Arminianismo Vs Calvinismo Pdf

카테고리 없음

by daedectimis1975 2020. 2. 29. 12:51

In the Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate, which side is correct?Calvinism and Arminianism are two attempts to explain how the sovereignty of God works with mankind's free will/responsibility in the area of salvation. The quest is noble, but ultimately doomed, as God is so much bigger and wider than we could possibly imagine, and there is no way we could possibly understand exactly how He works. The difference between Calvinism and Arminianism hinges on how much responsibility we have for our own salvation as opposed to God's ultimate sovereignty.

Arminians and Calvinists are definitively split on three key areas and moderately split on two others.Calvinists conveniently separated their theology into a 5-point acrostic: TULIP. They differ with the Arminians completely in the 'ULI' of the acronym: Unconditional election, Limited atonement, and Irresistible grace. Calvinists believe that God alone chooses who will be saved by His sovereign choice.

We are born dead in our sins, unable to respond to the grace of God. Therefore, God's predestination of who will be saved is in no way dependent on our reaction to God's grace. Arminians believe that God chooses who will be saved based on His foreknowledge of who will choose Him. The 'L' stands for Limited atonement. Calvinists believe Jesus' sacrifice was only to cover the sins of those who were predestined to be saved; Arminians believe Christ died for every sin of everyone in the world.

This is the only way anyone could be free to choose God. The 'I' is related.

Calvinists believe in 'Irresistible grace.' God chooses those who will be saved, and the individual has no choice—they cannot 'resist' God's grace. Arminians believe that God's offer can be resisted/rejected.Arminians are less consolidated with the 'T' and the 'P.' Calvinists believe in Total depravity, that is, we are born completely dead in our sins and are unable to save ourselves.

Some Arminians agree, while others believe we cannot be completely depraved if we are able to choose salvation. The 'P' stands for Preservation of the saints. Calvinists and many Arminians believe 'once saved, always saved.' Because the saving work is done by God alone, believers cannot lose their salvation.

Some Arminians, however, believe that mankind has so much influence in their own salvation that their actions can cause God to revoke it. They believe we must continually reject sin and live a godly life in order to maintain our position with God.So, who is right?

Calvinism seems to be a more biblical system than Arminianism. The Bible makes it clear that humanity is born in total depravity (Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-18). Because of our state of sin, unconditional election is essential for our salvation (Romans 8:29-30, 9-11; Ephesians 1:4-6, 11-12). We cannot respond to God's gift in our sinful state; He has to take us unconditionally. Likewise, His offer of grace is irresistible. We can no more choose to turn it down than we can choose to accept it (John 6:37, 44, 10:16).

And if we are unable to refuse God's gift, then we are unable to return it; eternal security is absolutely biblical (John 10:27-29; Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:3-14). Limited atonement is the only point of Calvinism against which a strong, biblically-based argument can be made. Despite the fact that Bible clearly states that God predestines those He will save, the Bible suggests Christ's sacrifice covered the sins of all the world, not merely the sins of the elect (1 John 2:2; John 1:29, 3:16; 1 Timothy 2:6; 2 Peter 2:1).

Calvinists reply that while Christ's sacrifice has the power to save all, in reality it applies only to the elect. If it applied to everyone, then those in hell are paying for the same sins Christ paid for on the cross.So, while it is valuable to understand the differences between Calvinism and Arminianism, ultimately, they are both human attempts to explain divine concepts. Yes, God is absolutely sovereign over salvation. Yes, humanity is fully responsible for receiving the gift of salvation God offers. How these two truths work together is the essence of the Calvinism vs.

Arminianism debate. But, whether Calvinism or Arminianism is correct, or some compromise between Calvinism and Arminianism is correct, our responsibility remains the same.

We are to proclaim the gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ to the entire world (Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 1:8).

This debate is contending the issue of whether or not Calvinism or Arminianism is closest to the teachings of the bible. Pro represents Calvinism and Con represents Arminianism. This debate should be impossible to accept. Please show interest in the comments.Please read the rules carefully before accepting this debate as accepting this debate is accepting the rules. Also take note of the final comments following the rules.Rules:(1) Evidence should be from the Bible (Old and New Testament) as we are debating a theological issue. All theological issues should be grounded in the Bible.

The Bible is defined as the traditional protestant canon established in the London Baptist Confession of Faith. You may use any translation you desire, and you may use multiple translations in your arguments with the simple rule that you cite the translation you are using.(2) This debate is not discussing matters outside of the theological systems presented.

It is not discussing the naming of each system, or the men whom the systems have been named after. This debate is solely a matter of scripture, and all claims must be backed up with scripture.(3) No personal attacks, or any games that will reduce this debate to anything less than what it is intended to be, which is a serious debate. Please be sure to know about the position you are defending prior to the debate.(4) There are five rounds.(a) The first round is acceptance and recognition that the rules are understood and will be followed.(b) The second round will be initial arguments.(c) The third round will be rebuttals or a furthering of one's case.(d) The fourth round will be rebuttals or a furthering of one's case.(e)The fifth round consists of summaries, and conclusions.(5) All definitions will firstly be valid in accordance to orthodox biblical theological terms.

If there is any reason to define a term it will firstly be in accordance with the theological definition. If you must define a word, cite your source. All secondary definitions will be based on definitions provided by dictonary.com. CARM is a good place for theological definitions, however, I am open to suggestions.(6) This debate presupposes all orthodox teachings of Protestantism such as the trinity, deity of Christ, authority of scripture, inerrant of scripture, etc. If you have a question about something else that may be presupposed please ask in the comments.Further comments:(1) As I am debating For Calvinism, it is imperative that I notate that I am debating Calvinism in the classical sense of the word, commonly referred to as Reformed Theology.

I am not in favor of hyper-Calvinism, nor am I debating the views of hyper Calvinism.(2) This debate will likely fall into the subject of 'Free Will', which may require a follow up debate. However, as I am debating in favor of Reformed Theology, it is important to note that I am arguing for Compatibilism in terms of human will, while the classical Arminian argues for Libertarian free will. If you are Arminian and do not argue libertarian free will, please define your position in round one.(3) It is important to note that within the discussion both sides should be ready to accept that it is impossible to fully understand God, for if we could fully comprehend God, he would not be God. This is of value as the discussion of man’s will, regardless of position, brings about areas where both parties cannot provide sure answers. A plea of ignorance beyond the discussions capacity to understand God’s work should then be accepted.

Since the discussion will be fully grounded in scripture, this should be, ultimately, a non-issue. The question to be answered is which system is most biblical.(4) It is highly possible to continue this debate on each point addressed as each point could take up an entire debate. If the opponent desires to do so, let me know!Basic points of the Historical Discussion:Below are the five points of Arminianism, which were later countered by the five points of Calvinism. In accepting this debate, I assume you understand the teaching of each point. We will be specifically addressing the five points for the sake of condensing the debate into doable debate.The Five Points of Arminianism:1.

Cinco Puntos Del Calvinismo

Human Free Will2. Conditional Election3.

Universal Atonement4. Resistible Grace5. Fall from GraceThe Five Points of Calvinism:1.

Arminianismo Vs Calvinismo Pdf Free

Total Depravity2. Unconditional Election3. Limited Atonement4. Irresistible Grace5. Perseverance (or preservation) of the SaintsConclusion:I only ask that the person who ends up partaking in this challenge will take it seriously.