Why Do Arminians Keep Saying Such Things?

[Rippon]

It is not blasphemous at all.

Blasphemy is blasphemy. To ascribe the Lord of the Bible with a willy-nilly approach to His election is blasphemy.

Saying God's ways are mysterious and beyond our understanding, true; however that is not a reason to help yourself to a license of interpretation saying all whom disagree don't understand God's ways are unsearchable - and same applies for you too.

I'm telling you it is blasphemous to say that Calvinists think that God is capricious in His election of those He desires. Since Calvinists have never ever said or implied such wickedness -- non-Cals should cease and desist from that line of attack.

Therefore why did God choose one over the other?

It is due to His good pleasure. God has the right to do whatever He wants with people. He doesn't need your permission to do things that you think are unfair.You sound like the objector in Ro. 9:14 (among other places) who charges God with being unjust. Paul had previously said that Jacob was chosen instead of Esau. The objector didn't like that. Paul responded with 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."

Yet the question how does God choose remains unanswered.

It's due to His good pleasure as I've said before. But I know that will not satisfy you. Therefore, I will give Paul's answer to the objector in 9:20a :"But who are you, a mere human being, to talk back to God?"

Does a non elect non believer have an eternal destiny other than the lake of fire?

Of course not.

While its ok to take eternal life election from Roms 9, ...

I'm glad you agree with the Bible on this point.

Calvinist ought to see that these objections are very valid, disgarding them and calling it blaphemy[sic] is simply unreasonable.

No, quite reasonable. The objections that Paul deals with in Romans 9 demonstrate that anyone who feels sympathetic towards such an individual is arguing against God. That's not a good place for you to be in.

 

[Rippon]

Absolutely. I don't interpret Rom 9 as eternal life/damnation election.

Then you are contradicting what you said in Post#3. In that post you said :"It's okay to take eternal election from Romans 9."

You are simply trying to burrow Calvinism into the text.

We don't have to "burrow" anything into Romans 9. Many folks object to a mere reading of that chapter. It is all too clear. That chapter is the initial stage in one becoming a Calvinist.

In contradistiction your side has to ferret-out what's not in the text. Is Caner your favorite expositor of this particular text?

I'm sure any Calvinist would like to believe that Paul was a Calvinist.

Well, it's perfectly clear that he wasn't Arminian!

 

[Darrenss1]

Yes, I thought you did. Please bear with me for a moment. In post number 5, Dale-c quoted Romans 9:16-24. In this passage Paul is dealing with a hypothetical objector. Paul's response to this man is a rebuke. Dale-c asks you if the objector in this passage was bringing up valid objections. Your response to Dale-c was an unequivocal...

Really? Dale C said: "Darren, do you believe those were valid objections?"

My wonderfully "ambiguous" reply could have been, "yes I believe Paul's objections are valid." Talk about jumping to conclusions....

Darren

 

[Rippon]

First, you seem to equate Arminians and Semi-Pelagians, which is demonstrably ridiculous (no need to rehash this as you've been dressed down about it before).

There's not a dime's worth of difference.

Second, you refer to objections to Calvinism's "doctrine of election" as "blasphemous," and "sacreligious" ("blatant" even!) -- another rather strong charge because "non-Calvinists" simply disagree with your views.

For a non-Cal to charge our view of election as being just a capricious act of the Lord is blasphemous. Full-stop.

Third, I wonder if you feel the same sense of urgency and alarm at the Calvinist mischaracterization of Arminians view of God as "weak" or "a failure" because Christ dies for all men but "can't" save all men?

The view that the Lord tries but can't quite do it because the will of humans is too strong? That is utter rubbish.

Rip, there is no "stooping" here.

When you have to look up to see the bottom -- yeah, that's stooping alright.

There is a serious question as to God's sovereignty

One that Paul rebuked in Romans nine.

We simply have a different view of God.

Agreed.

Arminianism sees God as sovereign over ALL things, knowing ALL things past, present and future in their actualities, as well as all their many potentialities.

He doesn't merely know. He determines,establishes,decrees,directs. The Arminian view waters-down God to a passive role. And give up that garbage of God knowing our "many potentialities". That's pathetic.

I just think the Calvinist view of God's sovereignty is too small.

That's rich. Mind if I quote you on that? I would like to use it in reference to nonsensical non-Cal doctinal views.

PS - exactly which "objectors" were you referring to in Romans 9 Rip?

Basically Paul deals with them throughout the chapter. But specifically verses 14,19-21 for starters.

 

[Rippon]

And is that based upon your view that Paul's objector's were raising a non Calvinistic objection?

Of course they were Arminian objections that Paul dealt with in Romans 9. And if someone tells me that I am speaking anachronistically --- so be it. No Calvinist would have issues with Paul's words to the objector(s) -- only Semi-Pelagians/Arminians.

To agree with your premise I would have to be a Calvinist.

Yes, you'd have to be Pauline=Calvinistic.

 

[Rippon]

What is the purpose of this thread? If the author of the OP has an issue with an individual, why the need to start an entire thread on it?

No issue with a single individual. Many non-Cals have over the years that I have been here said the blasphemous things I have itemized. Perhaps even ... you WD.

 

[Rippon]

I believe he was addressing me in his OP anyway.

No, I was not. as I have said before many non-Cals in my time here on the BB have said similiar blasphemous things. You're a new guy on the block. I have had very little interaction with you before this thread. But if the OP fits ...

 

[Darrenss1]

Of course they were Arminian objections that Paul dealt with in Romans 9.

I don't think so. Calvinist cannot see that non Calvinist have no problem with Rom 9.

No Calvinist would have issues with Paul's words to the objector(s) -- only Semi-Pelagians/Arminians.

That is simply not true. Calvinist only claim that an interpretation other than their own is problematic. I don't represent Arminian or Pelagians so I won't comment for them.

Darren

 

[Revmitchell]

I wonder who these Arminians/Semi-Pelagians are. Such titles are ungodly.


1Co 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
1Co 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

 

[Darrenss1]

Blasphemy is blasphemy. To ascribe the Lord of the Bible with a willy-nilly approach to His election is blasphemy.

So God purposefully elects and not elects for eternal life/damnation? This really should be addressing Calvinism's "passing over" doctrine but for some reason you are wanting to side step the issue.

The objections that Paul deals with in Romans 9 demonstrate that anyone who feels sympathetic towards such an individual is arguing against God.

Election of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, children of Israel were examples of God's mercy and purposes on the earth, Pharaoh therefore was not elected/purposed/raised up for damnation but to be the vessel of wrath to both free God's earthy chosen people and to be a testimony of God's power and judgment on the earth. There is no assumption of eternal life election in Paul's reasoning pertaining to Abraham and his seed in this text.

So what Paul states for Pharaoh and the rest is for the purposes of God on the earth.
*For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up
*Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
*Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
*Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
*vessels of wrath fitted to destruction

Yet the Calvinist comes to Rom 9:24...
Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

..and assumes it means Exclusive/Effectual election to eternal life within the Gentiles group in addition to the Jews. They assume it means God is NOT showing mercy then on ALL the Gentiles but only some. They read "therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy" meaning God is showing only some Gentiles mercy, therefore whomever objects to the Calvinist claims of election at that point the Calvinist states "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?"

That's not a good place for you to be in.

Assuming several false assumptions you make are true....

Darren

 

[webdog]

No issue with a single individual. Many non-Cals have over the years that I have been here said the blasphemous things I have itemized. Perhaps even ... you WD.

As blasphemous as "Christ the Calvinist"?

 

[webdog]

Originally Posted by JDale

First, you seem to equate Arminians and Semi-Pelagians, which is demonstrably ridiculous (no need to rehash this as you've been dressed down about it before).

There's not a dime's worth of difference.

Let it be known on record the pure ignorance displayed by the author of the OP. One should take any charge of blashpemy or anything else he says with a grain of salt...

 

[Darrenss1]

Originally Posted by JDale
One should take any charge of blashpemy or anything else he says with a grain of salt...

Equally, non Calvinism = blasphemy against God.

Not much you can say when someone assumes that the Apostle Paul was defending Calvinism against non Calvinism in Rom 9. Totally absurd....

Darren

 

[Josh the Baptist]

Can non-Calvinists obtain eternal life?

 

[Winman]

This line says it all right here Rippon.

Pure nonsense. God clearly gives the reasons he "gave them up" in Romans chapter 1.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in
unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

The Bible teaches if a man is lost, it is his own fault. And it clearly gives the reasons.

1) They hold the truth in unrighteousness (vs 18)
2) They are without excuse (vs 20)
3) They did not glorify God (vs 21)
4) They are not thankful to God (vs 21)
5) They became vain in their imaginations (vs 21)
6) They profess themselves to be wise (vs 22)
7) They changed the glory of God into images (vs 23)
8) God gives them up to uncleaness (vs 24)
9) They change the truth of God into a lie (vs 25)
10) They worship the creation and not the Creator (vs 25)
11) God gives them up to vile affections (vs 26)
12) They do not like to retain God in their knowledge (vs 28)
13) fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
14) They have pleasure in others who commit these sins (vs 32)

You Calvinists should study your Bible, the Bible clearly gives the reasons God gives some men up.

 

[FlyForFun]

Pure nonsense. God clearly gives the reasons he "gave them up" in Romans chapter 1.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in
unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

The Bible teaches if a man is lost, it is his own fault. And it clearly gives the reasons.

1) They hold the truth in unrighteousness (vs 18)
2) They are without excuse (vs 20)
3) They did not glorify God (vs 21)
4) They are not thankful to God (vs 21)
5) They became vain in their imaginations (vs 21)
6) They profess themselves to be wise (vs 22)
7) They changed the glory of God into images (vs 23)
8) God gives them up to uncleaness (vs 24)
9) They change the truth of God into a lie (vs 25)
10) They worship the creation and not the Creator (vs 25)
11) God gives them up to vile affections (vs 26)
12) They do not like to retain God in their knowledge (vs 28)
13) fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
14) They have pleasure in others who commit these sins (vs 32)

You Calvinists should study your Bible, the Bible clearly gives the reasons God gives some men up.

If you read the first three chapters of Romans, you'll see that the point is summarized thus: "All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God."

 

[Winman]

By the way, Romans chapter 1 also proves Calvinism false because it shows unsaved man clearly knows and understands what he is doing.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Calvinism teaches that a man can only understand the scriptures if he is regenerated first. The Bible shows the opposite.

 

[Winman]

If you read the first three chapters of Romans, you'll see that the point is summarized thus: "All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God."

So, you are saying God has given ALL men up?

Nice try.

 

[Lux et veritas]

The Bible teaches if a man is lost, it is his own fault. And it clearly gives the reasons.
You Calvinists should study your Bible, the Bible clearly gives the reasons God gives some men up.

There isn't a Calvinist I know of or have read who would disagree with your first sentence. Calvinism teaches precisely that "if a man is lost, it is his own fault". It also unreservedly accepts that the Bible "clearly gives the reasons".

The little sarcastic try at being funny by saying we "should study [our] Bible" only shows that you don't understand Calvinism yet. When I studied apologetics and debating, we were taught that until you can articulate your opponents' position in words that were acceptable to him, you were not ready to debate the issue.

For example, we had to debate the issue of baptism. But we had to study the paedo-baptist's position and take a turn defending it, before we took our turn defending the credobaptist position.

You and many (not all) of the Calvinist bashers on this forum are a long ways from being able to do that.

 

[Lux et veritas]

As blasphemous as "Christ the Calvinist"?

"Calvinism" did not spring from Calvin. We believe that it sprang from the great Founder of all truth.
Quote: Charles Haddon Spurgeon