Humanism of arminianism

[quantumfaith]

The OP is built on a tangled web of lies and deception. Arminians believe that God is all-sovereign and that He elected people to salvation based on His perfect foreknowledge because He chose to do it that way out of His sovereignty. Arminians also believe that man is totally depraved and that we can not be saved without the grace of God, and that salvation is all of God and Christ's all-sufficient work on the cross.

Thank you Paul for reminding me (and everyone else) of this fact.

 

[Jarthur001]

Again, your dishonesty is evident from your conclusions.

Really?

Well if this be true, shame on me. This this be false, shame on you for saying such things.

You state something an Arminian said as though he speaks for all who are not Calvinists.

That is not the truth. Others want to see other views from many. I quoted 3-4 Calvinist, it is only fair that some may think only Calvinist believe this. Therefore I produced a Arminian saying it. I do not, nor have I at any time said that all freewillers believe this. It is however clear that some do.

Is this not what I said?

You know this isn't the truth, but it serves your purpose to pigeon-hole those you don't agree with.

I'm not forcing any one to agree. I simply ask eah time....do you agree? BTW..do you agree?

You mention about a Calvinists being labeled as holding Calvin in higher regard than the Holy Spirit.

Yes...and so it was. And the small backbones of people who knew this was a error......where were they? Romans one says that sin is not only in those that DO the act, but also in those that give "approval". To this date you are the only one non-Calvinist that has admitted there is no such quotes. And this came after many pages. Where is the truth from the "nons"? (A good word that I may start using after what I have witnessed)

Again, just because one person said it, doesn't make it true for anyone except the poster.

Why do you think I asked 500 times to "nons" if they agreed??????? Surely they would could foreward...right? No...they said what they wanted. NOTHING

Yet you assign this position to all who reject the Calvinist position.

Actions speak. So I must eand...shame on the "nons"

 

[Jarthur001]

The OP is built on a tangled web of lies and deception. Arminians believe that God is all-sovereign and that He elected people to salvation based on His perfect foreknowledge because He chose to do it that way out of His sovereignty. Arminians also believe that man is totally depraved and that we can not be saved without the grace of God, and that salvation is all of God and Christ's all-sufficient work on the cross.

Its teeter totter theology. When you left up man, you pull down God. Man has a will...man has a will...man is the one that choses.....man controls his own outcome....God cannot over take mans desire......God cannot.....MAN MAN MAN...

 

[Jarthur001]

Thank you Paul for reminding me (and everyone else) of this fact.

I must admit, that I did not understand some one Rippons post. Today, I see clearly. You have no backbone. You will not come clean on this Calvin. vs Holy Spirit and now I know your long history of the same.

 

[Jarthur001]

Minks classic work goes on...

Thirdly, we will further consider the Humanism of Arminianism and its theory that fallen man’s will is the determinative factor in his present and future well-being.


Humanism and Arminianism teaches that one of man’s most destructive flaws is to mistrust himself. In countering this fallacious elevation of the native intellect of man, Paul says: "We rejoice in Christ, and have no confidence in the flesh" (Phil. 3:3). Christ, speaking of regeneration, declares: "it is not of the flesh, nor of !he will of man, but of God" (John 1:13).



Salvation of the soul is not the result of a cooperative effort of God and man, but God is the Sovereign and solitary author of the salvation of His people (Heb. 12:2). Esau, Isaac’s first born son, trusted in himself, and while running in the energy of the flesh, he lost the blessing (Gen. 27), and reflecting on Esau’s diligent effort to earn the promised blessing, Paul said: "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy" (Rom. 9:16).
Humanists claim that academic learning is the panacea for all of man’s ills and difficulties. It is this sort Paul has in mind when he says, they are:


"Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 3:7). The more they learn the more acute becomes their ignorance of God, and despite for His word. The humanist contends that the Bible is a myth, a fabrication of unlearned and ignorant men. Thus it is, he allows no place for the Bible in his acumen. His learning has given sophistication to his atheism, but he will one day learn that his denial of the God of the Bible has infinitely aggravated his reprobation (Rom. 2:5). "The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness" (1 Cor. 3:19).

I do say, I felt like freewillers would step up to the plate and defend their said on this. Other than 2-3 post, all I have seen was a cry of unfairness. Let me encourage free-willers to defend their views and list what mink says, with your own views.

 

[quantumfaith]

I must admit, that I did not understand some one Rippons post. Today, I see clearly. You have no backbone. You will not come clean on this Calvin. vs Holy Spirit and now I know your long history of the same.

As you said in some ealier post/thread. I lose no sleep over what you think. None, nada, nyet, nicht.....

 

[Robert Snow]

As you said in some ealier post/thread. I lose no sleep over what you think. None, nada, nyet, nicht.....

Jarthur seems to have taken over where Luke and P4T has left. I hope being obnoxious is not a trait all cal's have in common.

BTW, how can it be explained that in putting man in the proper place by giving him free will, does not demean God, rather it puts God in the place where He is even more glorious. God can both give man a free will and then use all man's choices to bring about what He wants to happen. This shows another attribute of the greatness of our God's grace!

 

[quantumfaith]

Jarthur seems to have taken over where Luke and P4T has left. I hope being obnoxious is not a trait all cal's have in common.

BTW, how can it be explained that in putting man in the proper place by giving him free will, does not demean God, rather it puts God in the place where He is even more glorious. God can both give man a free will and then use all man's choices to bring about what He wants to happen. This shows another attribute of the greatness of our God's grace!

I SO agree with you Robert, the constant "snipping" that the "free will, agency" etc of man in anyway "demeans" God or His sovereignty is simply false.

 

[Jerome]

You will not come clean on this Calvin. vs Holy Spirit

If Calvin said something wrong reject it. This is what Calvinist do.

Example:

Calvin's chronology and Moses' chronology:

Calvin's Commentary:
Jacob did not kiss Rachel till he had informed her that he was her relative

Genesis 29:11-12a
Then Jacob kissed Rachel and wept aloud. And Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's kinsman

So, which chronology do these Calvinists follow?:

Thomas Whitelaw's Exposition of Genesis:

he had first informed her of his relationship

John Gill's Exposition of Genesis:

this [kissing] was done after he had acquainted her with his relation to her

 

[pinoybaptist]

I will go for Moses' chronology.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

Its teeter totter theology. When you left up man, you pull down God. Man has a will...man has a will...man is the one that choses.....man controls his own outcome....God cannot over take mans desire......God cannot.....MAN MAN MAN...

No one said God CAN not, only that God does not. Until you learn the distinction, any discussion with you is futile.

 

[Jarthur001]

No one said God CAN not, only that God does not. Until you learn the distinction, any discussion with you is futile.

Hello Paul,

This is what you said..

The OP is built on a tangled web of lies and deception. Arminians believe that God is all-sovereign and that He elected people to salvation based on His perfect foreknowledge because He chose to do it that way out of His sovereignty. Arminians also believe that man is totally depraved and that we can not be saved without the grace of God, and that salvation is all of God and Christ's all-sufficient work on the cross.

I know what Arminians believe, but I'm not sure you do. I would love to take on many subjects in your statement, but not on this thread.

You know what.....

Paul if you desire to talk about Calvinism vs Arminianism, please start a thread and give me your best argument. I'll be there. Don't use some 2nd rate argument. I want your best.

I look forward to it, and if you want, send me a message when you have it up and running.

How about foreknowledge? That is the power in your system. If you want, lets talk about foreknowledge. That would be a good one. As I said, I don't think you know what you believe. So tell me why foreknowledge is better. On another thread please.

Or...you pick your best. Now come with Scripture support.

Have a good day by new found friend.

James

 

[webdog]

Aaaaaw yes you do. But my salvation does not depend on what you think of me.

So you will continue to hold to this blatant lie even after I already explained myself and my statement IN CONTEXT?

 

[Jarthur001]

Mink says more...

Humanists puffed up on their academic attainments have concluded that their postulates are axiomatic, and that their wisdom is so absolute it allows for no "ifs" or "perhaps". Their dogmatism is that of a fool, for they have said in their hearts, "There is no God" (Ps. 14:1), and they know nothing yet as they ought to know it (1 Cor. 8:2). The born again person does not deny the contention of the Humanists that an education in the arts and sciences taught by the elite institutions of men enhances success. The Lord’s churches have a high regard and respect for success, but what they know and proclaim is: any success that does not own God as its Author is of the flesh and the flesh profiteth nothing. Simply, aside from God there is NO genuine success.


Arminianism says: "Man has the intellectual power to choose eternal life or death, and that every man is given ample space to make up his mind in this vital matter". But Christ says, speaking of the natural man: "Ye will not come to Me that ye might have life" (John 5:40). Speaking of the utter impotence of man’s natural will, Christ says: "No man can come to me . . ." (John 6:44). Paul, in his accentuation of this truth, says: "The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:7,8). The natural man is "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 3:7).


Arminianism’s declaration of the absolute independence of man’s will is tantamount to saying, the fruit of a tree has a nature of its own, which is altogether free of the root of the tree. The fruit of a tree is invariably determined by the character of its root. Genealogically, Adam is the root of mankind, and when Adam committed spiritual suicide (Gen. 3:6), his progeny died in him. "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12).


"A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit" (Matt. 7:18). All the moral fruit which the natural man brings forth, be they ever so laudatory or praiseworthy by the standards of men, are, when weighed in the scales of omniscience, seen to be worm infested. Thus it is, the rationalist is left without a valid recourse, for the law of reaping and sowing applies not only to agrarian science, but to all earthly organisms. Christ said: "The tree is known by his fruit" (Matthew 12:33). Note: in this text, Christ personified the "tree," and in so doing, leaves NO room for the hypocrite. The flesh, be it ever so religious, profiteth nothing (John 6:63). Job, speaking of human reproduction, asks: "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?" And Job, with awesome finality, answers his own question, saying: "Not one" (Job 14:4).

 

[Jarthur001]

So you will continue to hold to this blatant lie even after I already explained myself and my statement IN CONTEXT?

Sorry, removed those post in error.
_______

What do you mean? What event were you talking of? Which year?

Post the event and your "explaining" and I will reply.

 

[Skandelon]

I believe the only logically consistent view of a Calvinist is to conclude that all those who remain non-Calvinists are not really saved.

How else do you explain how God's regenerating Spirit can bring a lost man to understand the gospel, but somehow fail in bringing him the rest of the way to a correct knowledge of basic soteriology?

Why is one believer Calvinistic while another is not? Is it something "good" within the man that makes him smarter, more humble, more accepting of the "truth?" Clearly, the only logically consistent response is to say that God is the determiner of who does and doesn't accept these doctrines as truth, right? And why would God deprive his child of the ability to willingly accept the truth of their salvation? Thus the only really consistent answer is to conclude that those who reject Calvinistic doctrine aren't really children of God. Where am I wrong on this?

 

[webdog]

Sorry, removed those post in error.
_______

What do you mean? What event were you talking of? Which year?

Post the event and your "explaining" and I will reply.

Please...don't play games. You know exactly what I am talking about as YOU brought it up again recently. I've never questioned your salvation, and if you continue to maintain that you will show yourself to be a liar.

 

[Jarthur001]

Please...don't play games. You know exactly what I am talking about as YOU brought it up again recently. I've never questioned your salvation, and if you continue to maintain that you will show yourself to be a liar.

No, you misunderstand me. It is clear I have not been clear to you. Please forgive me.

I do not deny you questioned my salvation, I'm asking which time are you talking about that you said please forgive me? Because I don't remember that forgiveness part at any time. This year or any year before.

I could be wrong, but I never remember you saying you were wrong and asking forgiveness. This is why I said, if you want to prove me wrong, and I could be wrong, just post your reply showing you said I'm sorry.

All I can remember at this point is you saying people misunderstand you.

Now Web....Don't feel like you must do this. I'm fine with how you feel about others. But if you feel better about it, go ahead and show the post. I will gladly admit I was wrong, and ask you to forgive me.

 

[Jarthur001]

now back to the subject

It would be good to hear an Arminian address these...

Humanists puffed up on their academic attainments have concluded that their postulates are axiomatic, and that their wisdom is so absolute it allows for no "ifs" or "perhaps". Their dogmatism is that of a fool, for they have said in their hearts, "There is no God" (Ps. 14:1), and they know nothing yet as they ought to know it (1 Cor. 8:2). The born again person does not deny the contention of the Humanists that an education in the arts and sciences taught by the elite institutions of men enhances success. The Lord’s churches have a high regard and respect for success, but what they know and proclaim is: any success that does not own God as its Author is of the flesh and the flesh profiteth nothing. Simply, aside from God there is NO genuine success.


Arminianism says: "Man has the intellectual power to choose eternal life or death, and that every man is given ample space to make up his mind in this vital matter". But Christ says, speaking of the natural man: "Ye will not come to Me that ye might have life" (John 5:40). Speaking of the utter impotence of man’s natural will, Christ says: "No man can come to me . . ." (John 6:44). Paul, in his accentuation of this truth, says: "The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:7,8). The natural man is "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 3:7).


Arminianism’s declaration of the absolute independence of man’s will is tantamount to saying, the fruit of a tree has a nature of its own, which is altogether free of the root of the tree. The fruit of a tree is invariably determined by the character of its root. Genealogically, Adam is the root of mankind, and when Adam committed spiritual suicide (Gen. 3:6), his progeny died in him. "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12).


"A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit" (Matt. 7:18). All the moral fruit which the natural man brings forth, be they ever so laudatory or praiseworthy by the standards of men, are, when weighed in the scales of omniscience, seen to be worm infested. Thus it is, the rationalist is left without a valid recourse, for the law of reaping and sowing applies not only to agrarian science, but to all earthly organisms. Christ said: "The tree is known by his fruit" (Matthew 12:33). Note: in this text, Christ personified the "tree," and in so doing, leaves NO room for the hypocrite. The flesh, be it ever so religious, profiteth nothing (John 6:63). Job, speaking of human reproduction, asks: "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?" And Job, with awesome finality, answers his own question, saying: "Not one" (Job 14:4).

 

[Winman]

now back to the subject

It would be good to hear an Arminian address these...

Where are all these Arminians you keep speaking of? I am neither Calvinist or Arminian, both are error.