# Help Revising Calvinism Chart



## Marrow Man (Aug 10, 2009)

I have to teach a unite on soteriology tomorrow evening (to non-Reformed folk), and part of it will include comparing/contrasting the 5 points of Calvinism with the 5 points of Arminianism. The textbook being used explains these, but doesn't do a particularly great job, especially since the author simply presents both views and then distances himself by declaring he is neither, all the while making classical Arminian arguments. 

I thought it would be helpful if I presented a handout of a Calvinism/Arminian chart. There is one available online here, but I thought I might carefully revise part of the church, perhaps clarifying some of the language where there might be problems or misunderstandings. I would like the input of PBers here as well.

For example, the box on Unconditional Election reads:



> God chose the elect solely on the
> basis of His free grace, not anything
> in them. He has a special love for the
> elect. God left the rest to be damned
> for their sins.



For the last statement, I thought about revising it to say, "God passes over the rest, to be justly condemned for their sins."

The box on Conditional Election reads:



> God chose the elect on the basis of
> their foreseen faith. He loves all men
> equally. God passed over no one, but
> gives everyone an equal chance to be
> saved.



The last statement should probably read (the Missus suggested this), "God _passes_ over no one ... "

Any thoughts?


----------



## Zenas (Aug 10, 2009)

Unconditional Election:

God chose the elect on the basis of His own will alone, not because of anything good foreseen in them, to be covered by the atonement of His Son who suffered His wrath on their behalf. He has deemed that those he has not elected to salvation will be punished justly; taking their own punishment on their own head for their rebellion against Him.

Conditional Election:

God foresaw that some would believe in Him and elected those whom He knew would have faith. Those who do not have faith are not elected but everyone has an equal "chance" to believe.


----------



## rbcbob (Aug 10, 2009)

*5 Points*

Tim,

Steele and Thomas does a nice job of setting _side-by-side_ the five points of the Remonstrance and the five counter-points of the Synod of Dort.


----------



## Zenas (Aug 10, 2009)




----------



## Zenas (Aug 10, 2009)

Milk to babes sir.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Aug 10, 2009)

Marrow Man said:


> I have to teach a unite on soteriology tomorrow evening (to non-Reformed folk), and part of it will include comparing/contrasting the 5 points of Calvinism with the 5 points of Arminianism. The textbook being used explains these, but doesn't do a particularly great job, especially since the author simply presents both views and then distances himself by declaring he is neither, all the while making classical Arminian arguments.
> 
> I thought it would be helpful if I presented a handout of a Calvinism/Arminian chart. There is one available online here, but I thought I might carefully revise part of the church, perhaps clarifying some of the language where there might be problems or misunderstandings. I would like the input of PBers here as well.
> 
> ...


How about this:

"God chose the elect solely on the basis of His free grace, not anything that He foresaw in them. God would only have foreseen rebellion apart from the special love for the elect. The rest were passed over to be justly condemned for Sin and for their hatred and rebellion of God."



> The box on Conditional Election reads:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



"God chose the elect on the basis of their foreseen faith. God loves all men equally and wills to enable all equally, by His grace, to respond. Each man cooperates with grace offered. God foresaw each choice in eternity past, which decision is the basis for God's election."


----------



## Rich Koster (Aug 10, 2009)

Comparison of Calvinism and Arminianism

I've used this before.


----------



## Marrow Man (Aug 10, 2009)

Thanks, everyone. Yes, I've read/have the Steele and Thomas book (in fact, that book helped make the Missus Reformed ten years or so ago!). The 10th Pres chart is a bit more succinct, but the S/T chart is more specific, and your suggestions are very helpful.

One thing I will definitely do in revising -- placing the columns of the chart in the same order as do S/T. Armianism comes _first _(historically), because those were voiced first, and the Calvinism column is second because is Dort's response to the Arminianism of the Remonstrants.


----------



## Marrow Man (Aug 10, 2009)

Based upon the original link, the link posted by Rich K., and the other comments posted here, I have constructed a chart and have a link posted here at my blog. I would appreciate any further critiques you may have.


----------



## ewenlin (Aug 10, 2009)

Nice work Pastor Phillips! Wonder if I can borrow this as a reference for my sunday school class?


----------



## Marrow Man (Aug 10, 2009)

ewenlin said:


> Nice work Pastor Phillips! Wonder if I can borrow this as a reference for my sunday school class?



Feel free to use as you like! All I did was synthesize and summarize what others before me have done.


----------

