Is fellowship possible between Calvinists and Arminians?

[Abiding]

I heard that bell, too.

And I am extraordinarily well treated by the lovely people here,
in spite of it. ♥

not me i think zones poking fun again at my nifty charimaticness

 

[rauleetoe]

You don't realize that you oppose the bible and the Lord Jesus Christ. That is where the disdain is coming from.

I'm talking about divine determinism. I don't know what double pre-destination is. Sounds kind of dumb. Why would you need to be pre-destined twice? Seems like once should be enough...

To me it seems prideful on the behalf of the synergist/free will/Arminian that they would say they stirred up enough goodness in themselves to help God save them. And then, because of these beliefs, they can't believe in the promises of God because their own will can overcome God's will in their heads. What if they stop helping God??? Everything in a Christians Life would seem to be based solely on the will and effort of the Christian himself. I would say the bible is implicitly against this whole line of thought.

Free will is libertarian and a gift given by God because he honors the relationship between him and those who freely accept this gift of salvation, as they are enabled by prevenient grace. It is all God..its not a thing we do on our own. Once again, stick with what is said..I never said we do anything of our own.
The arminian believes God is sovereign, of course if you make the definition of sovereignty to be obligatorily lumped together with Divine determinism..then according to that limitation of the definition then yes. But can God be sovereign without making everything that happens in this world be his fault and doing? I say yes he can. No..i never said i am against the bible. Do not place words in my mouth that i never said. And if you ever read some books on what calvinism actually teaches or do a little research on the soteriology you identify with..you will see that double predistination is what Calvin taught after building upon what Augustine taught, which was single predestination. Which in an essence means that some were forordained and predetermined unto salvation, and others according to Calvin, were passed over..for God's good pleasure supposedly..and yet this damning those who were withheld and not given this enabling grace to do anything more than what they had been doing somehow makes it right and just to then punish these same ones who would have been better off not being alive since they were predetermined to a hell and never given the grace to have any other option. Tell me grandpa, how is this biblical? In the light of romans 9 halfway through the chapter and not starting at verse one i guess you could come up with this conclusion. But i doubt you do a full study of the bible, seeing as you accuse me of not believing the bibe because i reject Determinism and compatibilism..what of the early church? I guess they not having Augustine and Calvin to teach them the 'gospel' they too did not believe the bible according to this opinion of yours.

 

[rauleetoe]

That is true. How many true Calvinist are on here? I know of a few. but not many.. And this chat room is far from Calvinistic. Just most of us believe in the eternal security of the soul based on the grace of God.

Was it not said not long ago in this very thread that most calvanists believe anyone who does not believe in osas is arminian? I guess what we see here is most arminians believe anyone who believes in eternal security is calvanist.

Once again..you say what has never been said..but i personally have seen many more calvinists here than i expected. No one said you are a calvinist..maybe a southern baptist maybe? I dunno..regardless..eternal security or actually what is known is OSAS is a calvinist concept from what i have seen.

 

[rauleetoe]

Do you know what it means to be holy, as your Father in heaven is holy? If you do then tell us. Serious stuff.

It means to constantly work on being sensitive to God's leaning and his spirit and to grow in sanctity and to be a better christian each day..It certainly does not mean throwing up the grace card the night after you got sloshed at the bar on new years..or whatever other thing you chose to justify. Yes..one can be struggling/tempted..but there is a means of escape from temptation. Sounds like you simply want to trick me into saying your licentious advocacy is better than living in holiness which God clearly says in his word it is his will for us. So, who do i listen to..you or God?

 

[rauleetoe]

how ironic

Actually it is not if you knew how these particular calvinists i am speaking about were towards those of opposing/contrasting theologies. Now this obviously does not speak for all calvinists..but I personally have had to end all communication with several..if someone flat out calls you stupid for disagreeing with them that calvinism is biblical, would you still talk to him? When he mocks you for not wanting at that moment to be ganged up by him and some of his high calvinsit buddies at a hookah bar(smoking is not a sin, but there are many things i do not do nor partake of since recommitting my life) and I would have rather had another option to maybe get some coffee..and civily explain why I do not agree with Calvinism, and this young man says, meet me now, at this town(about an hour away) at this hookah bar, right now..or do not waste my time! What would your response be Zone?

Just wondering..

 

[rauleetoe]

I wouldn't worry about anything that Red says. If Red is right and I'm wrong then everything is perfectly fine. After all, if "once saved always saved" is good for the goose then it is good for the gander.

However, if I'm right and Red is wrong, then he and his buddies are going to have a very hard time trying to explain to Jesus just how and why they thought His divine words and actions justified sin and very poor treatment of others.

By their fruit you shall know them. May the Lord have mercy on their poor souls...

Well they themselves show they have not the spirit and the Father's love is not in them..actually we very well can see clearly who their father is.
All we can do is pray..Those who make a mockery of Holiness living are simply hating the standard God gives us, not that one is 100 percent perfect and does not have a spotty instance here and there..but since these others are too focused and too into meditating on their sin than on fixing their minds on whatsoever is pure,lovely..of good report..they fix their minds on sin. So obviously the grace card is thrown up in their defence of cheap grace,which is not real grace.

 

[rauleetoe]

Arminian's are just inconsistent Calvinist's. Even John Wesley said there was only a hairs breadth difference between the two.

Both theological systems are built on the errors of Augustinian theology.

So can they fellowship? Of course they can, they both preach basically the same message.

Not true..the hero of Calvinism is Calvin, who's hero was Augustine. The father of arminianism is Arminius,who at one time a calvinist himself, further studying the word, realized the inconsistencies of determinism and calvinism and while he never blatantly renounced calvinism, could not be considered a calvinist according to five point calvinism.

Yes, both could possibly fellowship if both parties choose to focus on common ground. It can be an issue when one has a friend who shapes all their views of life according to determinism..because then every response to that friend has to become a rebuttal against calvinism and determinism and you must be ready to respond to why you could never be a calvinist..which is what i have had to do with a friend, whom I love like a bro, but is a relentless 5 point high calvinist, he loves the Lord..i know, but his theology shapes every minute detail of his life..how he views the lost(sadly its not with compassion or concern many times),and how he views even those in the church. On the positive note, being his friend helped me discover the alternative, classical arminianism..so all is not lost! I thank God for my calvinist friend, who knows..id still probably be a charismatic if it were not for him! (shudders)

 

[rauleetoe]

Most Calvinists I've encountered usually pride themselves as "educated" and "intellectual". While I have encountered Arminians who are prideful in thier beliefs, most I've met consider themselves to possess a simplistic and easy to understand perspective.

As for my own beliefs, I am a Monergist however, I also believe that God's soveriegnty demands a response from man (volition) and that synergy can be defined in one word; SURRENDER. I find Arminians to be much more open and apt to embrace this perspective than Calvinists.

In fact, it appears to me that many modern Calvinists have reverted back to an apathetic, almost Antinomian perspective similar to that held by the Church of England in the mid 1600 to mid 1700s before the 1st Great Awakening.

Yes..it seems the high calvinist has almost reverted to hyper calvinist..having a disdain and hatred for the world,and a snubnosed looking down attitude upon those who do not accept and receive their message. Sadly its people like this who turn people off from the message of the true gospel,which we see in john3:16,and emphasis is on verse 17! these 'good calvinists' are simply being genuine, unlike the new calvinists who must be not sincere about their true beliefs..who when they become extreme look far too similar to their hyper calvinist contemporaries, the westboro baptists..and as whack as the westboros are, they're merely being sincere, constistently faithfull to the high calvinist and hyper calvinist message. Why is anyone shocked anymore by what they say?

 

[Crossfire]

we do not need to defend anything, if it is truth, God will defend it for us.

That's why I don't mind placing people on ignore. If someone has a genuine question about something I've said, I don't mind answering them at all. However, there's no need to defend your perspective when those who are questioning your perspective are closed minded and just want to argue.

If I want drama, I'll watch daytime television.

 

[zone]

Actually it is not if you knew how these particular calvinists i am speaking about were towards those of opposing/contrasting theologies. Now this obviously does not speak for all calvinists..but I personally have had to end all communication with several..if someone flat out calls you stupid for disagreeing with them that calvinism is biblical, would you still talk to him? When he mocks you for not wanting at that moment to be ganged up by him and some of his high calvinsit buddies at a hookah bar(smoking is not a sin, but there are many things i do not do nor partake of since recommitting my life) and I would have rather had another option to maybe get some coffee..and civily explain why I do not agree with Calvinism, and this young man says, meet me now, at this town(about an hour away) at this hookah bar, right now..or do not waste my time! What would your response be Zone?

Just wondering..

uh....i'd get over the hookah bar thing once and for all, and not tar everybody according to that experience?

hookah dude prolly doesn't even know what calvinism is...maybe by this time next year he'll be a JW

~

the 'ironic' remark was because you had a dual objection going on...one was concerning charismaticism. i just found it ironic that you were having a nice discussion about wretched calvinists with a charismatic and you prolly didn't even know it

its interesting how we can get along if:

1) we don't peer into every element of someone else's life/theology snapshot by snapshot and assume it means everything there will ever be to them/their theology.

or

2) we can change our spots depending on to whom we are speaking.

anyways, peace to you in Christ's Name, rauleetoe
zone.

 

[zone]

not me i think zones poking fun again at my nifty charimaticness

^ drama queen ^

 

[zone]

Those who make a mockery of Holiness living are simply hating the standard God gives us, not that one is 100 percent perfect and does not have a spotty instance here and there..but since these others are too focused and too into meditating on their sin than on fixing their minds on whatsoever is pure,lovely..of good report..they fix their minds on sin. So obviously the grace card is thrown up in their defence of cheap grace,which is not real grace.

rauleetoe,
maybe ppl are focusing on sin (and trying to defend, or at least give Grace an honorable mention) because ppl are accusing them day and night of licentiousness, antinomianism, lawlessness, sin, sin and more sin...
ppl they've never met

that's the part i don't get. maybe we need new hobbies now and then.

love zone

 

[zone]

Free will is libertarian and a gift given by God because he honors the relationship between him and those who freely accept this gift of salvation, as they are enabled by prevenient grace. It is all God..its not a thing we do on our own.

???

what is all God?
what is not a thing we do on our own?

you mean you can't do anything until God grants you the gift of libertarianism?
where's that in scripture...like as 'a gift'? in Ephesians?
maybe i don't get it yet.


Prevenient grace is a Christian theological concept rooted in Augustinian theology.[1] It is divine grace that precedes human decision. It exists prior to and without reference to anything humans may have done. As humans are corrupted by the effects of sin, prevenient grace allows persons to engage their God-given free will to choose the salvation offered by God in Jesus Christ or to reject that salvific offer.

Prevenient grace is embraced primarily by Arminian Christians who are influenced by the theology of Jacob Arminius or John Wesley. Whereas Augustine held that prevenient grace cannot be resisted, Wesleyan Arminians believe that it enables, but does not ensure, personal acceptance of the gift of salvation. Wesley typically referred to it in 18th-century language as prevenient grace. In modern English, the phrase preceding grace would have a similar meaning.
wiki

uh-oh...Uncle Auggie again!
why is he involved in everything?

mind you, Wesley had some krazy ideas.

how much of Wesley do you accept, rauleetoe?

 

[rauleetoe]

uh....i'd get over the hookah bar thing once and for all, and not tar everybody according to that experience?

hookah dude prolly doesn't even know what calvinism is...maybe by this time next year he'll be a JW

~

the 'ironic' remark was because you had a dual objection going on...one was concerning charismaticism. i just found it ironic that you were having a nice discussion about wretched calvinists with a charismatic and you prolly didn't even know it

its interesting how we can get along if:

1) we don't peer into every element of someone else's life/theology snapshot by snapshot and assume it means everything there will ever be to them/their theology.

or

2) we can change our spots depending on to whom we are speaking.

anyways, peace to you in Christ's Name, rauleetoe
zone.

Oh Zone, trust me i am over the 'hookah bar' thing, but i will not be pressured into going into one because some crazy calvinist insists he must prove his rebuttal against anything that is against reform theology that very day, on his turf, on his terms..or else. Actually this guy was very calvinist and a high one at that! If you have the tulip etched onto your skin permanantly..chances are you are convinced that reform theology is the only way. I just used this example as to why i have had to cut off certain reformed folk out of my life.
By the way,I do not hate charismatics actually, or even calvinists..i hate what calvinism does, it misrepresents God. And as far as charismatics, i like a good charismatic, i may not pray in tongues with them..or flow in the 'prophetic', etc(I came out of this charismatic/pentecostal background) But my issue is things more often than not are not done in order regarding the gifts for one, and two, the issues i have with them are more about beliefs than persons(charismatics) I feel they over emphasize the gifts of the spirit and only emphasize that, and are a bit way too grace oriented, as are some baptists,many calvinists,etc.. I can even break bread with a catholic,whom most of them believe that Christ died for all men and seem to believe more of the bible than some protestants(case in point,calvinists) do. I have no vitriol or hate towards any christian, my utmost disgust is with the reform theology persuation, and not the person who believes it. There are even some good people who may have been raised this way or for whatever reason, adhere to reform theology. I do not get why the calvinist is so anti catholic when the one who started the theological emphasis that was built upon to get calvinism was from a catholic himself, the greatest catholic of them all, Augustine. So how can you hate that which you should clearly be thankfull to and for,without catholicism there would be no reformed theology. Which should be actually called, revised theology, more than reformed theology. As it is a revision of what Augustine taught.

 

[rauleetoe]

???

what is all God?
what is not a thing we do on our own?

you mean you can't do anything until God grants you the gift of libertarianism?
where's that in scripture...like as 'a gift'? in Ephesians?
maybe i don't get it yet.


Prevenient grace is a Christian theological concept rooted in Augustinian theology.[1] It is divine grace that precedes human decision. It exists prior to and without reference to anything humans may have done. As humans are corrupted by the effects of sin, prevenient grace allows persons to engage their God-given free will to choose the salvation offered by God in Jesus Christ or to reject that salvific offer.

Prevenient grace is embraced primarily by Arminian Christians who are influenced by the theology of Jacob Arminius or John Wesley. Whereas Augustine held that prevenient grace cannot be resisted, Wesleyan Arminians believe that it enables, but does not ensure, personal acceptance of the gift of salvation. Wesley typically referred to it in 18th-century language as prevenient grace. In modern English, the phrase preceding grace would have a similar meaning.
wiki

uh-oh...Uncle Auggie again!
why is he involved in everything?

mind you, Wesley had some krazy ideas.

how much of Wesley do you accept, rauleetoe?

I consider myself a Wesleyan Arminian if you mean regarding how much of wesley i accept..most of it if not all. What i have read about wesley, and about wesleyan arminianism I totally grasp and receive it as biblical..if this is what you mean. But hey, you are a lutheran are you not? Lutherans are monergistic, but not calvinist. I had a joke about lutherans calling them 2 percent milk catholics. But i have no issues with Lutheranism except for Luther himself being an anti semite. So, what is whack about holiness theology? Is it whack because you cannot grasp christian perfection? Its biblical. Read 1 thessalonians 4, and 1 peter 1.
Salvation, the gift of God, is through Jesus..its in romans 6:23. Libertarian grace is biblical, and it is a grace given by God, to man because he wants relationship with man to be genuine. If you are forced into a relationship with someone, is it a genuine relationship? Or is it an abusive and unloving thing, almost a slavery if you may call it that.

 

[zone]

Oh Zone, trust me i am over the 'hookah bar' thing, but i will not be pressured into going into one because some crazy calvinist insists he must prove his rebuttal against anything that is against reform theology that very day, on his turf, on his terms..or else. Actually this guy was very calvinist and a high one at that! If you have the tulip etched onto your skin permanantly..chances are you are convinced that reform theology is the only way. I just used this example as to why i have had to cut off certain reformed folk out of my life.
By the way,I do not hate charismatics actually, or even calvinists..i hate what calvinism does, it misrepresents God. And as far as charismatics, i like a good charismatic, i may not pray in tongues with them..or flow in the 'prophetic', etc(I came out of this charismatic/pentecostal background) But my issue is things more often than not are not done in order regarding the gifts for one, and two, the issues i have with them are more about beliefs than persons(charismatics) I feel they over emphasize the gifts of the spirit and only emphasize that, and are a bit way too grace oriented, as are some baptists,many calvinists,etc.. I can even break bread with a catholic,whom most of them believe that Christ died for all men and seem to believe more of the bible than some protestants(case in point,calvinists) do. I have no vitriol or hate towards any christian, my utmost disgust is with the reform theology persuation, and not the person who believes it. There are even some good people who may have been raised this way or for whatever reason, adhere to reform theology. I do not get why the calvinist is so anti catholic when the one who started the theological emphasis that was built upon to get calvinism was from a catholic himself, the greatest catholic of them all, Augustine. So how can you hate that which you should clearly be thankfull to and for,without catholicism there would be no reformed theology. Which should be actually called, revised theology, more than reformed theology. As it is a revision of what Augustine taught.

thanks for your reply rauleetoe.
i wouldn't be pressured into a bar or anywhere else by anybody (calvinist or hippie humanist, etc)...no matter what they wanted to convince me of. if i felt like going in, i would.

so, classical arminianism is the true faith delivered once for all then?
or you just really hate sin?

not sure of your take on the Augster. he was kinda on track with Arminius.
thing is always, which came first, the chikin or the egg kinda thing.

anyways, i'm a Confessional Lutheran (we confess that we are sinners, but have a very high view of the Law)
so...would it be accurate to say my choice of church tradition and theology would fall within the purview of your utmost disgust?

dunno

^ cool movie ^

 

[rauleetoe]

thanks for your reply rauleetoe.
i wouldn't be pressured into a bar or anywhere else by anybody (calvinist or hippie humanist, etc)...no matter what they wanted to convince me of. if i felt like going in, i would.

so, classical arminianism is the true faith delivered once for all then?
or you just really hate sin?

not sure of your take on the Augster. he was kinda on track with Arminius.
thing is always, which came first, the chikin or the egg kinda thing.

anyways, i'm a Confessional Lutheran (we confess that we are sinners, but have a very high view of the Law)
so...would it be accurate to say my choice of church tradition and theology would fall within the purview of your utmost disgust?

dunno

^ cool movie ^

I do not hate lutherans..it was a joke about the lutherans, i heard it from a catholic actually..worked at a convention center that had a huge lutheran convention one time, so the guy working with me said the whole '2 percent milk' catholic joke. It stuck with me. No, i do not hate lutherans..if you trust in adhere to,and rely on Jesus, and really are seeking his face, then you and i have much more in common than not. That said, I believe classical arminianism is the closest thing to biblically sound that i can find/have found in my studies and reading. And yes, there was a time i had been surrounded by those christians,alleged christians who only spoke about grace,(baptists,pentecostal and charismatic churches,even non denom,etc) Yet nobody ever told me that i could live for God, even recently the 'grace message' seemed really pallatable to me, but when i saw the implications of a grace only gospel in the lives of others and even my own, i realized this was not the 'full gospel' i truly am convinced that the full gospel, from my experience and understanding is Holiness. So, this in a nutshell is why i am of the wesleyan arminian emphasis.

 

[rauleetoe]

Dear Zone,
nope..I have not read any of Augustine yet, But from what i hear he didnt finish well..as was the case with Calvin, and sadly even Luther got caught up in the spread of the gospel by force, and at least the case with Calvin, and i heard possibly with Luther(must look into it, and even with Augustine) that they were murderers. I know for a fact Calvin was of at least one person(Serventus) And there was no proof of Calvin ever mentioning his born again,new birth experience..what it seen however is his pointing to his catholic baby baptism(it seems as if Calvin held onto much of the catholicism he allegedly hated, sounds confusing to me)
But yes, i saw that luther movie..it was good. And God used a highly flawed man like Luther during the reformation. Sadly many protestants are all too proud to be protestants in identity but hardly christian in lifestyle, so i have noticed. Just saying..

 

[zone]

I consider myself a Wesleyan Arminian if you mean regarding how much of wesley i accept..most of it if not all. What i have read about wesley, and about wesleyan arminianism I totally grasp and receive it as biblical..if this is what you mean.

right then.
well, maybe we'll have a discussion about that sometime.

Re: Is fellowship possible between <Lutherans> and <Wesleyans>?

But hey, you are a lutheran are you not? Lutherans are monergistic, but not calvinist. I had a joke about lutherans calling them 2 percent milk catholics. But i have no issues with Lutheranism except for Luther himself being an anti semite.

cool.
no, to begin with he wasn't antisemitic at all...his rants came after he found the Talmud.
please know your Reformation figures and timelines.
and Talmud.
thank you.

how can you not have any issues with Lutheranism, or specifically my being monergist?
i thought Arminians were 100% freewillers?
or...summink....

um....the arminian is dead in trespasses and sins but God is Gracious and Merciful and grants a free gift of a straight and righteous will, pure freewill so the arminian can reject Him?

i don't get it.

So, what is whack about holiness theology? Is it whack because you cannot grasp christian perfection? Its biblical. Read 1 thessalonians 4, and 1 peter 1.

hmmm.....lemme sleep on it.
i'm feeling inspired already

wesley doubted being saved before his death, eh? tsk....that's tragic. no assurance in spite of all that holiness and second blessing and stuff.
he said in a letter to his bro Charles that he never really believed.
at all.

quite a sinner he was too....he liked married women.

sad.

ttyl.

 

[zone]

I do not hate lutherans..it was a joke about the lutherans, i heard it from a catholic actually..worked at a convention center that had a huge lutheran convention one time, so the guy working with me said the whole '2 percent milk' catholic joke. It stuck with me. No, i do not hate lutherans..if you trust in adhere to,and rely on Jesus, and really are seeking his face, then you and i have much more in common than not. That said, I believe classical arminianism is the closest thing to biblically sound that i can find/have found in my studies and reading. And yes, there was a time i had been surrounded by those christians,alleged christians who only spoke about grace,(baptists,pentecostal and charismatic churches,even non denom,etc) Yet nobody ever told me that i could live for God, even recently the 'grace message' seemed really pallatable to me, but when i saw the implications of a grace only gospel in the lives of others and even my own, i realized this was not the 'full gospel' i truly am convinced that the full gospel, from my experience and understanding is Holiness. So, this in a nutshell is why i am of the wesleyan arminian emphasis.

ya. so basically you hate sin.
we agree on that

as for living for God, i think anyone who has been born from above loves Him.
of course they do. He gave them Agape Love shed abroad in their hearts.