The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum "Is Calvinism the Gospel?"

Unfortunately, this discussion is becoming ponderous, so much so that I am wondering if visitors/members are losing interest due to the effort required to work through such long posts. However, I'll let it continue for a bit more in its present form. And if it increases in size, should the discussion continue, methinks I may break it down into smaller bits and give its various topics their own thread.

Please note that I at least tried to make clear that in the Arminian system (fyi also in some Reformed circles, including Dordt; cf. First Head of Doctrine: Article 17) that infants dying in infancy is an exception and not paradigmatic. ALL others are saved only by faith.

Removing "unfettered free-will" would, a) be contrary to what the Remonstrants held to be true in regad to the will of man, i.e., all men infra- and supra- the Fall are endowed with free-will. And b) it would contradict what Arminianism teaches in regard to prevenient grace, i.e., it 'frees', gives man the 'ability' to either believe or not believe due to the will's bondage prior to the application of prevenient grace.

To the contrary, the effect of prevenient grace, in the Arminian system, frees man from the bondage of sin, at least to the degree that it provides the power/ability of a sinner to seek after God and believe on Christ. To cease resisting is not synonomous to agreeing with or joining with that which was formally resisted. One can stop fighting an oppressor for many reasons, e.g., the impossibility of overthrowing an enemy, but that which was the basis for the resistance remains odious and worthy of resistance nonetheless. Combining something you wrote further down with this response, Arminianism nowhere teaches that sinners are saved via "non-resistance", but rather only through faith, with the noted exception of infants dying in infancy.

Perhaps this would be the appropriate time to ask a question that has developed in my mind after reading your responses here in several places. What is your source(s) from which you have come to understand what Arminianism teaches? My sources are first and foremost, The Arminian "Remonstrance", the Canons of the Synod of Dort (the official Reformed response to the "Remonstrance"), and some 60+ books plus tomes of articles that specifically deal with historic, classic Arminianism, including the works of Jacobus Arminius. I do not recall ever reading any notion whatsoever, that Arminianism teaches that prevenient grace simply removes a sinner's resistance and consequently is saved without faith.

Wrong! In the Arminian system, God does NOT have the power to save everyone. Only in the Calvinistic system is that possible. God cannot save anyone outside of Christ. I'm going to assume that you understand this fundamental truth; the atonement of Christ was antecedently, absolutely necessary in order for God to save even one sinner. Calvinism is the ONLY theological system, in total harmony with Scripture, that teaches that ALL THINGS have been determined, eternally decreed by God without consideration of the objects affected, aka: Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, Preservation of the Saints, etc. Contrariwise, Arminianism's "god" CANNOT save a single sinner who doesn't believe on Christ due to the exercising of the alleged "free-will". Arminianism's "god" can save and only chooses to save those whom he foresees as believing as consequent to the giving of prevenient grace. In Arminianism, "god" only provides the means by which a sinner may take advantage of and choose to embrace. The choice to do so lies solely at the discretion of the sinner, not God. Again, these things are perspiciously laid out in the Canons of Dordt.

I am not sure why you think this is an "interesting approach" since it is historical fact.

I believe there are is a very small minority of professing Arminians and semi-Pelagians who are genuinely regenerate and have truly embraced the person of the Lord Christ with a Holy Spirit wrought faith. The overwhelming majority of them, I believe, are not genuinely regenerated and converted, i.e., they are yet under the just wrath of God and dead in sin. Therefore de facto, I do not consider carte blanche, those who profess to hold to Arminianism or semi-Pelagianism "brothers and sisters in Christ". As I have stated before, Arminianism and even more so semi-Pelagianism believes in a different God, different Christ, different Holy Spirit, another Gospel and thus their doctrine of soteriology (salvation) is synergistic, which is a flat denial of the Bible's doctrine of salvation which is monergistic.

Again, what you say is the Arminian teaching in regard election in the Arminian system is totally erroneous. The Arminians clearly and openly posited that election is grounded upon "foreseen faith", aka: "Conditional Election". Please consult the OFFICIAL statements, rulings and rejections of the Arminian position in the Canons of Dordt - First Head of Doctrine which specifically addresses the matter of Predestination and Election.

Let me answer in this manner... In Arminianism, God "loves" every man, woman and child indiscriminately. But this proposed "love" is ONLY emotive. This alleged "love" has no power of its own, i.e., it accomplishes nothing of itself. The election of certain sinners is clearly not based upon that "motive" for the simple fact that not all of mankind is saved. Arminianism officially teaches that the election to salvation of certain sinners is God's alleged "foreseen faith"; God elects believers. Historic, confessional Calvinism teaches the exact opposite. From all eternity, God in His infinite love, mercy and grace determined to save a certain number of Adma's fallen race in Christ. Thus, foreknowing (appointing/loving) them, He provides the necessary means to that salvation and infallibly brings His eternal decree to pass to and for His own glory.

As far as I am concerned the Calvinist teaching concerning the doctrine of God, and specifically of the fundamental attribute of deity, Omniscience, is one and the same with what Scripture teaches. God's foreknowledge is 1) not mere prescience, 2) based upon God's decree(s) [God knows all things because He has eternally determined all things], and 3) by definition an "appointment of..." and/or "love for" someone or thing.

I am more than acquainted with the Arminian doctrine of "free-will" and my understanding is in total accord with its evaluation by such notables as Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Owen, Jonathan Edwards, et al. Unfortunately, you didn't get the point I was trying to make with my illustration using Joe Smith. IF, as the Arminian system teaches, free-will is indubitably "free", i.e., God does not and cannot force Joe Smith to do that which he chooses not to, nor prevent Joe Smith to do what he wills to do, then it is undeniably possible that in space and time, Joe Smith could choose either to beleive or to not believe at any particular time. Since the will of man is "free" there is no possibility, even for God to know infallibly, what any man will do at any particular time under any particular circumstance. Again, if as the Arminians posited, God "foresaw" who would believe (exercised their free-will) and determined that this would actually come to pass (aka: POSTdestination - determined what was to be after it had happened) then the doctrine of free-will is null and void for this would eliminate any possibility of a man choosing contrary to what God foresaw and decreed. This is a major and insurmountable hurdle for Arminianism.

This is ONLY applicable to man because he is not Omniscient. But God knows all things because He has determined all things. Again, God's "foreknowledge" is based solely upon what He has eternally decreed. An architect can know exactly what a building that doesn't even exist will be like in every detail because of the very fact that he has designed it. However, those who didn't design the building must wait until its completion before they can know anything about it. Arminianism's "god" is nothing more than a grand deitisic mirror of man. Aseity, in reality, doesn't exist in Arminian theology.

And John Piper has been soundly criticized for several things he wrote in that book, which evidently were due to the influence of the teaching of Daniel Fuller.

NO! God's grace ALWAYS accomplishes its purpose... to save a sinner from sin and to grant eternal life. Salvation, according to Scripture and classic, historic Calvinism is ONE... from the eternal decree to save specific individuals to their final glorification and continued existence on the New Earth. The giving of the Holy Spirit's indwelling in the elect is no less effectual grace than regeneration. Sanctification is certain no less than Justification. There is no salvation apart from sanctification because it is an integral part of that salvation determined by God.