Arminianism and Calvinism co-existing??

[Bill the Cat]

My pastor preached on this parable yesterday and focussed on Evangelism. However, I was looking at this passage in a different light.

Luke 14
Parable of the Dinner
16 But He said to him, "A man was giving a big dinner, and he invited many;

17 and at the dinner hour he sent his slave to say to those who had been invited, 'Come; for everything is ready now.'

18 "But they all alike began to make excuses. The first one said to him, 'I have bought a piece of land and I need to go out and look at it; please consider me excused.'

19 "Another one said, 'I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to try them out; please consider me excused.'

20 "Another one said, 'I have married a wife, and for that reason I cannot come.'

21 "And the slave came back and reported this to his master. Then the head of the household became angry and said to his slave, 'Go out at once into the streets and lanes of the city and bring in here the poor and crippled and blind and lame.'

22 "And the slave said, 'Master, what you commanded has been done, and still there is room.'

23 "And the master said to the slave, 'Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, so that my house may be filled.

24 'For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste of my dinner.'"


The following is my belief, not the hard facts:

Notice the invitation was made to the invitees first, and they chose to not attend.(Arminianism- showing that the call is not irresistable) Then the poor and downtrodden and those on the highway were compelled to come.(Calvinism-the call was irresistable)

So how do we on each side of the discussion reconcile the other side of the parable?

[Xavier]

Duh, Molinism... :wink:

[Bill the Cat]

Duh, Molinism... :wink:
So in Molinism, there are SOME who are drawn irresistably, overriding any will?

[Xavier]

So in Molinism, there are SOME who are drawn irresistably, overriding any will?
No, I was just saying in jest...

In my opinion, the parable can be view in terms of election, but not to the extent that you are applying here.

I tend to think that the first group of guests are those Jews who have rejected Christ. Leading to the second group of guests, the Gentiles.

I don't think that the word "compel" implies that they are being forced to attend, rather that they are being urged to attend.

[john-philip]

My pastor preached on this parable yesterday and focussed on Evangelism. However, I was looking at this passage in a different light.

Luke 14
Parable of the Dinner
16 But He said to him, "A man was giving a big dinner, and he invited many;

17 and at the dinner hour he sent his slave to say to those who had been invited, 'Come; for everything is ready now.'

18 "But they all alike began to make excuses. The first one said to him, 'I have bought a piece of land and I need to go out and look at it; please consider me excused.'

19 "Another one said, 'I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to try them out; please consider me excused.'

20 "Another one said, 'I have married a wife, and for that reason I cannot come.'

21 "And the slave came back and reported this to his master. Then the head of the household became angry and said to his slave, 'Go out at once into the streets and lanes of the city and bring in here the poor and crippled and blind and lame.'

22 "And the slave said, 'Master, what you commanded has been done, and still there is room.'

23 "And the master said to the slave, 'Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, so that my house may be filled.

24 'For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste of my dinner.'"


The following is my belief, not the hard facts:

Notice the invitation was made to the invitees first, and they chose to not attend.(Arminianism- showing that the call is not irresistable) Then the poor and downtrodden and those on the highway were compelled to come.(Calvinism-the call was irresistable)

So how do we on each side of the discussion reconcile the other side of the parable?

IMHO, there is nothing in this scripture that necessitates a rendering that would leave a loss of possibility on those were called in the latter part of the passage.

In turn, if you do insist upon the interpretation you've given, I think we would be left with a calvinstic doctrine. After all, those who did not come were not compelled to come (they were not irresistably drawn), those who were compelled to come did (they were irresistably drawn.)

[Xmansmommy]

23 "And the master said to the slave, 'Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, so that my house may be filled.

Let me first ask your opinion of who the slave represents in the parable :btc:?

[Bill the Cat]

Let me first ask your opinion of who the slave represents in the parable :btc:?
Jesus

[geebob]

Bill, I think the problem is in taking this parable to indicate that there are two hard categories, those who were initially invited who reject God's grace and those who were not initially invited that were compelled.

Let me suggest that the the point of the parable was not to to susggest that everyone falls into these categories. There will be many who were inititially invited who are going to ultimately respond positively to the invitation, and many who were "compelled" who are gonna be really stuborn old coots who will resisit tooth and nail.

That said, I don't have much in the way of interpreting this off hand but it would make sense to see the Jews in the position of those who had the initial invitation and they are now rebelling, verses the gentiles who were spiritual paupers. And again, these aren't neat categories as Paul said the church is now made of both Jew and gentile.

[seer]

My pastor preached on this parable yesterday and focussed on Evangelism. However, I was looking at this passage in a different light.

Luke 14
Parable of the Dinner
16 But He said to him, "A man was giving a big dinner, and he invited many;

17 and at the dinner hour he sent his slave to say to those who had been invited, 'Come; for everything is ready now.'

18 "But they all alike began to make excuses. The first one said to him, 'I have bought a piece of land and I need to go out and look at it; please consider me excused.'

19 "Another one said, 'I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to try them out; please consider me excused.'

20 "Another one said, 'I have married a wife, and for that reason I cannot come.'

21 "And the slave came back and reported this to his master. Then the head of the household became angry and said to his slave, 'Go out at once into the streets and lanes of the city and bring in here the poor and crippled and blind and lame.'

22 "And the slave said, 'Master, what you commanded has been done, and still there is room.'

23 "And the master said to the slave, 'Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, so that my house may be filled.

24 'For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste of my dinner.'"


The following is my belief, not the hard facts:

Notice the invitation was made to the invitees first, and they chose to not attend.(Arminianism- showing that the call is not irresistable) Then the poor and downtrodden and those on the highway were compelled to come.(Calvinism-the call was irresistable)

So how do we on each side of the discussion reconcile the other side of the parable?

If you notice, there are three groups here.

1. Those who rejected the first call.

2. Those who responded to the call - without being compelled. Vs.22

3. Those who were compelled.

So the second group responed without being compelled.