This space is reserved for an 'opinion' about 5 Point Calvinism.
You can see from the "Ike's TULIP" page
that I'm a 3 1/2 point Calvinist, not a full 5 Point Calvinist. I'm
missing "Unconditional Election", and also 'half a point' on
"Limited Atonement". In short, I believe God's 'foreknowledge'
not 'predestination', drives "Election"; and I believe that Jesus paid
for "all" the sins of the world at the Cross, not just for 'the
elect', but that rejecting that forgiveness means that, like the Pharisees,
"because you do not believe, ye shall die in your sins", and so the "Atonement"
is not 'applied' to all men, but just the 'elect'. Now
before you throw a lot of verses at me, trust me that I've looked at all of them
- they're in all the books. Each scripture will eventually be up for
discussion.
Now, I have studied this 'divisive' subject deeply since many people ask me
about Calvinism; however God has seen fit to leave the door open on both sides
of the "Predestination" issue. {I just hate that, since I'd love
to squash all disagreement about Biblical beliefs among arguing
Christians!}. Everyone will have to be content that not one single person
in the history of Christianity has ever 'reconciled' all of the scriptures that
are on either side of this issue. That's why I consider this as 'Opinion'
and not 'Doctrine'.
This space will have several short discussions that I'm going to
progressively publish here, but I'm developing a summary also which I'll put up
when its well along - I'm never finished with studying, learning, and even
changing my mind on 'opinions' that I have. Although my position
will be well-thought out, and reasonably understandable, it will certainly not
satisfy many. There will always be valid counter-arguments from
'in-context' scripture by honest Christians. Just as I've done for other
'hot topic' issues, I state my thesis and some scripture. Then, I give
some known objections to my opinions or issues, and then I present my
explanations. Sometimes I have charts for more clarity. Finally, a
summary.
BUT ... right now, I just don't have a good, well-written,
answer.
So, in the words of a son-in-law of mine - "when you can't think of a
good answer -'Mock'." So now get ready for Ike's besetting sin -
sarcasm. Which God, in His sovereignty, even though He greatly desires my purity
and Holiness, never seems to remove that sin. It's God's fault.
[many friends who know me will laugh, and will also forgive me!]
Well dear friend, in reference to your disinterested, pagan neighbor, 'Bob'. Don't give up. My neighbor's Baptist wife and her
E-Free Mother-in-Law had been praying fervently for years for my neighbor's
pagan, self-sufficient Father-in-Law who of course had been hearing the
"General Call", but 'naturally' rejected it repeatedly. But, since he
was "Elected before the foundation of the world", he finally was given
the "Effectual Call" at 60+ years old, 'received' saving faith from
the H.S., and he stepped into the circle of 'those few' whose sins were paid for
at the Cross. He is now a dynamic, saved Methodist (although not a Free
Methodist) and he hands out Gideon Bibles and witnesses to others of how he was
saved by grace "through faith". Hallelujah for you Armenians! Keep
praying, dear friend! [OK, OK, that was a little over the top,
but that's my position on 5 Point Calvinism.]
If you can stand it, come back for real discussion, and not just
'mocking'. - Ike Sweesy
I
love healthy discussion – it brings clarity. But, this
"Calvinism" subject has
never had true clarity since Mary Magdalene and Jesus discussed it just after
the birth of their first child. - Ike Sweesy J
My
problem with your argument is thus: We
(mankind) have a difficult time believing God “selects” some and doesn’t
“select” others. God’s
foreknowledge argument is a way to alleviate the pain that mankind gets when
he thinks about a God who elects some to eternal paradise and some to hell.
Election was the MO in the Old Testament.
Did Abraham deserve or select to be the father of all
Israel
??
Personally, even with the foreknowledge argument, I cannot separate
Gods election/sovereignty from His foreknowledge. To me they don’t conflict
and are two sides of the same coin. I
don’t see how you can have foreknowledge without election.
Isn’t the Holy Spirit required to “move upon” an individual to
draw him to Christ? If so, who
decides upon “whom to move on”?
According to the Da Vinci Code, since
Christ had children with Mary, maybe we could do a genealogy study and ask
them to settle the argument once and for all however, some of it will be lost
in translation because they are in France
and ONLY speak French. The
damned French. They always
screw things up!!
- Mark R.
I
have no problem with Election or Atonement or Calling. Those words are
in the Bible. I just have a hard time getting the biblical distinction
between the “General Call” and the “Effectual Call”.
Unconditional, Limited, General and Effectual are not biblical words, but
are interpretations ‘derived’ from scripture. -
Whom to move on? - John 16:8 says the whole world;
Jesus said "all men". Further, I know all the
verses of Romans, and since not all Greek scholars get the same ‘intent’
from those seemingly ‘clear’ “predestination” passages, I have some
good explanations too. Like others, I see ‘election’ in the light
of ‘foreknowledge’ (‘elected’ politicians were not ‘predestined’
to win), I see ‘call’ in the light of Jesus (and the H.S. in Jn 16)
‘drawing’ ALL men unto Himself (“but ye would not”), and I see
‘atonement’ in light of “faith” which is what makes it
“effectual” (and Eph 2:8,9 which does not teach that God ‘gives’ us
His faith to believe – in this passage, Works is contrasted with Faith,
Being Saved is the gift from God, not Faith being the gift. The sentence structure
parallels don't work trying to make "Faith" the "Gift").
I also don't follow your argument about Abraham - selection doesn't
necessarily 'preclude' the reason being that Abraham 'responded' and
'accepted' God's call. "Many are called, but few are
chosen." Why? Faith. "Abraham believed God, and
it was counted unto him for righteousness." The
'selected MO' argument is 'reasonable', but the logic isn't
compelling. Likewise, the use of the word "Predestination"
in Rom 8:29 (which precedes verse 30) is that we are "Predestined to be
conformed to the image of His Son" (based upon 'Foreknowledge).
Likewise, it doesn't read "predestined for salvation". Now,
Rom 9 is a different story ... -
Ike Sweesy
_____________________________________________________________
Web Links for better discussions than mine on
Calvinism - "Pro" and "Con"
"PRO"
http://www.reformed.org/calvinism/
see also several links on "TULIP" and
"Calvinism" pages
"CON"
http://www.bible.ca/calvinism.htm
http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1995ii/Congdon.htm
http://www.biblebelievers.net/Calvinism/kjcalvn1.htm
