Featured A Question for Calvinust here (Part 2)

With the difference that the Calvinist preacher does not conflate the means with God's sovereign work of election. We call on all who hear to respond but know that all cannot. The Arminian's theology takes God out of the equation in regards to salvation. It makes Him passive. God can do nothing unless the sinner chooses. The Arminian preacher finds himself convincing instead of convicting. That is what Finney did. He had to become a salesman to "win souls". It's the same thing when there is an altar call with 10 stanzas of "Just as I am"; it is preying on the emotions , not trusting in the converting work of the Spirit.

 

My walk with God never changed. I witness to the lost the same. I preach Christ in the stand, just as I always did before.

You just take what we say and it warp it into that which we didn't...myself, Iconoclast, Reformed et al. You're like a bull with his head down, pawing the dirt. You're not out for debate...only to defame...

 

God told the Jews of the OT to keep the Law or die. Did He know they could not, of themselves, keep it? Was He unjust in doing this? He knew they couldn't, and they died anyways. In your book, that makes God unjust...

 

If you believe that man possess the free will to accept/reject the gospel, then you are Arminian in your view of soteriology (salvation). There are a few on the free will side on this board who proudly accept the Arminian label, but for some reason the majority who hold to the free will view bristle at being called 'Arminian'. Being Arminian does not mean believing everything that passes for Arminianism. I am a Calvinist in my soteriology but not in my eccelesiology. Still I have no problem wearing the Calvinist label because it accurately describes my soteriological view.

Based on the totality of what I have read in your posts since I have been on this board I would confidently state that you are Arminian in your view of salvation.

 

Passive in the sense that God reacts to man's actions. If the sinner exercises the Arminian view of free will then God is by requirement passive.

 

Seriously? Holding to OSAS earns you the Calvinist label around here?

 

I think the problem Arminians have that are not SDA or Methodist for example is that it does not make sense to insist that you choose to accept the Gospel - but cannot later lose your salvation because of some choices you make after being saved.

At least I have seen one or two Arminians on this board in the past use that as their reason for being non-Calvinist-not-quite-Arminian.

Don't remember if Steaver is reasoning along those lines or not.

 

If that is the definition of "Arminian" that some use - then I suggest that we define our own term for "Arminian" one where God is incredibly active - but is doing so in a way that preserves (in fact enables) - free will for all.

I think there are 20 million or so SDAs that would join me on that one.

 

2 Cor 5 "We BEG you on behalf of Christ be reconciled to God" --

you walked into that one.

But that does not make God passive in "Convicting the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16

and in "Drawing ALL to Him" John 12:32

and in taking the action to "STAND at the door AND knock so that if ANYONE hears my voice AND OPENS the door I WILL come in" Rev 3

So as to enable free will and the opportunity of accepting the Gospel.

The 4 and 5 point Calvinist evangelist faithful to his model of salvation the state of fallen man and the sovereignty of God can only say at his evangelistic meeting "I do not say that God loves you - for He may not, I do not say that God will have you be saved at this meeting or that he died for you for in your case -- he may not have ... for indeed he might not have just so happened to select you... I do not say that your eternal destiny depends on what I say here today - or what you choose to do today. So lets all just have a seat quietly and wait for 30 minutes to see if God just might save someone while we wait".

in Christ,

Bob