Unconditional Election and Total Depravity are Gnostic Teachings
Unconditional Election and Total Depravity are Gnostic Teachings
Unconditional Election (Predestination), is the letter U in the acronym T.U.L.I.P that forms the basis of Calvinism.
The doctrine of Predestination asserts that some people are born already selected for salvation or damnation, which they cannot avoid even by good deeds in this life. For St. Augustine and John Calvin it is a divine mystery that God in His perfect justice makes the apparently gratuitous selection of the elect, with a parallel thought that He has made a similar selection of the damned “…those whom in His justice He has predestined to punishment,” and “those whom in His mercy He has predestined to grace.” –Augustine, Enchiridion c, p. 269
We can’t point fingers at John Calvin alone for this heretical teaching because he obtained it from Augustine’s writings. But where did Augustine get it from?
Prior to Augustine becoming a Christian in 387 AD he adhered to Manichaeism, an Iranian Gnostic religion proclaimed by their ‘prophet’ Mani (216-276 AD) originating in Sassanid Persia (Babylon). Shortly after Roman Emperor Theodosius I issued a decree of death for Manichaeans in 382 AD and declaring Christianity to be the only legitimate religion for the Roman Empire in 391, Augustine supposedly became an ardent opponent of Manichaeism however Manichaeism still influenced his thinking as can be seen with the idea of ‘The Elect’.
Mani divided his church into 2 groups; The Elect, The Hearers and then The Sinners.
- The Elect (perfects): those who had taken upon themselves the vows of Manicheaism
- The Hearers (auditores): those who had not taken vows, but still participated in the Church
- The Sinners: everyone else
Augustine was a Hearer as he never took the Manicheaism vows because he could not live up to their very strict standards (Confessions of Augustine). The life of those who took the vows was a hard one. They were forbidden to have property, to eat meat or drink wine, to gratify any sexual desire, to engage in any servile occupation, commerce or trade, to possess house or home, to practice magic, or to practice any other religion. Therefore the vast majority of adherents where Hearers and the number of Elect were very small. When the Elect die their bodies are purified by the sun, moon and the stars – their light particles set free to form little deities in the cosmos surrounding the First-man. The Hearers have to pass through a long purgatory before they arrive at eternal bliss. Sinners are thrown into hell, body and soul where they will wander around for eternity in torment and anguish, surrounded by demons and condemned by the angels.
Augustine said regarding Predestination:
“…are rather to understand the Scripture [1 Tim 2:4] as meaning that no man is saved unless God wills his salvation: not that there is no man whose salvation He does not will, but that no man is saved apart from His will…it was of prayer to God that the apostle was speaking when he used this expression.” …. “We may understand by ‘all men,’ every sort of men. And we may interpret it in any other way we please, so long as we are not compelled to believe that the omnipotent God has willed anything to be done which was not done.” –Augustine, Enchiridion, pg. 103
“…the resources of salvation are located in God, outside of humanity. It is God who initiates salvation, not men or women.” — McGrath, Alister E. Christian Theology: An Introduction. Blackwell Publishing, 2007. pg. 19
“God does not choose us because we believe, but that we may believe.” –Augustine, Predestination of the Saints 17.34
One can now see how easy it was for Augustine to mis-interpret scripture regarding predestination. He could not achieve Election in Manicheaism, but by twisting scripture he could be Elect in Christianity.
Mani also believed in Total Depravity (also called Total Inability), which forms the T in T.U.L.I.P, where he said;
“…the nature of man can be corrupt to the point that his will is powerless to obey God’s commands.” — Henry Chadwick, “The Early Church”, Penguin Books Ltd (August 1994), pg. 228.
Calvinism’s definition of Total Depravity asserts that, “as a consequence of the fall of man into sin, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin. People are not by nature inclined to love God with their whole heart, mind, or strength, but rather all are inclined to serve their own interests over those of their neighbor and to reject the rule of God. Thus, all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to follow God and be saved because they are unwilling to do so out of the necessity of their own natures. (The term “total” in this context refers to sin affecting every part of a person, not that every person is as evil as possible.) [Emphasis added] –-David Steele and Curtis Thomas, “The Five Points of Calvinism Defined, Defended, Documented”, pg. 25.
Augustine said that;
Adam and Eve in punishment for their sin “became a natural consequence in all their descendants”. Moreover, it is not just a corrupted physical nature that we have inherited from Adam, but our… “human nature was so changed and vitiated that it suffers from the recalcitrance of a rebellious concupiscence….” –City of God, xiii. pg. 3
We can now too see why Augustine believed such an erroneous doctrine. In order for Election to work, man would have to be totally depraved or incapable of initiating any contact with God unless God chooses the person first.
Both Total Depravity and Election are 2 Gnostic teachings and even though Augustine opposed Manichaesim he did not divorce himself from their doctrines.
“The Gnostics [placed]…the natural order at so vast a distance in moral value from the supreme God. The influence of fatalistic ideas drawn from popular astrology and magic became fused with notions derived from Pauline language about predestination to produce a rigidly deterministic scheme. Redemption was from destiny, not from the consequences of responsible action, and was granted to a pre-determined elect in whom alone was the divine spark.” [Emphasis added] — Henry Chadwick, “The Early Church”, Penguin Books Ltd (August 1994), pg. 38
Election was a NEW concept and had not been heard of in Christianity before until Augustine introduced the idea. He had many opponents who rebuked him and his false doctrines.
Julian bishop of Eclanum, said that Augustine was causing trouble because he;
“brought his Manichee ways of thinking into the church… and was denying St Paul’s clear teaching that God wills all men to be saved‘ — Henry Chadwick, “The Early Church”, Penguin Books Ltd (1994), pg. 232-3
Vincent of Lérins said that of Predestination;
“…a most disturbing innovation, quite out of line with ‘orthodoxy'”. — Henry Chadwick, “The Early Church”, Penguin Books Ltd (1994), pg. 223
The following men agreed in the Biblical teaching of free will:
JUSTIN MARTYR (c.100-165 A.D.) said;
Dialogue with Trypho, CXLI:
“God, wishing men and angels to follow His will, resolved to create them free to do righteousness. But if the word of God foretells that some angels and men shall certainly be punished, it did so because it foreknew that they would be unchangeably (wicked), but not because God created them so. So if they repent all who wish for it can obtain mercy from God.”
IRENAEUS of Gaul (c.130-200) said;
Against Heresies XXXVII:
“This expression, ‘How often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou wouldst not,’ set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free (agent) from the beginning, possessing his own soul to obey the behests of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God. For there is no coercion with God, but a good will (toward us) is present with Him continually. And therefore does He give good counsel to all. And in man as well as in angels, He has placed the power of choice (for angels are rational beings), so that those who had yielded obedience might justly possess what is good, given indeed by God, but preserved by themselves . . .”
“If then it were not in our power to do or not to do these things, what reason had the apostle, and much more the Lord Himself, to give counsel to do some things and to abstain from others? But because man is possessed of free-will from the beginning, and God is possessed of free-will in whose likeness man was created, advice is always given to him to keep fast the good, which thing is done by means of obedience to God.”
ATHENAGORAS of Athens (2nd century) said;
Embassy for Christians XXIV:
“Just as with men who have freedom of choice as to both virtue and vice (for you would not either honor the good or punish the bad; unless vice and virtue were in their own power, and some are diligent in the matters entrusted to them, and others faithless), so is it among the angels.
THEOPHILUS of Antioch (2nd century) said;
To Autolycus XXVII:
“For God made man free, and with power over himself . . . now God vouch safes to him as a gift through His own philanthropy and pity, when men obey Him. For as man, disobeying, drew death on himself; so, obeying the will of God, he who desires is able to procure for himself life everlasting.”
TATIAN of Syria (flourished late 2nd century) said;
Address XI:
“Why are you ‘fated’ to grasp at things often, and often to die? Die to the world, repudiating the madness that is in it. Live to God, and by apprehending Him lay aside your old nature. We were not created to die, but we die by our own fault. Our free-will has destroyed us; we who were free have become slaves; we have been sold through sin. Nothing evil has been created by God; we ourselves have manifested wickedness; but we, who have manifested it, are able again to reject it.”
BARDAISAN of Syria (c.154-222) said;
Fragments:
” ‘How is it that God did not so make us that we should not sin and incur condemnation?’
-if man had been made so, he would not have belonged to himself but would have been the instrument of him that moved him . . . And how, in that case, would a man differ from a harp, on which another plays; or from a ship, which another guides: where the praise and the blame reside in the hand of the performer or the steersman . . . they being only instruments made for the use of him in whom is the skill? But God, in His benignity, chose not so to make man; but by freedom He exalted him above many of His creatures.”
CLEMENT of Alexandria (c.150-215) said;
Stromata Bk ii ch. 4:
“But we, who have heard by the Scriptures that self-determining choice and refusal have been given by the Lord to men, rest in the infallible criterion of faith, manifesting a willing spirit, since we have chosen life and believe God through His voice.”
Stromata Bk iv ch. 12:
“But nothing is without the will of the Lord of the universe. It remains to say that such things happen without the prevention of God; for this alone saves both the providence and the goodness of God. We must not therefore think that He actively produces afflictions (far be it that we should think this!); but we must be persuaded that He does not prevent those that cause them, but overrules for good the crimes of His enemies.”
In Stromata, Bk ii ch 2, CLEMENT argues strongly that “faith is not established by demonstration.” Faith involves a choice and “choice is the beginning of action.”
TERTULLIAN of Carthage (c.155-225) said;
Against Marcion Book II ch.5:
“I find, then, that man was by God constituted free, master of his own will and power; indicating the presence of God’s image and likeness in him by nothing so well as by this constitution of his nature . . .
-you will find that when He sets before man good and evil, life and death, that the entire course of discipline is arranged in precepts by God’s calling men from sin, and threatening and exhorting them; and by this on no other ground than that man is free, with a will either for obedience or resistance.
. . . Since therefore, both the goodness and purpose of God are discovered in the gift to man of freedom in his will . . .
NOVATIAN of Rome (c.200-258) said;
On the Trinity ch 1:
“He also placed man at the head of the world, and man, too, made in the image of God, to whom He imparted mind, and reason, and foresight, that he might imitate God; and although the first elements of his body were earthly, yet the substance was inspired by a heavenly and divine breathing. And when He had given him all things for his service, He willed that he alone should be free. And lest, again, and unbounded freedom should fall into peril, He laid down a command, in which man was taught that there was no evil in the fruit of the tree; but he was forewarned that evil would arise if perchance he should exercise his freewill in contempt of the law that was given.”
ORIGEN (c.185-254) said;
De Principiis Preface:
“Now it ought to be known that the holy apostles, in preaching the faith of Christ, delivered themselves with the utmost clearness on certain points which they believed to be necessary to everyone . . . This also is clearly defined in the teaching of the church that every rational soul is possessed of free-will and volition.”
De principiis Bk 3 ch. 1:
“There are, indeed, innumerable passages in the Scriptures which establish with exceeding clearness the existence of freedom of will.”
METHODIUS of Olympus (c.260-martyred 311) said;
The Banquet of the Ten Virgins xvi:
“Now those who decide that man is not possessed of free-will, and affirm that he is governed by the unavoidable necessities of fate . . . are guilty of impiety toward God Himself, making Him out to be the cause and author of human evils.”
Concerning Free-will:
“I say that man was made with free-will, not as if there were already existing some evil, which he had the power of choosing if he wished . . . but that the power of obeying and disobeying God is the only cause.”
ARCHELAUS said;
The Disputation with Manes:
“For all creatures that God made, He made very good, and He gave to every individual the sense of free-will in accordance with which standard He also instituted the law of judgment. To sin is ours, and that we sin not is God’s gift, as our will is constituted to choose either to sin or not to sin.”
ARNOBIUS of Sicca (c.253-327) said;
Against the Heathen: 64
“I reply: does not He free all alike who invites all alike? Or does He thrust back or repel any one from the kindness of the Supreme who gives to all alike the power of coming to Him? To all, He says, the fountain of life is open, and no one is hindered or kept back from drinking . . . ”
Against the Heathen: 65
“Nay, my opponent says, if God is powerful, merciful, willing to save us, let Him change our dispositions, and compel us to trust in His promises. This then, is violence, not kindness nor the bounty of the Supreme God, but a childish and vain strife in seeking to get the mastery. For what is so unjust as to force men who are reluctant and unworthy, to reverse their inclinations; to impress forcibly on their minds what they are unwilling to receive, and shrink from . . .”
CYRIL of Jerusalem (c. 312-386) said;
Lecture IV 18:
“Know also that thou hast a soul self governed, the noblest work of God, made after the image of its Creator, immortal because of God that gives it immortality, a living being rational, imperishable, because of Him that bestowed these gifts: having free power to do what it willeth.”
Lecture IV 20:
“There is not a class of souls sinning by nature and a class of souls practising righteousness by nature; but both act from choice, the substance of their souls being of one kind only and alike in all.”
Lecture IV 21:
“The soul is self-governed: and though the Devil can suggest, he has not the power to compel against the will. He pictures to thee the thought of fornication: if thou wilt, thou rejectest. For if thou wert a fornicator of necessity then for what cause did God prepare hell? If thou wert a doer of righteousness by nature and not by will, wherefore did God prepare crowns of ineffable glory? The sheep is gentle, but never was it crowned for its gentleness; since its gentle quality belongs to it not from choice but by nature.”
GREGORY of Nyssa (c.335-395) said;
On Virginity (368/3G8) ch. XII:
“Being the image and the likeness . . . of the Power which rules all things, man kept also in the matter of a free-will this likeness to Him whose will is over all.”
JEROME (c.347-420) said;
Letters CXXXIII:
“It is in vain that you misrepresent me and try to convince the ignorant that I condemn free-will. Let him who condemns it be himself condemned. We have been created endowed with free-will; still it is not this which distinguishes us from the brutes. For human free-will, as I said, depends upon the help of God and needs His aid moment by moment, a thing which you and yours do not choose to admit. Your position is that once a man has free-will he no longer needs the help of God. It is true that freedom of the will brings with it freedom of decision. Still man does not act immediately on his free-will but requires God’s aid who Himself needs no aid.”
Against the Pelagians Book III, 10:
“But when we are concerned with grace and mercy, free-will is in part void; in part, I say, for so much depends upon it, that we wish and desire, and give assent to the course we choose. But it depends on God whether we have the power in His strength and with His help to perform what we desire, and to bring to effect our toil and effort.”
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (347-407) said;
On Hebrews, Homily 12:
“All is in God’s power, but so that our free-will is not lost . . . It depends therefore on us and on Him. We must first choose the good, and then He adds what belongs to Him. He does not precede our willing, that our free-will may not suffer. But when we have chosen, then He affords us much help . . . It is ours to choose beforehand and to will, but God’s to perfect and bring to the end.”
As we can see they all believed in free will, except Augustine. This idea was then carried over to John Calvin and today Predestination and Total Depravity form part of the base doctrine of Calvinism.
While I was doing my research I found this youtube video by Paul Washer from Heart Cry Missionary Society who is also an ardent Amillennialist (A Roman Catholic doctirine) and dabbler in Contemplative Spirituality. Paul Washer asserts that an 18th month old baby is totally and utterly evil. How Paul Washer can make such a statement is beyond reason. I suppose when you are ‘Divinely Chosen’ you can say the most ludicrous things. This is a very shocking video.
John Calvin’s reign of terror:
- He had Servetus burned at the stake on October 27, 1553,
- Gentile beheaded in 1566,
- 34 women burned at the stake after accusing them of being witches who caused a plague that had swept through Geneva in 1545,
- “Freckles” Dunant dies under torture in February 1545 without admitting to the crime of spreading the plague,
- Several men and women are apprehended including a barber and a hospital supervisor who had “made a pact with the devil.” in 1545,
- 2 women executed by burning at the stake for sorcery by spreading the plague in March 7, 1545,
- Belot (an Anabaptist) chained and tortured – against infant baptism in 1545,
- 7 men executed concerning the plague outbreak in May 16, 1545,
- a child was whipped publicly for calling his mother a thief,
- a girl who struck her parents was beheaded,
- Jacques Gruet accused of writing a poster against Calvin, was arrested, tortured then executed in July 1546,
- and the list goes on, his victims ranging in age from 16-80.
If John Calvin was Elect, then so was Hitler! 58 murders is as good as 6 million.
John MacArthur and Grace to You ministries has this to say regarding Predestination:
I love the doctrines of grace and don’t shy away from the label “Calvinist.” I believe in the sovereignty of God. I’m convinced Scripture teaches that God is completely sovereign not only in salvation (effectually calling and granting faith to those whom He chooses); but also in every detail of the outworking of Providence. –“Why I am A Calvinist” — Phil Johnson, Grace to You ministries, http://www.gty.org/Resources/Articles/10194
The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended and Documented
Afterward by John MacArthur
I am thankful for this timely revision of wonderful classic that has already been an immense blessing to countless thousands. Notwithstanding its success over the years, the only question that ultimately matters about the “five points of Calvinism” is whether these doctrines are biblical. This book has demonstrated (conclusively, in my judgment) that the “five points” are nothing more or less than what the Bible teaches. The doctrines of grace and divine sovereignty are the very lifeblood of the full and free salvation promised in the gospel.
Today Calvinism is being subjected to constant attack. Several recent, popular, published critiques have tried to discredit John Calvin the man, or they have unfairly blamed Calvinism for the dubious politics of the Reformation era. But the doctrines of Calvinistic soteriology must stand or fall by the test of Scripture, period.
Scripture speaks with absolute, unmistakable clarity on these vital issues: (1) Sinners are utterly helpless to redeem themselves or to contribute anything meritorious toward their own salvation (Rom 8:7-8). (2) God is sovereign in the exercise of His saving Will (Eph 1:4-5). (3) Christ died as a substitute who bore the full weight of God’s wrath on behalf of His people, and his atoning work is efficacious for their salvation (Isa. 53:5). (4) God’s saving purpose cannot be thwarted (John 6:37), meaning none of Christ’s true sheep will ever be lost (John 10:27-29). That is because (5) God assures the perseverance of His elect (Jude 24; Phil 1:6; 1 Peter 1:5).
Those are the five points of Calvinism. I believe them not because of their historical pedigree, but because that is what Scripture teaches.
John F. MacArthur Jr.
— http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/MacArthur_5pts.html
Well John MacArthur, your Calvinistic version of Salvation falls and it falls hard!
The correct Biblical interpretation is this:
- CONDITIONAL ELECTION – God has chosen that all humanity be righteous by His grace, yet has called us to respond to that grace by exercising our God restored human freedom as a condition of fulfilling election.
- DEPRAVATION – Human beings are sinful and without God, incapable (deprived) on their own of being righteous; however, they are not irredeemably sinful and can be transformed by God’s grace; God’s prevenient grace restores to humanity the freedom of will.
Jesus Christ died for ALL mankind, not just for the Gnostic Elect.
Calvinism is not the gospel as Calvinists would love to have you believe. Calvinism is a horribly devious doctrine in that it sounds biblically correct for the most part, until you reach the MOST IMPORTANT PART: Salvation. Here you are presented with Predestination and Total Depravity; teachings out of the pit of hell. If a person is locked into a false sense of salvation, then Satan has done his job well.
UPDATES: Please see this article that EXPOSES John Calvin as a FREEMASON: Huguenots, John Calvin and Freemasonry
Michael
READ COMMENTS ABOVE – this question has already been answered
Michael said:
Isn’t it just kosher for the Calvinists to hone in onto their own pet verses to substantiate their views while they conveniently disregard other verses from Scripture? The above Scripture simply means that there is none other than the Father who can draw sinners to Christ because there is no other way than through HIS cross that He CAN do it. And that is precisely why Jesus said:
Are the “all men” in this verse only the elect? Does “all” mean that every single person will be saved? Perish the thought. It simply means that no man will ever be able to circumvent His cross. However, to some it is the power and wisdom of God unto eternal bliss in heaven and to others it is mere foolishness unto eternal damnation in hell. Are the latter the reprobate who had been elected unto eternal damnation before the foundation of the earth? No! certainly not; they will be cast into hell because they willfully reject the cross as God’s power and wisdom.
I read Part 1 of Phil Johnson’s article “Why I Am a Calvinist, . . . and why every Christian is a Calvinist of sorts” and have come to the conclusion that he actually does not know what he really is or what he really wants to be. On the one hand he claims to be a Calvinist who happens to disagree with John Calvin on certain things he taught and he does not condone many of the things he did. As a matter of fact he only adopted the label “Calvinist” . . . “for convenience sake?” Really? To what end is Calvinism a mere convenience? Ah! but of course Calvinism is conveniently acceptable when you believe that God has sovereignly and effectually called you to Him and granted you the gift of faith AFTER He has sovereignly and monergistically redeemed you without you having to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ and having to respond to it in faith. You see, as soon as the most important doctrine – the doctrine of how to be redeemed or saved – gravitates one centimeter toward another label (Armenianism) then Calvinism becomes a very convenient label simply because the other label supposedly robs God of his sovereignty.
Imagine someone who has conveniently adopted the label “Calvinist”, when given the opportunity to proclaim the Gospel (assuming that this is the most important thing you can or ever will do) saying to someone else: “I just love the doctrines (pluralism?) of grace and I will never shy away from the label ‘Calvinist’ notwithstanding the fact that I do not always agree with the person whose label “Calvinist” I have adopted for convenience sake.”
I know how I would respond to such a shibbolethian hodgepodge of semantics. “What! You just love to tell me everything about your love for the doctrines (pluralism?) of God’s grace but conveniently beg to differ with the person who attributed greatly to the clarification of those doctrines of grace, even to the extent that his “doctrines” (the one whose label you have adopted) are deemed to be on par with the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ? How do you expect me to trust and show respect for your love for those doctrines of grace when you conveniently adopt his historically important label but shun many of the things he had said and done? However, I must admit that I too would never pledge allegiance to a religious figurehead who has written, said and done many things contrary to the Word of God. You will probably agree that doctrines of grace which ultimately decide where you are going to spend eternity warrants a figurehead who is perfect in all his ways; who has never said and done anything wrong. His whole life must compliment his doctrines because the slightest taint in his character will taint his doctrines. No Sir, I prefer the many who have adopted the label “Christian” or “Disciple of Christ” because they at least speak of a trust in and respect for a Man who never said or did anything wrong, whose character is spotless and whose doctrines have always and will always be 100% true.”
A feisty contender for the faith is highly commendable and should be encouraged to continue fighting the good fight. This seems to be Phil Johnson’s mission in life – to “get feisty about certain points of doctrine—especially when someone attacks a principle that goes to the heart of the gospel, like substitutionary atonement, or original sin, or justification by faith and the principle of imputed righteousness.” He says: “When one of those principles is challenged, I’m ready to fight. (And I also don’t mind beating up on whatever happens to be the latest evangelical fad.).” As mentioned before, fighting the good fight is the honorable thing to do but then you must make very sure that what you are fighting for is not an evangelical blunder. So let’s hold a looking glass to the principles Phil Johnson is prepared to die for and see whether they are indeed worthy to die for.
These principles that go to the heart of the Gospel are:
Substitutionary atonement
This, as we all know, means to “pay the full price on behalf of,” “to die in the place of” or “to die in stead of.” For Jesus Christ’s substitutionary atonement or vicarious death to have been fully substitutionary His crucifixion had to be in behalf of the entire human race. Nonetheless, Calvin and many of his conveniently labeled followers assert that Christ was crucified for the elect only. This obviously makes his substitutionary death on the cross a partial substitutionary atonement (LIMITED ATONEMENT) for He, according to Calvin’s doctrines of grace, was not crucified for the reprobate. To put the label “LIMITED” on Christ’s atonement is not only an affront to Him and his Gospel but it also demeans his sovereign decree to pay the penalty for the sins of ALL mankind.
Original sin
In Romans 5 Paul explains how the original sin of the first man, Adam, affected the whole of humanity – “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned” (verse 12). Then he goes on to say that by the offense of one man judgment came upon ALL men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (verse 18).
Please note carefully that “the free gift” does not refer to the gift of faith which the conveniently labeled Calvinists claim to receive monergistically subsequent to their monergistically imposed redemption. It is the free gift of grace which God has bestowed on ALL men. Paul emphatically underpins this when he says in Titus 2:11: “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men.” God’s grace leads to salvation when whosoever receives it (the gift of salvation) by and trhough faith. Do I hear a chorus of conveniently labeled Calvinists protesting – “the word ‘ALL’ in the Bible refers ONLY to the ELECT in the very same way the words “the world,” “anyone,” “whomsoever,” and “everyone” refers only to the elect.” John Piper (one of the key speakers at the Third Lausanne Conference that was held in Cape Town from 3-23 October 2010) explains this strange phenomenon as follows:
You may find the following link rather interesting:
Piper who obviously does not believe in the Rapture, the seven year Tribulation and Christ’s Millennium of Peace on earth, makes the very same mistake all the other conveniently labeled Calvinists make. I would like us to focus on the little word “receive.” First off, John refers here to the Great Tribulation when Antichrist is going to forcefully impose his will on people by giving them a mark on their forehead or right hand. But wait a minute; it seems that Antichrist will have more respect for man’s free-will than Calvin and his conveniently labeled followers. John clearly states that only those who willingly receive his mark on their foreheads or right hands will irretrievably forfeit the gift of salvation. In fact, they will be granted an opportunity to refuse the mark of the beast by wholeheartedly receiving the gift of salvation as so many others will be doing during the Great Tribulation. Their forfeiture of the gift of grace and salvation is therefore not based on election but free-will.
Justification by faith
Justification by faith is one of the core teachings of the Reformation but what do the conveniently labeled Calvinists mean by that? In their view pre-election or predestination determines whether a person will be granted the gift of faith or not. Man’s ineptitude to understand and respond in faith to the Gospel compels God to redeem the elect monergistically (not synergistically) and then, subsequent to his/her electorally imputed justification, imposes on him/her the gift of faith. Does this eliminate Romans 10:17: “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God” or what?
Imputed righteousness
The best Scripture that describes imputed righteousness is Galatians 3:6-9: “Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.” It makes it abundantly clear that righteousness follows faith and that God’s righteousness can only be imputed to someone when that person puts his trust in God and Him alone. It was through his faith that righterousness was imputed to Abraham and NOT election. Had it been through election and not faith (prior to justification and salvation) then God’s foreseeing that He would justify the heathen through faith was a dismal mistake and they could not be called the children of Abraham.
Paul’s assertion that “even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness” proves beyond any doubt that faith in God is the precondition and the only prerequisite for Him to impute his rigteousness to anyone. This is also born out by the author of Hebrews when he says “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. (Hebrews 11:6).
Once again; to fight the good fight is just wonderful but then you ought make very sure what you are fighting for – the truth or a lie.
Phil Johnson wrote:
In the more than 40 years since I had become a child of God, I have never once heard the terms “hyper Christian” or “moderate Christian”. If there had been something like a hyper Christian and a moderate Christian I would assume that the latter is a Christian who is neither hot nor cold but lukewarm and that the hyper Christian is one who rigidly clings to the doctrine of Christ, knowing full well that enyone who does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God or his Son (2 John verse 9). Please note that there is but ONE doctrine of Christ and not a multitude of doctrines of grace as Phil Johnson claims.
If Calvinism is the purest from of the Gospel, one would assume that a hyper Calvinist is the hyper Christian (that’s to say if ever there was such a thing) and the moderate Calvinist is the moderate Christian. In that case the hyper Calvinist will be the one who rigidly adheres to all of the five points in the acronym TULIP and the moderate Calvinist will be the one who holds to only four or three letters in the acronym which most likely would look something like this: TUIP or ULIP or TLIP or TULP. Can you truly and honestly say that any of the latter acronyms are genuine Calvinism? As soon as you remove one of the letters in the acronyjm TULIP the whole thing falls apart because each is intrinsically dependant upon the other. Limited atoenment without total depravity means nothing and so also unconditional election doesn’t mean anything without limited atonement. I put it to you that there is no such thing a a hyper Calvinist or a moderate Calvinist, in the very same way that there is no such thing as a hyper Christian or a moderate Christtian. You are either a fully-fledged Calvinist or you are not one at all.
In closing I would like to reiterate what King James said about Calvinism.
Thank you Tom!!! :))))
Hi Deborah,
I have also written a comment on Phil Johnson’s article “Why I am a Calvinist, Part 1.” Have you received it. it is rather long.
Tom
Tom
I can’t find it. I will check the spam section. – I found it 🙂
[BERNARD, STOP IT!! YOUR COMMENTS ARE BEING DELETED BECAUSE YOU ARE BLINDED BY WILLIAM BRANHAM – SEEK HELP AND THE ONLY ONE WHO WILL SAVE YOU IS JESUS CHRIST
[deleted]
Deborah (Discerning the World) wrote:
I believe that repentance and godly sorrow leadeth to life.
As for mankind being totally depraved I believe that as well because the Word of God says that our righteousness are filthy rags and that each of us have gone astray, and that there is none righteous, no not one, and the heart is DESPERATELY WICKED AND DECIETFUL ABOVE ALL ELSE, so where are the verses of scripture that contradict this? There is none!~!~ The human race is depraved to the core and in need of a Saviour. God is not willing that any should perish but they perish because the love darkness rather than light because their deeeds are evil.
as for total election..the Bible teaches that repentance is an absolute~!!~No repentance….no eternal life,,,,no heaven.
donna
Don’t get me wrong here. Of course man is depraved, my goodness. But God in HIS SOVEREIGNTY has given us FREE WILL TO CHOOSE. BUT understand the concept of God handpicking certain people to be saved and others to go to hell prior to their birth – that is Calvinism. Calvinism teaches that Jesus only died for the elect and not the whole world as the BIBLE CLEARLY STATES.
donna
understand there is Calvinisms ‘totally depraved’ vs the biblical ‘depraved’. totally depraved means you have no free will, hence God has to choose people to salvation. Depraved means God in his Sovereignty gave us Free will to choose His Son or not and perish.
donna
>> he Bible teaches that repentance is an absolute~!!~No repentance….no eternal life,,,,no heaven.
that’s it’. REPENTANCE. Calvinist apparently don’t need to do this too often either because they are CHOSEN, and REMAIN CHOSEN – so what’s the point of repenting. I can’t see one. John Calvin could not see one either after he murdered people.
Debs, good explanation about “totally depraved”. That is a key point. Man is capable of doing good deeds – otherwise why would the Bible stress that our good deeds are as filthy rags and also that our good deeds cannot get us to heaven? So of course man is capable of doing good things, such as acts of charity, etc. There are sweet grannies who have not received Christ as Savior but are headed to eternal damnation. Most people can’t grasp that. Just proves that God’s holiness is beyond our comprehension.
Deborah (Discerning the World) wrote:
God is not willing that any should perish, but because of free will and because some men love darkness rather than light they will die in their sins, but not because God wanted it that way but because they chose the pleasures of sin rather than the narrow way that leads to life eternal.
I don’t know any of Calvinsism. I just know what the Bible teaches.
Total depravity still stand, but God leads us to repentance and a new life in Christ where our deeds are wrought in God.
Jesus was crucified from before the foundation of the world the Bible says, and God also knew before He created Adam who would be His children and who would not. God knew who would repent and who would not, and I believe when the Bible says I was chosen in Christ. Comparing scripture to scripture for our correct interpretation of election, therefore it would suffice to say that since God knew me before I was conceived He also knew I would repent, because He would lead me to repent, therefore my election is not the same doctrinal statement of Calvin.
I have to ask a question, can some of the people you name as false prophets just be immature and genuinely mistaken Christians who are genuinely saved and are teachings things from their misunderstanding of scripture…..or are they all hell bound false prophets as you seem to imply???
There seems to be NO MERCY here at all on this website.
I believe that God distributes gifts to each member of the Body of Christ for His own purposes and that each member has a different place in the body as the Bible says that each of us is a different stone in a building with Christ being the chief cornerstone.
Can somebody just be operating in a place within the Body where they were not put by God and therefore are making mistakes?
I know the false prophets on this site and what they teach is horrid, but you seem to give the impression that there is NOT ONE person who is a preacher or minister that can say anything right.
People make mistakes, not all preachers are false.
donna
Comming from someone who wanted to physically burn everything 2 days ago I would say you have a huge cheek. Good grief. I take that as a huge insult. If you don’t like it here go away, please, I have enough trouble trying to help people who are genuinely seeking the truth, I don’t need comments like yours. Everyone I speak of has been tried and tested by the Word of God. If you want to call good evil and evil good, be my guest – but leave me out of it. You seem to think that YOU can know who is false and I can’t. And no where have I said everyone is false, nor do I give that impression. Do you know how many pastors there are? Hundreds of thousands, if not millions. Honestly… think before you speak. (sighs)
donna
I’d love to know who you think is a genuine Christian on my blog who is just ‘immature’ or operating in the wrong place (lol) that I have mislabeled??
Echoing your SIGH…………….
Yes Donna, you are referring to FOREKNOWLEDGE of God. Of course He KNOWS who will be saved and who will not, but that does not rule out the fact that He gives us a choice in the matter. Calvinism says that we have no choice or free will, that God ORDAINS some to heaven and hell with no choice in the matter. You surely don’t believe that, do you?
You need to get up to speed on the doctrine of Calvinism as it is an error and you need to be able to discern thet truth and rightly divide the Word so you see the difference and can speak from the same page. Read all the good info that Debs has here and seek the Lord about it. Right now you are speaking from a lack of knowledge – that is a waste of time and effort. Come back when you are familiar with the facts. Okay?
hello deboah. Respectfully, you do not know what John Macarthur believes and teaches about election.He in fact believes that it is two paralell truths that while election is true, it is also true that we choose and he explains this in GREAT DETAIL in the teaching on his website called “SOVEREIGNTY and FREEDOM”. You do alot of research and that is good but because i KNOW what John Macarthur teaches , i know that you do not know what he teaches.I have heard many differant things on Calvins background but that is not really relevent to J.Macarthur, because he is a tremendous bible scholar and has mightily studied the SCRIPTURES for himself not just john calvins writings. Nobody can hear him without recognizing his vast bible knowledge. Not to imply that any man is infallable. But he is a true man of God. i am alittle disappointed that you have said negative about him without knowing ALL that he teaches, you have ideas about what he believes without knowing. I am not attacking you, i believe that you are sincere in what you are doing and what you are doing is something needful in the body of Christ.I hope that you will listen to what he believes in the link that i sent and if you disagree , i would like to hear you tell me based on scripture. I don’t know if you will post this or edit what i am saying, i would hope not but if you do , i would certainly wonder why. thank you .
Sylesa said:
“hello deborah, i hope that you will read and listen to what J macarthur teaches, he does believe in election and also in mans responsibility as well.He believes in the effacacy of the blood of christ , he simply states that it was not for some special property in his blood but that HE the SINLESS SON OF GOD shed HIS blood for our salvation and because Christ was the sinless son of God , His sacrifice of His blood and body was effacacious for our salvation. you make him sound sinister. I am very familiar with his beliefs. And even if you don’t believe in predestination, that does not a false teacher make, otherwise it would be like saying that you have ALL truth and are yourself infallable in your understanding of God and his Word. In fact , many of us err in our understanding of many things before we learn further, and that does not mean that a person is false. When it comes to denying the deity of Christ and His virgin birth and His Bodily ressurection from the dead and the atoning work at the cross and salvation by faith ALONE , now these are important issues to call a person a false teacher over! Also, when people teach false teachings to garner a following to divest people of their money or to control them ect. ect. these are also false teachers seeking their own gain. I assure you —John Macarthur DOES NOT do any of these! i appreciate that you will listen to what i sent you .He goes thru the Word and handles both sides of the issue. If you don’t want to post this , thats okay. Thank you anyways, i believe that you are a sincere person and that there are many things that you are exposing on this site that are correct and that is a good thing.”
Sylesa said:
“hello deborah, i hope that you will read and listen to what J macarthur teaches, he does believe in election and also in mans responsibility as well.He believes in the effacacy of the blood of christ , he simply states that it was not for some special property in his blood but that HE the SINLESS SON OF GOD shed HIS blood for our salvation and because Christ was the sinless son of God , His sacrifice of His blood and body was effacacious for our salvation. you make him sound sinister. I am very familiar with his beliefs. And even if you don’t believe in predestination, that does not a false teacher make, otherwise it would be like saying that you have ALL truth and are yourself infallable in your understanding of God and his Word. In fact , many of us err in our understanding of many things before we learn further, and that does not mean that a person is false. When it comes to denying the deity of Christ and His virgin birth and His Bodily ressurection from the dead and the atoning work at the cross and salvation by faith ALONE , now these are important issues to call a person a false teacher over! Also, when people teach false teachings to garner a following to divest people of their money or to control them ect. ect. these are also false teachers seeking their own gain. I assure you —John Macarthur DOES NOT do any of these! i appreciate that you will listen to what i sent you .He goes thru the Word and handles both sides of the issue. If you don’t want to post this , thats okay. Thank you anyways, i believe that you are a sincere person and that there are many things that you are exposing on this site that are correct and that is a good thing.”
—————————–
deborah, i tried to send you another link concerning john macarthurs view on the millenial reign of Christ but i got a message saying that it was a duplicate , lol, which it was not. i will esend the links. He definetly DOES believe in the thousand year reign of Christ. You can liten to what he has to say about it when you have time. thank you. http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/66-73_The-Coming-Earthly-Kingdom-of-the-Lord-Jesus-Christ-Part-1?q=millennial+reign+of+Christ, http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/66-74_The-Coming-Earthly-Kingdom-of-the-Lord-Jesus-Christ-Part-2?q=millennial+reign+of+Christ
—————————–
http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/66-69_The-Coming-Earthly-Kingdom-of-the-Lord-Jesus-Christ?q=THOUSAND+YEAR+REIGN+OF+CHRIST, http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/1335_The-Earthly-Kingdom-of-Jesus-Christ-Part-1?q=thousand+year+reign+of+jesus, http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/66-70_The-Glorious-Return-of-Jesus-Christ-Part-1?q=thousand+year+reign+of+jesus, http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/1336_The-Earthly-Kingdom-of-Jesus-Christ-Part-2?q=thousand+year+reign+of+jesus, http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/66-69_The-Coming-Earthly-Kingdom-of-the-Lord-Jesus-Christ?q=thousand+year+reign+of+jesus
—————————–
hello deborah. thank you so much for the comment. i know that you do alot of research, and greatly to your credit. John Mcarthur does believe in election but not in the way that you may think that he does. i will send you a link for you to listen to where he explains his belief and goes thru the scriptures. He believes that WE choose to reject Christ,not that God chose some for hell. Here is the link. Again , thank you for your comment,you are doing a service for the body of Chris http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/90-399_Sovereignty-and-Freedom?q=sovereignty+and+gracet.
—————————–
http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/90-399_Sovereignty-and-Freedom?q=sovereignty+and+grace Sorry Deborah, i seem to be having alot of trouble copying and pasting links, lol! Here is the link. Also , i did not see your response before i reposted the other links. Sorry. I need to learn how to navigate this site a little better. Please listen to this teaching for a better understanding of what he teaches on this sugject. There are many more that i can send you links for if you are interested. thank you for your patience on how many posts that i have sent because of not copying correctly.
——————————
http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/47-87_Six-Arguments-Against-Modernday-Apostleship?q=six+arguments+against+modern+day+apostleship This link did not turn out on my last post, but if any of you are interseted, click on one of the links that i sent in previous post a few minutes ago and type in in the search box “Six Arguments Against Modern Day Apostleship” and it will take you to the teaching on the gty.org website
——————————
Ahh ok, so God still choses certain men to be saved, and man chooses too reject Christ. Still, the big point is this: God does NOT PREDESTINE people to heaven. Again, the Bible says Jesus died for the WHOLE WORLD, Election states that Jesus only died for the Chosen. I’ve read through everything John Mac Arthur believes and I am sorry to say it’s not good. I was an ardent fan of his. Until I was reading some of his sermons one day and he mentioned predestination. I went to find out more out about and I was horrified. There is also another issue regarding the Blood of Jesus in his new Study Bible which left chills down my spine. How do people know God has chosen them? You could land up in heaven and find out you were not on the list. It’s a JOKE. No really. The message of Salvation is messed up in Calvinism – people are presented with this silly TULIP salvation. And it’s NOT the gospel. Thinking you are CHOSEN because you took an altar call does not make you SAVED, let alone CHOSEN.
I’m copying and pasting all your links to a folder, I will then read through them thoroughly. I don’t want Calvinist links under this topic, because these guys will jump on the Calvinism bandwagon. If you need to say anything important from those articles, best thing is just copy and paste a portion out and paste it as a comment…
hello deborah, thank you for posting my comments and links. I have read a little bit of what you have posted here on calvinism and i really need to take the time to read all of it. I will tell you that their is calvinism and what is referred to as hyper -calvinism. I understand and believe what J macarthur teaches in his message Sovereignty and Freedom because it is biblical –all labels of calvinism aside. It is not a discouraging doctrine but rather an encouraging one because he points out repeatedly in his message that WHOSOEVER will may come just as the scriptures say. His message encourages faith in God , does not discourage a person from coming to God fearful that they are not chosen. As to all this stuff posted about john calvin , i need to research this because i have heard VERY different accounts of his life. And i will rearch it out. However , at the end of the day, i would like to hear anybody who fefutes J M message Sovereignty and Freedom exegete the scriptures as he has done and give their own exegesis from scripture and not their opinion of any writings of or about the man John Calvin.Thank you for being fair minded and posting, even tho you do not like John Macarthur. You have more in common with him than you might think because it is his ABSOLUTE PASSION to teach the word of God and come against false teachings in the church which destroy mens souls. I greatly admire his knowledge and i admire what you are attempting to do on this site. I know that it can’t be easy listening to some of what gets posted here. Keep up what you are doing.
http://www.gty.org/Resources/Articles/A341_Why-I-Am-a-Calvinist-Part-1?q=life+of+john+calvin JOHN MACARTHUR IS NOT A FOLLOWER OF CALVIN i would like to point out as well.
Sylesa, I used to value JMA’s teachings, but no longer do so. I appreciated his stand on discernment and against “seeker sensitive” and the fact that he did not sign the Manhattan Declaration. He takes a stand against “easy believism” but carries it into the Calvinist theology. Calvinists oppose the view that a decision can be made for Christ – they believe that God has chosen that person by election and that a personal decision for Christ is not possible.
First of all, his study Bible. He tries to walk both sides of the fence. I would term him a “closet Calvinist”. In his study Bible in the verses pertaining to election and predestination he takes the Calvinist position. He does a pretty good job of toning down his Calvinism. He may have some slight differences with traditional Calvinists, but basically it is there.
He is firmly in the Calvinist camp.He participates in Calvinist/Reformed conventions and conferences – one example:
JMA teaches Lordship Salvation which is unbiblical. This strikes at the very heart of the Gospel! This is serious!
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/salvatio/lordshjm.htm
This is in no way a personal attack on JMA. I am sure he is a very nice, sincere and kind man, but he is sincerely wrong in his theology and he is more deceptive because he mixes truth and error.
I hope you will take the time to research and seek the answers for yourself according to the Bible.
Heya sylesa
It’s not that I don’t like John MacArthur, lol. I love the man. If I met him in person I would give him a big hug and then sit him down and ask him a million pertinent questions. The thing is, because of what I know about Calvinism (the message of Salvation is totally distorted) I can’t condone him and I wont refer people to him.
The other thing is MacArthur has a deep admiration for St Augustine (a Roman Catholic) – In one article even compared himself to Augustine. There is no such thing as hyper-Calvinism. If we remove the fact that John Calvin taught God chose men to go to hell, and John Macarthur teaches that men choose to reject Christ and just call it Calvinism it leaves us with a STRANGE picture.
Why would God in His Sovereignty CHOSE men to go to heaven, but give men the freedom to reject Christ. It’s like a giant conundrum. Why does not God in His Sovereignty give men the FREEDOM to CHOOSE or REJECT Christ? Like duh lol.
It almost seems like to me that Calvinists don’t actually know what they really believe. You see, if you are handpicked by God to be saved, then you don’t need to repent – what’s the point? You are Chosen! All you need to do is live a life conducive to looking Christian-like and you are a-ok.
We are PREDESTINED that is for sure, not because God CHOSE us to go a specific route come hell or high water, but because HE KNOWS our futures – He knows what each of our lives are going to turn out like, He knows each and every single little babies heart that is born and He knows who will ACCEPT His Son and who will NOT accept His Son.
Anyhow sylesa, let this not drive a wedge between us. I like you and your doggie. You will see over time that I am all for truth, if I make mistakes I rectify them and apologise. My biggest mission at the moment is to not point articles to specific pastors articles/sermons – I would rather re-write them because saves me having to apologise to people when the pastor has jumped ship over to the dark side.
For instance, what does John MacArthur have to say about John Piper… that I still need to research.
hello deborah, i just read your post AFTER i posted my long post. Of course our different perspective on John Macarthur will not be any wedge between yourself and i, I know that you are sincere and i believe in what you are doing and i whole heartedly believe that this is SO needed in the body of Christ. There are so many false teachers out there and so much lunacy from the charismatic movement and it is becoming more and more cultic and experience driven and less and less doctrinal! you are doing a good thing! i am all for it even tho we don’t agree on JM! please listen to the sovereignty and freedom teaching, it explains it as best as can be. I don’t understand the Lord being three distanct persons in the Godhead and yet one God but i accept it tho it has not been explained to my pea brain in a way that i can say that i FULLY understand it but i accept it anyways .same with election and free will, they BOTH are true because the bible , i believe teaches it and i accept it tho how it comes together i can’t fully grasp and in that case i will have to wait until heaven! You are doing a much needed ministry deborah and i am glad! thank you! I am not knowlegable about john piper. i am not sure what Jm thinks of him either. I do know that he at some point was with Rick warren? not sure. and i KNOW that JM does NOT endorse Rick Warren! I have to search it out! my chow chow boy duncan is my baby! i love him like one of my kids!lol! i tell my son that he is his brother, lol! anyways, i want you to know that i am so thankful for what you are doing! you are after my own heart! we are sisters!
burning lamp, thank you for taking the time to comment and for your comment. http://www.gty.org/Resources/Sermons/90-399_Sovereignty-and-Freedom?q=sovereignty+and+freedom This teaching explains that BOTH election and free will are true. i believe that jm is a tremendous bible teacher. as for Lordship salvation, and easy believism,it is speaking of the same thing. We don’t do right to be saved but rather we submit to jesus as Lord to do right BECAUSE we do trust Him and are saved, faith without works is dead.It is all in the motivation of the heart, if i do what i do to earn favor with God , then i am in error , but if i do what i do because i trust the God who said to do it , then this is a work done BECAUSE I BELIEVE GOD and NOT to earn favor with God. There is a world of differance in the motivation of the heart. One is truth , the other is of the law is is error. For instance, if i am at the store and i am short on money and the clerk makes a mistake and under charges me , i have a dilemna. IF i really believe that God loves me , has freely saved me by his grace and that He will take care of me {not sinless perfection, but rather the DIRECTION of my life and what i do) then i will because i want to , because i love and trust the LOrd who showed me grace, i am going to tell the clerk that she made a mistake and pay the proper money even tho it may hurt me financially, because ultimately it is God who takes care of me. this is a work of righteousness BECAUSE i believe God NOT to earn favor with Him, i already have His favor because of what Jesus did for me. But say , on the other hand i decide NOT to tell the clerk? i need to ask myself why? At the bottom of all sin is unbelief and pride,and if this is the PATTERN of my life then i have to examine myself to see if i am really in the faith because apart from my works how can i know? faith without works is dead the scripture says. It says show me your faith apart from your works and i by my works will show you my faith. Do you see it? Jesus said “why do you call me Lord and do not do what i say?” If HE is Lord in our life , i believe that it will reflect in our actions. Otherwise , the demons believe and tremble, but what good is that demonic faith that does not submit to the Lordship of the LORD jesus Christ? And why believe in your heart and confess with you mouth that jesus is Lord if you don’t submit to Him as Lord? Goes back to “why do you call me Lord And don’t do as i say” , not to mention many , many scriptures that show and teach that there is a differance in the life of a true Christian and the belief of demons that does not submit to the Lord. Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness but he ALSO obeyed and that showed that his faith was genuine and not simply mental ascent. I do believe in “Lordship salvation” but i view it simply as if i trust God , i will obey. Again, the motivation is not to earn favor , but because i believe and not sinless perfection in my life but the direction. The scriptures bear out these truths. That is why Jm comes against easy believism, because people are decieved into thinking they have faith when in fact they may not have a faith ant different from that of demons who at least are able to tremble! ai so greatly appreciate your response to my previous post even tho we don’t see eye to eye. thank you.
Sylesa, did you really read what Lordship Salvation teaches? I think not. It is a FALSE message of salvation.
You are wrong – I showed you that JMA is Calvinist. Calvinism denies free will – plain and simple. Any attempt to marry the two is FALSE.
Are you familiar with TULIP? If not, you should be. Yes, JMA does take a softer approach and does not come across as dogmatic as his Reformed brethren. But if you look carefully at how he expresses his beliefs it is fuzzy and can satisfy both sides of the issue. He is much more dangerous than an out-and-out Calvinist who lays his/her beliefs on the table. You can’t mix truth and error and come out with sound doctrine.
You really need to do your research on this. It IS VERY important – it goes to the very HEART of the Gospel!! For instance, the L in TULIP stands for Limited Atonement. That means that Christ did NOT die for everyone, just for those He CHOSE to save. In other words, only those whom God CHOSE can go to heaven. Think of the implications of that. It is an INSULT to our Lord. It also means that a baby could be born and if God has not chosen that child/person for salvation, they are doomed to hell from birth. The Bible clearly states that Christ died for ALL and that mankind has a CHOICE.
For instance, I encourage you to read this and then do more research. Be certain you are not being loyal to a MAN because he sounds good.
One tape which presents John MacArthur’s position on the extent of the atonement is Tape GC 56-19 (Titus 2:11, “Saving Grace,” part 2, Tit. 2:11, 1993). Almost the entire message is devoted to the extent of the atonement. In this message MacArthur teaches that the death of Christ is for all men, but the non-elect benefit from Christ’s death only in a temporal sense (they are not destroyed instantly, they benefit from the rain and sun, they benefit from “common grace” etc.). However only the elect benefit from the death of Christ as far as an actual payment for their sins.
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/macatone.htm
I don’t mean to be argumentative, but there is a very important issue at stake here – the truth of the Gospel, the bedrock of the Christian faith.