Christ was Arminian?

Please quote my post where I denied that Jesus is the payment for sin in that he was not punished! What I said is that God did not punish Jesus, man did! God allowed it and in fact made is so from the foundation of the world! But God did not do the punishing, Man did! God made Jesus the Payment for the sins of mankind. Those who believe in Jesus do not face further punishment, they will not be cast into the lake of fire. Those who do not believe in Jesus face the second death which is being cast into the lake of fire. God put His only begotten Son between man and the lake of fire. Man has the option of believing in Jesus or proceeding unhindered to the lake of fire.

I have clearly stated often on this BBS that belief is not a work, there is no energy expended (a requirement for something to be a work) in coming to belief. Acceptance of truth requires no work! If you think otherwise, you are free to post your reasons for thinking that believing is a work! The scripture that states believing is the "work of the Father" does not mean that the Father works to believe, what is there for omniscient God to believe? The work of the Father is that we believe in His Son. Jesus completed that work by atoning for our sins. The evidence for who and what Jesus was and is, exists and is readily available for ALL men to examine for themselves, and arrive at a conclusion of belief in Jesus or non-belief in Jesus. Yes, the Holy Spirit most definitely influences the evidence in the spirit of the one coming to belief.

You say that "only the elect" can be saved yet the scriptures you post such as John 10:16 do not support that position. You consistently deny that John 3:16 is Jesus opening the door for anyone who believes in him. You say that man does not have the ability to believe without first being regenerated by God, evidence says that man has the ability to believe regardless of what is to be believed. You consistently deny that man has the attributes that God made man to have. You consistently make claims for the attributes of God that quite simply are not true. For example: Grace, You say that God gives his grace in many forms. First, Grace is an attribute of God. Attributes are that which is true of the one possessing it and cannot be given away or transferred from the one having it to another who does not. You say that because man sinned, God altered his created man, taking away attributes and abilities that God put into man at the creation, yet provide no evidence that is true. I have never said that man remains in the original position of his creation but have in fact stated that because man sinned, he separated himself from God who is holy. However, that separation did not alter God's creation. The creation remains as God made it.

I have no control over how you feel about Calvin. All I can do is strongly inform you of how I feel about your false accusations.

Well you have not read them very well for you have not understood. Either that or you are deliberately attempting to provoke anger by your false accusations. Grace? I'm not convinced you have the foggiest idea of what Grace is. If you regret my anger, then stop falsely accusing me

We are to do nothing about it! You are to do something about it! I am not the one to determine what hope you may or may not have! You may well be an example of the fulfillment of scripture.

Why haven't you posted your testimony? Having an akinship with the church is not the same as professing the Lord Jesus Christ as your own personal savior.

Not sure of your point here.

If you feel those accounts are complete fulfillment of prophesy, then you must believe that the 1000 year reign of the Christ has occurred and that satan has been released from the pit, and that judgment has taken place. Where's the evidence?

I have read several versions of this, and have come to the conclusion that those versions are incomplete.

Are you saying that I don't have a strong position and need reinforcement from the opinion of others?

What do you do with the scriptures that warn man against falling away. Man fell away in the Garden, and over the centuries has continued to fall away. Those who do not fall away are those who put their faith to work, and those who stand up for Jesus (great title for a song).

God does not change, nor does he deny his word. Man is the variable! What do you do with all the scriptures that warn man against falling away? About being deceived?

 

Thanks Yeslew...

Now I don't know whether to Believe Jesus or not when He said "My Father which gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one."

You have completely destroyed my faith in the words of Christ, but the up-side is that you have given me a great faith in man.

Bro. Dallas

 

Congratulations, you're saved!


I suspect, however, you're not convinced!

 

Said the Arminian to the Calvinist!

You should have posted that on the Humor thread.

 

Topic: Christ was Arminian?
Yelsew

1,000 Posts
Club
Member #
4504

posted

Ken the Spurgeonite,

quote:

You've hit the nail on the head there. The false teaching of the
Arminians is caught in quite a theological quandary on this subject.
They come up with verses that they try to use to say that Jesus
died for the whole world, then they turn right around and limit the
power of the atonement without a single verse to defend their
position. They in essence teach that "Jesus died for the whole
world, but not really." It is a two-faced argument they attempt to
use and I refuse to buy it.


Let's try Romans 3:23, "For ALL have sinned and come short of the Glory
of God". If ALL have sinned, and Jesus' Atonement was for the sins of the
world, then the atonement is for ALL who have sinned!

It's odd that Calvinists cannot make that connection. Quandary Dismissed!

Posts: 1321 | From: The West | Registered: Sep 2002 | IP: Logged |


Yelsew

1,000 Posts
Club
Member #
4504

posted


quote:

As for me, I'll stick with the Biblical teaching, and the necessary
logical conclusion, that anyone for whose sins Christ Jesus
suffered and paid the penalty for, will be, indeed must be saved,
and cannot end up being anything other than saved.


The bible does not teach that! It is illogical to conclude that all who Jesus
died for will be saved. Consider the Broadway to hell and that Narrow way to
heaven. Consider the Lake of fire. Consider the Great deception of the end
times when many will be deceived and fall away.

What you have said here is that because Jesus suffered and paid the penalty
for all mankind, that ALL mankind will be saved. The bible says that is the
Fathers will, but that it will not happen thus the Father created the Lake of
Fire for those who do not believe in His son or the atonement he provides. If
you are teaching that you are a false teacher, and not worthy to be heard.

Posts: 1321 | From: The West | Registered: Sep 2002 | IP: Logged |


Frogman
1,000 Posts
Club
Member # 684

posted


quote:

'Logically these elect cannot lose their salvation, the debt is paid in
full and no further suffering is required.'

Although I agree with this part of your post, we can also say that Christ died for the sins of the world, [I John 2:2] but this does not mean that salvation is secured for all human beings. Simply stated there is no universal salvation and Heaven for everyone. The plan that God sovereignly designed makes believing and trust in Jesus as the only criterion for finally being saved. [John 3:18 & 5:24]

 

Christ is infinitely greater than any man or humanly made theology; I cannot emphasize this enough. I will, however, suggest that Arminian theology fits well within what He has taught us on the pages of holy writ. We have found that one does not have to twist Scripture or do mental gymnastics in order to write it down in a clear and Biblical manner.

One day we will all see that there were no conscripts in Heaven or Hell. The human being is invited to drink of the water of life freely, [John 7:37] not by compulsion through an alleged "Effectual Calling."

Jesus in His own words makes no limitation as to who can drink deeply of the Living water but lays the responsibility firmly on the human being. 'If any man thirst, let him come to Me, and drink. He who believes on Me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.'

Notice Jesus says you come to Me if you want salvation. He paid for the sins of all lost souls, [I Tim. 2:4 & 6; Hebrews 2:9]; now He expects them to respond [John 3:16] to His calling by the Holy Spirit. [John 16:8; Rev. 22:17]

I won't expect anyone will try to take these Scriptures and say that they do not match the statements that I have made in this post. There is no other explanation.

 

I have never stated that salvation is universal, but only those to whom God Wills, to these he shall send forth His Holy Spirit, to these the Holy Spirit Will teach the Gospel, to these by the Power of God, Christ becomes their daysman, when a man comes under the visitation of the Holy Spirit and repents of his sin(s) and sinfulness then he becomes a child of God, but this is not a case of daily God is being surprised that this drunkard has chosen to believe, that murderer, this theif, that adulterer, this compulsive lier.

Brethren, if Christ did not pay in full the sin debt for believers, then there will be no man who is subject to the flesh and with a propensity to sin who shall enter into that full and final rest at the throne of Grace. I believe this and I will stand on it as Bible regardless of the attempts of any to deny its truthfulness. If any one is able to escape from the Good things of God, if any one is able to be cast off then Christ has made himself a lier when He called his gift to those who come eternal life. If once again we are able to fall into the old man, then the new man has not been formed in us. If we are able to form the new man in us, then we have no use for the Bible, the sacrifice of the Lamb of God nor any of it. If one is able to be lost again then we find the will of man is stronger in choosing disobedience and death and even that were we to claim the devil as tormenting us and sometimes causing our backsliding, if this were permitted that we enter into a state of death once again, then if any are to be found at the throne of Grace, thier presence there will be not by the Grace of God, but the mercy of satan.

Bro. Dallas

 

What do you find in your statement that permits you to declare to me that I am saved? In this statement I declare a faith in man. Yet you congratulate me and say that I am saved.

You are correct in stating that I am not convinced, man has not convinced me of anything.

Bro. Dallas

 

I agree.

I disagree.

All one must do in the Arminian theology is deny that Christ has suffered and died and been raised the firstfruit of the resurrection and that He alone purged us of our sins. This is not bad hermeneutics, exegesis. Nor is it considered bad to declare congratulations to one who has declared a loss of faith in the words of Christ, this is denying the Word of God BTW, and would never in a true NT church be accepted as even close to an experience of Grace, especially when one attaches to it the faith received is one in man. Yet Yelsew did this and you remain in a position to argue with me??

I am a child of God, I have given my testimony here and in other places, I have been convinced by the power of God that I am a worthless creature worthy only of the flames of Hell and I have cried out to the Lord for mercy, none of this will a Calvinist deny as being necessary for salvation. But none of this is the act that bought any who do so, that act ultimately is the death, burial and resurrection of the Son of God.

I remain in my position, even stronger, that in order to prove man is worthy that some will exalt man above God. This is not a Biblical position. I care not who may or may not doubt my salvation, I have said that I know in whom I have believed. I thirst not, I hunger not because I have been eternally satisfied by the God of creation through the Lamb He has provided.

I agree. Man's will is broken and he is regenerated and he willing calls on the name of the Lord. Those who experience this become those who thirst, who are heavy laden, who call on His name, none other.

You of course are right, Jesus does not make any limitation upon who can drink deeply of the Living water, but of course He did say "IF ANY MAN THIRST" you suppose this thirst to come from one who is happy in his sins, who does not know that he is in opposition to God; this is not so brother, the fact remains that God must send to any who will thirst His Holy Spirit to cause this thirst. Man thirsts of himself to continue to enjoy the pleasures of the flesh and to continue in sin. How can one say he is thirsting for the things of God when he has all his heart desires to make him happy?

These scripture have already been dealt with by me, you know what I believe they teach. Heb. 2.9 is perhaps the one exception, but you will find this is written after Heb. 1.3 where we are told that Jesus purged us of our sins, then he sat down on the right hand of the father; if He purged us of our sins, then what is there left for us to do that we may complete this purging? Unless we desire to please man.

I appreciate your stedfastness, but this is the wrong place to post such talk if you do not expect any to refute it. To imagine there is no other explanation, I guess you have that freedom, but I also am a witness against this statement.

Bro. Dallas

 

Okay, so I HAD to respond to this!

Wrong. That is exactly what Arminians believe. Read Arminius to see it for yourself.

What a sentence. Many Arminans, and Arminius himself did not believe that a person could lose faith in the words of Christ.

Yelsew by his own admission is not an Arminian. He's something else. I don't know what - but he's not an Arminian. This is a straw man.

Hey - that's what Arminians would say, too!

Again, you're not in disagreement with Arminians here.

Arminians, true to the Word, don't do this. Again, don't use Yelsew as the standard for Arminianism. It'll mess you up.

 

Do Jesus words, ' . . . he who cometh to Me shall never hunger; and he who believeth on Me shall never thirst,' sound like a God Who picks and chooses? Calvinism destroys, for the most part, man's responsibility toward holy God. It's kind of like just waiting and seeing if God cares enough to tap the sinner on the shoulder. But then since only the relative few will get saved [Matthew 7:14d] and finally make it to Heaven, the lost people's chances are miniscule at best.

Is there any qualifier in Deuteronomy 30:19? It sure looks like a choice for those of us who have studied English grammar a tad. The living Word of God says that God has set before the people life verses death, blessing verses cursing and that He desires that they and their future posterity will find God and live forever. Oh, by the way I left out at least two words where God says, 'Choose life!' This points to what God calls freedom of the will, or 'free will.'

Let's see how people diminish these sacred words and twist them back into John Calvin's immature attempt at exegesis even after ingesting Augustine's mental and quasi theological gymnastics.

 

Ray, great post. I would like to post Deut. 30 so that all will read it if I may:

Notice the verse that I have highlighted in bold. Does that sound fimiliar to anyone else?

Look at Paul's words in Romans 10:

God said, "Oh, that you would choose life, that you and your descendants might live!

He is pleading with them to choose life. Is that a geniune plea of a God who truly desires for his people to choose life, or is that a God, who chose to impute total inability upon all mankind thus binding them in their choice to sin, and who is just saying this so as to cover his backside when he comes to judge them?

I think I'll believe God was geniune in his desire for them to choose life and I can only believe that if I believe God has given them the ability to make that choice. A choice without any options or ability to choose otherwise is not a choice. It's like Saddams idea of democracy, there is one name of the ballet and you better choose it. That's not a choice.

[ April 15, 2003, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Brother Bill ]

 

Brother Bill,

That was a good comparison when you brought up Saddam and his ballot system.

If God only handed out a limited amount of ballots so select sinners could write Yes on them for Heaven and refused to even hand out ballots to all of His creation we would have a new attribute of God called the Attribute of Partiality. This alleged attribute is exactly what one of aspects of His Personality would have to have been in order for God to have given us something like the Calvinist's, Particular Atonement/Limited Atonement.

 

God is not a politician, nor a tyrant. We cannot draw a comparison to Saddam Hussein in any way or measure.

Thanks for your post Scott, you are right, it wouldn't hurt me to read Armineus, but it also wouldn't hurt if I read Calvin. I haven't found the source yet, but I remember reading where Spurgeon Commended Calvin's Commentary because he never attempted to sidestep or twist scripture that seemed to be at variance to his theology, instead he simply presented the plain meaning of the scripture. I thought I would look this up and post it, it should be an interesting discussion. I believe the quote can be found in Spurgeon's Comments on Commentaries to his students at the Pastor's College. Perhaps Ken would know the source. But this would definitely show that some of the accusations pointed toward Calvin are not warranted either. If I find it, perhaps I will post it.
Bro. Dallas

 

The above quote is taken from the most recent post of Bro. Bill, I have a question concerning this statement that is directly related to this portion of it.

If we are to take this in the sense that I interpret from Bro. Bill's post, wouldn't we then be forced to say that our actions also affected the position of our children, then wouldn't this ultimately serve to disprove the historical baptist position against infant baptism?

Seems to me that it would what do you guys think?

Bro.Dallas

 

Thanks for your honesty. At least we both agree that many of the people who post here as Arminians are not our rule for what Arminianism really is. Tell you what, you read some of Arminius, and I'll read some of Calvin. Deal?

 

Sorry Scott, I don't believe in playing cards

I will read some of Arminius, but this is a vow from a strict Baptist who doesn't agree fully with John Gill, so I can't promise anything. As far as 'converting' that will not happen because I am confident in the truth of the Doctrines of Grace as I believe them. But I can see the advantage in knowing the real position of the Arminian.

What do you call the other position that is represented on here? Is this strictly 'Free-will' theology?

Bro. Dallas

 

I have an honest question. How can Calvinists speak of Docrtines of Grace when behind the title--God selects the majority for Hell and only saves the relative few? Is this something to shout about? [Matthew 7:13-14]

I think that we have reason to rejoice in our Doctrine of Grace because God overlooks no human being as to his or her personal salvation. All He asks is to believe and trust in Jesus. [John 3:16]

Do you see why we think your Doctrines of Grace contradict the true justice and love of God for all of His created human beings.