Search results

I agree with your answer, BUT I did not ask if Calvinists believe that He died for all. I asked if the PRICE OF DEATH WAS PAID FOR EVERY MAN, as stated in the article of Arminius I posted earlier. The way I understand the issue is that the price of death (wages of sin) was paid for every man...

Amen. I certainly agree

Sufficient for all, efficient only for those who believe is correct. But Arminius went further. He said that the price of death was given for all and every one, but it is not communicated to all and ever one (only to those who believe.) Does TULIP's Limited Atonement teach that the price of...

People keep saying that Arminius believed in four of the five points of Calvin. This is simply not true. Limited atonement states that Jesus only died for the Elect. The statement below is from Works of Arminius volume two. It is in reference to "did Jesus die for all, or only the Elect". In...

A true Arminianism would agree with Limited Atonement, but not in the way defined by TULIP. And Irresistable Grace, as you said, is an imprecise term We agree regarding the fact that the atonement of Christ's blood Is applied only to believers, in that sense it is Limited. But most Calvinists...

Amen! These are definitely things we can agree on. Praise God for these truths

T T. Cassidy, I pretty much agree with almost everything you say. I think the misunderstanding was on my part, and merely a semantic one. What you call regeneration, I called the drawing of the Holy Spirit, but we believe basically the same thing on this, the terminology is different. I...

How does Jesus draw corpses and how does a dead person resist a call? I appreciate your answers, and I think we agree on much, but what OTHER Calvinists say seems to disagree with what you are saying. Or maybe it's just a tension that I'm not understanding

Yes, the difference is in one God draws (as you said) and the drawing can be resisted or rejected. The other side says God regenerates and the drawing is irresistable. More important is the question as to whether there is a real offer of grace to the non elect To say that they are a razors...

Good point, but your view of grace is irresistable in one sense, because he who God draws ( or what you called regeneration) will infallibly come. They will infallibly believe. Then also, those who God passes over have no real offer of saving grace. This is the main place where the disagreement...

I own them and the quote I gave was from his works (though I got if online, because I couldn't find volume 1 )

He does not appear to have believed in Irrresistable grace... ..."is the grace of God a certain irresistible force?" That is, the controversy does not relate to those actions or operations which may be ascribed to grace, (for I acknowledge and inculcate as many of these actions or operations...

As long as you don't have the Spirit indwelling a person before justification, then I can go along with that. Well as long as you don't have the Spirit indwelling a person before faith and justification, I'm Ok with that. I understood "regeneration/the New Birth to occur when the Holy Spirit...

I agree with this, except that there is no regeneration unless the Spirit comes and indwells a person. Do you hold that the Spirit indwells people BEFORE they are justified? Your doctrine has God coming and taking up His abode in us while we are still under the condemnation of sin and...

NO, that is a false statement. No one is conflating justification with regeneration. What I am saying is that justification is necessary to remove the guilt and condemnation of sin, and I cannot see God taking up His dwelling in us BEFORE the guilt and condemnation of sin are dealt with by...

I never said the opposite of tulip is CA. And if you read my posts with understanding, you would know that I do not hold to "opposite of Daisy". Also, you would know that I am not semi pelagian and I do not accuse C.A of being semipelagian. In fact, I said that that was a misrepresentation.

Give me the most glaring example of something that disagrees with C.A. It will make it simple if I can show that the one you find most glaring does not contradict. And if it does, I will show that it does not contradict scripture. And while in points, Calvinism and classical Arminianism are...

I have not found irresistable grace in the writings of Arminianism or the remonstrance. Do you have citations for this. Besides this, can you tell me ONE thing that I have said that disagrees with Classical Arminianism?

Classical Arminians do not believe in irresistible grace. I'm apparently not the one who needs to brush up on classical Arminianism. If I thought grace was irresistible, I would accept TULIP en toto. To say that God's saving grace is offered to all AND is irresistible would amount to universalism

A. If a person has not been justified, they are lost. B. Justification is through faith. For them to be justified through faith, they must have faith. C So yes, lost people can believe and be saved. Do you suppose a person who has not been justified is lost? Of course. Can a person who is...