Doctrines of Grace
Hello Providential!
I disagree with Calvinism but it seems the best way to approach the people who hold those doctrines is by attempting an open biblical dialogue with them.
It's usually more helpful to dialogue about the issue instead of hurling vague one-liners at a group you disagree with.Providential wrote:Calvinism = Doctrines of Disgrace
I disagree with Calvinism but it seems the best way to approach the people who hold those doctrines is by attempting an open biblical dialogue with them.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another. (John 13:35)
Understand that I understand your point, BUT the Calvinist uses many deceitful ploys when defending his views, like saying "We believe in the doctrines of grace", which they say is synonymous with Calvinism. Or they say "We will be discussing the doctrines of grace", then they discuss Calvinism, or they ask "Why do you oppose the doctrines of grace? Are you a Pelagian?" That is disingenuous NONSENSE.
Therefore I refuse to cede to them these presumptions, which need to be proven, and the tactics they use are quite childish. If they want to play the slogan-game, I will give their doctrines a slogan that I believe FITS their beliefs. That Calvinism is blasphemous and a disgraceful set of beliefs, that Calvinism has a disgraceful history of persecuting other believers for their views, that Calvinism has disgraced the name of Christ is what needs to be known and affirmed. Allowing them to delude the body of Christ at large with "We believe the doctrines of grace" nonsense needs to crash into the brick-wall of truth, facts and honesty. Obviously, I am firm about this, having dealt with Calvinists for a long time. Blessings to you Sean.
Therefore I refuse to cede to them these presumptions, which need to be proven, and the tactics they use are quite childish. If they want to play the slogan-game, I will give their doctrines a slogan that I believe FITS their beliefs. That Calvinism is blasphemous and a disgraceful set of beliefs, that Calvinism has a disgraceful history of persecuting other believers for their views, that Calvinism has disgraced the name of Christ is what needs to be known and affirmed. Allowing them to delude the body of Christ at large with "We believe the doctrines of grace" nonsense needs to crash into the brick-wall of truth, facts and honesty. Obviously, I am firm about this, having dealt with Calvinists for a long time. Blessings to you Sean.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
I agree with Sean still even having these awful disputes with calvinists myself. I see calvinism as having much truth. I recently have been spending time with mormons and it's proved quite useful as they don't really think much in the terms of determinsim. They ARE DEVOUT to free agency (as they call it) and I find that calvinism actually proves useful to help their closed minds to think out of the box.
I don't want to be as hard line that it's blasphemous but I do think they should rethink a few things. I find myself more a calvinist than a arm. and so I can sympathize with alot of their views.
I've read olsen, cottrell and was raised arm and I find their offense for grace to be lacking myself.
If you ever sit with mormon missionaries ask them if they believe they are saved by grace or works. What you'll get is the arm defense.
Now most arminians will say hogwash but their on the same page from my experience. Now I'm not saying mormons and arm's are the same on all things (DEF NOT!). But on this issue they are more catholic and arm they they (mormons) realize.
But kindness is important and it helps when one feels the other is a friend and we can discuss anything and ask anything.
There is a reason why calvees feel the way they do and that is what does not seem to be discussed much by opposing groups.
If one follows the logic of calvinism they will get their answer as to why they say "calv=doct of grace" becuase in their mind "all others = doct. of works".
The real issues are the 5 points (a few others as well) and they come with a certain bias to the table. Arm's come with another set of biases to the table.
However, I do and will say that IT ALWAYS SEEMS THAT IT'S THE CALVEES WHO ARE VERY RUDE : ) I can honestly say at T-web that none of the arm's have been uncordial or rude to me and have been patient and even listening.
Aug
I don't want to be as hard line that it's blasphemous but I do think they should rethink a few things. I find myself more a calvinist than a arm. and so I can sympathize with alot of their views.
I've read olsen, cottrell and was raised arm and I find their offense for grace to be lacking myself.
If you ever sit with mormon missionaries ask them if they believe they are saved by grace or works. What you'll get is the arm defense.
Now most arminians will say hogwash but their on the same page from my experience. Now I'm not saying mormons and arm's are the same on all things (DEF NOT!). But on this issue they are more catholic and arm they they (mormons) realize.
But kindness is important and it helps when one feels the other is a friend and we can discuss anything and ask anything.
There is a reason why calvees feel the way they do and that is what does not seem to be discussed much by opposing groups.
If one follows the logic of calvinism they will get their answer as to why they say "calv=doct of grace" becuase in their mind "all others = doct. of works".
The real issues are the 5 points (a few others as well) and they come with a certain bias to the table. Arm's come with another set of biases to the table.
However, I do and will say that IT ALWAYS SEEMS THAT IT'S THE CALVEES WHO ARE VERY RUDE : ) I can honestly say at T-web that none of the arm's have been uncordial or rude to me and have been patient and even listening.
Aug
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
I think by equating "the doctrines of grace" to be synonymous with the doctrines of Calvinism, a implication emerges to bring the unlearned to the conclusion that if you deny the doctrines of grace, you are by default denying the grace of God. To me, this is just an unfair (perhaps deceitful) caricature of the other views to choose from such as Arminian and Open Theism Theology. Of course, when presented with such a caricature of this, anyone that is both unlearned and seeking to uphold God's glory and grace will automatically pick the "doctrines of grace." However, this seems to be very close to the fallacy of the excluded middle if I am not mistaken. Roger Olsen in his book Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities has devoted a whole chapter to expose the myth that Arminian Theology is not a theology of grace. The interested reader should get his book.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Troy,
I read the book a few months back. It's not totally fresh in my mind but Roger certainly did a good job my dispelling the myths. I realize that the goal was not a defensive position of the arminian but a dispelling of the misrepresentation of arminian theology.
It may be arminians are a bit too defensive on this issue however. For Calvinists it is a doctrine of grace. For Arminians their theology is a doctrine of grace. For me to say U is the TRUE doctrine of grace is only an endorsement of my viewpoint and it's not to slander your position. When a calvinist says such things it's because they truly believe they differ from the mormon like theology of deeds and works. Thus in the mind of the reformed (calvinist) the Idea that one has to do something (co-operate) from his own effort is a work of a type whether it be of thought or deed. In their mind God ALONE is responsible for the salvation of a man and therfore works DO NOT JUSTIFY the elect. Of course Olson and others battle the logic and I think rightfuly so. However it should be understood why the reformed speak in such terms. I find no offense for the calvinist to call their view "doctrine of grace" or "grace alone doctrine" or "the correct view". Of course Mormons make the same claims and IT MEANS NOTHING TO ME.
Aug
I read the book a few months back. It's not totally fresh in my mind but Roger certainly did a good job my dispelling the myths. I realize that the goal was not a defensive position of the arminian but a dispelling of the misrepresentation of arminian theology.
It may be arminians are a bit too defensive on this issue however. For Calvinists it is a doctrine of grace. For Arminians their theology is a doctrine of grace. For me to say U is the TRUE doctrine of grace is only an endorsement of my viewpoint and it's not to slander your position. When a calvinist says such things it's because they truly believe they differ from the mormon like theology of deeds and works. Thus in the mind of the reformed (calvinist) the Idea that one has to do something (co-operate) from his own effort is a work of a type whether it be of thought or deed. In their mind God ALONE is responsible for the salvation of a man and therfore works DO NOT JUSTIFY the elect. Of course Olson and others battle the logic and I think rightfuly so. However it should be understood why the reformed speak in such terms. I find no offense for the calvinist to call their view "doctrine of grace" or "grace alone doctrine" or "the correct view". Of course Mormons make the same claims and IT MEANS NOTHING TO ME.
Aug
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Arminians, Roman Catholics, Open Theists, etc. do not deny the existence or necessity of the grace of God. They all acknowledge that the grace of God is absolutely necessary.Troy C wrote:I think by equating "the doctrines of grace" to be synonymous with the doctrines of Calvinism, a implication emerges to bring the unlearned to the conclusion that if you deny the doctrines of grace, you are by default denying the grace of God.
What they do deny is the sufficiency of the grace of God. That is what separates the "doctrines of Grace" from its opponents. All other systems make salvation dependent for its final accomplishment on the cooperation of man in some way with the grace of God, so that God's grace in and of itself is insufficient to save.
Cheers,
Bob
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: