• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

False Religion of Arminianism 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
If Arminianism is a false religion, how is Calvinism not a false religion? Teaching "unconditional" election. Let alone denying the general redemption (in such passages as Romans 5:8).
Romans 5:8 in no way teaches general redemption.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
So what is the person who is not a believer who hears Romans 5:8 in a simple public reading going understand it to claim to mean? What does it simply say to a hearer? My exegesis.
Here is the nonsense of this. In high school if a teacher caught us passing a note they would take it and read it out loud to the class. With your logic a teacher reads a not from a boy to his girlfriend and it says I love you and that must mean he loves every girl who hears the note read in public. That is literally what you are claiming.
 

Silverhair

Well-Known Member
Where is "general" redemption ever found? It's certainly not in Romans 5:7-8.
For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

This is a very particular redemption. Nothing general about it. The "us" in this verse is those whom God has chosen to redeem.

Let's look further to verses 9-11
Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Is there any "general" redemption here? No! It is very specific and particular.

General Rom 5:6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.

Are you saying that some people are not part of the ungodly?
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
look that the context!

verse 4, "knowing this first, that in the last days mockers will come, walking after their own lusts"

verse 7, "But the heavens that exist now and the earth, by the same word have been stored up for fire, being reserved against the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men"

Are these the "elect"?

Verse 9 FOLLOWS these verses, and says

"The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some count slowness; but he is patient with YOU (as in verses 4 and 7), not wishing that anyone should perish, but that all should come to repentance"

WHY would the Lord need to be PATIENT for the "elect" to repent, because they WILL, according to your system?

WHY would it say, that God is not willing that any of the "elect" no perish, when they CANNOT, according to your system?

You see, IF you can, the Infallibe Word of God is AGAINST your theology! :Geek
So the “you” of 2 Peter 3:9 are the “mockers” and “ungodly men” … is that your official position? :rolleyes:
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member
General Rom 5:6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.

Are you saying that some people are not part of the ungodly?
That is getting to the heart of Limited vs General Atonement.
Did Christ die for ALL the ungodly (those destined for eternity in Heaven and those destined for eternity in Hell) or did Christ die for those ungodly destined for eternity in Heaven only?
Can that hair be split with this verse (and it’s immediate context) alone?

I do not believe that this nuance can be determined from the verse, so it is improper to just assume it means “all ungodly without exception”. We KNOW the “WE” and”US” of the proximate verses includes Paul and the Saints in Rome to whom he is writing.
 

DaveXR650

Well-Known Member
So why would said hearers not consider themselves as not one for whom Christ is claimed to have die, ". . . while we were yet sinners . . . ." No reason at all.

We don't have any right to consider ourselves elect or non elect as hearers. What we do have is a promise that if we repent and believe God will save us. A "Calvinist" who goes so far in thinking he's protecting God's sovereignty that he declares that WE don't have to repent and believe the gospel is doing a great disservice. But someone who, when they hear the gospel begins by judging God on whether the terms are fair or not for everyone possibly has a problem not with the theology of the extent of the atonement - but with what their true condition is as a sinner.
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Here is the nonsense of this. In high school if a teacher caught us passing a note they would take it and read it out loud to the class. With your logic a teacher reads a not from a boy to his girlfriend and it says I love you and that must mean he loves every girl who hears the note read in public. That is literally what you are claiming.
@SavedByGrace you put a funny rating on this post. Please explain how this is not what @37818 is doing.
 

SavedByGrace

Well-Known Member
The part where he said that if an unsaved person reads it and assumes it applies to them specifically it must be so. Romans was written to people who were already saved, not the unsaved.

Romans might be addressed to the believers at the church, but no doubt as in every church there are many who are not really saved. These also hear the Words and can apply them to themselves. I see no problem with this as the Gospel Message is for the entire human race
 

Silverhair

Well-Known Member
That is getting to the heart of Limited vs General Atonement.
Did Christ die for ALL the ungodly (those destined for eternity in Heaven and those destined for eternity in Hell) or did Christ die for those ungodly destined for eternity in Heaven only?
Can that hair be split with this verse (and it’s immediate context) alone?

I do not believe that this nuance can be determined from the verse, so it is improper to just assume it means “all ungodly without exception”. We KNOW the “WE” and”US” of the proximate verses includes Paul and the Saints in Rome to whom he is writing.

My question for you is "what in this verse would make you think it was limited to just the so called elect"? That is something that you have to read into the text.
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
My question for you is "what in this verse would make you think it was limited to just the so called elect"? That is something that you have to read into the text.
Keep reading the letter. When you get to chapter 8, tell us if it's "so called" elect that are being addressed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top