Cheryl Schatz

Yes, you may use my name. Sorry for being so slow in answering. I am working long hours on the DVD project so lots of things are set to the back burner. As far as pride for Calvinists, they will tell you that they are not prideful but humbled by what God has done for them. If appears that they are very sincere. Their issue of pride is not before God (this is where their humility comes in), but before man (this is where they have a problem of pride). So while a Calvinist can be very humble before God, they can treat their brother or sister in Christ who is not a Calvinist with ridicule, anger, and a stubborn pride that God has “gifted” them with the ability to understand Calvinism while you have not been given that gift. Some even see the fact that you are not a Calvinist with a question on whether you are one of the elect or not. They may not say that to you, but in many of their minds, those who are Calvinists have that as proof that they are indeed one of the elect. I don’t have anger towards them. I feel that they have been deceived and I want to treat them as I would want them to treat me if I was deceived. The best way for deceived people is to treat them with respect, care and love of the Lord.

Yes!! That is so fantastic! Yes, ask questions and you will not come across as offensive or a know it all.

I think that for some, it is like a pride thing. It is pretty special to think that Jesus died for YOU, but for the majority of mankind, He has not offered Himself like He did for YOU and the FEW. Someone who has accepted that doctrine would want to hold on as feeling special is hard to let go of. As far as our DVD set, it could be around 5 hours long. It is hard to say at this time because there is still script revisions and editing so that will change things. And it depends on how many DVDs are needed to get the entire teaching into one set. We haven’t set a price yet, but it will also be available for download at a cheaper price.

As far as the question on called and chosen, the simplest way to answer that is to say that it is like the King who invited people to the wedding banquet. The original invitees did not come, so He opened the invitation up to all. The called are all that the invitation we out to, which is all. The chosen are all that actually came. The reason why only few are chosen, is because only few came. It is just like Jesus said, narrow is the road to life and only few find it. The few who find life are called chosen as they came.

I have not yet had time to watch the video, but I intend to. I know Erich. I did not know that he was a Calvinist. I do know that there are a few former JW’s as well as ministries to the cults who have embraced Calvinism. I am hoping that they will view our new DVD when it comes out. I do think that it would be difficult for a former cultist to embrace true Christianity and then find out that what he/she saw was truth has major errors. I feel for them.

Thanks for those comments! There is a lot to think about. I think the only thing I want to add is that the physically dead don’t have a choice to hear Jesus or not. Jesus will resurrect all to face eternity either with Him or in the lake of fire. All will be resurrected and not just some. Yet with the spiritually dead, only those who hear will live. Not all. There has to be a willingness to hear and to pay attention. It isn’t just a sound, but words of life that they are responding to. What I like to remind Calvinists about is that Jesus is the one who set up the metaphor of spiritual death. It is the prodigal son, a son who was very much alive and who was very much able to respond to conviction, that is the one who is described as having gone from death to life. Lazarus is not set up as a metaphor for the spiritually dead. That would not work because a physically dead man cannot sin or listen to conviction. A physically dead man is plain dead and can do nothing.

HI Rolando, welcome to my blog! You are right in that dead can be physical or spiritual. The prodigal son is the primary source of what a spiritually dead person is like. When we see a passage that could be either spiritual or physical, we must look carefully at the context to determine which it is. In the passage that I quoted above, Steven Lawson from Ligonier Ministries, a well known ministry of R C Sproul, teaches that John 5:25 refers to the spiritually dead. So we have their agreement that those who hear are the spiritually dead. It is a very powerful testimony from Jesus who ought to know what the spiritually dead can do.

Joanna, You are right about Jesus’ attitude. He did turn over tables in His Father’s house and He called the Pharisees white-washed tombs and other names. He had an advantage, though, because He could see who they were on the inside that they were keeping hidden from others. I think the best way for us to act and react is that all of us need mercy and grace. We will be judged with the mercy and grace that we show to others so it doesn’t hurt to have a little extra past what we ourselves need from others. And it is a pleasure to listen. I am very passionate on the subject of the Sovereignty of God and Calvinism. It has my attention.

Joanna, Thanks for clearing up the confusion for me on your name. So Joanna it is at this place because here we are just Christian brethren so real names will do just fine. The thing for me about Calvinist buzz words, they are things that push me to understand what they mean, and then they are words that I can use to help a Calvinist understand me. Sometimes I will substitute a word that has a clearer meaning and sometimes I just use what they have already set up in their mind. Either way, I believe that God wants us to dialog and to understand each other so that we can hold fast to what is true and to set aside that which is a lie. It is a pattern we should have all our lives because none of us is likely to be 100% correct on everything here on this earth. But in the essentials we can be united and show love and grace in areas that we disagree so that we can be united there too. Grace covers over a lot of sticky issues when we set our minds to love Jesus more than we dislike our brothers who push Calvinism. I know they are so often arrogant towards nonCalvinists (their humility seems to be only towards God) but my desire to have patience is because if I can’t influence them for good, then maybe, just maybe I can learn from them how better to share the true balance Sovereignty of God!

Yes, an Edit button would be good. If I knew how to add it. 😉

Gillian, You said: With the Calvinist, it’s like someone defaming a friend of mine, and I just lash out! I do understand this and I can feel the same. But perhaps I want to try to see it through God’s eyes, for He knows their hearts. They genuinely believe that they have found the truth on the issue of the Sovereignty of God and they feel that nonCalvinists are defaming the Sovereign God of the universe. And God….He is patiently waiting to give His truth to those who want truth more than they want to be right…and those who want to please Him more than they want to be in the favoured class. Paul even said that he would give up his salvation for his brethren if he could. This is the heart of Jesus, a heart of surrender and sacrifice. We come close to the heart of God when we too can love those who are following a false system, and we are willing to give up our own right to be right, so that we can let them off the hook sometimes so they can have their dignity. No one likes to have truth thrown at them as if it is a weapon and a badge of honor. I want to continually check my heart so that I can have at least a small amount of God’s patience who does not smoke any of us who have wrong notions of who He is. If He was not patient with me, I think I would have been smoked a long time ago, save for His amazing patience and grace. Sometimes I truly think that God allows disagreements on doctrine so that some of us can learn patience and sacrificial love and others can learn to set aside their pride and learn humility, and that all of us will desire the unity of the body in both spirit and truth. There has to be a balance and the valley of trouble and sorrow is the best place to learn the fruit of the Spirit. I think I am rambling now myself! What I am trying to say is that if there is an area where I might be wrong, I want God’s truth as much as I want God’s truth to be given to those who have been deceived by error. I want to love truth and embrace it without setting aside dignity and respect for my brother or sister in the Lord. And if they are not my brother or sister in the Lord yet, I want to model Jesus for them in a very small way that I am able. I am a peace maker at heart and I want to see the Church end our time on this earth fulfilling Jesus’ prayer that we may be one even as He is one with the Father. Our unity is so important and if we will practice love in everything we do and remember that our enemy is not our brother or sister in Christ, but spiritual enemies in the heavens, we will be one step closer to seeing Jesus’ prayer fulfilled in our lifetime. I do not believe that it is an impossibility. What is impossible with man is possible with God. So while I contend earnestly for the truth of the inspired Scriptures, I want to contend with patience and love for those who have been fed something that is not truth, just as I sincerely wish that someone would do for me if I was in error. I want to fulfill the law of love as far as I am capable and with God’s enabling me to be obedient. As far as the question you wrote about how a Calvinist would know that God loves them…there are many Calvinists who have felt doubt at times, troubling doubt, whether they are of the elect or not. Calvin taught that God has allowed some of the reprobate to receive enough of the spirit to be convinced they are believers when they are not and this is all the more to judge them. So they know that there will be false believers and many have been plagued with doubt at one time or another because of this doctrine. So what do we do? We preach the true gospel of God’s love for all and that Jesus loved Judas so much that He was even a friend to Judas and died for him. If Jesus’ love was that great toward someone who was an enemy, how much more can we be sure of His love for us? He will not deceive us. He truly wants us all to be saved and to come to know Him.

Good comments Gillian. Thanks!

You are right about the JWs that they do not participate in communion. It is only for the special 144,000 class and this class should be all dead by now. Calvinists would say that God loves everyone. They just define the kind of love as different. God loves the unelect by giving them rain, etc. But He only loves in a saving way the ones He has chosen from all eternity. In their reasoning He did not love everyone enough to send Jesus to die for all. I know Tom and I have a love for him as a friend. He is open enough to agree to view my DVD The Giving, when it is finished. I agree that there is a lack of love with many Calvinists, but not all. Tom has been very kind to me and open enough to listen. I am very happy to get that agreement! As far as who is harder to talk to, I would say it is JWs. JWs have no basis of agreement with us at all and they have not experienced a conversion so we talk from two different world views. I do think that it is a good idea to give your pastor the information on Judas and communion. I would recommend copying the info from my article here https://www.mmoutreach.org/tg/juda-2/ This one deals with the most information from communion to predestination. If he can understand that Judas was at communion and partook with the others, then you can ask why we won’t allow others to partake if they want. Thank you for your encouragement! God has given me a great amount of grace to have patience and low blood pressure! I give Him all the glory for the work He has done in me! 🙂

Darrell, very good comments! I completely agree.

I do have a lot of patience and I am willing to read, listen to and pour over their material. I feel that it is very important to understand their position because I do not want to misrepresent it.

Gillian, it is a tradition that it was only believers that are to take communion, because only believers (it is thought) were at the first Lord’s Supper that Jesus initiated. Even the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Judas had left before the Lord’s Supper so that he did not partake. I did not research on this issue many years ago and I presented the evidence at a conference for apologetic ministries and ex-JWs. I showed them that Judas was not only still there with Jesus and the disciples after the Lord’s Supper, but that he was commanded to eat and drink and that all of the disciples partook. I gave all the Scriptures and their eyes popped open as they had never seen this before. I never thought I would have to use the same information about Judas with a Calvinist. The training I had for 16 years working with Jehovah’s Witnesses has come in handy in helping Calvinists see some of their blind spots. The fact is that tradition blinds us. We are never told to keep people away from Communion but tradition says Communion is only for Christians even though Jesus died for all. The facts about Judas blow that tradition out of the water. But many people have been raised with the tradition and people do not easily change. In India, many pastors do not take communion even though they are pastors. They have been taught that if they have an addiction (many of them struggle with an addiction to tobacco) they are taught that they do not qualify to take communion. I find this practice so sad in that Jesus died for us as even as we were sinners so that we can come to Him just as we are. To keep people away from the sign of God’s covenant with us because they feel they are unworthy is just not right. If Jesus died for Judas and called Himself the friend of Judas, and Judas was commanded to take the first Lord’s meal, how can we tell people they cannot partake? I can’t say how close we are to crossing the line where the Corinthians had crossed and they were sinning against the Lord’s sacrifice. What I can say is that we are to proclaim that Jesus died for everyone and each are invited to partake of what He did on their behalf.

I should add that the information about Judas has changed the way our own church handles communion. We no longer tell people that it is for believers alone. We say that if they would like to celebrate with us the sacrifice of Jesus, they are welcome to participate.

Gillian, I am SO glad that you didn’t chuck Christianity from seeing the view of God from Calvinism. I have seen others turned off and turned away from God because of that same view and it deeply saddens me. I want to work hard at simplifying this issue for others who have been presented a false view of God’s Sovereignty. He is Sovereign but still humble and His humility needs to be acknowledged as we see grace and mercy through the eyes of Jesus.

Gillian, That was a long comment for sure, but it shows that you are trying hard to think this issue through!

@BtheCalvinist and I have been having twitter discussions on this post. I am going to put a summary of his comments here in the discussion section and then provide a fuller response as I believe his objections are worthy of answering here where there is more room to respond.

My question is “Why does the Bible never say that Jesus did not die for the goats?” @BtheCalvinist responded that “this is seriously as silly as the homosexual saying he didn’t speak against homosexual marriage. However Jesus did give a positive presentation of what marriage is. From the beginning it has been 1 man & 1 woman. Enough said. Why should he now run the list of what marriage is not? Are you saying Jesus is deceptive here? Why not since you say it concerning Christ(‘s) death.” What B is essentially saying is that Jesus only gave a positive expression of marriage and we cannot assume that there is no negative expression just because He did not mention it. My answer: First of all, Jesus did exclude homosexual marriage since Jesus stated very clearly that marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman. That is an exclusive expression about marriage in a positive expression. But Jesus did not leave it at that. He also showed what is not allowed as God’s design for marriage. Jesus disallowed 1 man and 1 woman coming together in marriage if there is adultery. This is a negative expression and Jesus made it clear that coming together in “marriage” through adultery remains adultery. What B is also doing is trying to find another example where only the positive is defined in an important matter with no negative or opposing definition is also made. By attempting this B is affirming my statement in the article that there is NO statement by Jesus or any other Biblical author that states clearly that Jesus did NOT die for person(s) or a group of persons. This means that the statements of who Jesus died for stand exactly as they are given without qualification. My argument is solid and no homosexual could use my reasoning and make a valid argument. This means that all of the “whole” inclusive statements about the people for whom Christ died including the ungodly, sinners, the world, all men, all, the many, enemies, friends, us make a huge box around mankind. I asked B what IF Jesus actually died for all people, what word could God has used to show that it was all people. I didn’t get an answer, and frankly I don’t have an answer either. The words that are used are breath-taking and all together they give us no reason to doubt God’s word. Jesus died for all people.

I would like to also add that Jesus was NOT deceptive about marriage. He made it clear. He was also NOT deceptive about for whom He would die. Then Bible doesn’t say that He died for SOME sinners. He also didn’t die for a select amount of the ungodly. He died for the entire group. “The” many is a term that encompasses it all.

The next thing that @BtheCalvinist challenged me with is “so you really believe Jesus violated scripture by giving an unbeliever the first communion? Does your church allow this?” My answer: Jesus did not violate Scripture. Jesus set up the first communion stating that it was the blood of the covenant shed for “you”. No one can tell Jesus what the law is for the first celebration of His shed blood. To say that if Jesus commanded Judas to eat and drink the elements, Jesus was violating Scripture, that is judging Jesus by your understanding. Jesus is not limited in how He sets ups His death, other than what He does is always the will of the Father. For my article on Judas and the first celebration of communion click here http://www.mmoutreach.org/tg/juda-2/

Further on @BtheCalvinist and his view that the definition of for whom did Christ did, does not need a qualification on the other side of the coin “For whom did Jesus NOT die?”, I say that it is highly important if God said Jesus died for sinners, but He really meant SOME sinners. If God leaves the parameters at “sinners” then we have to all qualify as those for whom Christ died. This is what the Christian church through the ages has taught. But when it comes to Calvinism, a Calvinist can read that Jesus died for sinners and Jesus died for the ungodly, but in his or her mind the Calvinist has to switch it up to mean only the sinners who have been pre-chosen from eternity past. What this does is make Calvinists read into the text something that is not there and forces them to put on their “Calvinist” glasses when reading some text lest they stumble by the clear meaning of the text.

Thank you Carmyn for you prayers!

Thank you Ryan. I agree that it came across an an attack on the person rather than dealing with the issue. the question that I have is, if a person has a sound argument, why would they need to resort to attacking the person instead of presenting their own reasons?

Hi Amy, Luke 17:21 also has the present tense. The kingdom is a now and in the future event. It is now because people enter the kingdom through faith, yet there is a fulfillment of the complete reign of Christ on the earth that is future. The gospel that was preached was repent for the kingdom of God is at hand (here). The Jews did not get it because they did not know that there were two comings of the Messiah. The first coming as the suffering Servant and the second as the victorious King. The grammar is very important especially in difficult passages. Thanksfully the English usually gets it right. The question we all need to answer is why is John not in the kingdom but others are? Thanks for the comment!

Curtis,
You wrote:

I do believe, that in a Church service where ministry is being performed that wives, or even husbands should keep silent as that does cause a disruption to others.

In the early Church all believers were allowed to speak and there was an opportunity for one to take over from the speaker.

1 Corinthians 14:29–30 (NASB)
29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.
30 But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.

You wrote:

The Word of God is easy to be understood by those who have the Spirit of God as their teacher, and can easily be detected in those who have that same Spirit

Much of the Word of God is easy to understand, but there is a portion that is very hard and takes a lot of work. Peter tells us that some things that Paul wrote are hard to understand.

2 Peter 3:15–16 (NASB)
15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

We are also told to be “diligent” in handling of the Word.

2 Timothy 2:15 (NASB) Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.

The term “diligent” means to have an intense desire and to make every effort. A workman is a labourer, one who works hard at a task.

We can recognize the spirit of the teacher in what is taught, but it is a lot different than working out what the Scriptures say. It can be hard work.

I do agree that God does not contradict Himself nor is He the author of contradiction. I believe that this is why we are told to test everything by the Scriptures because they alone are the test of truth. Our subjective feelings can be deceived at times and many have gone down a wrong path because they listened to deceivers. We should not expect that God will keep us safe when we ignore what He has already said in the Word. His Word does not contradict itself for sure!

Thank you so much for your comments.

Hi Joel, You wrote: It was NOT the “…choose life or death…” of Moses’ declaration. I would like to differ with you if I may. In Mose’s command to choose life or death, there was only two choices. In Joshua’s statement it was conditional “if” and there were only two real choices. Both gods of the nations were false gods and both led to death not life. Only one God. Only one life. The best thing is to pay attention to the conditional entrance to the statement. One cannot disregard this point. Your drawing of circles appears to show that there is nothing outside of the Sovereignty of God. In effect there really is no responsibility of man, just the Sovereignty of God. But if this was so, the Bible would make no sense and there would be no need for the warning passages of Scripture. Philippians 2:12, 13 show both the responsibility of man to act upon what God has given him, and the initiating of God who alone has done the work of salvation. We work out what He has done. We do not work for salvation as that is not possible. This is not a heavy work, the working out of our salvation, but it is a necessary stepping out in faith as burying the gift is an act of disobedience and an act of unbelief. You wrote: THE TRUTH is I can’t and I won’t until He gives me the desire and the ability to do those things. The desire and the ability has already been given to one who have been saved by grace through faith. If one has no desire to do God’s work and says God has not given them any ability, it would appear that they have not yet entered in by faith. You wrote: I’m not sure what part of DEAD we don’t get…so when we were sick or wounded, or unconscious, or in a coma in our trespasses and sins (Eph 2.1, Col 2.13) we unfortunately did the only thing we knew to do…be dead. “Spiritually dead” people can do lots of things. They can make choices and they can sin. You wrote: Did He holler, “Lazarus, be it unto you according to your faith!”? Maybe, “If thou wouldst only believe!”? Lazarus was not spiritually dead. Lazarus was a believer. You wrote: I will visit your article on God’s humility, and get back. Thanks! I appreciate you looking over the article I wrote and I appreciate any feedback that you can give. In God’s amazing freely given grace for all, Cheryl

Curtis,
The women’s issue was a huge issue with me as I wanted God’s truth more than my own feelings. God led me to truth through the passages that have been abused and used against women. It wasn’t the positive passages that needed my attention, but the passages that seemed to contradict the positive passages. I had to know what Scripture said without any contradiction.

The most important thing for me is to test everything by God’s Word. Jesus said that the Father wants those who worship Him to worship in Spirit and in Truth. We need the Spirit, but it must also have truth. The both together gives us the balance and it leads us to God’s truth. I know that I cannot trust my feelings as if my feelings are the measure of truth. The Spirit + the Truth = God’s Truth. Also the Scripture will never contradict God’s truth when it is read within its context and using the inspired words and grammar. That is why I work so hard to dissect the grammar, the inspired words, and the inspired context. I wish I could hold to the idea that Paul is telling wives to ask their husbands at home (as if only married women asked questions and as if married men knew all the answers) but the context and inspiration of the words and grammar do not match up with this explanation and that is why I rejected it years ago.

I you are interested in seeing why the context doesn’t match up and what does work that also doesn’t contradict with all the great positive passages that show God has created women spiritually equal to men, I recommend my DVD set. I really do think it will challenge and correct in a gentle and thoughtful manner.