Arminius drenched with contradictions

Is this which I have placed in bold letters the words of Arminius or of those he is arguing against?

does it seem to be denying the foreknowledge of God?

Bro. Dallas

 

No one deserves grace. But if God were to make possible grace to some and not to all, at this point He would become an unjust God. One of His attributes, as you know, is His Divine justice. Therefore, the concept of 'Particular Election' flies in the face of God and makes Him to be a bias God in matters so great as eternal salvation.

It is interesting that God tell us to 'love our neighbor as ourselves' and that we should forgive seventy times seven times, but God can get away with only loving His elect souls. Get the point?

 

Once again, Ray, you are not making sense. I have received somethings in my life that I didn't deserve. Does that mean that the person I received them from was unjust because you did not receive them too? More importantly, does that mean that God was unjust because he blessed me with some things he did not bless you with? That is simply bad thinking.

You believe that everyone deserves grace and it is therefore unjust if they do not get it. The Bible teaches that no one deserves grace and whoever doesn't get it has no right to complain. It is your sense of justice that is messed up, not God's.

 

npetreley & Pastor Larry,

Your childen may or may not deserve a special treat of ice cream cones other than they were created by you. Give one the treat and pass by the other two and see if they think you are fair/just. Let me know what they say when you speak to them about this idea. I will be glad to hear your honest answer.

We studied rectoral justice, distributive justice and remunerative justice. On top of this God's justice is infinite and without a cintilla of favoritism.

The Rectoral justice of God recognizes God as being the moral ruler who ministers His moral law in the world, promising reward for obedience to Him and punishment for disobedience.

Distributive justice relates to the execution of His law in terms of both reward and punishment.
Remunerative justice which is a reflection of His love means that He ministers rewards to the obedient; on the negative side retributive justice means that He administers wrath by which He punishes the wicked.

Never in this world has God ministered regeneration to some and neglected this same possibility to everyone. His justice forbids it!

 

Assuming this has been translated accurately, </font>[/QUOTE]You assume inaccurately.

James is expounding upon the portions of the supralapsarian position in which he disagrees and why he disagrees with them.

Thanks for giving more evidence to my claims on the other post that Calvinists are ignorant of the Arminian position. You all can't even follow the indept arguments of that day. (but I won't pretend its always easy for me, I do have to wade through it as well, but I try to be a little more careful before I go posting misquotes. I suggest you do the same.)

 

when does the parent/child relationship begin Ray to our knowledge it begins at the moment we experience the new birth, in God's eternal knowledge the reality of this relationship is real, but not acted upon until we, having been moved by regeneration of the Holy Spirit experience a Godly sorrow for our sin and sinfulness and repent. Then God enters into a father/child relationship. Not before.

In another place our Lord asked Peter what was it to him if he willed for John to remain until he returned.

Uh-oh...God does have differing plans for his children; but John did not have to suffer to go where he would not as Peter did.

Consider the whole of Scripture when making an answer.

God Bless
Bro. dallas

 

Huh? Yes, I know he disagrees with this viewpoint. That was not in question. And the issue of translation was whether or not the word "deny" was appropriate. I assume you have his original work, which you have checked and determined that "deny" was inaccurate, after which you deemed it appropriate to say that I assumed inaccurately that it was translated properly. </font>[/QUOTE]Your not understanding me still. The phrase "decreed to deny grace" is the language chosen by the supralasariuns who don't try to gloss over the fact that their system teaches double predestination and therefore would say that God does "decree to deny grace." If you have problems with that wording take it up with Arminians opponents. BTW, Arminiaus never says he thinks that unfair of God he said, "they are neither placed in a possible condition nor in any capacity of believing or of being saved." Which is a charge that Double Predestinationists are ok with. They would say, "Your right God doesn't ever make it possible or give man the capasity." Some Calvinists, even ones on this board, deny that charge saying that it is possible but that man is just unwilling. Why do they go to the trouble of making that distinction? Because they recognize the scriptural support for man's capasity to believe and God's geniune desire for them to do so, but still seek to maintain a Calvinistic view of predestination.

Nick, I think you are more in the camp with the Supralapsarians so you are somewhat blind to these distinctions. But, I think someone like Larry or Russell55 as examples would be more careful separate themselves from them.

 

npetreley,

I am not trying to be harsh but "Particular Election" is totally opposite of the Lord God's moral standard of His Divine justice. He has implanted in our hearts as sinners and saints with some degree conscience and morality, at least until a sinner abuses his conscience.

Particular Election is off the scope. God cannot tell Christians to love each other and then turn around and autocratically damn, at will, the majority of His created beings. This is totally against His sense of moral integrity and contrary to His moral ways in dealing with people.

I also notice that you changed what I said about your children and the ice cream to another unrelated example. I am a father of three adult children. When they were children and even now as adults I still try to treat them equality. Believe it or not, I was created in 'the image of God.' Should we think in a lesser way about the Lord? I still believe God is Divine and remains and always will be a God of Divine justice/fairness.

I understand that you believe a different theology so my views seem to be wrong. Always keep in mind that He is a God of justice and all of Scripture will dovetail into His perfect plan for His creatures and will His moral universe.

 

Autocratically or not, since you are not a postmillennialist, you believe the majority will be in hell. What does it matter whether it was autocratic or not? Their fate is still the same.

Therefore, to use this against the Biblical teaching of Calvinism is specious on your part.

 

Brother Dallas,

We well understand that God has a plan for each of us as childen of God as He did with John and Peter.

We are simply trying to get some of you to realize that God is not partial, as you portray Him being. He died for all human beings on the Cross. [I Tim. 2:4 & 6]

As far as God only getting involved in our lives only after He regenerates us is an erring view. God goes before the sinner to preparing His life where that lost person can respond to His ministry on the life of the needy soul.

Also, I don't think you want to say that God does not manifest His governance over all human beings whether saved or lost. If it was not for Him no one would ever have a human birth into His world. His blessings fall on the just and the unjust. [Matt. 5:45] ' . . . for He maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.'

Balance my friend, balance.

 

Ken H,

It is true that the number of the elect is without doubt set.

We object to the view that God only loves and regenerates certain people because it smears the very reality of God and His ways in the lives of the lost ones. It should always be our goal to present God in truthful ways.

 

I see. So you are calling me and all Calvinists liars, then?

 

So you are saying that salvation ultimately depends not upon God but upon people, then?

 

I don't believe I did say anything resembling this.

Bro. Dallas