Christ was Arminian?

KenH · Apr 19, 2003

Originally posted by Eric B:
this "mystery" of why some are chosen and not others will apparently remain a mystery even when we get there.

I am afraid you are reading too much into my response to Bob's silly scenario.

Yelsew · Apr 19, 2003

Eric, what do you do with Revelation 14:6 (see my previous post). The Gospel is for "ALL", not for some. Mystery solved, there is no "elect" except perhaps the 144 thousand "virgins" undefiled by women.

BobRyan, that is a qualification that one with a daughter left behind cannot meet.

KenH · Apr 19, 2003

Originally posted by Yelsew:
there is no "elect" except perhaps the 144 thousand "virgins" undefiled by women.

Whoops! Looks like you have some 'splaining to do, Yelsew.

Matthew 24:22(NASB)
22 “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.

Matthew 24:24(NASB)
24 “For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

Matthew 24:31(NASB)
31 “And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.

Mark 13:20(NASB)
20 “Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days.

Mark 13:22(NASB)
22 for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect.

Mark 13:27(NASB)
27 “And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven.

Luke 18:7(NASB)
7 now, will not God bring about justice for His elect who cry to Him day and night, and will He delay long over them?

Romans 8:33(NASB)
33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies;

Yelsew · Apr 19, 2003

Well, Ken you asked.

Matthew 24:22(NASB)
22 “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.

See Revelation 14:1-6 and

The great tribulation of Jerusalem
Matt 24:15. `So when you see the appalling abomination, of which the prophet Daniel spoke, set up in the holy place (let the reader understand),
16. then those in Judaea must escape to the mountains;
17. if anyone is on the housetop, he must not come down to collect his belongings from the house;
18. if anyone is in the fields, he must not turn back to fetch his cloak.
19. Alas for those with child, or with babies at the breast, when those days come!
20. Pray that you will not have to make your escape in winter or on a Sabbath.
21. For then there will be great distress, unparalleled since the world began, and such as will never be again.
22. And if that time had not been shortened, no human being would have survived; but shortened that time shall be, for the sake of those who are chosen.
23. `If anyone says to you then, `Look, here is the Christ,' or `Over here,' do not believe it;
24. for false Christs and false prophets will arise and provide great signs and portents, enough to deceive even the elect, if that were possible.
25. Look! I have given you warning.

Matthew 24:24(NASB)
24 “For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

Response,

The coming of the Lord and the prelude to it
II Thes 2:1 About the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, brothers, and our being gathered to him:
2. please do not be too easily thrown into confusion or alarmed by any manifestation of the Spirit or any statement or any letter claiming to come from us, suggesting that the Day of the Lord has already arrived.
3. Never let anyone deceive you in any way.
It cannot happen until the Great Revolt has taken place and there has appeared the wicked One, the lost One,
4. the Enemy, who raises himself above every so-called God or object of worship to enthrone himself in God's sanctuary and flaunts the claim that he is God.
5. Surely you remember my telling you about this when I was with you?
6. And you know, too, what is still holding him back from appearing before his appointed time.
7. The mystery of wickedness is already at work, but let him who is restraining it once be removed,
8. and the wicked One will appear openly. The Lord will destroy him with the breath of his mouth and will annihilate him with his glorious appearance at his coming.
9. But the coming of the wicked One will be marked by Satan being at work in all kinds of counterfeit miracles and signs and wonders,
10. and every wicked deception aimed at those who are on the way to destruction because they would not accept the love of the truth and so be saved.
11. And therefore God sends on them a power that deludes people so that they believe what is false,
12. and so that those who do not believe the truth and take their pleasure in wickedness may all be condemned.

Matthew 24:31(NASB)
31 “And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.

Revelation 14:1-6

Mark 13:20(NASB)
20 “Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days.

II Thess 2:1-12

Mark 13:22(NASB)
22 for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect.

II THESS 2:1-12

Mark 13:27(NASB)
27 “And then He will send forth the angels, and will gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest end of the earth to the farthest end of heaven.

Revelation 14:1-6

Luke 18:7(NASB)
7 now, will not God bring about justice for His elect who cry to Him day and night, and will He delay long over them?

Luke 18

1. Then he told them a parable about the need to pray continually and never lose heart.
2. `There was a judge in a certain town," he said, "who had neither fear of God nor respect for anyone.
3. In the same town there was also a widow who kept on coming to him and saying, `I want justice from you against my enemy!'
4,5. For a long time he refused, but at last he said to himself, `Even though I have neither fear of God nor respect for any human person, I must give this widow her just rights since she keeps pestering me, or she will come and slap me in the face.' "
6. And the Lord said, "You notice what the unjust judge has to say?
7. Now, will not God see justice done to his elect if they keep calling to him day and night even though he still delays to help them?
8. I promise you, he will see justice done to them, and done speedily. But when the Son of man comes, will he find any faith on earth?"

Doesn't really mean what Calvinists say it means.

Romans 8:33(NASB)
33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies;

[/quote]A hymn to God's love

Romans 8:31-39. After saying this, what can we add? If God is for us, who can be against us? Since he did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for the sake of all of us, then can we not expect that with him he will freely give us all his gifts? Who can bring any accusation against those that God has chosen? When God grants saving justice who can condemn? Are we not sure that it is Christ Jesus, who died, yes and more, who was raised from the dead and is at God's right hand, and who is adding his plea for us? Can anything cut us off from the love of Christ, can hardships or distress, or persecution, or lack of food and clothing, or threats or violence; as scripture says: For your sake we are being massacred all day long, treated as sheep to be slaughtered? No; we come through all these things triumphantly victorious, by the power of him who loved us. For I am certain of this: neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nothing already in existence and nothing still to come, nor any power, nor the heights nor the depths, nor any created thing whatever, will be able to come between us and the love of God, known to us in Christ Jesus our Lord.[/quote] Who is Jesus pleading for? All the "whosoever believeth's", at least that is what He Himself told us.

KenH · Apr 19, 2003

I am sorry, Yelsew, but I have no idea how your post is related to the fact that the Bible talks about Christians as the elect.

Yelsew · Apr 19, 2003

Sorry Ken,
I associated you as holding the same opinion about the elect as Frogman, Pastor Larry, and Tyndale1946.

You are using the same scriptures.

KenH · Apr 19, 2003

The elect are those who are saved by God. Now we may disagree on how they became elect, but they are the elect irregardless.

BobRyan · Apr 20, 2003

Ken
I agree with Yelsew and totally reject One-Note Bob's silly illustration, but just to play along with his game, here's how the illustration should read -

Then as noted = the theory you "prefer" is the one that says you are not "allowed to think the thought" of having a moments selfless concern for the fate of your child screaming in agony.

Nice going. It only "deepens the hole" for Calvinism as it paints a self-centered view of the saved and a monsterous view of God.

In Christ,

Bob

BobRyan · Apr 20, 2003

Ken -
Just admit it, Bob. Between Yelsew's right on the money battering of your position and my playing along by skillfully presenting a more accurate scenario, you're toast in this thread

Your "scenario" (as already noted) was the same as mine for the Calvinist case. It showed that the momentary selfless concern for the suffering child is terminated with joy over self-centered focus on the PARENT being blessed without a care about the fate of the child. (The child who is banished in Calvinism as God says to the parent who asks "COULDN't you have done SOMETHING to save my child as the SAVIOR of the WORLD?" - and God gives the Calvinist response "Why certainly I COULD have if I had CARED to")

Of course in Yelsew's model - EVEN that momentary selfless concern for the fate of the child "is not allowed" for the saints - and you fully embrace that as a "solution". But the fact that you are willing to entertain even a moments selfless concern for the fate of the precious child is highly commendable.

In Christ,

Bob

KenH · Apr 20, 2003

Originally posted by BobRyan:
It only "deepens the hole" for Calvinism as it paints a self-centered view of the saved and a monsterous view of God.

So, Bob, you think that trusting in God's righteousness in doing all things perfectly according to His will is self-centered. That's sad, Bob, real sad for you.

I don't know if I would characterize your view of God as monstrous, but it is certainly false and unBiblical.

And I notice you haven't provided any sources for your ideas for translation of Revelation 14:10. Somehow I am not surprised.

BobRyan · Apr 20, 2003

Yelsew
Eric, what do you do with Revelation 14:6 (see my previous post). The Gospel is for "ALL", not for some. Mystery solved, there is no "elect" except perhaps the 144 thousand "virgins" undefiled by women.

BobRyan, that is a qualification that one with a daughter left behind cannot meet.

As pointed out the saints are "With Christ" in His presence - as we see in 1Thess 4 "So shall WE EVER be WITH the LORD" (after the rapture).

We also have the statement of Paul in Phil 1 showing that the desire to "depart and be WITH Christ" is the focus of the "saints".

The Angels in Rev 14:10 are not omni-present - they are all in the presence of Christ and the wicked are tormented in the presence of Christ AND of the Angels (even in that view) - We too are in the presence of Christ (as saints).

Christ Himself declares in Luke 13 that it is not merely in the presence of the Lamb and the Angels - but the Saints are there as well and the wicked see them - just as well. Luke 13:28

The heartless concern that you propose (brought about by the zapped/pithed/whatever brain) would be "witnessed" by the suffering child.

There is no escaping this.

Fortunately - God does not present a case for "heartless disconcern" or "zapped brains" that are ignorant of the past and uncaring about our loved ones.

The Bible model is that of "informed motivation" where truths "that we can not bear now" are revealed in time. Instead of "knowing less" over time - the saints continually "know more". Decisions are made via informed choice and compelling informed presentations. The saints become MORE selfless and MORE caring and MORE informed over time.

As much my calvinist bretheren detest such a thing.

(BTW - the "virgin" status of the 144,000 saints of Rev 14 has to do with the James 4 concept of adultery vs purity seen in Rev 12. Not the idea that "they have no literal children").

In Christ,

Bob

KenH · Apr 20, 2003

Originally posted by BobRyan:
The saints become MORE selfless and MORE caring and MORE informed over time.

And how do you picture the saints watching their helpless child being tormented and being absolutely crushed emotionally by the sight and God, Whom you also picture as being absolutely crushed emotionally by the sight of what He is doing, resolving this issue so they can do something for the rest of eternity besides standing there being absolutely crushed emotionally?

Please tell us how you picture the rest of the story. I'm sure it will be interesting to say the least...or maybe the most.

Yelsew · Apr 20, 2003

Just to remind you all, I am not a hyphenated Christian. I am not a Calvinist or Arminian Christian. So please do not think of me as such.

Therefore, I am not taking sides.

Pastor Larry · Apr 20, 2003

Originally posted by Yelsew:
Sorry Ken,
I associated you as holding the same opinion about the elect as Frogman, Pastor Larry, and Tyndale1946.

You are using the same scriptures.

I think you are the one who is out of touch on the elect here. I don't think Ken differs that much from us. To deny the existence of the elect is to deny Scripture.

And I think you have made your side quite clear. Your rejection of the name does not change the content of your views. Let's dispense with the idea that you are "unhyphenated." It certainly is not true.

BobRyan · Apr 20, 2003

Ken

And how do you picture the saints watching their helpless child being tormented and being absolutely crushed emotionally by the sight and God, Whom you also picture as being absolutely crushed emotionally by the sight of what He is doing, resolving this issue so they can do something for the rest of eternity besides standing there being absolutely crushed emotionally?

Please tell us how you picture the rest of the story. I'm sure it will be interesting to say the least...or maybe the most.

#1. I already posted the first part of the answer - that shows that MORE information and MORE selfless concern reveals a God of Love in tghe Arminian model.

Here it is again.

Some have argued that plugging our doctrine into the future scenario to see what we are really saying about God - is not valid since our doctrines may not always fare well in that exposed light of day.

Lets try the Arminian view of the future - where you go to heaven as one of the "FEW" and find that your precious child was one of the "MANY" of Matt 7.

(Note: There is a God, there will be a day of judgment, not everyone is going to heaven. So we would then have the following scenario - that you might "expect" if the doctrines of Grace as seen in the Arminian teachings are true..).

When you go to the Lord and cry out "Oh my great God and Savior - couldn't you have done Something to spare my precious daughter from the fires of the 2nd death?"

By the doctrines of grace as taught in the Arminian model - ... God may well reply

"Why YES my child I loved them with an infinite love as Their tender Heavenly Father JUST as I loved you. I drew them to my heart of infinite love JUST as I drew you. I sent WAVE after WAVE of invitation, heart wrenching plea after plea - BUT In all this I did not force myself on them - JUST as I did not force myself on YOU.

THough I bled and DIED for them - and YES I could have FORCE both YOU and your child - but instead I Sovereignly Chose to Give you BOTH the ABILITY to see the light, to CHOOSE life or to CHOOSE your own selfish will.

And when you CHOSE against me - I CAME back with even stronger ties of love and compassion - ENABLING your choice of LIFE JUST as I did with your precious child.

And in the end - you ACCEPTED and your precious child - OUR precious child - MY precious child chose "NO".

My heart of infinte love is broken over that - but I also Sovereignly CHOOSE to enable my children to CHOOSE.

Of course the Calvinist may say of the Arminian God that we see pictured here "OH how TERRIBLE! How AWFUL" that God would "ALLOW selfless concern for our lost children EVEN for a moment once we are in heaven" (as some have said)... or that "God would LOVE our lost children" (As others have said) -- But I know that "not many" will do so - even among Calvinists because the comparison is obvious - blatant and clear.

And so - part A of Ken's answer.

In christ,

Bob

BobRyan · Apr 20, 2003

Part B of course is that (as already stated) "The wiping away of ever tear" for the Parent is described in Rev 21 AFTER the Lake of Fire sequence completes. In otherwords there is not "joyous bliss in uncaring ignorance while your child secretly suffers extreme agony in the presence of Christ and the Angels".

Rather - the event of Rev 20 completes - the new heavens and new earth of Rev 21 take its place and THEN with no suffering in all the universe - ever tear is wiped away.

It is MORE information, MORE love, More compelling evidence about what God is doing that leads to "every tear wiped away" not LESS knowledge, LESS selfless concern for others, and heartless disconcern for our lost loved ones cause by God "pithing our brain".

In Christ,

Bob

Yelsew · Apr 20, 2003

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Yelsew:
Sorry Ken,
I associated you as holding the same opinion about the elect as Frogman, Pastor Larry, and Tyndale1946.

You are using the same scriptures.

I think you are the one who is out of touch on the elect here. I don't think Ken differs that much from us. To deny the existence of the elect is to deny Scripture.

And I think you have made your side quite clear. Your rejection of the name does not change the content of your views. Let's dispense with the idea that you are "unhyphenated." It certainly is not true. </font>[/QUOTE]I don't think I've denied the existence of "the elect". In fact I have stated that the "the elect" are the 144,000 of Revelation 14:1-6. That is 12,000 each out of each of the twelve tribes of Israel. This makes more sense because they are "undefiled" by women as Jesus was, lived a "righteous" life (not necessarily sinless, but righteous). Jesus sanctified them out of the saints, thus they are the "Elect".

That is significantly different than the Calvinist "elect".

Yelsew · Apr 20, 2003

BobRyan,
If you can prove the events in Revelation are presented in Chronological sequence, then you may have a solid argument. So far you have not, and I know of no scholar who has.

BobRyan · Apr 20, 2003

All of Revelation does not have to be "in sequence" for Rev 19, 20 and 21 to be "in sequence".

In the case of Rev 19 (the second coming) followed by Rev 20 (the Millenium) and then Rev 21 (the New Earth), I know of no credible alternative among any theologians today.

If you are going to try to argue that the lake of fire occurs before the millenium OR that Rev 21 all by itself is nothing more than a jumbled sequence within the one single chapter - go ahead, prove it.

As you state - If we leave the Rev 19-21 sequence as stated in the chapters - my case is well made for "WHEN" ever tear is wiped away.

I can live with that "solution".

In Christ,

Bob

BobRyan · Apr 20, 2003

Ken
Just admit it, Bob. Between Yelsew's right on the money battering of your position and my playing along by skillfully presenting a more accurate scenario, you're toast in this thread.

On the contrary - in many respects you have "made my case easier".

#1. Your own scenario goes hand-in-glove with the one I gave for the Calvinist POV instead of refuting it. Which leaves even less room for you to complain when it is posted next time the subject comes up.

#2. The "glaring contrast" between the Arminian and Calvinist scenarios remains unchallenged AND the KEY Calvinist point "SURE I COULD have IF I had CARED to" remains unchallenged and viable as the REAL Calvinist answer.

#3. Your ADDED dimension offerred on this thread that NOT ONLY does God "NOT CARE" but He will not even "ALLOW a moments selfless concern for the suffering of your precious child - or any thought to that effect" - only "WORSENS" the picture that Calvinism needs to paint to complete its story.

I could hardly have gotten more help in presenting the problems with Calvinism on this point if I had paid you to do it.

Far from unhappy about the contribution you and Yelsew have made to complete the story, I am very grateful for you willing posts.

IN Christ,

Bob

Christ was Arminian?

Well-Known Member

Yelsew

Guest

Well-Known Member

Yelsew

Guest

Well-Known Member

Yelsew

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Yelsew

Guest

<b>Moderator</b>

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Yelsew

Guest

Yelsew

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member