Calvinists ARE Passionate about Evangelism!

By Pastor Dustin S. Segers

Yes, Calvinists ARE Passionate about Evangelism!

Today, I read the following quote written by David Flick,

Are Calvinists passionate about evangelism? Or are they generally more passionate about defending a system of theology? Some say Calvinists are passionate about evangelism. Others say that Calvinists are generally more passionate about defending theological system from which they gain their name. This article will examine the question of whether or not Calvinists are more passionate about evangelism or whether they are more passionate about defending a theological system of beliefs.[1]

Next, I read the following quote from the same website as written by the esteemed Liberty University professor Dr. Ergun Caner,

I do not think of five-pointers as liberals. I will, however, state firmly: Five-point Calvinism is a VIRUS. It saps the evangelism of every church it infects.[2]

It is interesting that a brother of such intelligence would make a distinction between being passionate about doctrine and theology versus evangelism – as if there’s some supposed dichotomy between the two in the Calvinist’s understanding of the Great Commission (?). Another has named the very doctrines that are foundational to our local church’s evangelistic endeavors as a “virus”. Flick goes on to conclude in his article,

According to my not so scientific study, the passion of Calvinists is firmly rooted in the doctrinal arena. There is very little passion in the heart of a Calvinist for promoting and encouraging evangelism. To say, as John Sneed and Jon Estes have declared, that “Calvinists are passionate about evangelism” is a myth. My study indicates that Calvinists are roughly 5% passionate about evangelism and 63% passionate about doctrine. Until someone can show otherwise, I’m not believing that Calvinists are “passionate” about evangelism. The evidence is pretty clear to me.[3]

With all due respect for Dr. Caner and Mr. Flick, I have a few questions for them. I ask them the following not to be derogatory or condemning, but to say that pastors like myself need help in the type of evangelism that you will read about below:

1. Brothers, are you familiar with the great Calvinistic evangelists of history? Ligon Duncan sums it up better than I ever could:

The greatest evangelists and missionaries of Protestant era have been Calvinistic or Reformed. That is, they have embraced and preached the doctrines of grace. Whether it is Bunyan or Spurgeon, Carey or Nettleton or Whitfield or Duff or Stott, that you are talking about – the Baptist tradition, the Congregational tradition, the Anglican tradition, the Presbyterian tradition and so on – find the hall of fame evangelists and missionaries and you’ll find folks who live, breathe, teach and preach the doctrines of grace.[4]

2. Where are men like you when our church is the only Protestant church represented as we stand outside one of North Carolina’s largest abortion clinics 3 Saturday’s per month to proclaim the gospel of grace to those sin-wrecked souls? Where are my non-Calvinistic Baptist brothers when I’m preaching the gospel in an open-air fashion on the street corner of that abortion clinic compelling men and women to repent and believe in Christ for salvation lest they stand before God on judgment day with the blood of their unborn children on their own hands?

3. Where are brothers like you when I’m being physically attacked outside that selfsame clinic for preaching the gospel to an angry sinner?

4. Where are brothers like you when I reason from the Scriptures with our lost Catholic friends who are also standing in front of the abortion clinic?

5. Where are brothers like you when I call upon all unbelievers in our congregation to repent and believe the gospel lest they perish?

6. Where are brothers like you when I trust the Holy Spirit as He works effectually through the accurately taught word? Where do I fall short of the glory of gospel truth when I have the utmost confidence that God will do the work of regeneration in the hearts of unworthy sinners without emotionally manipulating them to “make a decision” for Jesus through repetitive song lyrics, lowered lighting, slanted floors, raised hands, and repeating coldly mouthed and empty “sinner’s prayers”? What could possibly be wrong with being more concerned about accurately preaching the truth (i.e., understanding doctrine rightly) rather than using anthropocentric tactics in an attempt to fill the vacuum of my doctrinal knowledge about soteriology, when such tactics tend to fill the pews with goats who want to be entertained and have their ears vigorously tickled versus producing sheep who hunger and thirst for righteousness as they come to understand that imputed righteousness through the clear proclamation of Scripture?

Brethren, it is because I am a pastor who believes the doctrines of grace that I trust our Sovereign God to perform the major spiritual heart surgery that is required to believe the gospel unto eternal life. In this I know that ultimately, the salvation of anybody is out of my hands despite my responsibility to make that message clearly known (Matt. 28:19-20). If I thought otherwise, I’d have to resort to manipulative tactics that seek to compel the flesh “to respond” so as to meet God half-way across the table by appealing to the sinner to use his precious (but non-existent) libertarian free will. Brethren, I’d rather accurately wield the sword of the Spirit so as to cut to the marrow of the unregenerate man’s spirit with the clearly preached word.

I pray that God will use the debate that Drs. Emil and Ergun Caner are having with Drs. White and Ascol in October to show them and those in attendance at the debate that those who believe in the doctrines of grace are brothers and sisters in Christ who desire the same thing that they do: namely, the salvation of souls unto eternal life. I pray that brother Caner will stop resorting to empty ad hominem argumentation by calling the doctrines of grace a “virus.” I hope that Mr. Flick will take the time to read the grand little book Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God by J.I. Packer or Let the Nations Be Glad! By John Piper. Men of such intelligence as Dr. Caner know better than to ridicule and resort to ad hominems. This is especially true given the fact that the One who called Himself the embodiment of the Truth, the very One who saved Dr. Caner’s soul from the bondage of Islam demands academic integrity from Dr. Caner (John 14:6). I pray that God will continue to bless our local congregation through these crystal-clear, biblical teachings as we seek to honor and bring glory to Him through the proclamation of those teachings whether outside the abortion clinic, in our local churches, on the college campus, or in our own homes.

Pastor Dustin S. Segers



[2] (emphasis mine).



Explore posts in the same categories: BaptistFire - Direct Responses, Doctrinal Issues, Evangelism, Soteriology

28 Comments on “Calvinists ARE Passionate about Evangelism!”

  1. JeremiahBailey Says:

    On of Flick’s arguments against Calvinists being passionate about evangelism is that in 58 volumes of Founders Journal only 13% were about evangelism. Does such argumentation even dignify a response? Talk about grasping at straws.

  2. Gene Says:

    Yes, that one was a real zinger, wasn’t it.

    1. The stated purpose of the FJ is to discuss doctrine and historical concerns. Where pastoral concerns overlap, that could be the case.

    2. Notice that by this yardstick if anybody isn’t discussing evangelism, he isn’t passionate about evangelism. So, a pastor that preaches expository doctrinal sermons would be called “unevangelistic.” I’ll have to ask Dr. C. Mark Corts about that one. He was pastor of my home church. I didn’t hear him preach messages that were evangelistic in content. In fact, he made it a point to preach doctrinally, because he believes/d that Sunday morning is primarily for the feeding of the sheep, not the ingathering of souls. Oh, he was once Chairman of the IMB, and his church was and remains the #2 largest SBC church in NC, so he must get a free pass. Silly me.

    3. If a seminary journal discusses evangelism in 20 percent of the articles published in their journal, does this mean the seminary is unevangelistic? Ditto for ETS or any other theological society? If SBC Life publishes 30 percent of articles about evangelism and the rest are about other SBC issues, are we to conclude the SBC as a whole is unevangelistic?

    4. Evangelism is actually quite straightforward in Reformed theology. Why publish endless articles about “soul-winning” and the latest fads in church growth, when you can just get out and do the work? Notice that these folks will criticize Calvinists for writing articles and not knocking on doors on one hand and then sit and write articles against Calvinism. Notice also that they say we shouldn’t spend so much time writing, and then get mad at us for not writing as much about evangelism as they would like. There’s no pleasing some folks.

    5. If I looked at SBC churches membership, baptism, and attendance statistics (and you know at some point I will), what would I find? If 29,000 are on the roll and 500 are baptized in a year, but only 7500 show on any given Sunday, what does that say about the effectiveness of your “passionate” evangelism program, assuming all new baptisms are also first time professions. If our little church has an attendance that outnumbers its membership any given Sunday, what does that say about our church compared to yours. I’d add that this was the pattern of the early Baptist settlers…their attendance frequently outstripped the total membership of the church. That is exactly reversed in nearly all Baptist churches today.

    6. Historically, there were 107 debates between 1644 and 1701 in which Baptists participated. Are we to assume that if the majority were about doctrine and not evangelism that they were not passionate about evangelism?

  3. JeremiahBailey Says:

    spot on Gene! good work.

  4. kletois Says:

    Another weak argument, which is quite frankly a bit of a yawn. Calvinists are passionate about defending the truth AND preaching the gospel. One has to question the intelligence of one who doubts that.

  5. Eric Says:

    Elder Caner,
    Please give one example of a church which has moved towards reformed doctrine, which has lowered its view of evangelism. You say it’s a virus and saps evangelism, with such a widespread infection it should be easy to document…shouldn’t it?

    How bout finding one (just one) Reformed Baptist Elder who doesn’t encourage and promote evangelism.


  6. I’m looking forward to seeing where this blog goes with its rebuttal of ‘BF’. I havn’t seen BF before and so I dont really know what is there be it false or not.

    In regards to saying that Calvinism is a Virus.
    I agree whole heartedly.
    I have been a christian all my life. Churched since a baby and I remember being born again at about 2. It is my earliest memory and it was not a false conversion or a child being manipulated. Jesus Entered my heart and life then and I know this to be true.

    Now I have (reluctant to sdmit) been a ‘luke-warm’ christian for much of the time since then. I know I have always been saved but I was not ‘on fire’. Recenlty however (the last couple of years) I have been seriously looking at and debating theology with friends and family. I was against calvinism not too long ago as most of the ‘calvinists’ I knew were hard, cold and hyper. However I will gladly admit to being a calvinist, now days, even going as far as to identify myself as a 5 pointer! The Only ‘symptom of this Virus’ for me has been more passion in seeking and sharing the word of God.

    If truth is a virus then I pray the Lord will create a pandemic that many more will be saved by His amazing and perfect Grace. There is no other way to life and living without Grace is only waiting for Death.


  7. Hey guys, thanks for investing time and effort into putting out the “strange fire” of Baptist Fire’s website. My guess is that Dr. White would do a guest post on occasion if asked.

  8. 4ever4given Says:

    …well… I guess I am a Christian infected with that Calvinistic virus that LOVES to share the Gospel.

    I have been reading through Sermons That Shaped America: Reformed Preaching from 1630 to 2001. It is an excellent read that thoroughly refutes the false claims that the Doctrines of Grace believers are too busy defending a theological system.

    It sadly seems God has called today’s non-compromising ministers that proclaim the true Gospel down a seeming lonely path. But please know that there are people praying fervently for you all.

  9. C. Nichols Says:

    James White’s imput about this new blog.

  10. Jonathan Says:

    I suppose I have been ‘infected’ then by the rather beneficial virus known as Calvinism. I am so glad you guys have decided to engage the odd misrepresentations over at Keep it up. I plan on reading regularly.

    God bless you guys.


  11. Mike Ratliff Says:

    Let’s see, infected by the Calvinistic virus causes one to become doctrinally sound and evangelistic while those uninfected are inconsistent and stuck in men’s traditions.

    I’ll take the infection.

    Mike Raltiff

  12. Eric Nielsen Says:

    “My study indicates that Calvinists are roughly 5% passionate about evangelism and 63% passionate about doctrine.”

    David Flick’s article provides incontrovertable evidence that non-calvinists are more passionate about statistical studies and graphing than they are about evangelism. And I think it’s only fair to point out that Tom Ascol posts way more about Evangelism than he does about graphing. In fact, for every article with a bar graph that David Flick has posted, Tom Ascol has posted 13 articles about evangelism.

  13. Bob Colton Says:

    In responding to the charge that Calvinists are not passionate about evangelism, perhaps a definition of what it means to be passionate about evangelism would be in order. Does true passion for evangelism require an exaggerated, unbiblical emphasis on evangelism? Is biblical evangelism really the ultimate goal to which everything else in theology and church life must be subordinated? Is not biblical evangelism rather a fruit of properly magnifying the sovereignty of God and other crucial doctrines of God’s Word? Is it not the result of the church’s properly worshiping God and preaching the basic truths of the Bible with the power of the Holy Spirit? Is it not the outcome of a church’s being immersed in a sound understanding of the Word and in a fervent, Spirit-led prayer life?

    Have we not seen that when evangelism is made to be the end of all things in Christianity and church life, all sorts of compromises with the world and dilutions of the Word can take place? And astoundingly those unbiblical compromises are made in the name of evangelism! When evangelism is exalted to an unbiblical priority, then, as we see abundantly in today’s evangelical church, the end begins to justify almost any means. This then results in making a mockery of a regenerate church membership and brings devastation to the purity of the church.

    So it seems to me that what often passes for a passion for evangelism today is really a passion for numbers and has little to do with true biblical evangelism. What kind of evangelism is that which suggests either explicitly or implicitly that lost people can be saved without experiencing conviction of sin? Such an approach to conversion tends to produce a supposed Christian lifestyle in which holiness is not really viewed as necessary. So my plea is that we will be very careful about what constitutes a true passion for evangelism. I think that the passion for evangelism seen in Bunyan, Whitefield, and Edwards is quite different from what often passes for passionate evangelism in contemporary American evangelicalism.

  14. David A. Gonzales Says:

    Our church is a Reformed Baptist church with about 175 regular attenders. We support 15 missionaries, several outreach groups and have a very successful outreach group in all the local Borders Book stores in our city (we have Bible studies every tuesday night). We have been doing the Borders Study for over 6 years. My last church (a PCA church) was also very active in outreach to the local community (door to door, University Fellowships, etc). I think when you realise the Gospel and what the Lord has done for us (totally a work of the Lord) we will response and care about evangelism.

  15. Tom Buck Says:

    All of this talk about Calvinists not being evangelistic is nothing more than a large smoke screen which they are trying to use as a vaccine to inoculate people from the so-called virus of Calvinism. The vaccine of their choice is not intelligent and Christ-like discussion but to use fear. Fear has always been a great tool in the hands of those who do not want to be challenged in their thinking and want to control the thinking of others. So it is an easy tactic to throw out the charge of someone not being evangelistic to shut down any and all dialogue.

    The real problem is not whether one group is evangelistic and the other isn’t because any intellectually honest person would conclude that both groups are passionate about evangelism. The root of the problem is how one measures evangelism.

    In my experience, those who lay down the charge that Calvinists are not evangelistic are basing that on their interpretations of results rather than the content of the Gospel, which is the real measure of evangelism. None of us would argue that the number of decisions posted in a church that teaches the doctrines of grace is usually less than those who preach a man-centered Gospel. Like it or not, I believe that is attributed to the fact that we understand that the Gospel cannot be reduced to something that is manageable (i.e. walking an aisle, signing a card, praying a prayer). We don’t just count a number because someone “makes a decision.” We understand the teaching of the parable of the soils and know that the legitimacy of a “decision” is borne out in the fruit produced in the life. The other side assumes that because they have numbers posted that evangelism is taking place and if our numbers are less that we are not passionate about evangelism. Thus you have churches that post huge numbers for baptisms but have little knowledge of where the vast majority of those people are five years later. Not to mention the lack of church discipline in the vast majority of churches that do not embrace the doctrines of grace. Most churches that hold to the doctrines of grace believe that sometimes the real spiritual growth of the church is actually a reduction in numbers in order to deal with sin among the flock.

    So, for those who see Calvinism as a virus, results beome the measuring stick for legitmacy of ministry and accuracy of doctrine. If numbers are high, then my doctrine must be correct and my ministry must be valid. To show the absurdity of that thinking, if one uses the number of converts and numerical growth to be the measuring stick of legitimacy, it woud leave you to wonder why the Caner’s left Islam because it is growing leaps and bounds.

    I don’t mean that as a harsh slap in the face but am trying to make the point that the Caners left Islam because the message was FALSE! It was NOT THE GOSPEL! So all the passion of Islamic “evangelism” is completely illegitimatized by the falseness of the message they proclaim. So if the message is wrong, it doesn’t matter how many “converts” you have.

    Is not the Gospel first and foremost doctrinal? If it is, then doesn’t it matter whether we are accurate in presenting the doctrinal truth of the Gospel message? And would it not be true that if the message is not accurate, the numbers “making decisions” really don’t matter anyway? Therefore, would it not make sense to have rational and intelligent discussion about the very message that we proclaim to a lost world?

    So can we do away with the inflammatory argumentation making charges against one another that we know are not true? Can we abandon inflammatory statements of calling Calvinism a negative “virus” when in actuality history proves men holding these great truths to be some of the greatest evangelists in the history of the church?

    Or could it be what we really fear is having our own ministries examined and found wanting? Maybe what we fear is finding that much of what we have done in the name of the Gospel ministry will be illegitimatized. Let us all be reminded of the sober truth that results are not the measure of legitmacy for life or ministry from the very words of Christ:

    “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’” (Matt. 7:22-23)

  16. Stan Barringer Says:

    Reformed theology has survived the attacks of spineless and ungodly apostates throughout the last 400 years. That is the only thing that keeps me from being discouraged when I read the self-humiliating remarks of the brothers Caner and other publishings on BaptistFire. ALWAYS remember, brothers, what Spurgeon said:

    “Had a man been an Arminian in [Puritan] days, he would have been accounted the vilest heretic breathing, but now we are looked upon as the heretics, and they as orthodox.”

    Times really haven’t changed much, eh? Well, praise God almighty for this new site to challenge and embarrass those who would distort the gospel of grace.


  17. Nathan White Says:

    Why doesn’t Flick, Caner, and the other SBC critiques of Calvinism just come out and say that their goal is to defend the traditional philosophy and methodology of evangelism currently ruling and reigning in the SBC? That is, obviously these men equate pragmatism, altar calls, and sinner’s prayers with the ‘standard’ of passionate evangelism, and obviously they see these practices as being threatened by Calvinists believers. Why not just be honest and admit that they are just interested in protecting their traditional beliefs?

    To me, its just circular argumentation on their part. Yes, Calvinists shy away from manipulative altar calls. No, that has absolutely nothing to do with a lack of ‘passionate evangelism’ unless you see the manipulative altar call as the standard by which to gauge obedience.

  18. Gene Says:

    Consider this:

    If evangelism is the number one priority of the Church, then she will spend eternity not fulfilling her number one priority.”

    As far as Dr. Caner. If he does not change his tune, then I believe P.H. Mell’s words describe him well:

    “Calvinism has never heard of him before, and if its advocates ever think of him hereafter it will never be in a connection flattering to his vanity.” (P.H. Mell on anti-Calvinist Russell Reneau).

  19. kerryk Says:

    I am the senior teaching elder of our church. (For other baptists out there who are not familiar with that term–I am what is typically called “the pastor”).

    We are members of the SBC.

    We hold to the doctrines of grace as itemized for ease of refrence in the five points.

    I preach verse by verse expository sermons that are heavy on the scripture citing side, and thick with doctrine. For those of you who understand, let me just say, we do not skip over passages that we think don’t fit human traditions, and we do not try to explain them away to support humanistic philosophical Christianity.

    Our people are spoiled, but spoiled in a good way. What I mean, is that they will not leave if you paid them too. They are tools in God’s hand to proclaim His glory, and they know it, and they act upon it. Yes, we hold each other accountable in our local body. No, we are not seeker sensitive.

    My main point is that I always share the gospel in a general call when I preach, as we have visitors, etc. I always urge people to respond to the Holy Spirit according to His word with no pretense that I can manipulate God’s work in His effectual call. In other words, He uses me to accomplish His decreed will, and not the other way around.

    I evangelize. I do missionary work in Mexico, and in India. We support missionaries.

    Bottom line– The whole framework argument that those who believe in biblically defined election do not evangelize is a contrived, silly, and shallow argument meant to cloud the lack of serious scholarship concerning passages that don’t fit man’s traditions.

    I posted above and said to keep up the good work. I encourage you again here.

    Blessings to you in Christ,
    Pastor Kerryk

  20. Francesco De Lucia Says:

    The greatest compliment that the opponents of Calvinism can pay it, is to distort it before they try to overthrow it, for they thereby tacitly admit that they cannot meet it and overthrow it honestly, but must distort it before they have a chance of defeating it.

    Prior to the late 1800’s almost all Baptists down through history, that any self-respecting Baptist would want to claim kin to, held to Calvinism. Even those who lived before John Calvin were Calvinistic, though they were not called that; the most common name for this theological system prior to this was Augustinianism, though here again, it did not originate with Augustine. Calvin got this from Augustine’s writings, and possibly from the writings of the Waldenses and Anabaptists, both of whom held to these beliefs. Certainly, he never got it from the Catholic system from whence he came, as some claim, for this system of theology was never widely accepted by Catholicism at any time, but is actually about as contrary to Catholic principles as anything can be.

    Calvinism has been held by most sound Baptist theologians, such as Abraham Booth, J. P. Boyce, John Bunyan, B. H. Carroll, Alexander Carson, J. L. Dagg, E. C. Dargan, T. T. Eaton, D. F. Estes, D. B. Ford, J. M. Frost, Andrew Fuller, Richard Fuller, John Gill, A. J. Gordon, J. R. Graves, Robert Haldane, Robert Hall, Alvah Hovey, J. B. Moody, E. Y. Mullins, J. M. Pendleton, A. W. Pink, J. W. Porter, W. B. Riley, E. G. Robinson, T. T. Shields, T. P. Simmons, C. H. Spurgeon, A. H. Strong, R. A. Venable, and a host of others. It is either an ignorance of the facts, or else a deliberate distortion of them, to claim that only a few Baptists ever held to this system of theology. Some charge this system with quenching evangelistic fervor, but it is an interesting fact that none of these Baptists of the past ever felt that it was any detriment to their evangelism. Indeed, Calvinistic Baptists have traditionally been the leaders in mission work, and these very beliefs have been a stabilizing force in their evangelism, and have prevented their going to the extremes of high pressurism that so many resort to today.

    from: Davis w. Huckabee, Studies in strong doctrine, Appendix I,

  21. Dakota Says:

    Case in point: I’m Calvinistic missionary : )

  22. Spence Says:

    Dare I ask if Arminians even understand biblical evangelism? I don’t doubt that some are truly justified under their system or even methods, but is it not in spite of the system and methods? What about the countless millions who have been deceived into their manipulative appeals only to find their faith to be a dead faith? Their system is hopelessly driven by American ethnocentrism and consumerism, neither of which are biblical standards.

    The defense of such claims upon Calvinism is simple but should there not be an offense? It is time for neo-Calvinism to begin; defining itself by it does and not what it doesn’t do. The ministry website linked to this post is a neo-Calvinistic evangelistic outreach ministry.

  23. ServinginRussia Says:

    I am too Dakota. We are Caner’s (and others) worst nightmare…reformed missionaries. He may wonder why? How about obedience. By the way, listen to his morning sermon from his “Why I am predestined not to be a hypercalvinist” …er…uh…”sermon”… It was as bad as a preacher saying something like…”God hated Esau for what he did!!!”…um, nervermind. To save you some time, here are a few excerpts from Caner that morning…”I affectionately call my minivan my ‘castration wagon”…”We have everything in our church the world has to offer” (how right he is, sadly)…and the most shameful, when speaking about his parachuting effort, he described the instructor strapped to his back so he could control the jump as “…being to close for my taste.” Everyone laughs, and then he reiterated (I am assuming so all the young children listening could be sure and ask their parents later why everyone was laughing), he restates…”The instructor was too ‘brokeback’ for my taste”. Unbelievable!!! Can you hear Spurgeon, Whitfield, Edwards, or any other great preacher (reformed or not) make comments like this!!! In my view, his morning sermon shows a prevailing lack of respect for God’s word and for the highest calling of exposing God’s word in the church today. His evening sermon revealed that truth (in my opinion). On a side note, does it seem odd to anyone else that Mohler, Ascol, Piper, Nettles, Sproul, Schaffer, Edwards, Whitfield, Spurgeon, Calvin, Luther, Augustine, and the Apostle Paul are wrong on the issue of election…and Ergun Caner is right?

  24. Peter Says:

    I think the distinction should be made from those Calvinistic preachers who in fact have the right mindset in terms of Calvinism and the importance of evangelism on one hand, and those who (are in fact Calvinists) take Calvinism to their own logical impulsivities. Unfortunately, I have met some handful of Calvinists who have reasoned the conclusions that Dr. Caner is describing. I have also met some Calvinists who would refuse this logical conclusion, but show a real-life apathy when it comes to daily practice. In any case, if this was what Dr. Caner was talking about, he should have made a distinction between the two types of Calvinists–a generalized statement was uncalled for. The real question is between what Calvinism is really upholding, versus what (some of) its subscribers are realistically susceptible to.

  25. J W MAJORS Says:

    Dr White should not debate Caner. Caner has proven him-self to be a stiff-necked arrogant uncouth slanderer. The man has no integrity and will never be moved by logic or Scripture. Leave him alone.

  26. J W MAJORS Says:

    There is an interesting website called There you will see the results of the virus of Armininism. You will see example after example of God refusing to do what the Armininians say He must do. Decisional regeneration is doing it’s deadly work. Even Paige Patterson admits that 40% of those who show up in their churches are unregenerated. And these are the ones who bother to show up. To maintain one can spirtually believe before regeneration is to say one can be a believer without being born again. But the lie won’t die.

  27. Yes, I’m very familiar with the site as I am a former atheist. I agree with your general assessment . . . namely, that most evangelical churches are absolutely full of false converts because of the false practice of decisional regeneration. Sadly enough, such a practice can be likened to the modern Christian Church/Church of Christ teaching of baptismal regeneration with the only difference being that the baptismal pool is replaced by an “altar call” and a persuasive speaker who really knows how to manipulate folks.

  28. J W Majors Says:

    Calvinists will never be loved by Arminians any more than being loved by Moslems. Their fight is with the Sovereignty and Freedom of God,but they are cowards who refuse to state this openly.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: