Why Some Arminians and Calvinists Need to Calm Down

It does NOT say---?

Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Ver. 48. Glorified in the word] That is, received it into their hearts (as some copies read this text, εδεξαντο), suffering it to indwell richly in them (as becometh such a guest), Col_3:16; yea, to rule and bear sway, yielding thereunto the obedience of faith, which is the greatest honour that can be done to the word; as the contrary is, to despise prophesying, 1Th_5:19, to cast God’s word behind our backs, Psa_50:17, to trample on it; which the very Jews and Turks are so far from, that they carefully take up any paper that lieth on the ground, lest it should be any part of the Scripture, or have the name of God written in it. (Paraeus, Proleg. in Gen.)

And as many as were ordained [ tetagmenoi (G5021), or 'appointed,'] to eternal life believed. A very remarkable statement, which cannot, without force, be interpreted of anything lower than this-that a divine ordination to eternal life is the cause, not the effect, of any man's believing. Grotius (and after him many others, as Humphry) plead ingeniously for a middle sense of the verb, and translate thus: 'As many as disposed (or 'addicted') themselves to eternal life'-referring to 1Co_16:15. But this, besides having very much of a strained appearance, is vapid, and almost tautological. In favour of the King James Version are such critics as Bengel, Olshausen, Meyer, DeWette, Winer, Alford, Hackett, Webster and Wilkinson. 'In the words, "as many as were ordained to eternal life," we must reckon (says Olshausen, himself a Lutheran) the idea which pervades the whole Scriptures of a predestination of saints. The attempts which have been, made to evade it are in the highest degree forced.'

4 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Ver. 44. No man can come to me, except, &c.] Down then goes the Dagon of free will, with all that vitreum acumen glass point of all the patrons thereof; whether Pagans or Papagans, Pelagians or Semi-pelagians. Let them say never so much Ignavis opus est auxilio divino; Quod vivimus Deorum munus est; quod bene sancteque vivimus, nostrum. Lazy work is with the help of God; we live because the service is of the gods; we live because it is well consecrated of us. (Sen.) A wiser than the wisest of them tells us here another tale; and elsewhere, Joh_15:5; "Without me ye can do nothing." Where Austin observes that our Saviour saith not perficere, to finish, but facere; to do; nor doth he say, Without me ye can do no hard thing, but nothing. And the same church father notes that sub laudibus naturae latent inimiei gratiae. The friends of free will are enemies to free grace.

God the Father draw him] By a merciful violence, ex nolentibus volentes facit. {See Trapp on "Son_1:4"} The Father draweth, and the man cometh; that notes the efficacy of grace, and this the sweetness of grace. Grace works strongly, and therefore God is said to draw; and it works sweetly too, and therefore man is said to come.
Trapp.

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
No man can come to me (in the sense of Joh_6:35), except the Father which hath sent me - that is, except the Father as the Sender of Me, and to carry out the design of My mission.
Draw him - by an internal and efficacious operation; though by all the means of rational conviction, and in a way altogether consonant to their moral nature. (Son_1:4; Jer_31:3; Hos_11:3-4.)
And I will raise him up at the last day. See the note at Joh_6:54. Thus this weighty statement mounts to the following: 'Be not either startled or stumbled at these sayings; because it needs divine teaching to understand them, divine drawing to submit to them.'
JFB.

Joh_6:44. Οὐδείς, no man) Jesus is wont, before that He removes error out of minds, to convict the perverse disposition itself of those who so err. This is His aim, Joh_6:44-46 : and at the same time, after having passed without notice that which was unseasonable in the interruption on the part of the Jews, and having stilled their murmuring Joh_6:43, He in continuation discusses those very truths, which He spake at Joh_6:40. Nor, however, does He omit to confirm His descent from heaven: He only does not reply to the question, How?—οὐδεὶς δύναται, no man can) The Jews were relying on their own powers: this Jesus refutes, and teaches them of the need of observing the drawing of the Father.—ἐλθεῖν πρός με, come to Me) To come to Christ, is, by faith to attain to and recognise His heavenly mission, and to commit one’s self to Him.—ἐὰν μή, unless [except]) He therefore doeth aright who cometh to Me, saith Jesus: for by the very fact of coming, He is following the drawing of the Father.—ἑλκύσῃ, shall have drawn) The Father hath sent the Son to us; and draws us to the Son, by the power of His love making us hear and see. See following ver., “Every man that hath heard and learned of the Father, cometh unto Me;” and 65, “No man can come unto Me, except it were given him of My Father.” [It is one and the same thing, the expression which is used, to give us to the Son, or to give to us (grace) that we may come to the Son, Joh_6:39, “All which He hath given Me.”—V. g.] An instance of such a drawing is given in the case of Peter, Joh_6:68, “Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life:” in the case of Paul, Gal_1:15, “It pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by His grace.” The same word occurs in the Septuag., Son_1:4, εἵλκυσάν σε, [Engl. Vers.] “Draw me, we will run after Thee;” Jer_31:3, “I have loved thee with an everlasting love, therefore with loving-kindness have I drawn thee” [in Septuag. ch. 38:3, εἵλκυσά σε εἰς οἰκτείρημα].


You work out your salvation-don't "work" on mine

PaulThomson said:
It does not say when they had been appointed to aeonous life. Could it have been the ones who had believed the gospel in Acts 13:43 and Paul told to continue in the grace of God?



Nothing you posted there shows from the context of Acts 13:48 when the hearers had been appointed to aeonous life. I have given a contextual reason for placing the time they were appointed at the previous sabbath when they had believed Paul and he told them to continue in the grace of God 13:43.
You have not given from the context what the Word of God was that the hearers heard and glorified and believed. I have pointed out from the context what the word of God was. Paul recites it to them in the immediately previous verse. We don't have to guess what that Word of God was. Luke records it for us. Acts 13:46-48
"It was necessary that the Word of God should first be spoken to you, Since you thrust it from you and judge yourselves (or we could say appoint yourselves) unworthy of aeonous life, WE TURN TO THE GENTILES, FOR SO THE LORD HAS COMMANDED US SAYING, "I HAVE SET YOU TO BE A LIGHT TO THE GENTILES, THAT YOU MAY BRING SALVATION TO THE UTTERMOST PARTS OF THE EARTH."
And when the Gentiles heard THIS, they were glad and glorified THE WORD OF GOD, and as many as had been ordained to aeonous life (or had appointed themselves to aeonous life) believed.
It doesn't specifically say what the word of God was that they believed. The nearest contextual antecedent that it could be is the declaration of Paul in all caps. They heard THIS, they glorified THIS and they believed THIS.

You simply eisegete determinist ideas into the text that are nowhere evident in the text or context, and think that doing so turns the text into a determinist proof text.

Given that the immediate context says the Jews had judged themselves unworthy of aeonous life by their rude obstinacy against the preaching of it, it is not at all strained to consider that the context also says that the Gentiles who open-mindedly considered the preaching of it and had believed the message had appointed themselves to aeonous life. Determinist hand-waving and dismissive language is not a reasoned argument against tetagmenoi being a perfect middle participle.

Am I the only one here who believes that both Election and Free Will Christians exist?

Those who believe what the Bible actually says know that election is not for salvation.

Please show me a scripture that says this. Thanks.

He doesn't know what he is talking about-pontificate.


Ephesians 1:4-5: "Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will"

Romans 9:11-18: "For the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls"

Romans 8:29-30: "For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified"

Acts 13:48: "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed"

2 Thessalonians 2:13: "God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation"

2 Timothy 1:9: "God has saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity"

Election and salvation-indissolubly one.

Please show me a scripture that says this. Thanks.

When someone puts a thumbs down on Bible truth, they would rather stick with the doctrines of men.

Why Some Arminians and Calvinists Need to Calm Down
Theology
Mar 19
Written By Nate Sala
healthy-dispute-management.jpg
I’ll be honest. Wading into the murky quagmire that is the debate between Arminians and Calvinists is about as exciting to me as getting my wisdom teeth pulled. Oftentimes I find the disagreement to be less than gracious. Other times I find it to be vicious, condescending, and outright silly. Case in point: A recent blog caught my eye that tried to argue against Calvinism because, get this, Calvinists are big, dumb jerks! Just look at that Mark Driscoll guy! So did you catch that line of reasoning? Calvinists are rude therefore Calvinism is false. Well that’s a tasty sandwich topped with ad hominems, isn’t it? Another one argued against Arminianism by describing it as Pelagianism in different clothes (but forgetting to mention that the two are distinctly different). One particular forum even tried to say that Calvinists are secretly Pelagians. What?! Oh, and let’s not forget the old handy dandy “you guys aren’t real Christians” tripe.

Look, I’m not one who thumbs his nose from the sidelines while refusing to get his theological hands dirty. I hold a particular view on this issue (and have no problem sharing it when appropriate). But there is something that I think a lot of us have forgotten. The ongoing saga of Arminianism vs. Calvinism has been around for so long because Scripture appears to support both views. Just talk to a Calvinist or an Arminian. They can probably open their Bible and point you exactly where you need to go. Let’s face it: Arminians are just as confident waving around John 3 as Calvinists are whipping out Ephesians 1. Thing is, no one knows with a 100% certainty whether his view is correct. By the way I say “his” because I hardly see any women blowing a gasket over this issue.

So, fellow brothers in Christ, please help the rest of us, and yourselves, and this centuries-old debate by taking a deep breath and calming down. Since the goal of discussing this issue should be to get someone to consider your viewpoint fairly, then try to remember these simple tips:

#1 Don’t Be Obnoxious

Stop resorting to hyperbolic rhetoric to further your point. I mean it. If you don’t, I’m going to jam a million tooth picks through my earhole and into my brain until the part of me that recognizes hyperbole disappears. By the way, writing hyperbolically is not making an argument. It’s just writing hyperbolically. Perhaps that style of communicating is persuasive to some people but, for those of us who know better, it just looks childish. And the numerous exclamation points after sentences you want to emphasize!!!!!!!!! And the way your finger often slips off the shift key so that your seven exclamation points also now include the number one in the middle (!!!1!!!!) looks really sloppy. Also, incessantly italicizing words or phrases or typing in ALL CAPS TO REALLY EMPHASIZE YOUR POINT is not making an argument either. It just looks like you’re impulsive and probably screaming. In other words, if it takes all of these silly grammatical devices to make your point, then your argument (if it even exists at all) is likely weaker than the plot of Die Hard 5.

#2 Don’t Name-call

Calling your opponent a fake Christian if he disagrees with your viewpoint is never useful. It simply showcases the obvious insecurity in your own argument. That is, your argument should stand or fall on its own merits, not whether you’ve successfully intimidated your opposition through name-calling. Also, someone can just call you a fake Christian right back and now you’re stuck in a statistical dead heat in the first round. At the end of the day Arminians and Calvinists still believe in Jesus and His redemptive work on the cross. So, yes, people can actually disagree with you on this issue and still love the Lord. Trying to take away their salvation unless they think like you is almost as ridiculous as young-earthers suggesting that old-earthers are not real Christians. No, wait. That’s equally as ridiculous.

#3 Don’t Mischaracterize

Stop, stop, stop mischaracterizing your opponent’s point of view. Calvinists, stop telling people that Arminians deny God’s grace. Arminians, stop telling people that Calvinists believe everyone is a robot. I read a pro-Arminian post recently that went something like this: Calvinism is a false gospel that offers no eternal life or salvation by the Holy Spirit. Dear Arminian who decided that was actually worth writing down, perhaps you genuinely misunderstand your opponent’s view (in which case you never should have hit “send” on that post) or you do understand your opponent’s view and are purposely misleading others (in which case you probably shouldn’t own a computer). Brothers, in order to speak on a particular issue, you need to do your homework. And, by “homework,” I don’t mean skimming Wikipedia. Understanding your opponent’s view from his own perspective keeps you from landing a devastating uppercut on a jaw made entirely of straw. Think of it this way: If mischaracterizing opponents is what internet atheists do on Twitter, why would you want to do this to a fellow believer?

#4 Be Honest about Your Shortcomings

It seems to me that people from both camps tend to be, let’s just say, selective in the passages of Scripture that they cite in support of their view. That is, they selectively forget the ones that don’t support their view. Also, for some reason, I keep noticing that the average Arminian is way more interested in his system than citing Scripture while the average Calvinist doesn’t want to do anything but cite Scripture. Maybe that’s not characteristic of these groups. I’m open to that. The point is: In order to formulate a robust view, the Calvinist and the Arminian must deal with the problems their respective systems create. Calvinists, how do you square Luke 7:30 with your view? Arminians, how do you deal with Jesus’ own words in John 6:65? And, most importantly, are your answers sufficient to the challenge or are they just exercises in swatting them away?

In Conclusion

Here’s the point, gentlemen: Whether Arminian or Calvinist, neither of you is at 100% certainty in your respective views. I don’t need to meet any of you to know that you’re not. No one is. We are all somewhere between 51% and 100% certainty. But all of these issues I’ve raised so far seem to stem from those acting as if they’re 100% certain. So why don’t we all calm down, try to reconcile all of Scripture to our particular viewpoints (because maybe you have a good argument to share that we haven’t heard yet), and exhibit a heck of a lot more humility and less ostentation. I mean, isn’t the real purpose of these kinds of discussions to be winsome not gruesome?

Why Some Arminians and Calvinists Need to Calm Down

I give a thumbs down when someone has no understanding of Bible truth.

Listen brother-just woke up to see you hounding and pounding-you steel man my position whilst you are clutching at straws.

But then it says whoever believes in him will have eternal life. Whoever here is no longer the whole world.

That is incorrect ."Whoever" still means whoever in all the world. If all would believe, all would be saved.

4 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Ver. 44. No man can come to me, except, &c.] Down then goes the Dagon of free will, with all that vitreum acumen glass point of all the patrons thereof; whether Pagans or Papagans, Pelagians or Semi-pelagians.

He doesn't know what he is talking about-pontificate.


Ephesians 1:4-5: "Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will"

Romans 9:11-18: "For the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls"

Romans 8:29-30: "For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified"

Acts 13:48: "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed"

2 Thessalonians 2:13: "God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation"

2 Timothy 1:9: "God has saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity"

Election and salvation-indissolubly one.