emailscalvinism6

Cork Free Presbyterian Church, 10 Briarscourt (Annex) Shanakiel, Cork, Ireland
Pastor: Colin Maxwell. Email: colin.maxwell@fpcmission.org

We sometimes get a response to our various articles, especially on Calvinism. I intend to reproduce some of the emails below, essentially as received but usually with the sender's name replaced with their initials (purely to protect their anonymity) The sender's email appears in black. My response, as ever, in red:
*******************************************************
Received 26-05-04
Dear Pastor Maxwell, My name is JM and I am just writing to ask you a quick question. I have been a Christian for almost ten years and I am thoroughly Calvinistic. You issued a challenge of sorts to find well-research anti-Calvinist material to examine. Though some of the authors you have already critiqued were quoted in this man's book, I wanted to ask you if you have ever heard of C. Gordon Olson. He wrote a book "Beyond Calvinism and Arminianism". His subtitle is "An Inductive Mediate Theology of Salvation." Hi. Thanks for your e-mail. I appreciate you taking time to write to me. No, I haven't heard of C. Gordon Olson at all.
The vast majority of the book is anti-Calvin and he proposes that the Calvinistic system is all deductive and not inductive. This is one of those criticisms which are easily made. We might conclude the same about the Arminian/non Calvinist position. Again and again in my discussions with those who take the opposite line to the Reformed Faith, they start off by writing (metaphorically) the word "Free Will" up on the black board and that Christ must die for every last sinner if he is to die for any and begin to argue from there. By saying what he does, Olson is practically rubbishing some of the greatest exegetes of Scripture who ever lived.
I wanted to bring this book to your attention. A friend of mine gave it to me (also a Calvinist) and asked me to give my thoughts on it, but since I'm still a "low-roader" in doing proper exegetical study with the original languages and so on, I don't feel qualified enough to attack this volume alone. Actually, I'm no expert either in the original languages. As for exegetical study, I think the best way is to take your time with any verse and , under God (Psalm 119:18) make good use of lexicons and commentaries from both sides. Avoid the great mistake which lies at both ends of the spectrum i.e. using only Reformed sources on one hand or swallowing all that the opposers of our doctrine have to say on the other.
Since you've been looking for a challenge, I wanted to at least mention it to you. You may have already dealt with the objections, but this author is new to me, and I'd welcome your thoughts or input. There are some web pages out there with his material. One is specifically called, "How Theologians 'Do In' Theology." I'd welcome any thoughts you might have. Blessings in Christ, JM I would be interested to know the nature of his objections. Are they purely scriptural? Does he insist on rendering "all men" and "every man" as "each and every last sinner" etc., Does he insist that God's foreknowledge is simply His intelligence of events before hand without any input into them etc., Does he give much mention to those great sovereignty verses like Proverbs 21:30/Daniel 4:35 etc.,? Does he fully understand the position he is trying to refute i.e. understand that the immediate cause of damnation is impenitence? Can he tell the basic difference between a Calvinist and a hyper Calvinist or does he just lump them all together? There are critics and there are critics out there of different worth. If I get a chance, I'll look him up in the Internet and see what he has got to offer. If he manages to get out of the usual pack of critics, I'll try and make some time to answer some of his objections. Thanks again for writing. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 30-04-04 Dear Colin, My wife and I are unable to find a church that preaches the Doctrines of grace or the nickname Calvinism in our area of ----- Texas. We don't want to compromise our position, but we have no where to go. We would really appreciate your guidance, instruction and help. Please pray for us in our search. In Christ, MB Thanks for your email. I can appreciate your difficulty. Humanly speaking - and you really must seek the Lord for yourself on this one - either you are going to have to sit it out under a non Calvinistic ministry or see about starting a Calvinistic ministry yourselves. I sat for 5 years, and about 3 of them as a Calvinist, in a fundamental church in N. Ireland which was not Calvinistic. The pastor, however, was a real man of God (I wrote an obituary for him: click here) and my Calvinism wasn't hampered in any way. There was certainly no crusade against it, although obviously the odd debate came my way. I probably said too much and was a bit OTT as 20 year olds tend to do/be. I don't know whether you personally are called to or capable of preaching. Many a fellowship got off the ground listening to tapes or watching videos of other services. Not ideal, but better than nothing. Contact info@freepres.org for the USA side of our work here and see where this leads you. Thanks for writing. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 19-03-04 Hi Colin, Thank you very much for your quick and most interesting reply. I hope that you understand I wasn't trying to make negative comments about your work and your site when I wrote, I really do like what you have. I am British, living and working in Kansas City, MO. I am a Baptist Professor of Church History who is very interested in both the whole free offer of the Gospel issue, and Jonathan Edwards as a contributor to that and for him as an individual too. Last year Broadman published Vol 1 of a multi-series work of previously unpublished sermons of Jonathan Edwards that I have compiled. This year Banner are publishing 3 volumes of mostly previously unpublished sermons from Robert Murray M'Cheyne that I have also made ready.
It is good to hear from you and to read of your work for the Lord in the literature field. Ever since Paul asked for his books (2 Timothy 4:13) preachers have been indebted to those who have laboured to provide us all with such rich reading. I got the biography of McCheyne "Constrained by His love" for Christmas past and found it very challenging. I have also enjoyed reading his sermons…so full of Christ. I would rank him as one of my favourite writers, alongside Bishop JC Ryle and John Calvin.
Obviously Edwards had a massive impact on Baptist theology and practice through his influencing Andrew Fuller from hyper-Calvinism to preaching the Gospel as a Feast to which we call sinners as guests. This was revolutionary and was the impetus to Carey.
I think it is worth noting that it was the true Calvinists themselves which rescued the free offer of the gospel from the Hypers. I certainly would not like to make a choice between hyper Calvinism and Arminianism. I have just finished reviewing John Bunyan's book "Come and Welcome to Jesus Christ" for the British Church Newspaper and even the very title itself exudes the glorious fact of the free offer.
It's also true, isn't it, that Edwards did begin his preaching career in New York at a Presbyterian Church; and the Scottish Presbyterians did encourage and invite Edwards to become a Minister in Scotland after his dismissal from Northampton. Edwards didn't say that he wouldn't go because of any theological issue, but because he didn't relish such a long voyage. Things could have been very different if he had gone, he may not have died so soon of the smallpox, and wrote much more. Thank you again for all your work for Christ and His Glory! Every blessing MM
I'll have to take your word for it as I am not an expert on Church History, never mind JE. As mentioned before, I have read Iain Murray's biography on JE (BOT) and I have occasionally dipped into the massive 2 volume set of his works, by the same publisher. Thanks for writing. Make full use of anything you fancy of this site. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 15-03-04 Re: Just read your article on Calvinists. I have been a Calvinist for almost 40 years and have heard just about every possible accusation against what I believe. Most of this seems to come from so called Christian organizations that were at one time solidly Calvinistic. I am sure that you are aware that when the Westminster Catechism, the Baptist Catechism and the Anglican Catechism were exactly the same except for the areas concerning the church and the ordinances. In fact one faction of the Methodists were also Calvinists, but here we are in the 21st century and those that were our brethren are no longer there and we are turning back to those of like faith and belief. One of my main concerns is not just being a Calvinist, but how it effects the rest of my faith in God. What I am saying is that if God is Sovereign enough to save me by His grace alone then he also is Sovereign enough to create this world in 6/ 24 hour days and I do mean literal days. Christians need to know that if you suggest that God had to use ages to create the world then he would not be sovereign enough to save my soul. TH Thanks for your note and comments. I agree 100% with your stance on Calvinism and also on the 6/24 hour days of creation. I think, to be fair however, those who dispute the 6 literal days in Genesis don't actually think that God could not have done the work in 6 days, but they think that He did not chose to do so. If you don't mind me saying so, I think too that you need to be careful with your own logic here! If God had to use 6 days to create the world, then He would not be sovereign enough to save your soul either. The point being: God freely chose to do both without any compulsion. Anyway, glad that you have been enjoying the site. I appreciate you emailing me. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 15-03-04 Dear Mr. Maxwell, My response to Four Implications of Calvinism by Mark Huss ©Fundamental Evangelistic Association Answered by Colin Maxwell [Note: A reference to a page which I haven't brought over unto this new site.] You wrote: "Here might be a good place to point out that reprobation consists of two main parts. The first is called preterition where God in His sovereignty decided not to elect some to everlasting life. As God owes no man anything, none can justly argue at the righteousness His decision in passing him by and leaving him to his own sinful self determination. This act of preterition does not make man a sinner. The second part is called condemnation. This is the act of a Sovereign Judge. It is passed upon sinners. No man will be damned except for his own sin. It is true that in these particular quotes, isolated from a large section of his works, Calvin is emphasising the sovereignty of God part. But elsewhere, Calvin quite clearly reminds us that the reprobate is responsible for his own damnation. To quote: "For when we assert that none undeservingly perish, and that it is by God's freely given kindness that some are released, we have said enough to show forth his glory without the least need of evasion." (Institutes 3:24:12) Again he taught that "We who know all men to be on so many accounts liable before God's judgement seat. confess that the wicked suffer nothing out of accord with God's most righteous judgement." (Institutes 3:24:14)" Hi, Thanks for your email. I appreciate you taking time to read the article above and also to comment on the particular point (in the italics) I was making. I hope my comments below throw some light on the issues you raise.
Two simple points:
1. "This act of preterition does not make man a sinner" Well look at the very next point! "This is the act of a Sovereign Judge. It is passed upon sinners" How is God passing Judgement on so called sinners? I mean if they are not made sinners by preterition. Then how are they being Judged as sinners? The act of condemnation is passed by a Sovereign Judge which is therefore judicial and takes into account man's sin. No man is in hell unless he deserves to be. In this both Calvinists and non Calvinists agree. Preterition simply treats men as sinners, it does not make them so. All men were judged as sinners, not because they had at this point (if I can use a time related word in the past eternity) actually sinned (how could they if they were not yet in existence) but because God in His foreknowledge knew they, when they did live on this earth, would sin. The wonder of this is not that God decided to pass some by and leave them in their yet future sin, but that He decided to save any out of their future sin and decreed that they would be saved. This is on the basis of grace alone. I assume that you accept the basic doctrinal position, common to all Christians, that God knew what was going to happen in the future and also knew He was going to do long before He did it?
2. "No man will be damned except for his own sin." No man would sin if God did not pre-determine that they would. Why? Because God judges us (according to John Calvin) sinners before we ever sin. So in order that God's judgement stands perfect. God would have to make sure we sin. Making God the author of sin. --In Him, Pastor MA This is not as simple as you make out. While God ordains all that comes to pass (Ephesians 1:11) yet the certainty of any event does not make it necessary. In other words, God might ordain the event to happen, even sinful events, but the sinner still rushes headlong and voluntarily into it and so becomes culpable. The classic case of this, of course, is Calvary. Read Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: and tell me that either that God did not pre-determine the Cross or that those so predetermined to be there are not held guilty for their deeds. Same truth, only perhaps puts more forcibly, appears in Acts 4:27-28 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. The Calvinist isn't trying necessarily to reconcile what the Bible declares about God's sovereignty and man's responsibility or trying to find out where they meet. He is just stating what the Bible says. God is never revealed as the author of sin in the Bible, although He could have prevented sin from entering into the universe. For reasons best known to Himself, He did not do so, yet we would consider it a blasphemy to say that God authored sin.
Thanks again for your thoughts. I have spoke to and corresponded with quite a few Christians on the matter raised above and I have never yet got an answer to God's sovereignty and man's responsibility at the Cross. To state both brings the soul into what is commonly known as Calvinism. To deny either/both leads either to Deism or a Hyper Calvinist fatalism, neither of which are satisfactory alternatives. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 14-03-04 Dear Mr Maxwell, Could you tell me exactly what the ‘Free Offer’ is? Is the preaching of the gospel to all? What is God’s attitude during this preaching of the gospel to all men? We trust you are seeing fruits for your labours. Sincerely, RK Hi, Thanks for your email. The 'Free offer' is when we preach the gospel to all men indiscriminately and offer them the opportunity to be saved. We do not limit our exhortations, reasoning, pleadings etc., to those whom we dare think are elect, but we see all men as potentially elect and so preach and evangelise that every last one of them might be saved. The Lord might know those who are His in election, but such information is not vouched to us and even if it was, we are still told to preach the gospel to every creature (Mark 16:15) Arthur Pink gives us a good example of extending the free offer when he concluded an evangelistic sermon with these words:
"Why not believe in him for yourself? Why not trust his precious blood for yourself, and why not tonight? Why not tonight, my friend? God is ready, God is ready to save you now if you believe on him. The blood has been shed, the sacrifice has been offered, the atonement has been made, the feast has been spread. The call goes out to you tonight. 'Come, for all things are now ready.'" (Studies in the Scriptures 1927) (Other helpful quotes, affirming the "Free offer" from leading Calvinists: Click here and Click here)
God's attitude during this time cannot be anything less than sincere. We cannot charge the Almighty with hypocrisy. True, it cannot be said that God has willed with the force of a decree all whom He sincerely invites to be saved, but then this is not exclusively a Calvinistic "problem" but a "problem" for all who believe the Bible to be the word of God. Thanks again for writing. I hope this answer helps you. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 25-02-04 God bless you friend, I am a Calvinist and find my faith under attack all the time. One question that bothers me is this, If God only gives faith to certain individuals why does he rebuke men for their lack of faith? Could you shed light on this question? In Christ, Jason. Hi, I appreciate you taking time to write. The question is easily answered when we consider why men lack faith. They lack faith because of sin. They do not believe because they don't want to believe. They love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil (John 3:19) This is/was the position of us all if left to ourselves. Man's sin, however, does not nullify his responsibilities towards God. At this stage, God could still require obedience towards Him, not lift a finger to help us in any way and still remain the all just God who is perfect in all His ways. For reasons best known to Himself, God has not chosen to give all men faith - all men do not have faith (2 Thessalonians 3:2) If we start propagating that God is obligated to deal with all as He deals with some, then we are moving out of the realms of grace into other (and dangerous) ground indeed.Thanks for writing. I trust this answer sheds the light you require. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 29-01-04. Dear Colin: When I read John 6:37-65 it seems to me that this is air-tight proof of Calvinism, as it shows that the Father has to draw someone, and everyone He draws gets raised up (saved). Hi. Nice to hear from you again. While the analogy of raising the dead is applied to salvation (Ephesians 2:1) yet it is not strictly in view in this passage. Christ refers this resurrection to the "last day" (v39,v40,v44,v54) therefore to the physical resurrection of the bodies of the saints. (which is a "part" of the salvation package which God gives to us.) It is, of course, an argument for the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. "I will" can never be reduced to "I might" or even "I can" but "I will"
Lately though, I've been encountering Arminians who seem to feel that the "hearing and learning" verse 45 [It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.] somehow refutes the Calvinist's interpretation of this passage. I've heard them explain this to me numerous times, but - to be honest . . . I don't get it. If you would be willing, could you explain the "loophole" that they are trying to create here, and how it can be refuted? I think it is more a matter that they are emphasising the responsibility of the sinner while you are emphasising the sovereignty of God. Both positions are true, although Calvinists have the advantage in that we believe both, while the Arminians (as you term them) effectively deny the sovereignty of God. If there is a "loophole" it is possibly on the thought that your friends believe that those who are drawn are those whom God knew would hear and learn. We make the hearing and learning dependent on the election…your friends reverse the order.
Also, am I correct in reading John 6, that there is a 1 to 1 relationship between "those being drawn by the father" and "those being raised up"? Thank you so much for your excellent ministry. JB, Wisconsin, USA Although it is common to all the elect of God, yet it is on a 1-1 basis in that we are all individuals. Thanks again for writing. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 19-01-04 Dear Pastor Maxwell: Thank you so much for your page of email-replies to Calvinism questions; I don't think there is anything else like it. Hi. Nice to hear from you. It excites and encourages me (often in the midst of some discouragement) to know that the web site is being used of God to further His glory. I am glad that you are finding it useful.
I am a relatively new Calvinist, and am currently in an ongoing debate (via letters) with an Arminian pastor friend. He sent me a couple of points that I wonder if you'd be willing to respond to:
1) In a letter to my Arminian friend, I made the case that if "decisional regeneration" were true, man would have something to boast about (related to his own salvation). We would be able to say "I was smarter, more open, more clever, or less stubborn than my neighbor who did NOT choose Christ". To this he responded with, "if I handed you a free gift of 100 dollars and you accepted it from me, would your mere acceptance of the 100 dollars be 'a work' "? In other words, he is trying to say that the Arminian notion that our acceptance of Christ's free gift can not be considered a work that we can boast about. I think this is wrong thinking on his part, but I'd like to hear what you have to say.
The illustration is flawed insomuch has it does not state or cover all the fundamental issues in the debate. True, it covers the idea of a gracious gift and of our need to actually receive it to make it ours (both very true) but it omits the idea that we cannot receive the gift of God unless chosen to do so in Christ. This is taught clearly in John 6:44 and other verses relating to man's sinful inability. This leads us to consider why some are chosen by God to receive the gift while others are left to perish in their sin. We believe that God's election is unconditional i.e. not because of any thing either in us or foreseen in us. Your Arminian friend (as you term him) believes that our faith is the ultimate cause of our election. God elects us (it is said) on the basis or the condition we believe and this makes our faith a cause in our salvation and so effectively a work on our part. Because your friend believes God has empowered all men equally to believe, he must have room to boast over those who had not the basic spiritual wit to believe as he has done. I know this sounds a bit crude and any believer, Calvinist or otherwise, will repulse from such a thought, yet it may be easier done under the Arminian scheme and is impossible under the Calvinist interpretation.
2) In one of his letters, my Arminian friend proudly touts that he is neither an Arminian nor a Calvinist. And yet, in another letter he calls himself a "Reformed Arminian", thus distancing himself from garden variety Arminians. Further he says that Calvinists have not "cornered the market on God's sovereignty".
God is sovereign, of course, whether it is acknowledged or not. So in this, your friend is right. However, the Calvinist interpretation alone does justice to the sovereignty of God. The Arminian scheme (or non Calvinist scheme as I prefer to call it) does not, because it insists on giving man a part to play and indeed, the ultimate choice. I often hear non Calvinists speak of the sovereignty of God, but if you push them to explain what they mean, they either get somewhat vague or effectively deny it.
I have attempted to refute his perceived middle ground by comparing it to Vegetarianism. Either you are a vegetarian or you are "non-vegetarian", and if you claim that you are neither - all we have to do is watch whether you eat meat or not to know the truth. Colin, do you have any further resources or advice for refuting those who try to hold this "politically correct" sounding middle-ground which they say "balances" the two sides of this debate? Thank you again for your excellent website. JB
Some folk are not happy with attaching human names unto doctrines of God's word. I can understand that position, although I tend just to get on with the debate! It is something we have inherited and there's not much we can do about it. Your illustration is a good one. It was the non Calvinists who raised the issue over the Five Points and these are a good test as to who is actually Reformed. You can go through them one by one and while there are a few "Four Pointers" out there, it usually doesn't progress much beyond this and the lines become more clearer. I like the words of Spurgeon "When a Calvinist says that all things happen according to the predestination of God, he speaks the truth , and I am willing to be called a Calvinist; but when an Arminian says that, when a man sins, the sin is his own, and that if he continues in sin and perishes, his eternal damnation will lie entirely at his own door, I believe that he speaks the truth, though I am not willing to be called an Arminian. The fact is, there is some truth in both those systems of theology." (1903, pp.602-603)Thank you for writing. I trust these answers have been of help to you. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 14-01-04 Dear Pastor Colin Maxwell: Dear brother in Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior. It was a pleasure to read your article about Calvinism, his free offer of the gospel and your response to David Clouds article, which is well done and which I agree with. You make your point in a clear non-confrontation way, in love and meekness, respecting the man and even using his material when useful.
Hi brother. Nice to hear from you. I appreciate you taking time to email me. I am glad that you enjoyed the articles referred to above. There is little point getting "all het up" over these matters. Unkind words never won a soul nor an argument. I don't always succeed, but I do try to avoid rancorous situations.
Our family attends Bethel Baptist Church in Lambeth Ontario Canada, which is David Cloud's home church. We print his "O Timothy" newsletter and handle his mail. We’ve only been going to Bethel for 2 years so have only met Mr. Cloud twice as he is usually in Nepal or other parts of the world. On a personal level he is a very easy going guy. Any dealings I have had with him are via email and usually on the Calvinism issue which doesn't help my overall appreciation of him. Again, the Way of Life web site, being a necessary warning ministry, doesn't help either to foster a warm glow of appreciation, but I am sure if the circumstances were more congenial I too would find him very easy going. I am willing to take your word for it.
I operate, The St. Thomas Evangelical Library out of my home which is associated with the Evangelical Library in London England of which I am sure you know. How we got to Bethel is quite a story but I will only give you the main points in God’s providence. I was raised a Roman Catholic, but when I married my wife who was Presbyterian I had to leave the Catholic Church. We looked for quite some time for a church we could both feel comfortable in and settled in a Pentecostal church in which we actively took part for 11 years. A friend finally gave me some books on Whitefield, Spurgeon, Calvin and such and I who never read anything spent the next few years reading and studying about 4 hours a day. Oh what days of blessed truth. I got really saved reading the "Life and times of George Whitefield". We eventually had to leave the Pentecostal Church in which I was a deacon, song leader and head of men’s ministries. And we began a lonely quest in finding a church, not one that was perfect or that had to have all the points of Calvinism perfectly in order and practice. I also was lead of God to start a Christian book service as in this part of the world; Biblical truth is a scarce commodity. I eventually heard of the Evangelical Library in London England and went to a church whose Pastor set under Martyn Lloyd-Jones for some years who encouraged me in starting the Library. Over the 10 years we searched for a local church home of which we could be active members, but oh it is much of a desert out there. Even though I believe in the Baptist position we attended for several years churches that were pedo-baptist, as there was no reformed Baptist churches in the area in which we live (even though in the immediate area there live approximately 500,000 people). I’ve read almost all of Martyn Lloyd-Jones books and he is my favorite author outside of God. We recently moved and I am still setting up the Library again but have about 3000 books. You can check out my web page, which has some broken links in it but has been of value to some by God’s grace. I can appreciate your desires and also the difficulties of finding somewhere fundamental to worship in. Many Christians are spoiled for choice.
About two years ago we came to Bethel Baptist and for the first time in 10 years we felt we had hope. The Pastor has come along way by God’s grace to a biblical position in most doctrine. He loves CH Spurgeon the Puritans, and the old writers. He loves the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and His importance in the life of the church and evangelism. Finally after 10 years we felt we could become members in a local church. I had spent 10 years studying and reading and growing in grace and knowledge and was never able to teach anywhere or use my talents as we were not members. But at Bethel I have many opportunities to teach and preach the glorious doctrines of God’s Word. I recently finished a series on Revival and Prayer. The church has doubled in the past two years and many from the Brethren movement are now attending. It is good to hear of churches advancing under the preaching of the word of God.
Its sad that Calvinism is so much despised as you said you went to Indiana USA for a conference against Calvinism. In Baptist circles often you cannot quote Calvin, but Spurgeon is OK even though Spurgeon got his quote from Calvin. I think a lot of them actually hate John Calvin. And yet Spurgeon was an out and out Calvin man. "I am a Calvinist, and a lover of that grand man’s memory and doctrine…" (44:517) A little bit of inconsistency doesn't help their cause.
Someone in church on Sunday borrowed Calvin’s Sermons on Deuteronomy, and another Ian Murray’s book on Spurgeon vs. Hyper-Calvinism and others borrowed many books on revival by Edwards and other sound men. Good! There is wonderful power in literature as well.
I think David Cloud in his desire to proclaim the truth and his busy schedule often hinder him from doing deeper research. He loves the truth and sees so much error that often he may err too. Mr Cloud has fallen in the trap of going for quantity rather than quality. He has bitten off more than he can chew. By doing so, he has only succeeded in making untrue statements (I speak of the Calvinism issue) which misrepresent the Calvinists and mislead those whom he is trying to teach. This cannot be good. This is why I felt I had to prepare the page on why he is not a reliable critic of Calvinism. However, I do recognise that his motives are good even if he does fail to deliver.
But I like what CH Spurgeon said about John Wesley, that even though he felt strongly against his errors, he respected him a man of God and he said that God may own a man despite a 1000 errors if he holds to that one doctrine of justification by faith. I agree completely. I remember someone saying that it is easier to be gracious about departed saints who erred than living ones who err. They have a point!
I visited a former Pastor of mine last week and we talked about Calvinism and man's antagonism against it and he said in almost every case you will find that those that despise Calvin have never really read him or his works. As you know it is hard to find a man more humble, meek, holy biblically knowledgeable and useful in God’s vineyard. Another good point. Calvin himself made a powerful statement when answering some critics. He said: "If you will attack my doctrine, why not at least show candour enough to quote my own language." They can't do it because many of them, as your former Pastor said, know hardly anything about them. They peddle half quotes or do not do their homework properly or impose what they think Calvinism teaches without checking their facts. We try to tackle this as well.
Well brother its been nice sharing my mind with you. I will check out your most useful web site again and may God abundantly bless your labors.
To God be the glory! All of it! In Christ: JVE Yes…nice to hear from you. I appreciate you writing and sharing these things with me. I am sure those who read these words on the web site will be encouraged also.
*******************************************************
Received 11-01-04 (in response to a previous private email) Thank you brother. As a pro-life activist and a Calvinist--the idea that these aborted infants are going to hell would disturb me very much. Hi. Yes…we are inclined to believe that all infants who die before reaching the years of understanding go to Heaven. The Bible doesn't say much about the issue and so we are left to the general tenor of Scripture.
I had a Calvinist once tell me that "God will always cause His elect to be born"--but I do not see that in the Scripture. No…we don't. I hope I am not misapplying an observation wrongly here, but sometimes those who deem themselves Calvinists (as I do) use their Calvinism to keep the non elect out of Heaven instead of using it to bring the elect in. Just a thought!
I consulted "The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination" by Lorraine Boettner and on PP. 143-148 he holds to our views also on this topic. A good book and highly recommended.
Please carry on with the excellent web site and Lord bless. JP Thanks for writing. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 13-12-03 Colin: I love your Calvinist pages, I've been reading them for days now. After 17 years of being an Arminian - I became a Calvinist about 6 months ago. I've been trying to learn as much as possible since then. I can't believe how many books I've been buying! Your site answers a lot of questions that books simply do not. You have such a good attitude, I can tell just by the things you write. You are able to engage in debate without being a jerk, and you are very Christ-like in your writings. Thank you so much for everything you've written! It is always nice to hear from folk who have been helped through our web site. We give God all the glory. Sometimes it takes a while to come into a fuller understanding of these glorious doctrines. However, once grasped, they give a tremendous impetus to the Christian life and especially evangelism.
I do have a Calvinism question that's been haunting me for months now, maybe you could give me some advice: I am past the hurdle of "what motivates a Calvinist to evangelize"; this was a big concern for me at first, but now I understand. So here's my question:
I'm still confused about "how" (or whether) to pray for specific unbelievers for salvation. As an Arminian I always prayed "God please work in Bob's life to make him choose Christ". But lately I've come to notice that the Bible doesn't really mention "praying for lost people" - but instead it just says to witness to them. The closest thing I can find is when Christ says to pray for workers for the harvest. If I'm understanding A.W. Pink correctly, he seems to think that we should always be striving to pray in conjunction with God's will. But how do I know if the unbeliever that I'm praying for is one of the elect or not, and if not . . . then - am I praying AGAINST God's will for them (if he does not intend to save that particular person)? Should I instead pray a more general prayer like "Lord do your will in their life"? This is very confusing. How do you pray? (if you don't mind my asking) This is really an easy question. You're half way there with your comment "The Bible…" because the Bible is our guiding star in all matters. We are not guided by the decree of God, much of which is known only to God himself. Without seeing just exactly what Pink wrote, I would imagine that he meant that we are not pray for things that are expressly against the revealed will of God as expressed in the Bible. For example, we ought not to buy a lottery ticket and pray to God that our numbers will come up. Or ask God to so arrange things that we, as a believer, could marry an unsaved person when such things are clearly forbidden in Scripture. The question then becomes "Where in the Bible am I encouraged to ask God: "Please work in Bob's life to make him choose Christ"? The nearest I can think of is when Stephen - a Spirit filled man - prayed for his murderers, asking God not to lay this sin to their charge. (Acts 7:60) This is akin to asking God to save them because such a sin could not but be laid to their account unless they were justified by faith. We know that Saul was saved, but it does not follow that others were saved. In this prayer, he was simply following the example of the Lord Jesus as revealed in the word of God (Luke 23:34) God will have all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) and since we are to view all men as potentially elect (since we are ultimately in ignorance on this matter until we get to Heaven) we may hope and pray for individuals to be among that number. Furthermore, how could we pray for anything specific if we afraid of finally praying for something that was outside the eventually revealed will of God? Our prayers would be so vague indeed. Instead we are encouraged to even pray that mountains will be moved (Matthew 17:20) and we cannot know whether such an outcome is within the decree of God unless such a prayer is offered and the mountain is eventually removed. Clearly we are praying within the revealed will of God, reconciling that with his secret will is not for us to do. (Deuteronomy 29:29)
Well, thanks again for everything. You are an ocean away but I feel like you are my brother. May God bless you. --JB Wisconsin, USA
Good to hear from you. I trust these answers will prove to be of further help to you.
*******************************************************
Received 12-12-03 Sir, I was enjoying your 'Calvinistic Article Index' web page. I wanted to offer you the attached article if you like it and think it is useful. Keep up the good work. John Sneed, Minot, North Dakota, USA
Thanks for your email and encouragement. Also thanks for allowing (via private email) for your email address to be included here so that any reader who wants to avail of your offer can do so privately. For this excellent paper on the some of the differences between Calvinism and Hyper Calvinism, you may email Pastor Sneed at johnaleta@srt.com I appreciate your stand against Hyper Calvinism. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 6-12-03 I just want to let you know that your web site has really helped me in understanding Calvinistic teaching. WR
Thanks for writing. We are always encouraged to hear that our articles are of help to people. Colin.
*******************************************************
Received 3-12-03 Dear Sir/Madam, I am very worried about all this emphasis on salvation through faith in Jesus being the only way for a person to be saved. Thank you for your email. I have decided to answer it here on this Calvinism email page because our answer flows from our Calvinistic understanding of the Bible and will prove more helpful than those answers which do not have this insight. Our emphasis on salvation through faith in Jesus Christ as the only way of salvation is Biblical as Romans 3:28/Ephesians 2:8-9 etc., make clear.
Before Jesus was born, billions of people have already died without having heard about Jesus. After the death of Christ and up to the present time, billions of other people have also died without having heard about Jesus or the true Gospel. Billions more will die without any knowledge of Jesus or the true Gospel because no one will have the opportunity to preach to them about faith in Jesus being necessary for salvation.
Your statements are all true in themselves. However, you need to get beyond the mere observation stage and wonder "Why this is so?" At the risk of supplying a short answer and then being judged as being glib, you need to remember that billions of people in all ages are born with original sin (through Adam) and are also guilty by actual sins. It is these sins which takes the soul to hell. God was not obliged to save any man - He could justly have left us all to be damned in our sins - and therefore He is not obliged to save all…or even reveal Himself to all through the gospel. For reasons best known to Himself, He has chosen to reveal Himself to many but not all and also to save (relatively) few among the many to whom he reveals His word. This is sheer grace (based on justice) for those who are saved and sheer justice to those who are not. None can justly complain. It is not that God has no love towards the heathen. He has fed and clothed them and gave them health etc., but (as you point out) we must confess that He chose also to leave them void of the gospel. Lest we be misunderstood, we believe most passionately in world wide evangelism and believe that it is the duty of the Church to take the gospel to every last creature (Mark 16:15) and we try to do so…but we still recognise that God is sovereign and many will die without hearing the way of salvation. These are indisputable facts.
My question is this - Are all these billions of people unsaved and therefore condemned to hell or will be destroyed in the future lake of fire? Can it be true that not one of these poor ignorant people (ignorant of Christ) will be able to go to heaven since they all died or will die without being justified by faith in Jesus? The short answer again, in both cases, is "Yes" They go to hell because they have broken the commandments of God and the wages of such sin is death i.e. eternal destruction in the lake of fire. They cannot go to Heaven without justifying faith in Jesus Christ, unless (as many of us believe) they die in infancy or otherwise outside the state of responsibility (imbeciles etc.,)
If some of these poor ignorant people, having lived godly lives, can still go to heaven, then it follows that faith in Jesus is not the only way for salvation. You start your summing up with an "if" and it is here your argument stands or falls. The Bible teaches that no man can live a "godly life" in ignorance of Jesus Christ. Until he exercises faith in Jesus Christ, all his (supposed) righteousness' are as filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6) He may be morally upright and religious (after the standards of men) but in the sight of an all holy God, he still falls short of the divine glory (Romans 3:23) and unless that sin is pardoned, then they die in their sin and where Christ is (Heaven) there will never be (John 8:21) So in a sense you are right…IF the untaught heathen live godly lives and go to heaven, then salvation is by faith alone in Jesus Christ. But SINCE THEY DO NOT AND CANNOT live godly lives and do not go to Heaven, we are left to agree with the clear Bible teaching that "He that believeth not shall be damned." (Mark 16:16)
I would appreciate your comments on this confusing issue. Yours sincerely in Christ, James I appreciate you writing. I accept that my answers can be somewhat unpalatable, but if you search the Scriptures daily, you will see these things are so (Acts 17:11) Feel free to write again. Colin.
*******************************************************
RETURN TO LATEST CALVINIST EMAILS PAGE