Both points of view are scripturally supported, but I have a much easier time of looking at Arminian verses through Calvinist eyes than vice versa. I really have tried to understand free-will views, but I see an "a-ha" factor for salvation in there, a realization that the gospel message is real and true. The "decisions" we make after this point are not our will at all then, but rather the Holy Spirit already working inside us, beginning our relationship with Him, although having this much confidence in our own ability to choose God is a bit hubristic in my opinion.
I often get called a "robot" for my beliefs, but I'm a happy robot. And I do believe that I'm right, since the realization of my own "total depravity" has given me a reliance on God during some very low points in my life.
2006-11-15 08:47:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by ccrider 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Dear 5solas,
The Bible is always right! At the time the Calvinists came up with "TULIP", the Lord had really opened their spiritual eyes. This was during the reformation. The Calvinists brought the truths that God had opened their eyes to at the Council of Dort. Arminius, a Dutch theologian, launched his false "free will" gospel shortly thereafter. The Catholic church, which began in 300 A.D., had deviated so far from the truth and the Reformers were led to get back to the Bible. The Catholics had translated inferior Greek manuscripts into what is known as the Latin Vulgate Bible. Whereas the Reformers wanted a Bible in the language of the common people. They used the best Hebrew/Greek manuscripts to give us the King James Bible.
2006-11-15 09:02:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Personally, I always considered Calvinists to be barking up a tree that doesn't exist. they have a incredible amount of Pride hidden away in their theology.
One of the tenets of Calvinism is predestination, the belief that before God created the universe, he already planned out everything, and that we are all actors in a big script, little automatons dancing to a divine puppeteer. Those who the director has decided will be saved, he personally hand selected from the beginning of time.
Wow, doesn' that sound like the bloated ramblings of an overstuffed ego with delusions of grandeur?
Personally, I think of the Sneeches of Dr Seuss, arguing over who is better, the ones with or without stars on thars.
Hail Eris! All Hail Discordia!
2006-11-15 08:40:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Hatir Ba Loon 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
To be consistant with what? If you are consistant with the Bible you can't very well accept all 5 points of Calvinism since the Bible doesn't teach them all. Personally I prefer to follow the Bible rather than a systematic theology. Where in the Bible do you find the idea that Jesus died only for the elect? Where do you ever find the Bible teaching that man has a free will? Both systems are lacking.
2006-11-15 08:34:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by oldguy63 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Both are wrong.... There is only One True Church and that is The Church of Which Jesus The Christ is The Head... All who come to God in The Way He proscribes will receive His free gift of Salvation and enter Heaven... Go to God for the answers not to the works of man.
I accept email questions concerning the basics of The True Christian Faith. 1 honest question receives 1 honest answer to the best of my ability.... but check any answer with God to prove or not it's correctness.
2006-11-15 08:32:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by IdahoMike 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Let's just cut to the chase: God's right.
...let God be true but every man a liar...Romans 3:4
2006-11-15 08:32:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Carol L 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither
2006-11-15 08:31:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by Sliceathroat 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither
2006-11-15 08:27:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Caleb's Mom 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Neither
2006-11-15 08:27:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Both are severe. Neither one have to be correct.
2006-11-15 08:32:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sick Puppy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋