andyc
New member
Let's have a look at how the madists embrace TULIP while in denial.
Once people accept any of the first four points of Calvin (as people call it), the rest follow as a necessity. When the MADists acknowledge that they are not saved through their own faith, they've already embraced 'unconditional election', and therefore the rest must follow as a consequence.
Galatians 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ
Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God
If people are saved by, and live by the faith of Christ, the ability to believe was gifted. What's the basis for God doing the choosing?
Total Depravity
It is the teaching that, as a consequence of the Fall of Man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin and, apart from the efficacious or prevenient grace of God, is utterly unable to choose to follow God, refrain from evil, or accept the gift of salvation as it is offered. (wikipedia)
The madists acknowledge Calvin's view of original sin. They accept that they are born in sin, and that they are incapable of accepting Christ unless they are first enabled to. They'll argue about the details, but they subscribe to total depravity without a doubt.
Unconditional Election
(God) predestinated some people for salvation, the elect, and the others he left to continue in their sins and receive the just punishment, eternal damnation, for their transgressions of God's law as outlined in the old and new Testaments of the Bible. God made these choices according to his own purposes apart from any conditions or qualities related to those persons. (wikipedia)
The MADists would fight this one to death, but they embrace it really. In a sense, you only have to look at some of the MADists posts to realize it. Many of them nastily condemn people to hell for simply disagreeing with them. Therefore if God was a MADists, only hyper dispensationalists would be the elect. If I'm condemned to hell for rejecting MAD, and unable to accept it because of my total depravity, why isn't God giving me the faith to receive it?
From a theological perspective, for some MADists the view is only very subtly different to Calvin, but for other MADists its identical. Some (OVers) would say that God didn't choose his elect from the foundation of the world, but he has chosen his elect regardless.
If God gifts faith to people, what was the reasoning / basis behind God choosing them individually? There really is no basis other than God's sovereignty (predestination). And therefore the MADists who don't subscribe to the OV, have to realize that God foresaw that he was never going to open their eyes, and so rejected them from eternity, as Calvin teaches.
Limited Atonement
The doctrine states that though the death of Jesus Christ is more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world,[1] it was the entirely free plan and very gracious will and intention of God the Father that the enlivening and saving effectiveness of Christ's death would work itself out in the elect only, thereby leading them without fail to salvation. (wikipedia)
Once again, if faith is gifted, only those who God chooses are included. The MADists would strongly deny that that Jesus didn't die for the sins of the world, but they don't really believe it. If man is incapable of accepting Christ, then without the gift of faith the benefits of the atonement are completely useless to those who are incapable of believing for it. The MADists are probably spitting blood over this, but that is the consequence of them not thinking their doctrines through properly.
Irresistible Grace
Irresistible Grace (or efficacious grace) is a doctrine in Christian theology particularly associated with Calvinism, which teaches that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (the elect) and, in God's timing, overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to faith in Christ. (wikipedia)
Madists would say that God doesn't force himself on anyone, but if faith is gifted, when is it the right time for God to enlighten someone?
Madists believe that once a person receives the gift of Christ's faith, they are eternally held by Christ's faith. And so, once again, what is the basis for God choosing to justify a person through the faith of Christ? What makes the person receivable?
They might say, to mentally perceive that the gospel is true, but how can God acknowledge mental perception from a mind that is depraved?
God enlightens the person giving them an ability to believe? But from their perspective, at this point they would now already be saved, and so this would make grace irresistible because faith was irresistible.
Perseverance
For the MADists, OSAS is all about personal assurance. This is exactly the same for Calvinists. The believer will persevere, not must persevere.
However, if a Calvinist who claimed to be a believer renounced their faith, the other Calvinists would not accept that that person's faith was genuine. The MADists would say the same thing about their own as well.
The thinking MADist will now have to reevaluate what it means to be saved by Christ's faith, or accept that they are closet Calvinists.
Once people accept any of the first four points of Calvin (as people call it), the rest follow as a necessity. When the MADists acknowledge that they are not saved through their own faith, they've already embraced 'unconditional election', and therefore the rest must follow as a consequence.
Galatians 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ
Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God
If people are saved by, and live by the faith of Christ, the ability to believe was gifted. What's the basis for God doing the choosing?
Total Depravity
It is the teaching that, as a consequence of the Fall of Man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin and, apart from the efficacious or prevenient grace of God, is utterly unable to choose to follow God, refrain from evil, or accept the gift of salvation as it is offered. (wikipedia)
The madists acknowledge Calvin's view of original sin. They accept that they are born in sin, and that they are incapable of accepting Christ unless they are first enabled to. They'll argue about the details, but they subscribe to total depravity without a doubt.
Unconditional Election
(God) predestinated some people for salvation, the elect, and the others he left to continue in their sins and receive the just punishment, eternal damnation, for their transgressions of God's law as outlined in the old and new Testaments of the Bible. God made these choices according to his own purposes apart from any conditions or qualities related to those persons. (wikipedia)
The MADists would fight this one to death, but they embrace it really. In a sense, you only have to look at some of the MADists posts to realize it. Many of them nastily condemn people to hell for simply disagreeing with them. Therefore if God was a MADists, only hyper dispensationalists would be the elect. If I'm condemned to hell for rejecting MAD, and unable to accept it because of my total depravity, why isn't God giving me the faith to receive it?
From a theological perspective, for some MADists the view is only very subtly different to Calvin, but for other MADists its identical. Some (OVers) would say that God didn't choose his elect from the foundation of the world, but he has chosen his elect regardless.
If God gifts faith to people, what was the reasoning / basis behind God choosing them individually? There really is no basis other than God's sovereignty (predestination). And therefore the MADists who don't subscribe to the OV, have to realize that God foresaw that he was never going to open their eyes, and so rejected them from eternity, as Calvin teaches.
Limited Atonement
The doctrine states that though the death of Jesus Christ is more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world,[1] it was the entirely free plan and very gracious will and intention of God the Father that the enlivening and saving effectiveness of Christ's death would work itself out in the elect only, thereby leading them without fail to salvation. (wikipedia)
Once again, if faith is gifted, only those who God chooses are included. The MADists would strongly deny that that Jesus didn't die for the sins of the world, but they don't really believe it. If man is incapable of accepting Christ, then without the gift of faith the benefits of the atonement are completely useless to those who are incapable of believing for it. The MADists are probably spitting blood over this, but that is the consequence of them not thinking their doctrines through properly.
Irresistible Grace
Irresistible Grace (or efficacious grace) is a doctrine in Christian theology particularly associated with Calvinism, which teaches that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (the elect) and, in God's timing, overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to faith in Christ. (wikipedia)
Madists would say that God doesn't force himself on anyone, but if faith is gifted, when is it the right time for God to enlighten someone?
Madists believe that once a person receives the gift of Christ's faith, they are eternally held by Christ's faith. And so, once again, what is the basis for God choosing to justify a person through the faith of Christ? What makes the person receivable?
They might say, to mentally perceive that the gospel is true, but how can God acknowledge mental perception from a mind that is depraved?
God enlightens the person giving them an ability to believe? But from their perspective, at this point they would now already be saved, and so this would make grace irresistible because faith was irresistible.
Perseverance
For the MADists, OSAS is all about personal assurance. This is exactly the same for Calvinists. The believer will persevere, not must persevere.
However, if a Calvinist who claimed to be a believer renounced their faith, the other Calvinists would not accept that that person's faith was genuine. The MADists would say the same thing about their own as well.
The thinking MADist will now have to reevaluate what it means to be saved by Christ's faith, or accept that they are closet Calvinists.
