Arminian Weaknesses reflect Calvinism

For the record, propitiation is not means of salvation for all people. Propitiation in all its nuanced forms does not speak of anything provisional; propitiation is something actual. So, either the elect are saved by the propitiation or all without exception are.

The Archangel

 

The problem is that God did not only formulate a plan of salvation before the foundation of the world. God chose to save certain individuals. God's electing work is not about developing a plan (although a plan certainly can be seen), it is about saving His people--those whom He has chosen.

God does not "foreknow" His program. He foreknows (which means chose) individuals. It is a personal application of both the vocabulary and the grammar.

To my knowledge, never--not even once--is an indefinite pronoun, like "it" used to refer to God's electing plan or purpose. It is always a personal pronoun like "us," "we," "you (plural)," etc. God chooses people, not plans.

The Archangel

 

That which I bolded, I have a hard time believing. I see it like this: God sends His Spirit to all mankind that have come to "know to do good and doeth not, to him is sin". Now, those who died lost, still were offered grace, but rejected it. By Him doing this, they can not stand before Him and say they didn't know they were sinners needing saved by grace.

A hearty AMEN here!!

I do think that man can do good things, such as helping out his neighbor, giving to the poor, feeding the homeless, etc. But none of these things will garner salvation.

I agree with this, also!!

That which I bolded I totally and profoundly disagree with!!

 

It is hard to accept this my brother when all you want to do is apply your own concepts to it. Blessings & keep the faith.:thumbsup:

 

EA&F,what specifically is it in Archangel's post that you disagree with? He makes scriptural sense to me. The Lord foreknows people. The Scriptural language is not about advanced knowledge of a plan,but foreloving certain ones of His choice.

 

He wasn't disagreeing

 

you must be tired my brother or perhaps I did not express myself adequately. I do accept & understand my brother, Archangels explanations. What I was commenting on was our Non-Calvinist friends unwillingness to accept it. Thats because they are interjecting their own human wants into Gods absolute Sovereignty

 

Thanks for the clarification......your usually fair & balanced Allan & I appreciate your commentary.

 

See Rippon I experienced the amazing grace of God's love first hand.

I was a very bad man, a sinner to a level of such shame I cannot explain here. And here is the thing, it didnt bother me. I had no morality & I stepped on people every day (or else robbed them).

Who would have imagined me as a Christian man..... But for the grace of God go I.

Here is the thing, it wasnt me asking for transformation, or new life, or whatever you want to call it. I was just fine ....I had skills honed by me & my buddy the devil. I was a successful professional crook & its a wonder I didnt ever go to jail. Now I cant even tell a lie because even if I tried I dont want to. Nor can I cheat or steal.

Bottom line Im much poorer & surprisingly happy to be so because as hard as I think it is, God provides for me.

Im sure you've heard these stories before.....the point is that I didnt ask for the saving grace.....it came....and I am a different man. Now I can understand that mans chief end is to glorify God & enjoy Him forever. What a gift!

 

Van, what you have brought to debate is SO FAR off the mark based on any sound exegesis of Scripture or any theological position that engaging you on the merits of your argument is akin to engaging one on the merits of the Easter Bunny.

Archangel pointed that out above, but you are seemingly blind to your own horrid attempts at theology. It is incoherent. THAT is why we are not engaging. It is not because you have actually argued something that we just don't have an answer that will suffice in rebuttal.

 

Correct! :thumbsup:

Why do the authors of scripture use the word foreknow IF indeed they mean "predetermined?" They had both words to choose from in the original language and they chose the word "foreknow," yet for some reason Calvinists insist the intent of the author was "predetermine."

Divine foreknowledge means nothing in a world where everything is predetermined. Why even speak of foreknowing the evil of a man's choice when in reality you were the determination of that man's evil choice?

 

Ad Hominem again? Is this necessary?

Van's arguments are well thought out, sound, very coherent, and historically supported by many scholars. To say things like this only reveal your own lack of ability to deal with the content of his posts. It also reveals the fruit of your own character. Really disappointing and sad...

 

I recall your participation in the limits of free will thread...

 

Was Ad Hominem employed? Did I belittle others? Did I ignore viable content for the sake of personal attacks? I don't think so.

I fact, I just read back through that thread and I was very respectful to you and worked diligently to address your posts... They went ignored for the most part.

 

Is everything about argument and debate with you? Let me ask you point blank:

Do you regard those who hold the Calvinist view, or Reformed Theology, to be outside the realm of orhtodox Christian belief such that they are not saved people, that it cannot be said in confidence that they have been born of God, and so that every effort should be made toward them to turn them to Christ whom they do not know?

Long question...but I want to be clear.

 

Only on a debate forum where soteriology is discussed and Calvinism is promoted. You don't know me, so please stop with the personal assessments.

As I have said many times before my brother and my best friend are both Calvinists and I love them both dearly. I actually introduced them to Calvinism. I just now disagree with them on this point of view.

I agree with what Piper said about some Calvinists HERE:

 

I didn't ask you if you loved your brother and best friend. Please answer the question or decline to do so.

I am not making a personal attack on you. If you think so, as you think so often, then I suggest you examine yourself as to why.

Your words and actions on this board are the only impression people will get from you outside of knowing you personally. And I am suggesting that what you are doing on these boards is actually harming your testimony.

You do seem preoccupied with controversy.