Christ was Arminian?

[npetreley]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> npetreley

For the gazillionth time, this verse describes calvinism perfectly. Whosoever believes will certainly have eternal life. The question is not who believes or whether they believe, but how they come to believe.

For the gazillion and 1 time - Calvinism states "IT is not YOU who WILLs it is NOT whosoever WILLs - but it is God who WILLS. MAN is DEAD in SIN - incapable of doing anything. God so loved the world that WHOSOEVER HE WILLED to select-elect-enable might BE ALIVE - and then SEE that they have ALREADY been given eternal life BEFORE they willed ANYTHING at all" ("Calvinism 101. Day two").

Instead of that Calvinist model - Christ present the Arminian model of God Loving the entire WORLD and then Giving His Son without restriction so that WHOSOEVER WILLS (man) to accept that unlimitted gift - should be saved.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]You are not making sense. You are attempting to defend your interpretation of "whosoever believes" by saying Calvinism talks about "whosoever will". That's not even within light years of being a rational defense.

The fact is that the "whosoever" in "whosoever believes" does not say anything whatsoever about free will. One could just as easily say, "whosoever has a broken nose" or "whosoever was born with brown hair" or, to put it in terms that come closer to a calvinist interpretation, "whosoever swims to that island over there". One cannot suddenly decide of their own free will to swim if one is unable to swim for any reason, but the statement is no less valid because of that possibility.

Now, if you want to bring "will" into it, then let's talk about that -- but talk about it separately, in the proper context. Here are a couple of examples for you to get you started:

John 1:11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Romans 9:16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Agreed - it is "unqualified" ALL.

Right.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
No restrictions.

Possibly wrong. The fact that it is unqualified in the text means there may be unspoken restrictions. I don't think there are restrictions, but that is my interpretation of the text, not precisely what the text says. The text does not tell you if there are restrictions.

From the context, I believe that the "peoples" interpretation is correct, so Jesus is saying all peoples (no restrictions) but not all people (every human being). But that's still just an interpretation. Neither interpretation -- mine or yours -- is something one can prove conclusively from this text alone. You have to compare it to other texts in order to understand it.

 

[Yelsew]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Yelsew - I am reading the "Christ a Calvinist?" thread and there you debate with Pastor Larry and "appear to be Arminian" in all 5 points of the Calvinist distinctives.

So what are you and I debating here? Just OSAS??
Loss of free will after getting saved??

In Christ,

Bob

I'm not sure you and I are opposed in debate.

I know that Jesus says that He will never leave us nor forsake us. But I've never heard a human say the same for Jesus with any surety. Therefore if one deliberately moves away from Jesus it may be possible for one to condemn one's self through loss of belief, or changes in persuasion. But Jesus (God) is not the one who moved!

I have never met a person who has lost anything of what God created him to be by changing his persuasion. Therefore the freewill possessed prior to Salvation is possessed through and after salvation. The persuasion change causes the changed person to exercise self control in a manner that Honors the Savior, and therein the perception that one loses freewill.

So I don't know if we are debating opponents or not.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Clearly you would like to focus on the Matt 13 parable INSTEAD - since it is less devastating to the Calvinist position on the surface than Luke 8 is.

I can understand why you would prefer to do that - but why not answer Luke 8 and then start a separate response dealing with Matt 13 on its own?

I don't want to focus on either. They're parables. They illustrate concepts, they don't mirror precise soteriology.

I was attempting to demonstrate that very thing by pointing out a contrasting parable. If you want to interpret Luke 8 as if it's a literal precise description of salvation, then you'll have to do that with Matthew 13, and you'll end up with a Bible that (according to your own interpretation of Luke 8) contradicts itself.

 

[DanielFive]

If Arminians are right and Christ has died for all the sins of the world (ie.every person ever born) why then does anyone go to hell?

What sins are they suffering for, given that Christ has suffered once so that all sins may be forgiven.

It doesn't add up.

Christ's substitutionary work was truly vicarious so that since He has died for sin, the one who trusts in Him cannot and will not die for the same sin. God in His justice will not require the damnation of the one for whose sins Christ has already suffered. Therefore if Christ has suffered for all sins then no-one need suffer in Hell.

It makes perfect sense that Christ suffered only for the sins of those who were predestined to eternal life, ie the elect. (Limited attonement)

It follows that all those for whom He has suffered will be irresistably drawn to Christ and will be saved. (Irresistable Grace)

Logically these elect cannot lose their salvation, the debt is paid in full and no further suffering is required. (perserverance of the Saints)

The elect may suffer through loss of assurance etc. brought about through failure to live a Godly life but they can never lose out on the reward of eternal life won for them by Christ at Calvary. In saying that they can lose this reward you are actually saying that Christs sacrifice was insufficient.

How can you arminians explain this?

 

[BobRyan]

Npetreley
I was attempting to demonstrate that very thing by pointing out a contrasting parable. If you want to interpret Luke 8 as if it's a literal precise description of salvation, then you'll have to do that with Matthew 13, and you'll end up with a Bible that (according to your own interpretation of Luke 8) contradicts itself.

I "suppose" I could "Deal with the Matt 13 topic" by only talking about "Luke 8" as you seem to propose in your response to Luke 8 - by only addressing Matt 13.

But a "better approach" would be to actually look at Luke 8 when talking about Luke 8 and look at Matt 13 when talking about the parable of the weeds.

In the case of Matt 13 the "GROUND" is NOT the symbol for the people, for humanity. We we totally forget all application to Luke 8 and start off on the new illustration of Matt 13 dealing with the reality of unconverted people that are placed in the church to slow it down.

A very different problem being addressed here. But Christ makes a good Arminian point EVEN in Matt 13 arguing that we "must" let the weeds grow with the wheat LEST we risk losing some of the wheat when taking out the weeds.

And of course the Calvinist objects says "what? Risk losing the Wheat?? no such thing!! The Wheat CAN't be lost once saved - weeds or no weeds"

No place for Calvinism to run.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

If Arminians are right and Christ has died for all the sins of the world (ie.every person ever born) why then does anyone go to hell?

"Christ is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT for OUR SINS only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2:2

Calvinism responds "I do NOT believe that Christ died for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD. So let me ask you Arminians who DO belive that - WHY do sinners still die in hell if Christ REALLY died for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD?".

#1. Let me ask Calvinists - "IF you REDEFINED the term WHOLE WORLD to mean 'arbitrarily selected FEW of Matt 7' - then WHY don't you say ' The WHOLE world is SAVED' - 'The Whole World will Go to heaven'"??

#2. 1John 2 does not say "Christ is the atoning sacrifice for the whole world and the whole world is forgiven without repentance or accepting tghat sacrifice"... BUT if we WERE Calvinists - we WOULD have to conclude that.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[William C]

Originally posted by enda:
If Arminians are right and Christ has died for all the sins of the world (ie.every person ever born) why then does anyone go to hell?

What sins are they suffering for, given that Christ has suffered once so that all sins may be forgiven.

It doesn't add up.

Depends on who taught you math.

Christ died for all who believe. Limited atonement (in my opinion) should not be our point of contention. Unless your a universalist we all believe the atonement is only applied to believers.

IMO, we should focus on the foundational point of Calvinism which is Total Depravity, or better stated "total inability," which is not taught in scripture.

 

[Frogman]

Depends on which scripture you are reading and teaching from.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by enda:
It doesn't add up.

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.

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.

Hallelujah! Jesus actually saves, not merely potentially saves, as the false teaching of Arminianism promotes.

 

[Yelsew]

Ken the Spurgeonite,

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!

 

[Yelsew]

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.

 

[Frogman]

Logically these elect cannot lose their salvation, the debt is paid in full and no further suffering is required. (perserverance of the Saints)

The elect may suffer through loss of assurance etc. brought about through failure to live a Godly life but they can never lose out on the reward of eternal life won for them by Christ at Calvary. In saying that they can lose this reward you are actually saying that Christs sacrifice was insufficient.

Isn't funny how that Calvinists (generally) have a greater confidence in the salvation of even those who believe in the free-will of man, thus believing they made a choice for Christ, than what they have in their own.? My grandparents believe just as Yelsew, that God does not cast man away once he is saved, but that man is able to walk away from God. They believe this even though Christ said my Father is greater than all. This is my problem with the Armenian and/or Free-will view, they limit God and exalt man. (To me though it is the most logical of their arguments, if I choose something, then I can unchoose it). All this choice, however, is based not upon Spiritual regeneration, but intellectual processes of man. The 'belief' is considered to be an intellectual choice where one day you accept it, the next you don't, supposing that a person knows the good things of God, but then hears a more persuasive argument. These also will not take the fact that if they go out from us it is because they were not of us statement of John either, why? Because this is the logical end of the Scriptural teaching of Election.

How can you arminians explain this?

This is a very good question preceded by a very sound post. Amen!! Enda.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

[Frogman]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
Ken the Spurgeonite,
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />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! </font>[/QUOTE]First you post this, then you say this:

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.

Jesus died for all, yet is unable to perform his promise in John 10.16 to bring all he died for also. Your willing even to contradict yourself to think you have won a debate

Then you try to make Ken's statement that of a universalist when it is not; in doing this you completely disregard the depth of John 1.29 in assuming the world is equated to man. You deny other scripture that teach that Christ will one day rule in righteousness, but that when the kingdom is delivered up to God then righteousness shall dwell in the earth and not only rule and reign. This is taught at I Cor. 15. Righteousness does not dwell in the earth at present, and righteousness does not at present rule over the earth; the God you serve must wait until the choice of man makes this biblical truth a reality. Even as he must sit on his throne in heaven and wait for man to validate the completed work of Christ.

How can a God unable to save his people ever hope to cause Righteousness to dwell in the earth?

You make the whole counsel of God to be as nothing.

Because you cannot bear the thought that man is not sovereign. Abandon your position now, it is a bucket full of holes and will carry no water for the satisfying of your thirst my friend.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

There is nothing in scripture that says "Atonement Saves".[/b] Yet you make the connection that it does!

It is time for you, Bro. Dallas, to stop your false accusations against me. I have never posted anything that exalts man. I have in many instances viewed salvation from the human perspective, but I have never said that man can save himself nor can man cause God to do anything other than what God has said he does and will do. I have never raised man above the status of "created being". I have consistantly described man the way God created him and the way that man is today. You have failed to convince anyone that I am wrong!

John 10:16. And there are other sheep I have that are not of this fold, and I must lead these too. They too will listen to my voice, and there will be only one flock, one shepherd.

There is no promise made in this verse. This does not say that Jesus saves all whom He died for!

John 1:29. The next day, he saw Jesus coming towards him and said, "Look, there is the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world.

I seem to be the only one posting here that makes regular reference to Jesus as the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. However I find nothing in scripture that declares the "taking away of sin" is equivalent to "Whosoever believeth in Him..." Those who do Believe in Him, will accept the atonement for what it is, payment of the wages of sin.

I have never once denied that Jesus will return and setup His kingdom here on earth and will reign in Righteousness for 1000 years. Your accusatory comments are ludicrous, You truly are a false teacher. I demand that you cease and desist your false accusations!

_______________________

Use of profanity will not be tolerated. You have been warned Yelsew. Do not do it again. Discuss things with grace and tact, not with profanity.

[ April 14, 2003, 09:08 PM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]

 

[Frogman]

payment of the wages of sin.

You have denied that Jesus is the payment for sin in that he was not punished in the stead of believers. Yet, it is upon Jesus that all punishment for the sin of believers falls. Then, how is it that God is Just in punishing the Holy One of Israel, but then he shall punish unbelievers once again for the lack of paying for these sin? If belief is not a work, you have alot of explaining to do, and I would appreciate it if you would provide more scripture to support your accusation that I am a false teacher when all that I say is that man is no longer in the place where God created him and your only contention against me, according to your previous post is that you consistently argue man has remained in that place, well, friend, if I have upset you I am sorry, If I have wronged you may God judge between me and thee, I am satisfied from Scripture and my conscience which He purged from dead works that I may serve a true and living God, that I may offer my body a living sacrifice which is my reasonable service, that my position is Scriptural. If man remains in the original position of his creation, then God made a terrible mistake in sending into the World the Holy One in order that the sin of the world can be paid; and not only was it a mistake, but one that once He started He could not abort. I simply have consistently stated that you exalt man over God because your use of Scripture only to show a pretext for man to believe apart from the empowerment of God to do so is biased and is so from your human emotion.

Your reaction makes me feel as if Calvin is not the only one who would gather the faggots and kindle the fire.

I regret angering you, but I have over and again read your posts that over and again claim the Word of God to be anything but inerrant. You, sir, are entitled to your opinion, you have God fearing historically Sovereign Grace Christians to thank for that luxury, but if you are not careful in the hogwash that you accept and believe as truth you will not even recognize the time for what it is when they remove this freedom from you and myself.

Furthermore, If I am a false teacher, what are we to do about it my friend? Do you believe that there is a shred of hope in me yet? Or would it not rather be true that this is so that the Scripture might be fulfilled?

I am a child of God; I have felt the presence of God in my life long since now that I cannot remember, as a young child of 7-8 yrs of age I could not rest on Sundays when my parents failed to take myself and our family to the House of God. As I said before, I am not offended by your reaction, you do not know me except for what you read of my posts and as has been proven the written word from man can be just as deceptive as can man's own heart.

I am willing to stand by the conviction of my heart, whether this is similar to what some man somewhere named Calvin believed or not, I care not. I serve a God who visited Laban the night before he overtook his son-in-law in the desert and warned him against harming the chosen one of God. This same God has not changed over the centuries though we are able to travel through time and place via the WWW, our God has remained "I AM THAT I AM" just as he visited Laban, so then he visits the hearts of men, women and children and they are constrained to perform HIS WILL and cannot perform that which they would, whether good or bad in the eyes of men.

Read of the history of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman Army. Compare the orders issued to this army and the prophecy declared by Christ and then tell me your view is correct and my own false.

You can find the prophecy of Jesus concerning Jerusalem in the Word of God and you can find the historical occurrance of the event in whatever source you desire, from Josephus forward.

Then read some humanistic, intellectual works, such as The Columbia History of the World and come back and tell me how far men get in knowing God through Christ by human intellect and will.

Again, I am sorry for causing you distress, and am grieved that you would feel it necessary to resort to clicking onto the Graemlin, yet I am unmoved by your accusation of my falsehood, I know whom I have believed and your posts are unable to convince me that you are even certain of your own salvation as you seem to post that man can wonder from the heavenly calling of which he has once been made a partaker of. As to whether you are able to convince others of your position, I know not, but I will stick to the Creator of all that is, and will trust in His Name and will stand therein until the last day; at that time if He turns me away, then He will have then denied His Word, Himself, and all the counsel and Decree of God. If you believe He is able to do this, then so be it.

Thank you and God Bless.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Frogman]

posted April 14, 2003 07:08 AM

Yelsew,

I would appreciate an answer to the above referenced post. I will continue to keep this post on top until you do address it. Thanks.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

[William C]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />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. </font>[/QUOTE]I hear ya Yelsew. Personally I don't think this point is worthy of debate but I still hear ya.

You believe that Christ died for all of mankind, but the atonement itself is only applied to those who believe? Right?

See, don't have a problem with that because scripture doesn't explain the application of the atonement in detail, but we can all be fairly certain its only applied to true believers. We all agree on that, so what's the difference?

 

[Yelsew]

Originally posted by Frogman:
posted April 14, 2003 07:08 AM

Yelsew,

I would appreciate an answer to the above referenced post. I will continue to keep this post on top until you do address it. Thanks.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

I find no such post. There is one posted at 08:08 is that the one you mean?

Did you set your computer clock ahead last weekend?

 

[Frogman]

I find no such post. There is one posted at 08:08 is that the one you mean?

Did you set your computer clock ahead last weekend?

Yes to each question. I am on central time. My computer set the clock automatically.

Bro. Dallas