What Is The Difference Between Calvinism And Arminianism?

Pastor Steve Waldron, New Life of Albany - Albany, Ga

[sarahgracebrooks]

By the way, My name is Frankie Brooks, Sarah Grace is my beautiful wife. I only use her you tube page. ty

[BK-yzpx]

Acts 13:48, look at the context of the people in the audience in verse 16: “Standing up, Paul motioned with his hand and said: “Fellow Israelites and you Gentiles who worship God, listen to me!” Throughout Acts there are Gentiles who feared God with whatever revelation they’d been given but did not know the gospel because the completed work of Christ had just been accomplished. But if you’re fearing God with what you know (See also Cornelius in Acts 10 and Lydia in Acts 16), of course you would be ready to receive the full revelation of the gospel. The Greek word “tasso” used for ordained has one of its definitions that means disposed. It’s not that complicated unless you’re trying to fit this into a theological system.

[BK-yzpx]

Molinism is more of a philosophical approach to how God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility might work, although it does get into theology and has Bible passages to make a case. But it’s not a completely theological system.

[josephjones]

Discussing the application and effects of the Atonement

I have written in the past on the subject of the atonement of Christ. Within Christianity, there are various views on the atonement of Christ: ie, for whom did Christ die for? Calvinism, (of which I adhere to: but do not agree with it on limited Atonement) teaches a concept known as Limited Atonement, this is the teaching that Christ died to accomplish salvation for all of the elect. According to this view, Christ didn’t actually die for every person, he died only for the elect, and everyone for whom Christ died for will be saved. While this is obviously contrary to scripture, there are a lot of people who hold to it. The second view is unlimited atonement, which teaches that Christ died for every person, but he only made salvation possible for people. In unlimited atonement, it was possible for Christ to have saved no one on the cross. Both of these views are wrong because they over-emphasize one aspect of the biblical witness on the subject of the atonement: so they both reach wrong conclusions. Calvinism so emphasizes Christ buying salvation on the cross for his church that it ignores the non-salvific aspect of the atonement that Christ made for all people. Arminianism, on the other hand, so emphasizes Christ dying for all people that they end up concluding that Christ didn’t actually save anyone on the cross for sure. His death, according to Arminianism, is made salvific by our free will, Christ didn’t go to the cross knowing that he accomplished salvation for the elect, he only made salvation possible for the elect.

What is a biblical view on these matters? I think that a middle ground between both positions best accounts for all of the biblical data on the atonement. Scripture is clear that Christ died for all men (I Tim. 2:6, Heb. 2:9), so the doctrine of limited Atonement is clearly opposed to the biblical witness. But, it appears that the Arminian position is error too, for Christ died salvificly only for the elect. As I have suggested before, I think that there are different aspects of Christ’s atonement: a salvific one and a non-salvific one. Christ died salvificly for the elect, he bought salvation for the church. Indeed, if Christ died salvificly for every person, then one of two things would have to be true. Either everyone gets to go to heaven, because they have had their sins canceled by Christ on the cross (Col. 2:14), because if Christ canceled their sins, than no one can be judged. Or, Christ didn’t actually pay for sins on the cross at all but only made salvation possible. He must not have actually paid the judicial price for our sins on the cross. Nor could he have made a propitious, substitutionary atonement on the cross. Because if Christ offered such an atonement for everyone, than it seems that everyone would be saved. This position is so opposed to scripture by denying that the cross actually saves us. According to the Bible, Christ saves, according to Arminianism, Christ only made salvation possible.

I would like to conclude this article by reminding my readers of my position. I hold that there is a salvific and non-salvific aspect of the atonement. Christ died salvificly for the elect, he bought certain salvation for all those that the Father gave him. But he died in a non-salvific way for the non-elect. They do not receive any benefits from Christ’s death; only the elect do.

[BK-yzpx]

Why is Lutheranism always left out of the discussion? Lutheran soteriology is neither Calvinistic or Arminian.

[josephjones]

Do a video on regeneration precedes faith

[johnnyhutto]

If you look at Rom 9:13 in a vacuum. It looks as there was a choice of people, but you also have to look at Gen 25:19 &Gen 25:23.Or am i going down the wrong road? I Believe that was about the nation of Israel and Edom and not personalities.I gathered this most of the preachers that I've listens to on these verses and from read it for myself.

[josephjones]

On regeneration

One of the defining marks of Reformed Theology is the teaching that regeneration-the new birth-precedes faith. This understanding is rooted in total depravity- the teaching that unregenerated man, cannot believe in Jesus before regeneration. Regeneration is the mother, source and cause of faith and repentance. Today I want to discuss regeneration in general and why it proceeds faith.

Let us first define regeneration . Regeneration is “call(ing) by his [God’s] Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.” [Westminster Confession X.I]. In other words, regeneration is the Holy Spirit’s changing a sinner from his dead, fallen nature (I cor 2:14), to a nature that can seek for Christ (John 6:44). He changes the heart and brings the sinner to repentance and faith (Eze. 36:26-27). We are regenerated, then we are able to accept Jesus Christ. Since only the elect are regenerated, everyone who’s regenerated, comes to Christ.

Now, why must regeneration precede faith? Several reasons. First, since regeneration is the new birth (“born again”), it must come before faith . Because man, in his natural state, cannot believe in Christ, he must first be regenerated. If faith preceded regeneration, then we would have men who are sinners, “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1) exercising faith unto salvation. Think about it, men who are born incapable of believing the gospel, are regenerated after faith- then it is they who get the glory. The dead man gave himself new life. This is an absurdity but that is what is logically necessary if faith preceded regeneration. Regeneration precedes faith in a logical order I.e one causes the other; however regeneration and faith occur simultaneously in the temporal order. Everyone who has been regenerated comes to faith instantly.

Because regeneration precedes faith, we know that God gives new life to us, not because of what we did, but by his sovereign grace. We also see how depraved humanity is- such that, we cannot have faith without being regenerated. All those who have been regenerated will come to Christ; this is a great comfort to know that God will surely bring those he regenerates to himself.

[josephjones]

I would hold to Amyraldism 4 point Calvinism

[TheChurchIsLikenUntoTheMoon]

This is why displensationalism is improtant. So you can properly understand the context of the bible.

[josephjones]

Are you closer to Calvinism or Trinitarianism

[josephjones]

The salfific aspect of Christ atonement

If you have followed this blog, you know that I am a Calvinist. That is, I hold that salvation is entirely the work of God. God chooses who he saves and regenerates them to cause them to believe in Jesus Christ. Man is unable to believe in Jesus apart from the regenerative grace of God. One issue that is debated in Calvinism is the issue of limited Atonement/particular redemption . This is the teaching that Jesus died to acomplish salvation for the elect. Jesus didn’t actually die for everyone in this view: rather he only died for the elect, and all of them will be saved. While this is obviously not true, there is a biblical point that this doctrine tries to bring out. Although limited Atonement goes from the incorrect angle to reach this, the doctrine is trying to bring out “For whom did Christ accomplish salvation for on the cross?” . Over the next two weeks, I want to consider the salvific and the non-salvific aspects of the atonement. Today, I want to discuss the salvific aspect of Christ’s atonement on the cross. Jesus died salvificly for the elect only; he bought salvation for his church (Acts 20:28, Eph. 5:25). Jesus accomplished salvation for his church. The salvific aspect of the atonement is limited, i.e particular in that it only is for the elect. Only the church receives the benefits of Christ’s death, the non-salvific aspect of the atonement has no benefits in it. Jesus died for all people, but not salvificly for everyone.

What did Christ actually do on the cross? What was the purpose of the Father in sending his Son to die on Calvary? These are the questions that the doctrine of limited Atonement attempts to answer. The Bible teaches that Jesus accomplished salvation for his sheep; the elect. Consider three passages of scripture “I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.” ‭‭John‬ ‭10:11, 15‬ ‭, “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.”- John‬ ‭17:9‬ ‭and “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy
Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.”-
Acts‬ ‭20:28‬ ‭. These passages teach us that Jesus
bought salvation for his church. Did Jesus buy salvation for everyone? No, if he did, hell would be empty. He bought salvation for his church

The salvific aspect of the atonement is that in God’s eternal decree, he chose certain people for Christ to save. Christ died to ensure that the elect would be justified and glorified . He did not do this for the non-elect, for that would require everyone to be saved. Christ died differently for the non-elect (which I will discuss next week). Jesus died to bring his people to the Father, it was individualized, Jesus knew every person who he would produce salvation for.

In conclusion, although Jesus died for every person on the cross, he only died salvificly for the church. He bought them, and they will never perish (John 10:28). Jesus accomplished what the Father sent him to do- save the sheep (John 6:37, 17:4)

[sarahgracebrooks]

Ok, try this....forget Calvin and forget Arminius. Now read the Scripture with ONE THING ON YOUR MIND. Brother Paul, is very careful to point out GOD has a RIGHT to SHOW MERCY on whomever he CHOSES. IF GOD CHOSE WILL KNOW IT, RIGHT AWAY! YOU WILL BE ON FIRE for the LORD!! YOU WILLHAVE TO TELL of his GRACE! You will also be AMAZED that, before that moment, the Father sent your SOUL TO THE CARE of JESUS, YOU COULD NOT RESIST!! ITS IRRESISTIBLE GRACE!!! John 3...the blows you can't see it or tell where it comes from or, where is headed, you can see it results though!! ....SO IT IS WITH THE SPIRIT OD GOD!! WHAT AN ANSWER he gave NICODEMUS! What an answer! We have got to (BE BORN AGAIN) WE CANNOT HELP WITH BEING BORN, we CANNOT STOP IT EITHER....BECAUSE WE ARE BORN FROM ABOVE....GOD ALMIGHTY DOES THIS DEVINE WORK!! Don't yall get it!! GUESS NOT. Nicodemus was a Pharisees, A BIG TIME TEACHER of the Law and he did not understand what Jesus was saying....until later in the Scriptures. Nicodemus was BORN from ABOVE. THIS ALSO TELLS US SOMTHING ELSE. Nicodemus was determined to find out about Jesus, he believed he was a teacher from GOD. Seems like his genuine humility put him in the way of ELECTION because we know from later scripture he was Save, Called out, born again. When we exhaust ALL EFFORTS of trying to SAVE OURSELVES, its seems like Jesus just shows up!

[ronjordan]

Calvinism is heresy. The idea that God would create people to torture them eternally in hell fire is blasphemous.

[tamibarnes]

Make a video on the deference between Calvinism and Christianity. Calvinism god is a lesser god and a lesser gospel and gives God a lesser glory. tHe idea that Jesus didn’t need to do anything but their god just pick people is very blasphemous. the idea that God couldnt or is incapable to create a free willed being makes their god an invention of man’s Imagination: that Jesus didn’t really get tempted, didn’t really marvel at men’s faith or lack of, and to an extent didn’t need to pay for sin. That Jesus has to control the wills of everyone to get people to respond to the greatest act and creation of God. God has a greater glory through this act, he has silenced his accusers (whom he made to be perfect, but for pride) and will end this showing all that He is greater than even satan’s accusations and his calvinist wicked imaginations.