A Question for Arminians (or no-name theology believers)

[Aaron]

It doesn't say all are made alive, it says, "it brings life to all men." It brings the gift or provision of life to all men, as referred to earlier in that verse.

So when the Scriptures say that sin brings forth death (James 1:15), it isn't saying that men are made dead? That sin just brought death and it's only effectual if men meet certain conditions? Or that when it says the clouds bring rain (Prov. 16:15, RSV) that there really is no water until men do a little rain dance?

This is the kind of tedium that makes many good men simply abandon their attempts at interaction with you. These men think that your problem is a simple misunderstanding, that reason and rational discourse will turn you from the error of your ways. What they don't count on is your disingenuine redefinition of words and the absolute disregard of the normal and customary usage of the parts of speech. But I am not a good man, and I don't think you are genuine. I know and quite expect that if it served your purposes, you would argue that "recover" means "to cover again" and "unloosen" means "to tighten." But I'm willing to take it on just for the fun of it. That, and for the edification of Calvinists.

I know that when you read James 1:15, you see "sin, when it is finished, makes a man dead." And when you read Proverbs 16:15 in the RSV, you know that clouds bringing rain means it rains despite any will or purpose of your own.

So you have a tough time arguing that when the Scriptures say that the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men, that it isn't saying all men are made alive.

But this is where the law comes in to explain it. The Levites received tithes of all the other tribes, but to whom did the Levites pay tithes to? They paid tithes to Melchizedek, the Priest of the Most High God. How? Through Abraham. Levi was yet in the loins of Abraham when he paid tithes to Melchizedek (Heb. 7:9-10)

And so, "all men" who were in Adam died when Adam sinned, for we were in Adam's loins when he sinned. In the same way, "all men" who were in the Second Adam when He acted righteously, are made alive.

That is what is being said in Romans 5.

 

[Aaron]

You can surely come up with a much better excuse of justifying your immaturity than that, pressed for time or not. Does mommy need her laptop back?

Notice that I didn't say that you aren't an airhead. I merely mimicked your style in my reply. An unadvised act, I'll warrant, but there it is.

 

[Winman]

In response to Aaron in post #168, Ezekiel 18 refutes your view.

Eze 18:2 What mean ye, that use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? 3 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

The Jews actually believed as you, that sin is passed down, if the father ate a sour grape, his son's teeth were set on edge. And God says this is false, but every man dies for his own sin. And this is further confirmed in vs. 20.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. THE SON SHALL NOT BEAR THE INIQUITY OF THE FATHER, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be UPON HIM, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be UPON HIM.

So, you take a verse that is not even speaking of sin to teach that sin is inherited from our father, when God clearly and plainly says the son shall not bear the iniquity of his father.

Your view is error.

 

[menageriekeeper]

Hmm, that was a rather long interuption. But I fit supper and choir practice into the break so all is good. Back to the discussion. All quotes are still from GLFrederick's posts 114 and 115 on page 12 of this thread:

That God's election FEELS like our own choice is a given. That's the way we are wired, and we, like so many of the characters in the Bible cannot see the spiritual realm that is ever active to accomplish God's will in so many ways as to be astounding in their utter complexity. When I accepted Christ, it "seemed" to me as if I was making a decision, and indeed I was.

"Feels like" and "seemed"? Wasn't it you who told me I needed to move past the emotions of the issue? (just kidding)

Seriously now, either you made the decision to believe or you are still unsaved. The scriptures say "believe and be saved", they don't say "wait until God gives you the ability to believe and then believe and be saved". While I won't deny that God is able to accomplish His will in spite of man, but that does mean that He imposes His will on any.

Quote:
Originally Posted by menageriekeeper
Therefore, while Christ's blood will certainly only cover the sins of believers, it is available to cover the sins of every man if only they would chose to believe.

Here you are fiddling about with the utter power of God to accomplish His divine will. You are also on the edge of blasphemy by suggesting that Christ could not 100% accomplish exactly the purpose for the Father's sending, i.e., to redeem the elect.

How did I suggest that?

Anyhow, do you not limit what Christ accomplished by saying it only applies to those few that God has arbitrarily chosen? "Oh, well Christ didn't have enough to sacrifice to be suffecient for the whole entirity of humanity so He only accomplished the salvation of the select elect few". That, my friend is what edges on blasphemy.

The way around this issue is to realize that "all those who chose to believe" ARE the elect,

LOL, are you SURE you are a Calvinist??? Of course those who believe are the elect, us free willers have been saying this for years.

He would not, nor actually could not, atone for those who are and would remain lost, or else they would either not be lost (universalism), or if they were atoned for the elect and no longer counted with the reprobates.

Ah, here's the rub. You seem to see no difference in attonement provided and attonement made/applied. ( maybe you are a Calvinist after all)

There is no "conditional" aspect to the atonement, whereby God must foreknow who will actually believe before He sets in place the mechanism for salvation.

I agree. God could have and apparently did set up the mechinism for salvation before man was created and therefore before Adam ever considered disobeying that one little rule that God gave him.

We cannot will righteousness (required if lost persons are responsible for coming to Christ on their own power) nor can we will a return to our lost state once "in Christ" for "we are not our own, we were bought with a price."

We don't have to will "righteousness" we only have to will belief. We are made righteous after salvation by the effects of attonement.

I agree (for i am not Arminian) that we cannot return to our lost state once we are saved, for the exact reason you have stated and also because if we are "made a new creature and the old is passed away" then the state of "being lost" is no longer available.

More tomorrow....have a nice night!

 

[Aaron]

In response to Aaron in post #168, Ezekiel 18 refutes your view.

Eze 18:2 What mean ye, that use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? 3 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

The Jews actually believed as you, that sin is passed down, if the father ate a sour grape, his son's teeth were set on edge. And God says this is false, but every man dies for his own sin. And this is further confirmed in vs. 20.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. THE SON SHALL NOT BEAR THE INIQUITY OF THE FATHER, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be UPON HIM, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be UPON HIM.

So, you take a verse that is not even speaking of sin to teach that sin is inherited from our father, when God clearly and plainly says the son shall not bear the iniquity of his father.

Your view is error.

*sigh*

Did Levi pay tithes in Abraham or not?