Does it Really Make a Difference?

[Guest]

Howdy all--

Some of the recent postings in Calvinism/Arminianism have caused me to take pause and reflect about what all the disputing amounts to, from a practical standpoint.

I have been a Christian for a good number of years. I was raised in a Baptist church and was therefore indoctrinated in Calvinistic teaching. It wasn’t ever really CALLED that, but that is what it was. For example, I never remember the pastor doing a sermon series on TULIP, but there were discussions of predestination, eternal security, etc.

Later, as I got older I began listening to RC Sproul and John MacArthur and thought they were very good teachers. I still do. Obviously they are Calvinists. Presumably they are saved.

Then I discovered other teachers, including my current pastor and Steve G, who are non-calvinists. They are both presumably saved. Although I am no expert, my views have shifted to a more non-calvinistic viewpoint, because it just makes better sense to me.

But I can also state that my practical Christian life has not been affected by which view I was holding at the time. It has been one of steady growth, whether I was holding more dispensational views (a few years ago) or more amillenial views (now), or whether I was more a fan of reformed theology (a few years ago) than arminian type theology (now). Maybe one day I will shift back toward another direction. I am not “emotionally” bound to any particular view. What I don’t expect to happen is that somehow my devotion to Christ will decrease.

I guess my question to all of you is this: Do you really and truly think that it makes a difference, in any real sense, whether Calvinism or Arminianism is correct, as applied to what should be the “normative” Christian life?

I have been listening to Steve G’s recently added Kingdom of God series, and it strikes me how very little all of this bickering over which view is correct really matters. If you read the gospels, and what Jesus said it took to enter the kingdom, there isn’t much Calvinism/arminianism in there.

So I am at somewhat of a loss to try to figure out why there is so much heated, apparently emotional argument over this topic.

I am not trying to downplay the importance of good theology. What I am trying to figure out is simply, is it a HUGE DEAL which view is correct? Can we not all be disciples? Can we not all enter the kingdom?

TK

[Guest]

TK wrote:

I guess my question to all of you is this: Do you really and truly think that it makes a difference, in any real sense, whether Calvinism or Arminianism is correct, as applied to what should be the “normative” Christian life?

Not only do I "really and truly" think it makes a difference ... I know that it made a profound difference.

When I was in my teens and early twenties, I was a Calvinist in every sense of the word. Here are some of the ways in which my attitudes and therefore my actions were different then because of my Calvinistic beliefs:

1. It affected my witnessing:
I wanted other people to "accept Christ" and thereby go to heaven when they died. But I seldom urged anyone to do so. After all, what difference did it make, since the elect would all go to heaven anyway, and the others would all go to eternal hell anyway. My witnessing would not change the eternal decree. So why bother?

2. It affected my righteousness:
As a Calvinist, I had a false sense of security. I had experienced Christ, and so I believed I was already saved from hell for eternity. I was "eternally secure." It was good to obey God, but if I didn't I'd still get to heaven. No matter what I did, my soul was safe.

Further, all of my righteousness was as filthy rags. It counted for nothing in God's eyes. I was helpless to work righteousness anyway. I was to depend entirely on Christ's righteousness and not on my own. So why bother?

3. It affected my prayer life:
Everything that happens was ordained by God before the world began. So why pray for anything? God won't change what He has ordained anyway.

4. My "words of comfort" to the suffering only made things worse:
If someone had lost a loved one or were faced with a fatal illness, I assured the sufferer that it was all part of a great and wonderful plan which he/she would understand at some future time in heaven. Of course, this confused the sufferer.

"What great plan could God have that would make Him kill my little
4-year old daughter?"

"How can my agonizing cancer help out God in His plans?"

Of course, I had no answer to such questions. My "words of comfort" served only to turn the sufferer against God, and to blame Him for their suffering.

[Guest]

Paidion,

Good post. And worse, Calvinism, as applied in practice, has caused many seekers to turn away in despair because they did not have a "conversion experience" as they were told they must.

[Guest]

That's right. Only in eternity will we know how many thousands went to Hell because of Calvinism. Once Saved Always Saved, a damnable doctrine if there ever was one, has put many into Hell itself.

Calvinism is fatalism. It is anti-faith. It causes people to just accept circumstances, rather than pray AND fast to change them and defeat the Devil. It causes people to blame God for everything, and forget the Devil exists and he is our enemy, not God. You can't pray in faith if in the back of your mind, you're not sure God wants to give you something, because he is "sovereign". Many don't get healed because of Calvinistic belief--it destroys the seed of faith necessary to get the answer we need. I depise TULIP, as I have seen it promote sin in a believer's life, backsliding, sickness, hinder healing, and cause men to blame God and turn away from such a god. Like Wesley said, "He is a Sovereign God, not a sovereign devil".

[Guest]

I hear what you guys are saying in theory, but i can honestly state the average Christian (who doesnt even know the slightest idea what TULIP is, etc) doesnt seem to have the same type of concerns. in other words, it seems to be more theoretical. not that it can never have ANY effect (as expressed by Paidion) but most people (like my mother, for e.g., who is very devout) have no such concerns.

i am interested in what the calvinists here have to say.

TK

[_Rick_C]

Good thread TK...
and aren't you really in Northwest Ohio?

I guess my question to all of you is this: Do you really and truly think that it makes a difference, in any real sense, whether Calvinism or Arminianism is correct, as applied to what should be the “normative” Christian life?

Some time ago I dropped out of an Assemblies of God Bible college with only 11 hours to go for a Bachelor's degree. Why? Among several things, none of which are legitimate excuses...I reasoned, "A couple beers might help me to relax"....I was working my way through school, finishing up my degree in Summer Sessions, and hadn't had any alcohol or drugs for 8 years.

Eighteen years later, after going from a "New Age experimenter" to an agnostic to an atheist -- I had become an alcoholic. But then -- in 1999 -- I got faith!!! I got faith but kept on drinking (a lot)....

Though I was raised Arminian, I had learned about Calvinism in college. I decided I would "pick" the doctrine of Eternal Security (which isn't exactly the same as the Perseverance of the Saints, mind you). I decided (ahem, cough, rationalized!) I would "pick Eternal Security"...so I could still believe I was saved and drink up to a case of beer a day!!!

Just over 2 years ago I got fully sober after making attempts in AA and "Christian 12 Step meetings." I did it by believing what Paul says in 1 Cor. 6:9-11. Namely, that drunkards (alcoholics) will not inherit the kingdom of God. In verse 11 Paul states that being a drunk is, in fact, in the past tense for those who are truly saved. I just believed what the Bible says! and dropped AA & so-called "Christian 12 Step" beliefs. I haven't been sober for this long since 1982 when I left Bible college.

What I'm getting at:
I've told my story to some Calvinist folks and do you know some of them had the audacity to tell me I WASN'T EVER SAVED...till I fully got off alcohol? I know...deep down inside know...that Christ entered into my life in August 1999! I had become an atheist! I also know I was saved when I went to Bible college and had I died before 1999? You wouldnt want to be me (I'll put it that way).

I had to drop believing in "Eternal Security" because I was using it as a lame excuse to continue being a drunk! (I also believe it is false, btw). But had I not been a fairly established believer when these Calvinists told me I had never been saved? TK, they were PLAYING GOD....and this is a huge turnoff to anyone....These people thought they could judge MY eternal soul? No, I think not. I think not: that's God's Biznis!!!

[Guest]

I think the major problem with Calvinism, in my opinion anyhow, is that the character of God as loving to all His creatures is badly tarnished. To say that God made some people just to destroy them and place bogus offers of salvation to "whosoever will" in His Word, would make him more or less the divine Cat toying with the sinful mouse before He destroys it.

I just think that if I saw God in the way that Calvinism portrays Him, I'd have a harder time seeing the loving God I've come to know, and would view him as a tyrant that plays favorites.

I don't mean this in a mean way to Calvinism, it's just how I see it.

[_Rick_C]

P.S., TK & all,

I have been listening to Steve G’s recently added Kingdom of God series, and it strikes me how very little all of this bickering over which view is correct really matters. If you read the gospels, and what Jesus said it took to enter the kingdom, there isn’t much Calvinism/arminianism in there.

I've gone on & on & on! about it in a couple threads in this forum!
(but I don't think anyone's really interested...why not, I have no clue)....
1) John Calvin and Jacobius Arminius weren't even ALIVE when the Bible was written.
2) Aren't we supposed to see things how the [Jewish!] people who wrote the Bible saw them?
3) I need chapter & verse on: Why am I supposed to either be a Calvinist or an Arminian? (as I don't recall any Apostles or Jesus ever meeting these boys)....
4) THEREFORE, we must get beyond Calvin & Arminius! by going fifteen centruries past these guys, influential though they may have been (or whatever), Go All The Way to the First Century, and: BACK TO THE BIBLE!!!

imnsho......(I feel quite strongly about this), lol

[Guest]

Perhaps both sides misunderstand altogether. Maybe the true reality of God is grander and more beautiful and Calvin or Arminus could imagine.

Or maybe this disagreement is really an opportunity to practice Christlike love instead of trying to be right and win the argument.

I've realized that many times the best action for me to take for the health of my marriage is to "shut my fool mouth" and let go regardless if I'm right or not.

Dave

[Guest]

Arminianism is simply Bible doctrine. We call it that to help iudentify its tenents and distinguish itself from other systems.

Most people have never read a thing Arminius ever wrote. Too bad. If you do, you'll see what a loving, kind patient and DEEP brother he was. He was ahead of his time doctrinally and the opposite of Calvin. Arminius did not believe the State should hassle or prosecute people for religious beliefs, but only for actual crimes! For that, he endured the Calvinists fury and ridicule. The history of Calvin, and Calvinism is a disgrace upon Christ, and the doctrine itself is hellacious in word and in effect.