Calvamanianism.

Ok... let me be up front. I think this topic poses some danger on discussion boards. I have seen numerous times where people got all heated about it. Just wanted to put that up first to remind everyone to keep the unity. I am leading a study on the book of Ephesians for Home Group. I had the intention this week to do the first three chapters but the first chapter was just so full of meat that we are going to just do the first chapter. In the first chapter it brings up the topic of being chosen and predestination. Before I pose my question here is a very very very brief nutshell between Calvinism and Armenianism....and probably extreme definitions of both. Calvinism - Eternal Security, predestination. God chose you from the foundation of time, therefor you are eternally secure. You have no choice in the matter. Armenian - free will. Man has a choice. Christ came that all may have a chance to believe and go to heaven. Ok, now my question: In the first chapter of Ephesians it says that God chose us and predestined us. What if we have the meaning here all messed up? What if the scripture doesn't actually mean "chosen" in the sense that He chooses "one man over another" but that he chose the church to be the vessel in which His spirit resides...and (later in the first chapter in Ephesians) to be His body where the fullness of Christ resides? Just like He chose Israel to be His nation, He chose the church to have the fullness of Christ, but not necessarily that He chose the individual. Does "chosen" apply to the individual believer or the church as a whole? Scripture also clearly states that God is the one who draws men to himself. Scripture also states that "for God so loved the world that he gave his only Son for all men, that whosoever believes will have eternal life". How do you reconcile these two scriptures with each other? Does the answer lie in the fact that God does at one point in every persons life draw every single man to himself but then its up to that man to decide to believe and accept salvation? This answer would resolve both the drawing of men and free will to believe in Him. I believe that at least in Ephesians this answer best fits into the context of the chapter. The letter is written to the "church" in Ephesus. It goes on speaking our blessings in Christ and our identity in Christ and then in the end of the chapter it goes on about the church being the body of Christ, of which Christ is head of and Lord over. And then the next couple of proceeding chapters speak on unity in the church. Do we take the concepts of predestination and "being chosen" out of context by applying it to the individual rather than the church as a whole? I used to be a die hard Calvinist, then decide that Armenian was the way to go. One camp pretty much denies free will and the other camp pretty much denies the sovereignty of God. Really, I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle of the two. One that embraces God's sovereignty but at the same time leaves the choice to the individual. Right now I am a Calvamenian Thoughts? Am I way off base and taking things out of context. I have never heard this way taught before so I assume there is a reason.

Conqueror wrote:What if the scripture doesn't actually mean "chosen" in the sense that He chooses "one man over another" but that he chose the church to be the vessel in which His spirit resides...It is the work of Christ that is predestined not man. All those who Abide in Christ become part of His predestined work. It's not about us, Ephesians is all about Him.In ChristJeff

11In him we were also chosen,[e] having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.Pretty sure Paul is referring to believers here.

GrannieAnnie wrote:What the Lord does use is His "Foreknowledge" of who will get on that jet, so He does know who is predestined to make it to N.Y..I believe your understanding of foreknowledge could be deepened somewhat.Let me explain, and feel free to comment.1. God (the Trinity) exists apart from His creation (that is, 'before' there was a creation God existed, and if creation ceases to exist God will 'continue' to exist).2. The act of creation neither diminished, nor augmented God's nature. God is unchanging.3. When God created the universe, he created both time and space.4. God therefore exists apart from both time and space, and as such rules that govern temporal and spatial reality cannot be rightly applied to God.If we understand foreknowledge to be God --looking forward-- into time, we have put a restriction upon God's perspective that isn't there.God doesn't experience time like we do, since His awareness/consciousness exists apart from time.If we picture the universe as a gigantic "ball" of space and time - God would be like a person who can examine the whole ball at once - that is, God doesn't look at one part of the ball then the next - but takes it all in simultaneously. So it is with creation. Because God is outside of time and space His awareness is everywhere simultaneously - (omnipresent), but he is also "fully conscious" in every moment of the past, in the present, and in every moment in the future (omnichronological)Because God is omnipresent and omnichronological God doesn't "looks forward" into time as though his awareness were trapped in the present like the rest of creation - instead God -is- in the future right now, just as He is in the past and in the present.It is a subtlety, but when understood the implications are profound.Predestination therefore cannot be described as God looking forward from one end of time and responding to men who have freely believed on His name in the future, predestinates them from the past. That intellectually dishonest - a sort of cerebral prestigidigitation. In this scenario, man is sovereign in election because God responds to man's choice. The bible portrays however a sovereign God, and if we allow God to be sovereign, we see that predestination works like this:Apart from creation and therefore apart from time), God determined (predestined) exactly whom He would save. This predestination was not based on the choice of man in any way, but rather man's free choice to come to God depends on God having predestined him to do so.The scriptures say that no one comes to the Son unless the Father draws him. God draws only the elect whom He predestined - and that predestination was not dependant upon man's choice - rather man's choice is dependant upon being predestined.That is the difference between, "My sheep hear My voice" and "I don't have any sheep, but some sheep will hear my voice and choose to become My sheep"I could go on -but the important thing is that we understand that God is not bound to time as though he were a created being.Dan/\\/\\/\\

I'm content to know that He's omniscient.I am not inferring anything with regards to yourself GrannieAnnie, I am merely springing off of your reply to make a further comment regarding the nature of contentment. There are many Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses who are content with their errant understanding of the truth. Many of these will reject the truth because they are content with what little truth they do possess.Was it Robert W who have us that wonderful definition of "understanding" - the gist of it being that when all his questions have been answered to his own satisfaction he feels he has come to an understanding of the issue. If some new information should arise either by challenge or whatever, he, like a nobel Berean, examines the challenge, and answers any questions that the challenge to his current understanding would ask - then when he is once again satisfied that all his questions are answered - then and only then is he content in his understanding.This sort of contentment is noble - because it is teachable and doesn't assume perfection in knowledge. The former kind however (Mormons and JW's who refuse to listen to the truth) is ignorant and beggarly.I do hope that anyone who is content with their own understanding doesn't acheive that contentment through ignorance, but rather through thoughtful examination. :-) Dan/\\/\\/\\

What made the Bereans -noble- wasn't that they read the OT scriptures, it was that they carefully researched what Paul was saying -before- they dismissed it. We learn from this that to dismiss something before you examine to see whether it is true or not is the thing that is ignoble.I appreciate your zeal.Dan/\\/\\/\\

Sooooo.... If God desires that none should perish but that ALL should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:7) Then why did he harden Pharaoh's heart? (Romans 9:14-18)

I didn't read all the posts, but I am either a backslidden Arminian or a 4.5 point Calvanist. Not sure which.I also agree with the brother that stated God is not constrained by time. God knows all. Therefore before He even started to create anything, He knew how it would all end. So for someone to say He is ignorant of who will be with Him in that day, is plain wrong in my view. It is saying that God doesn't know all. God knows the number, man does not. These are the elect. God knows who we are before we enter the womb. If he knows the number of each hair on our head, surely he knows the number who will be with Him in the last day.However, to say that man has no responsibility, and if he is elected, he can just hide in his home until the Spirit of God moves upon him, is absolute foolishness. If we have no responsibility to God, as believers or infidels, why is there a judgment? Even Spurgeon, who was heavily Calvanist, preached against this 'frozen chosen' way of thinking. Spurgeon used to pray, 'God call out your elect, and then elect some more.'Here is my take. God gave us freewill, however He knew who would submit to the Holy Ghost before the foundation of the world was laid. So when He created us, he created His chosen, as well. How can we say that we chose Him, when He made us, made the way to Him, breathed life into us, paid for our sin, guides us, gives us the ability to turn to Him, etc, etc, etc. While we have submitted ourselves to His will, in the big picture, He created us knowing full well who would turn to Him and who would resist. The end result is His glory.So man does have a responsiblity toward God, but He already knows the outcome. So the second you say, "I'm elect. Let's just sit around and wait for the judgment," or "It's all up to me and you, God just made the way and sits back," it seems to me you have misunderstood Scripture.Freewill: John 7:37b "If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink."Election: John 15:16a "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you..."Resistance against the Holy Ghost: Acts 7:51 "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye."I see no problem with election and freewill working in harmony Scripturally. The confusion comes about when someone assumes we know everything God knows, and assuming God works with the same means and limits that we do.

Letsgetbusy,So when you say God knew before he created us "who would submit to the Holy Ghost", are you not still saying in effect that because we chose Him, He elected to choose us through some sort of foreknowledge?So who chose who first, and this choosing was based on what? Are you not still in effect making God's sovereignty bow down to man's choice to serve Him or not?Please answer the question I posed earlier;If God desires that none should perish, but that ALL come to repentance, Why did HE harden Pharoahs heart?

Sooooo.... If God desires that none should perish but that ALL should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:7) Then why did he harden Pharaoh's heart? (Romans 9:14-18)I've looked into that question a while back..You should check why God hardened pharao's heart.. makes a good study. But I won't get into that in this topic. Perhaps you'll find it handy to check what happened before God hardened pharaos heart.

Yes, but your response still didn't answer the question! The topic is Calvin vs Arminius, so this is a valid question, asked so the readers of this forum will THINK! Did God go against his own desires that none should perish, and harden Pharoah's heart anyway? There is a very simple answer found right there in Scripture, so keep your answers brief.And Annie, I'm pressing the issue because my sincere desire is to get people BEYOND this silly debate! God's ways are so much higher than our ways!P.S. John Calvin oversaw the execution of 58 people in Geneva that didn't agree with his theology, so while his views produced some great truths, they did not produce much love or compassion in the man himself!

And Annie, I'm pressing the issue because my sincere desire is to get people BEYOND this silly debate! God's ways are so much higher than our ways!You are right about one thing....this debate is silly.

I copied this from another thread a long time ago. Sister Shelly wrote:This analogy is a VERY simple look at Predestination and Election. I did not intend it to be for salvation, regeneration, sanctification, etc. It basically states in my opinion, that on the topic of predestination/election that we were chosen as a whole (the church), yet have the individual will to choose to serve our Lord and Master. Once again the analogy was not to serve as an end all be all for salvation and etc. BTW, desire is not enough..the analogy did cover a living faith, meaning a day to day belief in Jesus Christ, and not just believe but living the Word, not just reading it or knowing it. Let me explain myself perhaps a little more clearly. ELECTION--God's choice of those who believe in Christ is an important doctrine to the apostle Paul (Rom 8:29-33, 9:6-26, 11:5,28; Col 3:12; 1Thess 1:4; 2Thess 2:13; Titus 1:1). Election refers to God's choice in Christ of a people in order that they should be holy and blameless in his sight. Paul sees election as expressing God's love as God receives, as His own, all who receive His Son, Jesus. I feel that the doctrine of election involves these following truths: ( I may split up over several posts.) 1. Election is Christocentric ie, election of humans occurs only in union with Jesus Christ. Jesus himself is first of all the elect of God. Concerning Jesus, God states, "Here is my servant whom I have chosen". Christ, as the elect, is the foundation of our election. Only in union with Christ do we become members of the elect. NO ONE is elect apart from union with Christ through faith. If the analogy were carefully read, you would see that if one does not maintain that union with Christ, he/she is no longer part of the elect and have abandoned ship. 2. Election is "in Him...through His blood" (Eph. 1:7). God purposed before creation to form a people through Christ's redemptive death on the cross. Thus election is grounded in Christ's sacrificial death to save us from our sins(Act 20:28, Rom 3:24-26). 3. Election in Christ is primarily corporate, that is the election of a people. The elect are called "the body of Christ", "My church","A people belonging to God" and the "bride" of Christ. Therefore, election is corporate and embraces individual persons only as they identify and associate themselves with the body of Christ, the true church. This was true already of Israel in the OT. 4. The election to salvation and holiness of the body of Christ is always certain. But the certainty of election for individuals remain conditional on their personal living faith in Jesus Christ and perseverance in union with Him. Paul demonstrates this as follows: a.) God's eternal purpose for the church is that we should "be holy and blameless in His sight" (Eph 1:4). This refers both to forgivness of sins, and to the church's sanctification and holiness. God's elect people are being led by the Holy Spirit toward sanctification and holiness (Rom 8:14; Gal 5:16-25). Paul repeatedly emphasizes this paramount purpose of God (Eph 2:10, 3:14-19, 4:1-3,13-24; 5:1-18.) b.)Fulfillment of this purpose for the corporate church is certain: Christ will "present her to Himself as a radiant church...holy and blameless (Eph 5:27). c.) Fulfillment of this purpose for individuals in the church is conditional. Christ will present us "holy and blameless in His sight" only if we continue in the faith. Paul states this to us clearly: Christ will "present you holy in His sight without blemish...if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel" (Col 1:22-23). 5. Election to salvation in Christ is offered to all (John 3:16-17; 1 Tim 2:4-6; Titus 2:11)and becomes actual for particular persons contingent on their repentance and faith as they accept God's gift of salvation in Christ. At the point of faith, the believer is incorporated into Christ's elect body (the church) by the Holy Spirit (1 Col 12:13), thereby becoming one of the elect. Thus, both God and humans have a decision in election. PREDESTINATION--Predestination means "to decide beforhand" and applies to God's purposes comprehended in election. Election is God's choice "in Christ" of a people (the true church) for Himself. Predestination comprehends what will happen to God's people (all genuine believers in Christ). 1.) God predestines his elect to be : called (Rom 8:30); justified (Rom 3:24; 8:30); glorified (Rom 8:30); conformed to the likeness of His Son (Rom 8:29); holy and blameless (Eph 1:4); adopted as God's children (Eph 1:5); redeemed (Eph 1:7); recipients of an inheritance(Eph 1:14); for the praise of His glory (Eph 1:12; 1Pet 2:9);recipients of the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13; Gal 3:14) and created to do good works (Eph 2:10). 2.) Predestination, like election, refers to the corporate body of Christ(the true spiritual church), and comprehends individuals only in association with that body through a living faith in Jesus Christ. Thank you for your time. Yours in Christ, ShellyIt is Christ's work that is predestined. The question is: Do you hear His voice.In ChristJeff

Hey Jimbob!Well yes I didn't answer the question. At start I did begin to write down some of the things I found out when studying this issue about the pharaoh.. but I decided not to post that.About the Calvanism vs Armanian thing, I have little interrest to take a stand in that issue or to brand myself with a label. However it is an interresting topic to read. (especially since I don't know much about these 'groups' of believers and what they believe.)I think its noble that you want to make people think! Have you reached a conclusion?The link Annie was talking about:Here!Let us also examine if the replies/posts we make are in His Love, without preconceptions towards eachother!God bless! :-D

point blank!!!!the only answer to this contreversy with studing the scriptures the holy bible always says one thing:THE WORD OF GOD IS MORE HUMAN THAN CALVINISM AND MORE DIVINE THAN ARMENIANISMTHATS ALL THERE IS TO IT,"when i kneel down to pray i'm a calvinist, but when i preach in the pulpit im an armenianist"

the only answer to this contreversy with studing the scriptures the holy bible always says one thing:THE WORD OF GOD IS MORE HUMAN THAN CALVINISM AND MORE DIVINE THAN ARMENIANISMTHATS ALL THERE IS TO IT,"when i kneel down to pray i'm a calvinist, but when i preach in the pulpit im an armenianist"

At the heart of the controversy between Calvinism and Arminianism is the emphasis on the sovereignty of God by the Calvinists and on the free will of man, or human responsibility, by the Arminians. Arminian theology teaches that man has free will and that God will never interrupt or take that free will away, that God has obligated Himself to respect the free moral agency and capacity of free choice with which He created us. Calvinism, on the other hand, emphasizes that God is in total control of everything, and that nothing can happen that He does not plan and direct, including man's salvation. Both doctrinal positions are logical, both have Scriptures to back up each of their five points, and both are, in my opinion, partially right and partially wrong.As Philip Schaff put it in his History of the Christian Church, "Calvinism emphasizes divine sovereignty and free grace; Arminianism emphasizes human responsibility. The one restricts the saving grace to the elect; the other extends it to all men on the condition of faith. Both are right in what they assert; both are wrong in what they deny. If one important truth is pressed to the exclusion of another truth of equal importance, it becomes an error, and loses its hold upon the conscience. The Bible gives us a theology which is more human than Calvinism and more divine than Arminianism, and more Christian than either of them." (New York, Charles Scribner's & Son, 1910, VIII 815 f). Certainly, the Bible does teach that God is sovereign (Psalm 135:6; Daniel 4:35, Ephesians 1:11), and that believers are predestined and elected by God (Romans 8) to spend eternity with Him. Nowhere, however, does the Bible ever associate election with damnation. Conversely, the Scriptures teach that God elects for salvation, but that unbelievers are in hell by their own choice.Every passage of the Bible that deals with election deals with it in the context of salvation, not damnation. No one is elect for hell. The only support for such a view (which John Calvin did teach) is human logic, not Biblical revelation.The idea of total depravity is consistent with Scripture (Ephesians 2:1, Romans 3:11), but the doctrine of limited atonement, that Jesus did not die for the sins of the whole world, is clearly anti-Biblical (John 3:16, I Timothy 2:6, 11 Peter 2:1, I John 2:2). The Bible teaches that Jesus died for everyone's sins and that everyone is able to be saved if they will repent and turn to Christ. Limited atonement is a non-Biblical doctrine. (John 3:16,17; Romans 5:8, 18; 2Corinthians 5:14,15; 1Timothy 2:4; 4:10; Hebrews 2:9; 10:29; 2Peter 2: I; 1John 2:2; 4:14.)Irresistible grace is taught by some, who do not understand the concept, to mean that God drags people to Himself contrary to their wills. Actually, the Biblical view, and the view of most Calvinists, is the belief that God works on our wills so as to make us willing to surrender to Him. In other words, He makes us willing to come to Christ for salvation.And, many Scriptures teach that a true believer is safe and secure in Christ, that salvation doesn't depend on our ability to keep ourselves, but on God's ability to keep us. (1John S:11-13; John 10:28; Romans 5:1 and 8:1). The only condition for salvation is faith in Christ (John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9). On the other hand, the Bible teaches us that we must abide in Christ (John 15; Luke 13:14; Colossians 1:29; 2Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 6:4-6; 1Peter 1:10) to persevere in salvation.

2 Peter 3:9The Lord is not slow to fulfil his promise as some count slowness, but is patient towards you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repetance.That indicates to me that the choices you make in life are fundamentally your own decisions. I have seen people twist calvinism into saying that they can do whatever they want, if they are predestined to heaven then thats where they'll go, if not theres nothing they can do about it.As a university student I see this a lot (even in myself) - people lose sight of the Bible, and a lot of their motivation, in favour of following a certain set of beliefs - giving up self control on the basis that you can only do what God wants you to do.Colossians 2:8See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human traditions, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.Paul's writings to the churches are full of messages instructing the people to change there ways, of course you need God's help in this, but if you accept 2 Timothy 3:16-17, it indicates that repentance is an act of will; i can't imagine the Holy Spirit, through Paul and others, was being fallacious in telling people to change there ways lest they lose there 'birthright' (ref. Ephesians 4 vs. 17-32, James 1 19-27, 2 Timothy 4 1-9 and especially Hebrews 12: 14-17)Indeed you are called to "resist the devil and he WILL flee from you, draw near to God and he will draw near to you." (James 4: 7-8) and Jude 1:21, pretty proactive stuff if you ask me.I think it's always dangerous to put God in a box - quite frankly I don't whether he has limited himself (as in, Isiah 43:25) or not, his very prophecy (as in Daniel) would cleary indicate he knows the future - yet is it not a limit to the very soverignty the calvinists claim to preserve that he cannot delegate it out?At the same time 1 Peter 3: 15-17:"But in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defence to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience that when you are slandered those who revile your good behaviour in Christ may be put to shame."Almost 4am :(

"are you not still saying...He elected to choose us through some sort of foreknowledge?"What saith the Scriptures?Jer 1:5a "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee"Rom 8:29a "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son"Rom 11:2a "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew."Eph 1:11b "being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will""So who chose who first" God chose us first. How could we choose him first if he predinated us with foreknowledge? He is all knowing, and that infinate knowledge means that he knew how everything would end before Gen 1:1. "and this choosing was based on what?"Whatever will bring Him glory. I was not there when He laid the foundations of the Earth."Are you not still in effect making God's sovereignty bow down to man's choice to serve Him or not?"He bowed down so low that He let man walk all over Him. He is so sovereign that He let man put Him on a cross. The standard He gave has never changed, but the Son bowed down to the Father to show us while He is the Most High, he is also aquainted with grief and sorrow."Why did HE harden Pharoahs heart?"God uses people who are seeking to be close to Him, but He also uses people who utterly hate him. Like: Satan, Pharaoh, Herod, the Pharisees, Saul, etc. He uses men like Pharaoh to strengthed His people. Tribulation on the farm is the thrashing of wheat that seperates in from the chaff. He has and will continue to try His people, to bring Himself glory.Yes, we are saved by grace, but through what? Faith. We are saved by grace through faith. Grace is a free gift, but you don't have to accept a gift. Grace is like a huge piece of spiritual conduit that is available to all mankind, but until your faith travels to God via the way He has appointed, namely through the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, the blood will not be put on our account. Let me add as some may get the wrong idea, God set up this way, but does not change His standard to meet us closer during this day and age. He made the way, and simply said, "If any man serve me, let him follow me." He is not made more or less God by us following or not following. Neither is he comprimising. He stooped lower that we are willing to stoop to pave the way to Him. And now in glory, just says if anyone will come, let him come.I don't think giving man a choice is anti-election. If you are asking me how I think it happened, you are just asking a man. I wasn't there. However, I think an all-knowing God created us, but knew who would turn to Him prior. If we had no say in anything, then why is there a judgment? If we have no responsibilty, then why are there rewards in heaven? If we have no freewill then why do the verses in Scripture read, 'whosoever believeth' and 'whosoever shall call.' And why does God command all men everywhere to repent instead of only commanding his elect? Because he paid for the sins of the world but foreknew who would respond, and made specific plans ahead of time to bring glory to Himself through men. That's why we have God, the Holy Ghost, in us.

If we had no say in anything, then why is there a judgment? If we have no responsibilty, then why are there rewards in heaven? If we have no freewill then why do the verses in Scripture read, 'whosoever believeth' and 'whosoever shall call.' And why does God command all men everywhere to repent instead of only commanding his elect? Because he paid for the sins of the world but foreknew who would respond, and made specific plans ahead of time to bring glory to Himself through men. That's why we have God, the Holy Ghost, in us. There is a judgment because all have sinned against the One True and Holy God and thus deserve the penalty for their sins. While our hearts are not inclined to come to Christ without the intervention of God, still we sin against Him willingly. It is a grace and mercy when He intervenes, not a debt.Whosoever doesn't believe or does not call does not fit the description of 'does not perish' :-) Only those who believe and call on Christ for salvation are saved.Concerning repentance: God deserves the unfaltering obedience and praise from all He has created, thus the blanket command of repentance is due Him. The only exception would not be the non-elect, but rather the non-sinner, who doesn't exist except in Christ.God knows all things, including who will be saved and who will not. But, we must be careful not to say what the Bible doesn't teach. The Bible teaches that God elects according to the pleasure of His good will. Foreknowledge is involved, but the foreknowledge the Bible speaks of in these instances takes for granted that God foreknows what He also brings to pass. God foreknows (and much could be said about what the term even means, see Romans 8:29-30 and to whom it applies), but His election is never said to be based on His foreknowing any particular thing that a person does. If anyone wants to see who ... calls, elects, predestines, they should look up all instances and see who is the one doing the action, and who is the recipient of it. Election and predestination lose their meaning as words with the idea that they are based on the recipients foreseen actions rather than the grace of God upon an undeserving sinner, one whom He has loved while they were yet a sinner and not because they would choose already (and without His aid) not to be one.