It is not pleasant to have a worn idea continually forced. I agree with John Piper that this need to argue, warn, convince, and debate is patently true of Calvinists.

What i find wonderful with the Word of God is it is full of life and wisdom for us, when we limit ourself to a system of theology as cal or arm we dont have all the scripture in its fullness. Thats why we have the division and "camps"

I see God has given us all verses, if i meet a brother that confess christ but live utterly worldly in his conduct of life i will challenge his conversion with scripture to make him examine his faith and conversion. If i meet a believer who is falling and struggling i will give him the assurance verses and election verses encouraging him in the fact God will finish what he started.

We need wisdom and leading by Gods spirit, we need fear God, and i am suspecting that when we limit us to one or the other we miss much of the wonderful wisdom God has given us, all scripture is god breathed to us for a reason.

We fail, I fail often in applying it maybe as it should be applied, but still i think we should "aim" higher then settling for a definite system that is failure proof and absolute understandable and explainable.

We cant even give a complete satesfying answer to the trinity, how much less Gods election or mans free will in salvation or how it works?

yes God has given scriptures to help us understand by his spirit, but not for division or limiting ourselves within the body.

Now i can read spurgeon and rejoice and be sent to my knees, i can read wesley and say amen and be blessed. I find both camps have truths from scripture, when we settle for one we miss half of Gods wisdom.

live4jc wrote:
While I agree that some of the comments made on the sermon by David Cooper are a concern because of encouraging Christians not to fellowship with other Christians, they err no less than those who would suggest that their form of 'ism' is 'the gospel'.

Good point. Where did the division originate?

"Calvinism is the Gospel"-Charles Spurgeon

This is a very sad statement and we should do away with it. Away with Calvinism!

[b]Christ is the gospel!!![/b] Accept no substitutes.

Christ is the gospel!!! Accept no substitutes.

Actually, friend, what Christ accomplished is the gospel. Christ is not "good news" for the lost who reject Christ, as I'm sure you would agree.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

roaringlamb wrote:
Not to belabor the point, but are there any that will exegete John 6 or Romans 9 in a way that uphold the Arminian position?

I'm just curious to see how you would parse the verbs and work around the language structure to make it fit within the presuppositions of Arminian beliefs.

Disciples of Christ have never been interested in parsing verbs and working around the language structure, let alone defending Arminian beliefs. I am saddened that you have thought this. Most disciples of Christ are far too interested in fellowshipping, praying, worshipping, and serving the master to be concerned about such things. Some disciples of Christ that I know say that the Holy Spirit has led them into all truth. I do understand that for most Calvinists this makes us "ignorant and unlearned", but I guess we don't mind that label since it is a Biblical term applied to the earliest disciples. Again, I am sincerely sorry that our interests differ, but they must because our Master said that our time is limited.

Disciples of Christ have never been interested in parsing verbs and working around the language structure

Disciples of Christ have always been interested in understanding what their Lord taught them.

Brother, again, you are really throwing mud into the fan here. I would encourage you to calm down and step back for a while.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

TaylorOtwell wrote:
Friend, I think you are turning up the heat in this thread to an unedifying level. I would humbly encourage you to "cool it". I am going to use the term "Calvinist" and "Arminian" simply because it is a quick way to distinguish between two different ways of understanding salvation.

I apologize that you do not appreciate the comments I offered, but I feel I offered them responsibly. I think we can both exchange that we are finding the others comments unedifying, but you have the honor of pointing that out first. For me, I do not find much Christ in Calvinism, so why continue to push it? Do you think that most people here are edified by Calvinism?

Josef_Urban wrote:
Dear Greg,

Please give me mercy and understand that I am writing this in a Spirit of love.

However, the issue is that this message that is being promoted by you (showing your endorsement and stamp of approval on it) is promoting not Christian love and unity like you say you want here, but is promoting downright SECTARIANISM. You have said that they are "seperationists" and that they have a right to be -but I wonder, are they seperationists or are they sectarianists? And what's the difference?

I agree with you that there are many Calvinists that are overly dogmatic, harsh, and simply not even born again that bash everything that doesn't fit their precise theology with a spirit of contention and sectarianism too. But, dear brother, this does not make it right for us to post something on the other extreme that's in the same exact spirit of contentious sectarianism. If we go on immitating their bad example, then where does it end? And are not we then just as guilty as they? And it makes it worse when we say we're against that, and try to use two wrongs to make a right, doing ourselves the very thing we are speaking against in others!

What if we had audio of biblical times and a man in his sermon told his congregation at the end not to fellowship with the Apostle John? Would you promote his "otherwise good" message? If not, where should the line be drawn? Is not Paul Washer and other Calvinists who love the Lord not just as much a child of God? Truly, to draw a sword of division between us and them is to draw a sword of division between us and the children of God, and consequently, between us and God Himself in this matter.

Thank you for writing in a spirit of love and mercy. I don't disagree with most of what you wrote, but I think it is misinterpreting Greg.

Greg has indicated his level of approval of any message on this site in other threads. I think we should receive every message he promotes or posts in that general light. I think it is really demeaning to Greg to say that by posting this message he should be identified with those who draw a sword of division among the body of Christ. That is reading way too much into his post and this message.

jimdied2sin wrote:
Please do not mis-quote me in your zealousness.

Surely did not mean to. Perhaps I misunderstood your point, which is what I was attempting to respond to.

The issue is about two wrongs and your divisive characterization of all Calvinists is false and absured. It does help make my point though. Are ye yet carnal Koheleth?

Apparently to you I am yet carnal, so you can win. I am carnal. Now, to move on, I did not mean to characterize every last Calvinist. I only meant to characterize all of my personal contact with Calvinists. I think I have a right to speak about that.

Also, maybe I should use more smiley faces! ;-)

I guess people think I am getting heated, when my real desire is to attempt to add a few comments and also indicate my appreciation for all of Greg's labors. I would like to see him have the freedom to post a message he feels is beneficial for SermonIndex. You will notice that there was entirely no complaint or correction or warning from me when a Calvinistic message was posted a while back. I am going to assume that Greg is trusting the sovereign and almighty God will help his people discern if there are any errors in what is shared on this site.

For me, I do not find much Christ in Calvinism, so why continue to push it? Do you think that most people here are edified by Calvinism?

Friend, I believe people will be edified by the truth of the Scriptures. I find a "Calvinistic" view of salvation to be consistent with the Scriptures. If you do not, there are Scriptural passages we can discuss and seek to interpret contextually and consistently. Again, RoaringLamb has suggested this, however, it has not been done.

If a topic regarding salvation is posted, I think Greg would allow us to post our thoughts reasonably, calmly, and lovingly. May the Lord help us to post in such a fashion. But, this is a [b]discussion[/b] board. People have different opinions, and different convictions - that is simply the nature of the world.

Why do we discuss and debate differences between us? If we are honoring the Lord, we debate Scripture because we have such a longing to be unified in our understanding of it.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

when we limit ourself to a system of theology as cal or arm we dont have all the scripture in its fullness. Thats why we have the division and "camps"

I know you are no Calvinist and you do not claim to adhere to Arminian beliefs but that does not mean there is some special "fullness" in between; some special "in the middle" understanding that allows you to utilize the entire Bible in a way others can or do not. There are many preachers that preach the WHOLE Bible. It may be that your middle ground understanding simply does not agree with their interpretation.

The ones in between are not special, they simply have a differing set of beliefs that do not fully fit into one of the other categories, thus creating their own “camp”.

TaylorOtwell wrote:
If a topic regarding salvation is posted, I think Greg would allow us to post our thoughts reasonably, calmly, and lovingly. May the Lord help us to post in such a fashion. But, this is a [b]discussion[/b] board. People have different opinions, and different convictions - that is simply the nature of the world.

Why do we discuss and debate differences between us? If we are honoring the Lord, we debate Scripture because we have such a longing to be unified in our understanding of it.

Again, I don't disagree with you. Yes, this is a discussion board. We agree that posts should be reasonable and loving. Unfortunately, not all of us are enjoying a number of the posts. And I apologize that I myself am not posting in a way you appreciate. I take responsibility for that and will attempt better in the future. That does not change the fact that I do not find a lot of revival or Christ in Calvinism. I can appreciate that you are very excited about Calvinism, but I think it would be better to focus on something else.

In your statement above, you use the word "debate". While that is not a recommended New Testament method of fellowship, I do find it to be a common technique of Calvinists. I guess I am asking if Christ would have something to change. I am definitely not leaving myself out of the need to change, and I have appreciated every correction and admonishment that has been posted.

No. I don't think everytime there is a honest post about the topic of salvation that there should be "calvanistic" viewed beleivers posting their theology in that discussion thread.

SermonIndex.net has run for 7 years without having any emphasis on calvinism but the simple teaching of the Word of God.

Greg,

The simple teaching of the Word of God was this: "No man can come unto me [Christ], unless it is granted to him by the Father." You'll notice that, even in Jesus' time, many disciples no longer walked with him after that statement.

Those with "Calvinistic" convictions find their convictions to be the "simple teaching of the Word of God", else we wouldn't hold to them.

Perhaps there should be a rule that "Calvinist can't post their views on salvation"? If someone posts a question on salvation, I just assumed others were free to offer their interpretation. Those who do not share our convictions love to have monologues, but when it comes to dialogues about the issues, they all of a sudden want get back to "simplicity".

With care in Christ,
Taylor

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=26808&forum=36&12] 'Am I Calvinist?', 'Am I Arminianist?'[/url]

TaylorOtwell wrote:
The simple teaching of the Word of God was this: "No man can come unto me [Christ], unless it is granted to him by the Father." You'll notice that, even in Jesus' time, many disciples no longer walked with him after that statement.

Those with "Calvinistic" convictions find their convictions to be the "simple teaching of the Word of God", else we wouldn't hold to them.

Perhaps there should be a rule that "Calvinist can't post their views on salvation"? If someone posts a question on salvation, I just assumed others were free to offer their interpretation. Those who do not share our convictions love to have monologues, but when it comes to dialogues about the issues, they all of a sudden want get back to "simplicity".

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Taylor, I really do want to understand your points and I also want to have enjoyable discussion. I don't feel the spirit here is that Calvinists cannot or should not post their views on salvation, but with moderation. From my perspective, I hope the moderators will apply this evenly to any topic being repeated often in the forums. I desire not to be biased.

I guess on the John quotation, a lot of us don't want to focus so much on one verse. Regarding your closing thoughts, I wish I could apologize for all the monologues, although any essay or sermon is a monologue, so it is really our choice to partake or not.

For myself I don't think my appreciation of Christianity in recent years has departed from "simplicity". It is not a matter of wanting to get back to it so much as not wanting to get away from it.

Like you said, we could discuss the verse in John; or we could discuss the verse about becoming like little children. I think these would both be great discussions. However, they both belong in their own threads, separate from this one. I think a great experiment would be to post a new thread with the title "Exegesis of John 6:35-40" and everyone interested can dive right in! :-)

Greg great Sermon, and you were so right to post it !!

For one stage everytime i logged on, there were thread after thread ad nauseam about Calvinism..One from the other angle is a welcomed relief!!

strawrifle wrote:
Greg great Sermon, and you were so right to post it !!

For one stage everytime i logged on, there were thread after thread ad nauseam about Calvinism..One from the other angle is a welcomed relief!!

The moment jimdied2sin showed that the sermon called for non fellowship with Paul Washer I haven't downloaded the sermon and will not download such a thing.

And I'm not Calvinist.

Let us not name names and if we find that godly names are being dragged into the mud such as in this sermon we should find another sermon to listen to.

I'm sure that others have great material touching on the same issues without seeking to tear down godly saints such as Brother Paul Washer.

Hmmmmm Josh but jimdied2sin saying "Are ye yet carnal Koheleth?" to someone he barely knows gets a pass???

:-(

"glories in its shame" haha get a grip...

sermonindex wrote:

The sermon by no means tears down or maligns brother Paul Washers name at all. It was a local church decision for them to recommend to the young people not to listen to Calvinist teachings and also not to fellowship with strong Calvinists. This is a "local" church decision. Other then that part of the tape, the whole sermon is fine and given in a very good spirit.

The "local church" decision has been posted on sermonindex for tens of thousands to listen to.

I will, as others, now leave this thread, as it tends to strife and I am no man's judge and cannot know the motives of any man, including those who would discourage fellowship with a Saint such as Brother Paul Washer.

The Lord be glorified.

I can no longer stand by and not at least attempt to draw out a pleading for an observation ...

How utterly grievous is this taken as a whole. I want to ask, is it worth it saints?

Of late I am so reluctant to even use the abominable names anymore because they have become that - Labels, stereotypes - Misrepresented and applied haphazardly, misconstrued and misunderstood - Understood and still used as something to force others into - The particulars have been gone into ad nauseum and I have a very hard time with the notion that was forwarded, this point of contention - It is flatly wrong regardless of perspective and it should have been addressed as that, wrong, without equivocation ... But, yes the proverbial 'but' ...

... [i]above all things [b]being fervent in your love among yourselves[/b]; for love covereth a multitude of sins: using hospitality one to another without murmuring[/i]: 1Pe 4:8-9

Some happenstance last week, on the way to work, flipped on the radio and those words above were the first and last that I heard. I do not know who said it, who was preaching, but they hit me like I had never heard them before, like a lash to the soul ... and the mind returned to these confines and to similar situations just like this. [i]Have fervent love ...[/i]

Foolish am I to think of some mighty sliver bullet to put a decided end to all of this but for the life of me - a death to it all. It is not one and a hundred thousand particulars- It is not an anti-intellectualism - It is not a straddling of two lines, two camps, two systems -It is a plea for an abolishment of them both.

[b][i]Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.[/i][/b] 2Ti 2:14

Bold. Obtrusive. Loud. Can we hear it? Will we embrace it, meditate on it ... practice it?

[i]To no profit[/i] - Striving about [u]words[/u]. It is the issue, it is the matter. Words are important, meaning is important, definitions, histories, ... yes.

[i]To the subverting of the hearers[/i].

No!

All of this is overdone, overblown, it has gone too far for too long - What does it say of us that we cannot even refrain from it but must inject yet another particular another point another schism, to what profit?

[u][b]Charging them before the Lord[/b][/u]

That is a very terse and strong statement.

The middle is challenged, the ends are challenged - To gain a point, make a point, stress an overstressed construct to the point of breaking. Strange this all has it's own life and is seemingly impervious to a breaking at all, it just goes on and on and on, all to no profit when it is done in this fashion.

Take a look at it broadly, overall, in an all encompassing manner - What then? What of it? Honestly? There is something absolutely ridiculous about this when it comes right down to it - That there is a thread of commonality, but it is so thin, so overlooked that it is amazing [i]it too[/i] has not broken. Do we not recognize in all of this how much is really, largely the same thing said differently (as someone here so intuitively made note of)? But that is not good enough, it [i]must further be stressed[/i]

But who cares when we have just one more thing to add to it, one more bit ... and I do mean the particulars.

I have wondered - What if a writing, a post, from these very pages was made to stand on all fours and two separatist groups were formed over it - A schism was developed and it ran of it's own accord, not unlike this whole abominable, over done mess. Would it not be a horror and a grief? Or would we in the name of our strict, pedantic theology hold fast, hold fort, encourage the very schisms that we are distinctly warned not to have amongst ourselves?

[i]Of course[/i] this cannot mean disregard to sound grasp of the scriptures. Of course it cannot mean also one and a thousand other retorts and corrections ...

The strongest of these old dead saints here and those alluded to elsewhere, most of them [i]got it[/i]. They knew the limitations even if they were convinced of certain truths as they perceived them - To a point. To a limit. Within the fold if I could put it that way.

Then the rest of this is nothing short of civil war, though it may rarely be civil.

See the signature below. It applies as well and was put in place for this very reason. A banishment on these two terms, these two characterizations. Who cares which is which or who is who - You are neither. They were two men with two interpretations and it is the followers who have made it more than it should have ever turned into.

If this is how everything must be viewed than the equivalent is to be stuck in a portion of Romans and making a complete livelihood out of it. Oh for a end to all of this, again [i]to what profit[/i] ultimately my friends?

My last and greatest observation in all these wranglings, time and again, over and over and over again ...

Jesus.

Where is He - Run this through the constructs and arguments, the petty, yes often very much petty squabbling - Where, I ask, is Jesus in this? Where is He named and appealed to and spoken of.

Tell me it is worth all this expense and exhaustion and endless, circular, parsing of words and labeling of intentions.

Tell me.

I don't know what to say. I thought about not posting or maybe just messaging Mike privately, but . . . I feel like I have failed. I really don't like controversy. I am sorry to everyone I have offended. I hope a better way will open up for us on these forums.

... above all things being fervent in your love among yourselves; for love covereth a multitude of sins: using hospitality one to another without murmuring: 1Pe 4:8-9

Man, oh man. This is just a good Scripture for the hour. I hope you will keep me accountable to it, brother. Love. Where is it? There is such a great need of it in my own life.

Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. 2Ti 2:14

I am left speechless. Mike, thanks for pulling out the sword of the Spirit. My prayer is that striving about words will pass away from these forums. Definitely from my own life. May it be so, for the Lord's sake.

Brother Taylor wrote:

Friend, I believe people will be edified by the truth of the Scriptures. I find a "Calvinistic" view of salvation to be consistent with the Scriptures.

Have you considered this section of Scripture?
................................................................................................
Job 33:
14 \tFor God may speak in one way, or in another,
\tYet man does not perceive it.
15 \tIn a dream, in a vision of the night,
\tWhen deep sleep falls upon men,
\tWhile slumbering on their beds,
16 \tThen He opens the ears of men,
\tAnd seals their instruction.
17 \tIn order to turn man from his deed,
\tAnd conceal pride from man,
18 \tHe keeps back his soul from the Pit,
\tAnd his life from perishing by the sword.
19 \t“Man is also chastened with pain on his bed,
\tAnd with strong pain in many of his bones,
20 \tSo that his life abhors bread,
\tAnd his soul succulent food.
21 \tHis flesh wastes away from sight,
\tAnd his bones stick out which once were not seen.
22 \tYes, his soul draws near the Pit,
\tAnd his life to the executioners.
23 \t“If there is a messenger for him,
\tA mediator, one among a thousand,
\tTo show man His uprightness,
24 \tThen He is gracious to him, and says,
\t“Deliver him from going down to the Pit;
\tI have found a ransom’;
25 \tHis flesh shall be young like a child’s,
\tHe shall return to the days of his youth.
26 \tHe shall pray to God, and He will delight in him,
\tHe shall see His face with joy,
\tFor He restores to man His righteousness.
27 \tThen he looks at men and says,
\t“I have sinned, and perverted what was right,
\tAnd it did not profit me.’
28 \tHe will redeem his soul from going down to the Pit,
\tAnd his life shall see the light.
29 \t“Behold, God works all these things,
\tTwice, in fact, three times with a man,
30 \tTo bring back his soul from the Pit,
\tThat he may be enlightened with the light of life.

............................................................................................

Likewise please consider this section of Scripture....

...........................................................................................

Job 36:
7 \tHe does not withdraw His eyes from the righteous;
\tBut they are on the throne with kings,
\tFor He has seated them forever,
\tAnd they are exalted.
8 \tAnd if they are bound in fetters,
\tHeld in the cords of affliction,
9 \tThen He tells them their work and their transgressions—
\tThat they have acted defiantly.
10 \tHe also opens their ear to instruction,
\tAnd commands that they turn from iniquity.
11 \tIf they obey and serve Him,
\tThey shall spend their days in prosperity,
\tAnd their years in pleasures.
12 \tBut if they do not obey,
\tThey shall perish by the sword,
\tAnd they shall die without knowledge.
13 \t“But the hypocrites in heart store up wrath;
\tThey do not cry for help when He binds them.
14 \tThey die in youth,
\tAnd their life ends among the perverted persons.

..............................................................................................

And if one does not believe that the OT Scripture accurately declares God's nature and work, please consider this section of Scripture
.............................................................................................

Rom. 8:12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

............................................................................................

What does the Scripture say? What does the Spirit say to your heart ?

Your brother in Christ
Jeff

This passage confirms the Calvinistic understanding. "For it is God who works all these things"... (33:29)

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Hi Taylor,

It would be helpful for me if you would give your testimony of coming to the Lord and showing how it fits in with the Calvin way of thinking, as I am having difficulty seeing how it works.

Hi HeartSong,

Thank you for the suggestion. I plan to be on a computer later this afternoon (I'm on my phone now), and I will make a new thread with my testimony and some thoughts regarding how Gods sovereignty is involved. It takes a while for me to type on this phone! :-)

With care in Christ,
Taylor

Brother Taylor wrote:

This passage confirms the Calvinistic understanding. "For it is God who works all these things"... (33:29)

Brother Taylor,

I am glad that you have selected this Scripture, for if we continue in Paul's message to the Philippian church we find this exhortation....
...............................................................................................
Phil. 3:12 Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. 13 Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, 14 I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus.

Phil. 3:15 Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you. 16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us be of the same mind.

...........................................................................................

We are to press on in maturity, so brother have you considered what these sections of Scripture say?

............................................................................................
Job 33:
14 For God may speak in one way, or in another,
Yet man does not perceive it.
15 In a dream, in a vision of the night,
When deep sleep falls upon men,
While slumbering on their beds,
16 Then He opens the ears of men,
And seals their instruction.
17 In order to turn man from his deed,
And conceal pride from man,
18 He keeps back his soul from the Pit,
And his life from perishing by the sword.
19 “Man is also chastened with pain on his bed,
And with strong pain in many of his bones,
20 So that his life abhors bread,
And his soul succulent food.
21 His flesh wastes away from sight,
And his bones stick out which once were not seen.
22 Yes, his soul draws near the Pit,
And his life to the executioners.
23 “If there is a messenger for him,
A mediator, one among a thousand,
To show man His uprightness,
24 Then He is gracious to him, and says,
“Deliver him from going down to the Pit;
I have found a ransom’;
25 His flesh shall be young like a child’s,
He shall return to the days of his youth.
26 He shall pray to God, and He will delight in him,
He shall see His face with joy,
For He restores to man His righteousness.
27 Then he looks at men and says,
“I have sinned, and perverted what was right,
And it did not profit me.’
28 He will redeem his soul from going down to the Pit,
And his life shall see the light.
29 “Behold, God works all these things,
Twice, in fact, three times with a man,
30 To bring back his soul from the Pit,
That he may be enlightened with the light of life.

....................................................................................

When Jesus taught the scribes and pharisees that He was the "light of life," can you imagine that the minds of these men immediately went to the section of Scripture above....

What about this section of Scripture?

..................................................................................
Job 36:
7 He does not withdraw His eyes from the righteous;
But they are on the throne with kings,
For He has seated them forever,
And they are exalted.
8 And if they are bound in fetters,
Held in the cords of affliction,
9 Then He tells them their work and their transgressions—
That they have acted defiantly.
10 He also opens their ear to instruction,
And commands that they turn from iniquity.
11 If they obey and serve Him,
They shall spend their days in prosperity,
And their years in pleasures.
12 But if they do not obey,
They shall perish by the sword,
And they shall die without knowledge.
13 “But the hypocrites in heart store up wrath;
They do not cry for help when He binds them.
14 They die in youth,
And their life ends among the perverted persons.

.......................................................................................

Do you see parallel between the section of Scripture above with the teaching of Paul in this Scripture?

.......................................................................................

Rom. 8:12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

............................................................................................

What does Scripture say? What does the Holy Spirit say to our hearts according to the Scripture?

In Christ
Jeff

Maybe you could edit the sermon Greg? cut out the testimonies afterwards and just have the sermon.

Brother Greg wrote:

It is sad that out of 1000's of views on this thread the actual sermon was only listened to by 72 people!

In addition, in this thread, while the preacher taught through much Scripture, few have even mentioned the merit of what this preacher taught.

What of the Scripture that was presented? What does the Holy Spirit say to your hearts?

In Christ
Jeff

Jeff,

I'm sorry, maybe I am missing something. Perhaps you should be more specific with your questions or responses. I'm not quite sure what you are getting at with these passages.

With care in Christ,
Taylor

I believe I am believing the simple interpreation of the bible on the matter.

As do I.

Both sides believe they ‘believe the simple interpretation of the Bible’. And each side is equally convinced of the others error, this is what has created the debate that has lasted hundreds of years

While we may not share the same view of election, I do not believe this is a reason to break fellowship. I gladly call you brother and understand your reasoning for posting this message. I have only posted in hopes of clearing up a common misunderstanding.

God bless you, and thank you for all your work on SI.

Greg,
I'm relatively new to this forum and have been greatly blessed by the dozens of sermons I've downloaded and listened to from this site. In the few short months I've been reading posts, I've seen much debate on the Cal/Arm issue, an issue that I love to talk about and have my own strong convictions about. I've notice recently more and more posts from members seeking to calm the discussions on this issue a bit, so that we can focus on more "central" aspects that both sides agree on. Taking that lead, I've been trying not to get too pulled into debating this issue, as I'm sure neither side has effectely won too many from the opposing camp via this forum (I could be wrong). My question is, you appear to be the head moderator for this site and yet you apparently go directly at this issue and take some fairly hard stands as to what scripture says and what "all Calvinists" clearly believe...so are we to continue debating this issue in post after post, or is it your desire to move the posts and discussions away from this issue and try to keep the topics less confrontational?