Chats With Arminians

I battle both Arminianism and Hyper Calvinism.

Lately I have posted some blog discussions I have had with some Arminian brothers. One I published recently here in this blog.

Recently I have had another minor discussion, in the comment section, with some Arminians at http://classicalarminianism.blogspot.com/

I had said, in response to their saying that Calvinists all believe that regeneration precedes faith, these words:

"It is false to think that Calvinists all believe that regeneration precedes and produces faith. These are the Hyper Calvinists. Traditional Calvinism, at least among the Baptists, have held to the view that regeneration includes faith and repentance."


One respondent said:

"Whether or not YOU believe that regeneration precedes faith is one matter, but IT IS a primary tenet of Calvinism, so says R. C. Sproul and James White. Perhaps you define things a bit different than the typical Calvinist. But Sproul, White, MacArthur, Piper, etc. ALL agree that a person would never have faith in Christ without first being regenerated. So, you must be a modified Calvinist."

I then responded with these words:

"James White does hold the view called "reformed" that has regeneration prior to faith. So does Sproul and many of the Presbyterians. But, this is not the traditional view of the Baptists or leading Presbyterians as Edwards. Why not cite Baptists other than Piper and White? Spurgeon did not believe in regeneration before faith and he was a five point Calvinist. The great Baptist confessions do not put regeneration before faith. You brothers have listened to White and Sproul too much. Piper is inconsistent on this point, however. He has statements that reflect that regeneration precedes faith and statements that it comes simultaneous with faith."

Another discussion point concerned the work of "conviction of sin," a thing that Arminians and many Calvinists (those who are not "hyper")believe precede regeneration or the new birth. I had brought up the issue of "conviction" in response to things said by Arminians against the doctrine of "irresistable grace" and in favor of their "free will" theology.

I have pointed out an inconsistency in the Arminian free will scheme as it relates to being "regenerated" or "born again." I showed how no Arminian (yet) has ever taken the position that the work of the Spirit in "convicting" of sin was a work that could only be done in conjunction with the "free will decision" of the sinner. They all admit that this pre-regeneration work of the Spirit is "irresistable." The Spirit convicts, and does not ask the sinner for permission to do this work. He does not come to the sinner and give him a choice whether he wants to be convicted or not. They all believe that this pre-regeneration work of the Spirit is done irresistably and without the consent or free will decision of the sinner!

My point then is simply this:

If one can be "convicted" irresistably, why can one not be "regenerated" the same way?

Another discussion ensured relative to I Cor. 4: 7.

I believe this verse by itself destroys Arminianism. I have never brought this passage up in discussions with Arminians without seeing them on the proverbial "hot seat." Those at the above website have thought that I paid no attention to the context in saying what I have said about God being the one who "makes the difference" in each sinner, answering the question why one believes and one does not. These Arminian brothers think that I go against the context in my interpretation. But, I don't think so.

James said "every good and perfect gift is from above," from God. (James 1: 17). Thus, everything a man receives is owing to God alone. (See also John 3: 20) So, the fact that one receives faith, repentance, and salvation, is owing to the Lord, and not to the sinner, fundamentally speaking.

Finally, here is the final comment I left this morning.

"Brothers:

James White does hold the view called "reformed" that has regeneration prior to faith. So does Sproul and many of the Presbyterians. But, this is not the traditional view of the Baptists or leading Presbyterians as Edwards. Why not cite Baptists other than Piper and White?

Spurgeon did not believe in regeneration before faith and he was a five point Calvinist. The great Baptist confessions do not put regeneration before faith.

You brothers have listened to White and Sproul too much. Piper is inconsistent on this point, however. He has statements that reflect that regeneration precedes faith and statements that it comes simultaneous with faith.

I think you all have admitted that many sinners have been brought under conviction of sin by the gospel and by the Spirit and who had this work performed on them without their choice.

As far as the Spirit convicting the world of sin, this is done through the gospel, is it not? If so, we cannot make "world" mean every human being, for every human being has not heard the gospel.

Notice also that the Spirit convicts the world without the world's decision to be convicted.

I don't believe all who are convicted are born again. Do you?"