Arminian Weaknesses reflect Calvinism

[The Archangel]

1. Christ died for all people, and His sacrifice provides the propitiation or means of salvation for all people. There is no other way.

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 Archangel]

How come no Arminians have posted but instead we get a boat load of non-germane misdirection?

For example, did I say or suggest 1 Peter 1:2 demonstrates or supports that God chose the Word? Nope. This is just misdirection, rather than actually addressing what I said.

Here is the actual sentence: God’s plan for salvation was thus formulated before creation, and therefore anyone chosen and spiritually placed in Christ is chosen according to God’s foreknowledge of His salvation program, (1 Peter 1:2).

And here is 1 Peter 1:2, [who are chosen] "according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ, and be sprinkled with His blood; May grace and peace be yours in fullest measure."

Question when did God reveal His foreknowledge of Lamb? See 1 Peter 1:20, which indicated "before the foundation of the world."

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

 

[convicted1]

Arminian Weaknesses reflect Calvinism
1. God has decreed to save through Jesus Christ those of the fallen and sinful race who through the grace of the Holy Spirit believe in him, but leaves in sin the incorrigible and unbelieving. This is election by foreseen faith. (The underlying biblical truth that makes this view false is God chooses those whose faith He credits as righteousness during their lifetime, not before creation.)

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.

2. Christ died for all men (not just for the supposed pre-selected elect individuals), but no one except the believer has remission of sin. (True.)

A hearty AMEN here!!

3. Man cannot do anything truly good until he is born again of God, in Christ, through the Holy Spirit. (Scripture says the unsaved can give good gifts to their kids, so discernment and choice is taught as a capability of the unsaved, limited as it is in that nothing the unsaved can do will result in earning salvation. If the point is in support of mystic mind manipulation (resistible grace) being necessary in order to overcome Total Spiritual Inability to enable us to place our faith in Christ, it is a false premise. Matthew 23:13 demonstrates that the unregenerate can believe in God and seek God yet be turned away by false teachings.)

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.

4. All good deeds or movements in the regenerate must be ascribed to the grace of God but his grace is not irresistible. (If we do something good, it was enabled by God’s grace, if something sinful, it is all on us, God’s grace did not cause it. True)

I agree with this, also!!

5. Those who are incorporated into Christ by a true faith have power given them through the assisting grace of the Holy Spirit to persevere in the faith. But it may be possible for a believer to fall from grace. ( Those incorporated into Christ are incorporated by God, after He credits our faith as righteousness. Scripture plainly says that it is not possible to become unsaved, but is possible to believe you are saved and then fall away from your “faith.” For people will say, “Lord, Lord” but Christ will say, “I never knew you” (Matthew 7:22-23.) Note “never”, not “I knew you once but no more.” 1 John 2:19 says that those who went out from us were not of us, again teaching those who fall away were never born again.)

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

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

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

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:

 

[Rippon]

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.

 

[Allan]

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

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

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.

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

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

He wasn't disagreeing

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

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

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!

 

[glfredrick]

Yet another off topic post calculated to bury in twaddle any meaningful discuss of the flaws in Arminianism.

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.

 

[Van]

Thanks Convicted1, the two points you disagree with are Arminian views.

You are correct, all men are without excuse. They may not have heard the gospel and therefore never had an opportunity to trust in Christ, but they did unto others not as they would have others do unto them. And for stuff like lack of integrity, they will be tormented, they will be in agony, and they face eternal punishment in eternal darkness.

And as far as falling from grace, we agree no one can lose their salvation, but they can enter heaven as one escaping from a fire, bringing little or no rewards with them, so they could fall away from the grace of earning rewards by being a faithful servant, building of the foundation of Christ with eternal stuff, rather than stuff that will burn up when tested.

 

[Van]

Propitiation cannot be provisional? Christ became the propitiation for the whole world, but the whole world is not saved. Therefore it is provisional, it provides the means of salvation for everyone who believes.

The assertion, propitiation cannot be provisional, is yet another attempt to rewrite the meaning of words to pour Calvinism into scripture. Note to put too fine a point on it but a propitiation is something that propitiates. Thus, by its very nature, it is provisional.

Scripture does not read, Christ propitiated to indicate a one time action, it says He became the propitiation for the whole world, 1 John 2:2.

Calvinism, as represented by the TULI, cannot be defended with scripture, unless you revise the scripture by changing the word meanings or grammar or both.

How do we receive the benefits of His propitiation? By being chosen individuallly before creation? Nope, we are chosen during our lifetime, placed in Christ spiritually, and God's wrath is taken away - the penality for our sins past, present and future - by the circumcision of Christ. Anyone God puts in Christ receives the propitiation, anyone not in Christ gets no benefit from Christ's sacrifice on the cross, they face the wrath of God who is angry with sinners every day.

 

[Van]

Then we get the write that foreknow means to be individually chosen. How convenient.
Folks, words have meanings and foreknow simply refers to something or someone known beforehand. Paul was "foreknown" by those who knew him when he was growing up. When a plan formulated in the past, including before the foundation of the world, is being carried out according to the foreknowledge of God.

Calvinism is built on rewriting the meanings of words to pour their doctrine into scripture.

Does foreknow only mean to choose individuals? Nope. Does foreknowledge only refer to chosen individuals? Nope.

Can foreknow refer to corporately elected individuals after they have been individually chosen and placed in Christ? Yes

Can foreknow refer to the aspect of being corporately elected, rather than individually elected? Yes.

Words have meanings, and we should stick with the meanings intended by the author rather than pour in our own to change the message to conform to our man-made doctrine.

 

[Skandelon]

Words have meanings, and we should stick with the meanings intended by the author rather than pour in our own to change the message to conform to our man-made doctrine.

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?

 

[Skandelon]

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.

Ad Hominem again? Is this necessary?

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.

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...

 

[glfredrick]

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...

 

[Skandelon]

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.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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

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.

 

[Skandelon]

Is everything about argument and debate with you?:

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.

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.

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 love the doctrines of grace with all my heart, and I think they are pride-shattering, humbling, and love-producing doctrines. But I think there is an attractiveness about them to some people, in large matter, because of their intellectual rigor. They are powerfully coherent doctrines, and certain kinds of minds are drawn to that. And those kinds of minds tend to be argumentative.

So the intellectual appeal of the system of Calvinism draws a certain kind of intellectual person, and that type of person doesn't tend to be the most warm, fuzzy, and tender. Therefore this type of person has a greater danger of being hostile, gruff, abrupt, insensitive or intellectualistic.

I'll just confess that. It's a sad and terrible thing that that's the case. Some of this type aren't even Christians, I think. You can embrace a system of theology and not even be born again."

- John Piper

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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.