The Nature of Theology

[TCassidy]

Arminianism teaches four of the five....I'm don't see how they would teach the last.

How would "without Christ, men are depraved" be understood to agree with the Arminian doctrine that man is depraved but not so depraved he cannot still seek after God and is good enough to love God and come to God even though depraved?

"Or that man is saved due to no merit of his own?" Except for his own "innate faith?"

"Or that salvation is only for believers?" But Christ died for everybody without exception and it is only rejecting His atonement that results in eternal death?

"Or that grace draws the lost to Christ?" Except for those who resist His grace?

"Or that a saved person is preserved unto the end?" Even James Arminius believed this needed further study.

So, if an Arminian denies this does that mean the Arminian gospel is not the true gospel?

I love it when we have an actual discussion of these issues instead of ducking and dodging and trying to avoid the questions.

 

[JonC]

How would "without Christ, men are depraved" be understood to agree with the Arminian doctrine that man is depraved but not so depraved he cannot still seek after God and is good enough to love God and come to God even though depraved?

"Or that man is saved due to no merit of his own?" Except for his own "innate faith?"

"Or that salvation is only for believers?" But Christ died for everybody without exception and it is only rejecting His atonement that results in eternal death?

"Or that grace draws the lost to Christ?" Except for those who resist His grace?

"Or that a saved person is preserved unto the end?" Even James Arminius believed this needed further study.

So, if an Arminian denies this does that mean the Arminian gospel is not the true gospel?

I love it when we have an actual discussion of these issues instead of ducking and dodging and trying to avoid the questions.

I do not see many of those statements regarding Arminianism to be reflected in many od their doctrinal statements. That Arminianism holds as foundational the necessity of the work of the Spirit in salvation, and without such no man will be saved, is stated fairly clearly in the articles challenged at Dort. But they do believe this differently.

Arminius did leave the security of the believer open, and there was a disagreement there. If I recall he even stated that there are passages that seem to indicate man can fall away. Again, however, there are differences in belief here. I don't think OSAS is biblical, but I affirm the eternal security of the believer.
To answer your question, I do not think Arminians believe another gospel.

 

[JonC]

Hi Jonc,

I don't think your two 'If so's' that precede this above statement follow or flow into your next 'If so' shown above. You may have gotten 'If so' happy? If not, can you explain how it does because I don't see how it fits?

Also, since I am fully aware of the errors ('flawed understandings' per you) of Arminianism (or so-called) it would be honest of you to not just label Calvinism as flawed, but explain as to why.

I also wish you'd use the Word more often in your interactions.

Of course there is only one Gospel; Galatians 1:8ff. Some say there are two. Scripture disagrees with this false dichotomy.

To so-called or alleged 'Arminians' (who are generally not but are non-Calvinists) to me, and to many others, and I believe according to Scripture as well, preach a truncated gospel message. This message guarantees a person heaven, a retirement in the heavens that is guaranteed on the basis of a prayer too many times.

This is preached instead of preaching the vital need of a Savior who will save them from their sins, and change their life now, Matthew 1:21, Romans 6:1ff of the evidence of sanctification being necessary, Hebrews 12:14; of the necessity of repentance, Mark 1:15, Acts 2:38, Acts 17:30; and the necessity of a change via true conversion, 1 John 1:1ff; 1 Corinthians 5:17. Instead men are guaranteed something wonderful to happen.

When they die.

But nothing transforming has to happen at this point, as evidence of conversion is generally mocked in this 'other gospel' message.

I agree with you, brother, that what is sometimes referee to as Arminianism here is often something else. And there are false gospels out there....probably some holding falsely to a correct understanding of the gospel as well.

I believe that all of our theologies are less than perfect and that we should be cautious not to lean on our understanding. There is a difference between what we believe about the gospel and whether or not we believe the gospel.

I have chosen not to provide a list of passages as my point here is the flaw inherent in our theologies. Not that we abandon theology but that we are discerning when it comes to that relationship between what is revealed by God and what is inferred through our understanding. I also believe that we all are capable in terms of biblical literacy and while I have actually used several passages I have not cited them as such. This would be different if we were debating Calvinism or Arminianism. I see weaknesses in both (in my own views as well). Unfortunately, it seems to me that there are some people who cannot discern where Scripture itself ends and their unferstanding begins.

 

[TCassidy]

I do not think Arminians believe another gospel.

So, where a believer in Particular Redemption as opposed to General Redemption, you would side with those who teach a General Redemption and thus relegate those believing in Particular Redemption as preaching another gospel?

 

[JonC]

So, where a believer in Particular Redemption as opposed to General Redemption, you would side with those who teach a General Redemption and thus relegate those believing in Particular Redemption as preaching another gospel?

No, not at all. I believe that Christ died so that all may believe but at the same time that He died to redeem only those who would believe (the elect).

I actually side with the belief that God through Christ was reconciling the world to Himself. God (the Father) has life in Himself and granted the Son also have life in Himself. The Father gave Christ the authority to judge because He is the Son of Man (Christ was made as sinful flesh). Men will one day be resurrected, some to life and others to condemnation. All things will be subjected to Christ (except, of course, the Father) and then Christ Himself will be subjected to the Father so that God may be in all.

But I recognize, to the best of my ability, what is my understanding and what is Scripture. Those who teach Calvinism, Arminianism, Amyraldianism … and even those theologies that are not of Calvinistic trajectory….all teach the gospel (hopefully), but they do so through a theological system that is subject the imperfections that are inherent to man.

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC


.

But there is also a reason that we are commanded not to lean on our own understanding.

Our own understanding has to do with our own carnal thoughts , without the revealed word of God.
Man as a restored image bearer is meant to be an analogy of God....we are to think God's thoughts aftyer HIM.
eccl12;
12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.

13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

God has an eternal purpose...a Covenant....
He reveals this Covenant to the Church...

First individually; Psalm25
8 Good and upright is the Lord: therefore will he teach sinners in the way.


9 The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.


10 All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.


11 For thy name's sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.


12 What man is he that feareth the Lord? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.


13 His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth.


14 The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.

The sheep partake in this Covenant, the Lord illuminates them and them alone.

EPH3;
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
This speaks of truth that is revealed or illuminated to the Church...It does not say we can never know it, or unless you are completely perfected you cannot know.

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC

δοῦλος, post: 2218314, member: 12639"]No, not at all. I believe that Christ died so that all may believe but at the same time that He died to redeem only those who would believe (the elect).

This statement as written is false....many never even heard about Jesus...ever, died and perished in their sins...there was no potential salvation at all. This line of reasoning denies the revealed Covenant relationship between the members of the trinity, and the elect.
In trying to "bridge the gap" you exceed what is written.

I actually side with the belief that God through Christ was reconciling the world to Himself.

The extent of the reconciliation is worldwide in scope, but not extended to non Covenant persons at all.
Those at the White throne judgment cannot be rightly said to be reconciled at all.

The Father gave Christ the authority to judge because He is the Son of Man (Christ was made as sinful flesh).

Christ did not have "sinful flesh"....that is why the incarnation was necessary. I think perhaps you did not type this clearly.

But I recognize, to the best of my ability, what is my understanding and what is Scripture. Those who teach Calvinism, Arminianism, Amyraldianism … and even those theologies that are not of Calvinistic trajectory….all teach the gospel (hopefully),

This can be debated for sure....God can work through cults, but that does not mean they are necessarily preaching the gospel. Scrpture speaks of another gospel and another Jesus ,and another spirit.


4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

 

[TCassidy]

I believe that Christ died so that all may believe but at the same time that He died to redeem only those who would believe (the elect).

So salvation is ultimately up to man, not God? Those who will believe will be saved and those who won't believe won't be saved? Why is one willing to believe but the other is not willing?

This is beginning to winnow down to my (perhaps too subtle) point.

What, exactly, is the Gospel?

Paul tells us exactly what the Gospel is in 1 Corinthians 15:3&4 "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures."

Notice two important things. Who did Christ die for? He died for "our" sins. Who is the "our" Paul is taking about. Every person without exception? Or for us, the elect?

And where in there is the requirement for a sinner to "believe" or "repent" or "pray the prayer of faith" or "walk the aisle" or any other thing?

It looks to me as if Paul is presenting the Gospel as a fait accompli. Am I wrong?

 

[JonC]

JonC


.

Our own understanding has to do with our own carnal thoughts , without the revealed word of God.
Man as a restored image bearer is meant to be an analogy of God....we are to think God's thoughts aftyer HIM.
eccl12;
12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.

13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.

God has an eternal purpose...a Covenant....
He reveals this Covenant to the Church...

First individually; Psalm25
8 Good and upright is the Lord: therefore will he teach sinners in the way.


9 The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.


10 All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.


11 For thy name's sake, O Lord, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.


12 What man is he that feareth the Lord? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.


13 His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth.


14 The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.

The sheep partake in this Covenant, the Lord illuminates them and them alone.

EPH3;
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
This speaks of truth that is revealed or illuminated to the Church...It does not say we can never know it, or unless you are completely perfected you cannot know.

Icon,

I do not know if you have realize it, but often you seem to present Scripture as proof text, but only on the condition that it is accepted with your theological explanation in tow.

For example, here you seem to take the statement “the secret of the Lord is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant” with the understanding that those “secrets” are extra-biblical understandings (theology….not only Scripture but the reasoning and hermeneutics used in interpretation and doctrinal development) given via special revelation. The reason that your theology is correct, in this model, is that God granted it to a smaller portion of Christians so that they have this knowledge which has been hidden from the majority of believers (non-Calvinistic believers have simply not understood properly those doctrines). This is called Gnosticism (it’s the “blue lodge” for Christians, so to speak).

Now how do you know that his view is correct? It seems that the reason is it is your understanding…your belief. If you were an Arminian then Arminianism would replace Calvinism as that true theology given by special revelation. In fact, you can fill in the blank on the theology of which this could apply as everyone believes their understanding to be correct.

I firmly believe that God has led me through study and prayer to leave several Calvinistic doctrines behind. At the same time, I am grateful for having held that position because it corrected other errors. For future reference, and ease of posting, it is not necessary to type out each passage. I think for the most part where we disagree is not an unknown verse but interpretations of passages we both fully know and appreciate.

 

[JonC]

JonC

This statement as written is false....many never even heard about Jesus...ever, died and perished in their sins...there was no potential salvation at all. This line of reasoning denies the revealed Covenant relationship between the members of the trinity, and the elect.
In trying to "bridge the gap" you exceed what is written.


The extent of the reconciliation is worldwide in scope, but not extended to non Covenant persons at all.
Those at the White throne judgment cannot be rightly said to be reconciled at all.

The Father gave Christ the authority to judge because He is the Son of Man (Christ was made as sinful flesh).

Christ did not have "sinful flesh"....that is why the incarnation was necessary. I think perhaps you did not type this clearly.


This can be debated for sure....God can work through cults, but that does not mean they are necessarily preaching the gospel. Scrpture speaks of another gospel and another Jesus ,and another spirit.


4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

Nope...the statement as written is absolutely and undeniably true. My belief may be false and you may disagree with my line of reasoning...heck....my reasoning may even be inconsistent and illogical....but that I hold it is true nonetheless. Biggrin It is, however, very consistent. You and I do not share the same framework or theology in getting to the conclusion that Christ died to redeem only the elect. We can affirm the same truths in one sense, but they mean different things to us (there is a danger of talking past each other here). But it is true that I believe Christ died so that all may believe but only to redeem those who believe. That provision was eternal (the Cross was not necessarily limited in power to a specific time...it's effect is eternal). Those who never heard of a cross, much less Jesus dying on one, in the Old Testament are also among those for whom Christ died.

 

[JonC]

So salvation is ultimately up to man, not God? Those who will believe will be saved and those who won't believe won't be saved? Why is one willing to believe but the other is not willing?

This is beginning to winnow down to my (perhaps too subtle) point.

What, exactly, is the Gospel?

Paul tells us exactly what the Gospel is in 1 Corinthians 15:3&4 "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures."

Notice two important things. Who did Christ die for? He died for "our" sins. Who is the "our" Paul is taking about. Every person without exception? Or for us, the elect?

And where in there is the requirement for a sinner to "believe" or "repent" or "pray the prayer of faith" or "walk the aisle" or any other thing?

It looks to me as if Paul is presenting the Gospel as a fait accompli. Am I wrong?

Salvation is completely up to God. Those who will believed will be saved and those who won’t believe won’t be saved. None are willing to believe, all have rejected God and all reject Christ. I was once a person who rejected Christ (I was a sinner, and I was unsaved). But God worked in my life (and my will) and drew me to Himself. In other words, I believe that Christ died so that everyone could be saved even though it was a reality that no one would be saved. At the same time He died to redeem those who the Father would give Him – those who would believe (those who God draws, the elect). The reason is for the glory of God and not man.

That is the question. What is the gospel. It is the “good news” of the Who…not the what (just putting a little Barth in there for flavor). The passage in 1 Corinthians 15 is dealing with the resurrection and the hope of the believer in a bodily resurrection. I do see it as a general statement (not one indicating that death alone as effectual, but that Christ died for our sin, was buried and raised as evidenced by witnesses. Paul’s argument is against the denial of a bodily resurrection, not that salvation was not made possible to mankind.

I don’t know about a requirement to “pray the prayer of faith” or “walk the aisle”, and am really not aware of a theology that believes those to be requirements. But if you are asking if we are required to repent and believe the gospel of Christ then this is something that I believe. I also believe it is a requirement for all, failed by all, but made a reality by God in the lives of some. Probably no need to argue that part because it is only the last part (those who are saved) that really matters here.

 

[Iconoclast]

Icon,

I do not know if you have realize it, but often you seem to present Scripture as proof text, but only on the condition that it is accepted with your theological explanation in tow.

That is how it seems to you...not so to others.

For example, here you seem to take the statement

Careful here JONC....do not read into my statement. My statement will stand as written...I do not need someone adding their thoughts to my statement...like this;

“the secret of the Lord is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant” with the understanding that those “secrets” are extra-biblical understandings (theology….not only Scripture but the reasoning and hermeneutics used in interpretation and doctrinal development) given via special revelation.

I am able to type all those words if I want to...but I carefully word my statements to avoid such error.

The reason that your theology is correct, in this model, is that God granted it to a smaller portion of Christians so that they have this knowledge which has been hidden from the majority of believers (non-Calvinistic believers have simply not understood properly those doctrines).

This is an over -simplification and a falsehood once again. There are many reasons some see the truth, some see part of, and some are NO CHRISTIANS at all.

This is called Gnosticism (it’s the “blue lodge” for Christians, so to speak).

Nonsense....I am not advocating any such gnostic thought. Do not say I am. This is why I say...let me post what I do...you post what you do...

Some things we will find agreement on... somethings we will oppose each other.

Notice...I do not suggest your ideas come from some failed ideology like gnostic heresies...so try and restrain your self from going there, unless you are sure I post such a thing.

Now how do you know that his view is correct? It seems that the reason is it is your understanding…your belief. If you were an Arminian then Arminianism would replace Calvinism as that true theology given by special revelation.

Arminianism is a heresy...pure and simple. they departed from the truth not the other way around...

 

[JonC]

That is how it seems to you...not so to others.

I don’t pretend to speak for anyone but me.

Careful here JONC....do not read into my statement. My statement will stand as written...I do not need someone adding their thoughts to my statement...like this;.

Theology by definition is “extra-biblical.” Otherwise it would be called Scripture. And again…my addition of “seems” was intended to facilitate correction to any misunderstanding that I may have had with your comments.

This is an over -simplification and a falsehood once again. There are many reasons some see the truth, some see part of, and some are NO CHRISTIANS at all.

That is exactly what I mean, Icon. It seems to me that you chalk up those Christians (those true believers) who hold a different theology as seeing in part and those who see the truth as holding your theology. By Gnostic I mean the methodology, not the content (hence the “blue lodge” comment). But you do have my apologies if you took my comment to mean that you believed gnostic heresies. I stand by my assessment of the method, but did not mean to imply that your theology was heresy.

Arminianism is a heresy...pure and simple. they departed from the truth not the other way around...

Is Arminianism then “another gospel” that results in a false belief (they are not Christians at all because they reject the gospel of Jesus Christ)?

.

 

[TCassidy]

Salvation is completely up to God. Those who will believed will be saved and those who won’t believe won’t be saved.

That seems like a contradiction to me. It is completely up to God except for who believes?

 

[JonC]

That seems like a contradiction to me. It is completely up to God except for who believes?

No. My understanding is no one who is saved is in a state of rejecting Christ, they all believe. And that belief is of God.

In other words, it is not a contradiction at all. My belief is that we are saved through faith and not of ourselves, that salvation is a gift of God.

So for my edification, TC and Icon, how many are saved who do not believe in Christ and how many are saved who God did not elect?

 

[Iconoclast]

No. My understanding is no one who is saved is in a state of rejecting Christ, they all believe. And that belief is of God.

In other words, it is not a contradiction at all. My belief is that we are saved through faith and not of ourselves, that salvation is a gift of God.

So for my edification, TC and Icon, how many are saved who do not believe in Christ and how many are saved who God did not elect?

I'm driving right now but I should be at a keyboard in about 30 minutes about 30 minutes I'll be online and be glad to answer

 

[JonC]

I'm driving right now but I should be at a keyboard in about 30 minutes about 30 minutes I'll be online and be glad to answer

Thank you, Icon. Please just explain how my view of salvation through faith with God providing that faith (actually, God providing salvation as a whole) is a contradiction. Then perhaps we can continue on the topic of the OP of whether or not theology can be considered special revelation (this is an interesting discussion, maybe we should follow it as well but I'm just concerned it'll turn into a Cal/Arm debate....and being neither that really wasn't my intention).

 

[TCassidy]

My belief is that we are saved through faith and not of ourselves, that salvation is a gift of God.

Not of ourselves except for us exercising our innate faith?

So for my edification, TC and Icon, how many are saved who do not believe in Christ and how many are saved who God did not elect?

None and none. Obviously.

 

[JonC]

Not of ourselves except for us exercising our innate faith?

None and none. Obviously.

We do not have innate faith unto salvation to exercise.

Both Calvinists and Arminians (the two groups I mentioned) agree at least on that point.

The third article (of the five articles of the Remonstrants) states that “man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, insomuch as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do anything that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is); but that is needful that he be born again of God in Christ, through the Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, or will, and all his powers, in order that he may rightfully understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good.”

The Canons of Dordt in answer to the Remonstrants state that “all men are conceived in sin, and are by nature the children of wrath, incapable of saving good, prone to evil, dead in sin, and in bondage thereto; and without the regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit, they are neither able nor willing to return to God, to reform the depravity of their nature, or to dispose themselves to reformation.”

Neither claim that we are saved by exercising our own innate faith....I certainly didn't claim that to be the case and neither does Scripture.

Paul states that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and that there are none righteous, none who understands, and none who seeks for God.

Has anyone here claimed that we exercise our innate faith in salvation, or are you still winnowing down to your point?

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC

No. My understanding is no one who is saved is in a state of rejecting Christ

,
Of course not. If they are saved from their sins, and rejecting Christ is a sin....then they can no longer remain in their totally depraved condition...

they all believe. And that belief is of God.

Yes....Jn 3;16 is very clear...everyone believing will be saved.....everyone believing and continuing to believe has eternal life.....Eternal life...is eternal
Okay.....I will address these questions and if time permits re-visit the one that got cut off by accident...

In other words, it is not a contradiction at all. My belief is that we are saved through faith and not of ourselves, that salvation is a gift of God.

Agreed here....

So for my edification, TC and Icon, how many are saved who do not believe in Christ and how many are saved who God did not elect?

here you speak words that we agree on, but now I will go back and see if this remains so!

from post51

Salvation is completely up to God

.
Okay...we both agree with Jonah.

Those who will believed will be saved

The way you word this...is not correct. Those who will believe?????.....there is no one who will believe apart from God working in them....so this is why we are seeing an inconsistency in your posting

and those who won’t believe won’t be saved

.

All men are born in this condition .....only those elected by God unto salvation will believe.

None are willing to believe, all have rejected God and all reject Christ

.
Okay....back on track....

I was once a person who rejected Christ (I was a sinner, and I was unsaved). But God worked in my life (and my will) and drew me to Himself.

agreed

In other words, I believe that Christ died so that everyone could be saved

????There is no scriptural basis for this belief.....
JONC......if we agree that no one believes apart from God given faith as you have posted,and God does not elect everyone to believe....
How do you propose "that everyone COULD believe????God does not stop them, but they have no desire for God....so who is this everyone who could believe????CautiousCautiousCautious

Explain this how this is not going in two directions at the same time.Cautious

Nope...the statement as written is absolutely and undeniably true. My belief may be false and you may disagree with my line of reasoning...heck....my reasoning may even be inconsistent and illogical....but that I hold it is true nonetheless. Biggrin It is, however, very consistent.

show how Jonc