Alright, we're beginning a new series today, a short series, about eight weeks on Calvinism and Arminianism. I'm really looking forward to this, and this is gonna be interactive. There's gonna be some interactive portions, and there's gonna be some group table portions, and there's gonna be some sort of traditional lecture portions. So what I want you to do is I've given you a handout. Everyone needs a handout. I'm gonna divide you up in tables, and what I want you to do is individually, so individually, I want you to go through the first few pages of the handout where you see Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, Exhibit D, and Exhibit E. And this is what I want you to do as an individual. Without any helps, Google, your internet, or anything else, without any helps, I want you to identify which of the statements are Calvinistic and which of the statements are Arminian. All right, so you have Exhibit A, Article 3, that's sort of one statement of faith, and then you have Exhibit B, and in Exhibit B, you have two sections. That's all one statement of faith, even though it's two sections. So you're identifying which statements are Calvinistic, and which statements are Arminian. Now, this is what I want you to do. I'm gonna divide up the tables here, and I want you to go through this for five minutes by yourself. All right, and then I'll explain what we're gonna do after that, all right? So, question. I don't know what Armenian is. Okay, all right, that's okay. All right, just read the statements, and it will start getting you engaged, and we're gonna talk about what that is, okay? So just read the handout, and it'll start getting you familiar with what we're doing. So these two tables over here, you take Exhibit A, Once you're done, move on to the next. You guys start with exhibit B, these two tables. Go to C, D, E, and then back to A. You two tables start with C and go D, E, A, B. You guys start with D and then go E, A, B, C. You guys, you two tables, start with E and then go back to A, B, C, D. Now remember, by yourself for five minutes, okay? Go! All right, five minutes is up. Now what I want you to do is in your tables, just in your tables, discuss what you came up with with one another, okay? So go back to the one you started with. So you started with A, you guys B, C, D, and E. All right, so for five minutes, in your tables, discuss what you found and what you came up with. All right, let's bring it back together now as a large group, and let's go through what we discovered. So what we're gonna do is walk through this. All right, so you guys, you first two tables over here, you guys started with letter A, so you were able to get that one done, I hope. What was your consensus on this statement? Calvinistic, okay? All right, the answer is it's an Arminian statement of faith. Letter A is Arminian. It's actually the five, it's from the five statements of the remonstrance back in 1610 that the Reformed churches responded to, which we're gonna get to in the next few classes. All right, letter B, exhibit B, what did you guys think? Calvinistic or Arminian? So maybe this table and then you guys in the, you guys. We were mixed. You're mixed, okay. Until it got to and working with us. It's Calvin until we got to the last sentence and working with us. All right, so then you think it's Arminian because of that last phrase. Not sure, what about you guys? Alright, here's the answer. The answer is Arminian. So this is from, you can write this down if you want, this is from the 1784 Methodist Articles of Religion that John Wesley drew up. And what John Wesley did is he took the 39 Articles of Religion from the Anglican Church in England and he removed all of the Calvinism out of it and came up with this Statement of Faith. Alright? Letter C, so this table and then you guys. So you guys right here, Calvinistic or Arminian? What do you think? Well, we went with Arminian. Arminian. OK. All right. What do you guys think? On that one, we read really quickly. We thought Calvinistic. Calvinistic on letter C. All right, so maybe just a word or two of why you picked Arminian and then we'll ask why you did Calvinistic. Why did you choose Arminian? We chose it because I think we just were talking about we have skewed take. We think we have this caricature of what Armenians teach that they were no theologians, and so just the words here would fit for a classic either, and so we guessed that you were putting Armenian doctrinal statements in this. Okay, so is there any... But really, the statements themselves could pretty much go either way. Okay, alright. You guys, so Calvinistic, why did you think it was Calvinistic? Well, kind of for the same reason that he just said. We looked at all of them and they seemed... The statements in and of themselves seemed to ring true. And we were reading really quickly and not absorbing every sentence. So it seemed at a quick read that I didn't see anything jump out at me that made me stop. So that's why I picked Calvin. Alright, the answer is Exhibit C is Arminian. And this is from the Free Will Baptists in the 19th century. So in the 1800s, they drafted this confession of state of faith. The Free Will Baptists. All right, letter D. So I think you guys, and I think you were by yourself on this one, or exhibit D. We thought that this was from the 1784 Methodist articles on religion. You thought exhibit D was? Yeah, D. And we think that that is Armenian. Okay, did I double up? No, but we just thought that. You just thought that. Okay. Man, I'll power to you, brother. Okay, alright, and you're correct, it is. It is from the Nazarene Church. The Nazarene Church from the 20th century. Yeah, so how it works is exhibit C is one sort of statement of faith and there are different sections in the statement of faith. So that whole thing, exhibit C is Arminian. Alright, exhibit E, so the whole thing together is the statement of faith. So you guys. So you think this statement of faith was both Calvinistic and Arminian. Is that what you're saying? Okay, so again, maybe I wasn't clear, but exhibit E is one statement of faith, .8 is .8 of the statement of faith, and .11 is .11 of the statement of faith. There are different sections in the statement of faith. But the whole thing is one statement of faith. So you would think that it would be even the same. So you guys failed, let's move on to this table. All right, you guys back there. All right. All right. All right. You're very wise, Lindsay. Very wise. Yes, it is Armenian. This is actually from the Wesleyan church. It's their current statement of faith. So if you were to attend a Wesleyan church, most likely, if it was part of the Wesleyan denomination, they would have these sections, this part of this statement of faith, as the statement of faith. All right. Very good. So I tricked you to make a point. If you flip over your sheet, you're going to see you have a blank sheet for notes. And what I'm going to do now is I'm going to talk for about 15 minutes. While I'm talking, please write down any notes that you want in this section. What I'm going to do is at the very end of our series, is I'm gonna give you a manuscript of all of the lectures that I teach. So there'll be different lengths each time. So you'll have the actual words I say. These are also gonna be recorded. Next week I'm gonna have PowerPoint, I wanna have PowerPoint. So that's how we're gonna work. So each class you'll receive a packet, and then at the end you'll receive sort of all of the lectures, okay? So. Let me talk for a few minutes and tell you why I tricked you. The reason I tricked you, or you were tricked, is because when we talk about Calvinism and Arminianism, there are so many misrepresentations and misunderstandings. I mean, they abound. Even in our church where we, Where we consider ourselves good theologians, good Bible-believing church, even we have a hard time recognizing the difference between a Calvinistic statement of faith and an Arminian statement of faith. Now, I admit, I tricked you a little bit in that. But our church, if you don't know, our church, we stand in what we could call a Calvinistic tradition. That's our tradition, that's sort of where our roots are as a church. And as such, because that's who we are, because we are Calvinists, most of us are, most of us think we are, Because that's true, there's a tendency that we have to misrepresent the other side. It's so easy to do that. For example, let me give you an example. I've heard very often, and maybe you have too, that people will say that Arminianism is Pelagianism or it's Semi-Pelagianism. Now if you don't know what Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagian, if you don't know those terms, don't worry about it. Don't worry about it. My point is, is that Arminianism is not Pelagianism and it's not Semi-Pelagianism. It's Arminianism. But yet people misrepresent Arminianism, say that it is Pelagianism or it's Semi-Pelagian. It's not. On the other hand, on the other side of the aisle, Our Arminian brothers and sisters will say, and I've heard this said, I can document this, that the god of Calvinism is a monster because he elects and he damns who he wills haphazardly. That's what they say. Now, if you are thinking here, you know that that is a caricature, caricature, caricature. Yeah, caricature, yeah, I can't say that word. Not a character, they are being a character, but caricature. It's a misrepresentation. Right? God is a monster. That's not what Calvinists believe about God. So Armenians are misrepresenting Calvinism, Calvinists, when they say that. So I'm doing this series because I want you brothers and sisters, I want you to know what Calvinism teaches, what Arminianism teaches, so you can understand and so that you know what they teach, so that you don't misrepresent the other side, wherever you happen to land. And it's okay to be an Arminian in our church, we will have you. Right? This we teach from a Calvinistic point of view, that's where our church lands. But if you are an Arminian, we will accept you into our congregation, because we believe Arminians are Christians. They believe the Bible. But we believe that they're wrong in certain areas. So that's why I'm doing this, so that you can understand, so that you won't misrepresent the other side. So here's the question that I have that I wanna explore today in just our brief time that we have. And that is, how do we remove, how do we remove these misunderstandings and these misrepresentations? That if you were to, after the class today, oh, I've never heard of Calvinism, I've never heard of Arminianism, and you were to go on the internet and you were to type in Google Calvinism or Minionism, you would get a whole slew of misrepresentations. It would be mind-blowing to you. So how can we not fall prey to that? How can we not fall into that? Well, here is my answer for us. History. The answer is history. Going back into history is massively important. It's not only helpful to understand what the issues are, It's helpful so that we don't misrepresent the other side. In fact, we cannot, my contention is that we cannot talk about these topics. We often do, but we cannot talk about Calvinism and Arminianism without talking about history. But many Christians do this very same thing. They do this. They talk about these topics without divorcing it from history. Let me give you an analogy of what I mean. Let's say someone comes to GCBC, a couple comes to GCBC, a first time visiting. And we get to talking, I meet them in the foyer, the narthex, and we get to talking and I find out that they're having marriage problems. They're coming to church, they wanna get help. They find out, hey, Pastor Dan, he's a biblical counselor, and they ask me on the spot, hey, will you do counseling for us? And I say, yeah, I'd love to, I'd be glad to. And as soon as I say I'm glad to, I immediately start to tell them where they're wrong and what they need to fix. Now that would be ludicrous because I have no idea who these people are. I do not know their background. I do not know their history. So I can't offer help to them. It's the same thing with Calvinism and Arminianism. We do the same thing. We jump into the topic without knowing the history. and so we can't therefore offer, I would say, very much help. In fact, I once heard a pastor, and I can document this to you, I don't know that I want to, and my purpose here is not throwing this pastor under the bus by any means, and I'm not even gonna give his name because I don't wanna do that, but I heard a pastor once say this. He said, quote, I don't care what Calvin says. I don't care what Arminius says. I only care what the Bible says. Now, this sounds really good on the surface, but if you dig a little deeper, It is deceptively wrong. And here's why. Here's why it's wrong. I do not doubt the intentions of this pastor. I believe his intentions are for his people and his congregation to base their beliefs, to derive their theology on the Word of God alone. Listen to me as I say this. We should derive our theology, what we believe about Calvinism and Arminianism, on the Bible alone. We should. It's called sola scriptura. That's what we do as Protestants. But, but, what this pastor was really saying is this. He was saying, don't investigate and believe what Calvin wrote about the Bible. Don't investigate and believe what Arminius wrote about the Bible. Only believe what I say about the Bible. That's what the pastor was saying. If you go deeper under the surface, you see this pastor, what he was doing was he was being a historical. He was distancing himself from history and in the process, claiming himself to have the answers. to these topics of Calvinism and Arminianism. But listen, brothers and sisters, here's my point today. Christianity does not allow for this pastor's approach. Do you hear what I'm saying? We have 2,000 years of history that we cannot ignore. We cannot ignore it. We must inherently deal with the past. Not because it's just what we do, but because Christianity is a historical faith. And the Spirit of God, the living Spirit of God has been speaking to men and women for 2,000 years of church history. It's why our famous and most favorite historical preacher, Charles Spurgeon, once said, this is what he said. Spurgeon said, quote, I find it strange that so many men talk about what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves with little respect or thought for what the Holy Spirit reveals to others. And so when a pastor, like I just said, Again, he has good intentions, right? But when he says unhelpful things like, I don't care what Calvin or Arminius says, it translates into people saying a common objection, which I often hear, I will hear people say this, I am not a Calvinist, I am not an Arminian, I just believe the Bible. But, again, this statement, while the intentions are noble, is unhelpful and even can be detrimental. Why? Let me give you three reasons why. Number one, both Calvinists and Arminians, both of them only care what the Bible says. That's what Protestantism is. So saying I just believe the Bible doesn't really help. Doesn't really tell you where you land in the issue of Calvinism and Arminianism. Number two, saying I just believe the Bible can be detrimental because I just believe the Bible doesn't tell anyone, I actually just said this, it doesn't tell anyone what you believe about the Bible. It's like churches, have you ever heard a church say, sometimes you will hear a church say, we have no creed around here but Christ. You ever heard that? No creed but Christ. Churches will say that, but the question is, is what does the Bible say about Christ? Right? That's the question. What does the Bible say about Christ? No creed but Christ. Well, what does it say about Christ? And as soon as you ask someone that, they go to a church, the church says no creed but Christ, you ask them, well, okay, what do you believe about Jesus Christ? And they say, I believe Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man in one person, and he will be so forever. As soon as they say that, if you know your history, you know that they are embracing Chalcedonian Christology. And Chalcedonian Christology is a label, just like Calvinism and Arminianism. And these labels mean something in the historical context. Third reason why saying, I just believe the Bible can be unhelpful and even detrimental, is because it is divorced from 2000 years of historical articulation on the interpretation of what the Bible says. what our brothers and sisters have believed the Bible to say. We can't divorce ourselves from the past. So my contention this morning is that you must take a position on the issues surrounding Calvinism and Arminianism. In fact, I would say you do take a position. You have a position on Calvinism and Arminianism. You may not be able to articulate what it is, You may not be able to identify sort of what stream of history you're coming from, but you have a position. And let me show you, I know that's the case. If I were to ask you, do you believe in election? I'm sure most of you here today would say, yes, of course. I believe in election. I believe that God elects people. It's clear, it's in the Bible all over the place. Now, if I were to ask you a further question, and that is, okay, you believe in election, what is the basis for election? What's the basis for your election? And you were to tell me, it's God's choice. Or you were to say, it's something else. Or it's a mixture of God's choice and something else. you would be taking a position and you would use scripture to defend it. I hope you would use scripture to defend that position. My point is, is that you already are taking a position on election and election falls under the rubric of Calvinism and Arminianism. That doctrine falls under that rubric. Brothers and sisters, there are many people today articulating beliefs about salvation, about election, about sin, about how we're converted to Christ, and related doctrines that are at the heart of Calvinism and Arminianism. Many people today are articulating positions, but the question is, are they historically informed or not? Many are not. For example, let me give you an example of what I mean, that many are not historically informed. One Calvinist author, his name is Edwin Palmer, I don't believe he's alive anymore. Edwin Palmer, so I can pick on him. He's written, no he's written and he can't change his mind. Edwin Palmer says that, quote, the Arminian, the Arminian believes that man is sick in sins and trespasses, and the Calvinist believes that man is dead in sins and trespasses. You ever heard that? He's wrong. Listen to Arminius himself. Arminius said, quote, Man is not capable of and by himself either to think to will or to do that which is really good. But it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed in his intellect, affections or will, and in all his powers by God and through Christ, by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit. That sure sounds to me like Arminius believed that man is dead in sins. And he did believe that. Similarly, on the other side, right? Again, ways in which people are articulating beliefs that aren't historically formed. There is an Arminian named Roger Olson. He still exists. He's a brother in Christ. He is a confessional Arminian. He's written a couple books about it. If you wanna know what Arminianism teaches, I would read Roger Olson's books. He says that the Calvinistic view of God makes God the author of sin. Yet, no Calvinist makes this assertion, for the canons of Dort explicitly say that, quote, the cause of blame, the cause or blame for unbelief, as well as for all other sins, is not at all in God. God's not to blame for sin, but in man. So here's where we're going with this series. First, next time what I wanna do when we're together next week is we're gonna give a historical sketch. We're gonna take one week to sort of paint a historical picture of the issues surrounding Calvinism and Arminianism. You've gotta understand the history of why this debate arose in the 17th century so you can understand the theology that was coming out of this debate. And far from being unimportant or uninteresting, I find this history utterly fascinating. It's so fascinating to me, and we can learn a lot from what is happening in the 17th century during this time, and it's really needful to understand these issues. And then second, after we set the stage next week, the following weeks, what we're gonna do is we're gonna walk through the main issues at stake in Calvinism and Arminianism. So you can understand if you don't know what the issues are. What I wanna do is I wanna give you understanding so you know the issues and you can misrepresent each side fairly wherever you land. Of course, I'm gonna argue for the Calvinist position. And you can argue for the Arminian position, I'm fine with that, but let's go back to the scriptures, right? and make sure we're being historically fair and accurate. So we're gonna take one issue, one by one, and my goal is that you would be able to articulate each side fairly, knowing what you believe and why you believe it. All right, so what I wanna do in the remainder of our time, we've got about seven minutes. Oh, by the way, after each lecture, I want you to have a main takeaway, and here's the main idea. So write this down in your notes if you want to, or maybe you just got it from me talking. The main idea today is that history is important and necessary for the contemporary discussions of Calvinism and Arminianism. That's kind of the main point that I wanted to get across today. I hope that was came across in the last 15 minutes. All right, flip over to the next sheet. You have there where it says homework. I'm going to give you homework. So I want you to take this home and discuss it. I want us to be discussing these issues at home, in our conversations with people, to be talking about these issues, so we are, so, because we'll learn better that way. We'll learn, we'll get more out of it that way. So let's take five minutes now, in the last five minutes, go through these questions as a table, all right? So, start going through these, and try to get through as many as you can, and I'll dismiss us at the appropriate time, all right? Yeah, question? I just have a question. So, are you suggesting or should we understand that Calvinism and Arminianism are the only two choices? We'll get to that. That's a good question, we'll get to that. Good question. Don't want to steal my thunder for next time. All right. All right. That's fine. If you don't know the answers, that's fine. Just talk amongst your group. I think that would be helpful. All right. So talk amongst your group. Yeah.