I have been asked to write a simple explanation of Calvinism versus Arminianism

[Pergamum]

The indigenous church structure (denomination) here, consisting of 400,000 - 800,000 members (census data hard to get due to remotenesss) has a basically evangelical statement of faith.

The issue of Arminianism came up 2 years ago and most of the pastors in the synod meeting (representatives of the church as a whole scattered throughout the region) agreed that Calvinism was the Gospel. Some, however, wanted acceptance of Arminianism as well. Many church members know nothing of the differences. I passed out tracts prior to the meetings and have since as well.

Today, the head of the Missions Department for this large church body asked me to write a simple book, booklet, article or tract on these differences to further inform the church membership.

It needs to be simple. Concrete illustrations help. Historical perspective is minimally important but biblical data is most important. theological terms need to be simple or else explained. Pictures or illustrations would also help. The church culture and demographic is almost entirely Melanesian.

Any help would be appreciated for simple explanantions and illustrations from nature. Leopards changing spots or pigs not being able to change their own character by themselves are some concrete ways to explain the need for God to change us. Also, if you move a corpse, the body only stinks more....a good explanation of the religion of the spiritually dead.

If you have any other word-pcitures to us, please help me. I am immensely busy and need all the help I can, and want to get something out there and distributed soon since it has church backing and is on people's minds now.

 

[Tim]

In Nicene Council's film, Amazing Grace/History of Calvinism there is a "skit" where a man walks into a graveyard full of tombstones. He sets up a table. He has a sign saying he is offering salvation "for free". He waits and waits, but no one approaches the table.

With regard to the indigenous people to whom you minister, do they bury or cremate their dead, or something else? That would help guide you with this illustration, of course.

 

[Pergamum]

We bury. Thanks, that is a good illustration.

 

[Scott1]

Arminianism= man plays some part in obtaining his own salvation.

Calvinism= man is completely dependent on God for obtaining his salvation.

---------- Post added at 07:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:17 AM ----------

Illustration:

Arminianism:
Man is at the bottom of a pit and cannot get out. God is outside the pit and throws a rope down to the man. The man holds on to the rope and God pulls him out.

Calvinism:
Man is at the bottom of a pit, dead. God sees the man, has compassion on him, and climbs down into the pit. God climbs the rope, puts the lifeless body over His shoulder, and carries the dead man out of the pit. Then, God then breaths life into him.

---------- Post added at 07:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:25 AM ----------

Arminianism= There remains in man an island to vestigial righteousness that remains after the Fall that allows him to savingly believe. This allows man to seek God, if man so chooses.

Calvinism= The Fall affected every aspect of man's being- mind, soul, and body such that God must first change the constituent nature of a human being in order for him to be saved. This means man, does not, by nature seek God. This means God must first choose to seek man.

---------- Post added at 07:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:35 AM ----------

There is no better Scriptural basis I'm aware of for the doctrines of grace ("five points," "Calvinism") than the Westminster Confession of Faith with Scripture Proofs.

Studying through those statements and/or propositions of doctrine with regard to salvation, redemption is worth the time of teaching through it thoroughly, with the Scripture proofs.

Redemption as a process of election, inner calling, regeneration, justification, adoption, and sanctification.

We could spare much heresy and error in this world if only a little time was taken to thoroughly go over this with all men, trusting God for the results.

 

[CharlieJ]

If you're looking for lists of proof texts, you can pick from Nathan Pitchford's collection. DOCTRINES OF GRACE ? CATEGORIZED SCRIPTURE LIST

 

[Whitefield]

When discussing inability with an Arminian (especially a Wesleyan Arminian) be prepared to answer an appeal to prevenient grace. See here.

 

[Notthemama1984]

Man is at the bottom of a pit and cannot get out. God is outside the pit and throws a rope down to the man. The man holds on to the rope and God pulls him out.

I know that this is not completely Arminian, but I have had "Arminian" preachers add to your illustration, "man recognizes his peril in the pit. He tries to get out on his own, but can't. Man then cries out for help. God hears and throws down the rope......."

These preachers have man making the first move. It might be something to add to your illustration. Arminianism might be properly defined as X, but that does not mean that alot of people define it as XY.

 

[Scott1]

Man is at the bottom of a pit and cannot get out. God is outside the pit and throws a rope down to the man. The man holds on to the rope and God pulls him out.

I know that this is not completely Arminian, but I have had "Arminian" preachers add to your illustration, "man recognizes his peril in the pit. He tries to get out on his own, but can't. Man then cries out for help. God hears and throws down the rope......."

These preachers have man making the first move. It might be something to add to your illustration. Arminianism might be properly defined as X, but that does not mean that alot of people define it as XY.

Yes, generally, Arminianism (especially when challenged by "Calvinism" ) will say that man recognizes he cannot get out of the pit (that is implicit in the illustration, though). And also that man holds on "tight" to the rope (implying man must choose to hold on to it, sometimes emphasizing man must "hold on very tightly to the rope, as if his life depended on it").

These ideas are very emotionally appealing to fallen creatures, because they allow man some part in his getting saved.

Sometimes, the public presentation, completely misunderstanding the biblical doctrines will set up a scale with Arminianism on one side, Calvinism on the other. Illogically, and unbiblically arguing that the more one believes in "God's free will" the closer to Calvinism, maybe 75%.
If closer to man's free will, maybe 45%.

The difficulty with that reasoning begins with... sovereignty is not relative.

If God does has free will that is limited in any way by His creation, He is not sovereign.

And if God is not sovereign....

God is not God.

Believing that is not uniquely "Calvinist."

It's not even uniquely Christian.

Even other religions often believe their god is sovereign.



But according to Scripture, man is dead, not merely injured, disabled, or incomplete, in his sin.

Arminianism will also (often implicitly, because it does not have a thoroughgoing biblical theology) redefine "grace." Arminianism will say on one hand it is a free gift of God, on the other though, that man is entitled to it, if only he wants it, and will perhaps add, does a few things (like "make a decision" to follow God) in order to get it.

But Ephesians 2:6-7 tells us the faith itself to get it is a gift.

It's also interesting that Arminianism logically says that man can go back in the hole if he rejects God and really wants to. Here, many will depart from that logical conclusion (imagining themselves to be something like "three point" Calvinists), and say that man does not have free will to go back in the pit.

The doctrines of grace are biblically consistent on this point-
As salvation is not ours to grant, neither is it ours to lose.

This is very difficult for creatures which are, by nature, self centered.

Thank God for His grace so our eyes are opened and we can see around that!

 

[Marrow Man]

A while back I posted a one-page chart on my blog, here: Arminianism v. Calvinism « Gairney Bridge

The chart, in part, is adapted from Steele and Thomas' The Five Points of Calvinism. It is meant only to be a simply side-by-side comparison for those who might be unfamiliar with the differences in the systems, although I originally designed it for an undergrad systematic theology class (at a non-Reformed school).

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

There is no better Scriptural basis I'm aware of for the doctrines of grace ("five points," "Calvinism") than the Westminster Confession of Faith with Scripture Proofs.

Studying through those statements and/or propositions of doctrine with regard to salvation, redemption is worth the time of teaching through it thoroughly, with the Scripture proofs.

Redemption as a process of election, inner calling, regeneration, justification, adoption, and sanctification.

We could spare much heresy and error in this world if only a little time was taken to thoroughly go over this with all men, trusting God for the results.

True enough. To get the conversation started, I usually proceed as follows:

To me, the matter of the understanding the doctrines of grace begins with our human inability, for example, see John 6:44, 65; Romans 8:7-8; 1 Corinthians 12:3; 1 Cor 4:7. If unsaved man is unable to turn of himself to God, because of this spiritual inability, then divine election must be unconditionally dependent upon solely the sovereign good pleasure of God since man is unable to respond of himself favorable to God. Now if election is unconditional then redemption, since not all are re-born, must necessarily be particular for those who are elected unconditionally. And if redemption is particular, that is, for the elect, and if the elect are unable to come to God of themselves, then the grace that brings them to Christ must be effectual. Finally, if the grace that brings the elect to Christ is effectual, and if they are elected to eternal life, then they must persevere by God's grace in that life.

AMR

 

[sastark]

In Nicene Council's film, Amazing Grace/History of Calvinism there is a "skit" where a man walks into a graveyard full of tombstones. He sets up a table. He has a sign saying he is offering salvation "for free". He waits and waits, but no one approaches the table.

Contrast this with Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead, and you have an illustration of Calvinism to go along with this great illustration of Arminianism.

 

[Iconoclast]

Maybe as time permits, you can glean some simple ideas from this explanation.
Lectures on Calvinism and Arminianism (522 pages) Dr. W. R. Downing Free
Literature - Sovereign Grace Baptist Church of Silicon Valley

Just scroll down

 

[cih1355]

According to Arminianism, God has given everyone enough ability so that they can come to Christ without being guaranteed by God to believe in Christ. According to this view, God makes it possible for you to believe in Christ; He does not guarantee that you will come to Christ. Imagine Jesus saying to Lazarus, "Do you want to come forth, Lazarus? God has made it possible for you to come forth."

 

[Kevin]

Great project brother. I am encouraged to see the way that God is "leveraging" your ministry. I don't have any clever ideas, but I am praying for the project.

 

[Pergamum]

There are plenty enough explanations of Calvinism.

The purpose of the thread is how to explain these concepts to folks who are not academically trained and who have low levels of reading. Like 3rd grade level. While some of the leaders are really profound and astute, the normal church member here is not and so I want a simple and biblical explanation with many illustrations from nature that they would understand.

 

[Iconoclast]

On getting a New Heart;

A calvinist doctor performs a heart transplant from start to finish.
The arminian doctor opens up the patient, then hands the patient the scapel and says; I have done all I can, the rest of the surgery is now up to you.

 

[reformedman]

A dead fish floats down the river toward the waterfalls. The fish around it are aware of the danger and see their condition so they turn, but the dead fish can do nothing for itself, it doesn't recognize anything much less can it see it is soon to be over the waterfalls to be crushed by the rocks hundreds of feet below. The only ways that dead fish can turn physically is to be made alive. If the fish is made alive so that it can see itself in danger, it will turn and have a new desire to repent, er, I meant turn from what it now hates. It now has no desire with the natural flow that it had to blend in with what was natural for it to do, to go with the world around it, to be easy with its surroundings and be led by the waters around it. Now this fish goes against what is normal in its environment.
The earlier the fish is made alive, the easier its sanctification, er, I meant its work will be. Less friction to get to the pond where there is very little current.
But if it is made alive late in life, it has a long arduous and toilsome repentance to work for. The currents are stronger toward the end.
In the end, if the fish is Arminian, it will say that it saw the danger and decided to repent and go to the pond; God knowing his desire, then helped him in strength to turn.
In the end, if the fish is Calvinist, it will trust the evidence, that it got as far down the dangerous river against what is normal for any fish to want to do, and accept the fact that it must have been dead for it to have gotten as far down that river as it did. And that being dead it was made alive by an outside force first, before it turned.

When his travel up the river is done, a fisherman in the pond will rapture it, lol.

 

[Douglas P.]

Historical perspective is minimally important

For what it's worth it was combination of understanding Reformation history and what the Reformers were saying about faith, and what the Remonstrances were trying to return to that finally opened my eyes to the disastrous errors of Armainism.

 

[Pergamum]

Douglas, if I focus any on history I would also want to show a historic continuity all the way back to NT times (i.e. church fathers, etc). If you, therefore, have good selections from Aquinas and Augustine and the Council of Orang (?), etc, i would be glad to maybe include those in the project...but conciseness is one need for this booklet.

 

[Notthemama1984]

When his travel up the river is done, a fisherman in the pond will rapture it, lol.

 

[Rich Koster]

Demonstration:

Lay some nails and toothpicks out on the table. Hold a magnet over them.
The elect are nails. (please use traditional nails for this demo, not some aluminum or copper spikes )
The non-elect are toothpicks.
God is the magnet that draws them to Himself, through the Gospel.

 

[InSlaveryToChrist]

The indigenous church structure (denomination) here, consisting of 400,000 - 800,000 members (census data hard to get due to remotenesss) has a basically evangelical statement of faith.

The issue of Arminianism came up 2 years ago and most of the pastors in the synod meeting (representatives of the church as a whole scattered throughout the region) agreed that Calvinism was the Gospel. Some, however, wanted acceptance of Arminianism as well. Many church members know nothing of the differences. I passed out tracts prior to the meetings and have since as well.

Today, the head of the Missions Department for this large church body asked me to write a simple book, booklet, article or tract on these differences to further inform the church membership.

It needs to be simple. Concrete illustrations help. Historical perspective is minimally important but biblical data is most important. theological terms need to be simple or else explained. Pictures or illustrations would also help. The church culture and demographic is almost entirely Melanesian.

Any help would be appreciated for simple explanantions and illustrations from nature. Leopards changing spots or pigs not being able to change their own character by themselves are some concrete ways to explain the need for God to change us. Also, if you move a corpse, the body only stinks more....a good explanation of the religion of the spiritually dead.

If you have any other word-pcitures to us, please help me. I am immensely busy and need all the help I can, and want to get something out there and distributed soon since it has church backing and is on people's minds now.

The Calvinists and the Arminians alike have their own flower. The Calvinists have the tulip which God sent them as a gift and as a sign of love, whereas the Arminians have the daisy which they themselves pick up from an open plain and then begin to pick the petals off the flower one by one saying, "God loves me, God loves me not, God loves me..."

 

[Pergamum]

Finished, and am working on translating/editing/formatting now.

It turned out 30 pages, longer than I expected because I wanted to add the full Scripture proofs instead of the addresses. Having a local friend read it and test it for readability. Thanks.

 

[Scott1]

Pergamum,

Will you be able to link to the final product (maybe in a members-only forum)?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Praying for the effort.

I have personally found the most compelling (and comforting) argument for the Biblical notions we call Calvinism rest in God treating enemies as His friends. Bunyan's Pilgrims Progress has the great illustration of Great Heart (I think that was his name) storming the castle of Giant Despair wherein men were trapped. The image I often use of Christ's work among us is as the Stronger Man Who overcomes the stronghold of Sin and Death and sets men free from the dungeon into which they are chained. He does so freely and purposefully and fully. Those whom Christ sets free are free indeed.

When Christ weeps for the enslaved, it is not a sentimental weeping but a purposeful pitying that leads Him unto action. Man could not approach God for God was too holy and must judge the sin to which man enslaved himself through his rebellion. Man could not come near God and so God clothed and veiled Himself in human flesh so that He could come safely near men who could not stand to be in His presence. He set them free from all the secondary effects of the Fall (sickness, disease, social alienation) and was despised and rejected Himself. He was alienated that we might become God's friends. In His final act of humiliation, He bore fully upon Himself the eternal wrath that we deserved even as we, His enemies, would have driven the nails into His hands. Looking up upon Him as He bore the full weight of the Curse for us, our sins are judged. Rising again on the third day, we who believe arise with Him. Living an indestructible life, we who are united to Him will fully be conformed to that life and be glorified in Him.