Freed From The Arminian Camp

[BobRyan]

nptreley
Well, God did not predestine that I would expose the unbiblical nature of arminianism and its errors. I do that of my own free will.

Now you have got it!

From the Calvinist POV - we must conclude that EITHER Calvinists are the only ones that are saved - OR God has sovereignly ordained that his chosen, saved and born-again spirit-filled saints shall expose the errors of Calvinism and show it to be utterly refuted by scripture. As in my case.

From the Arminian POV - when the Calvinist seeks to show error in the Arminian doctrine - they are simply acting on their own - out of their own free will resisting God's leading on that point.

It is a perfect match because we BOTH agree!!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

BTW I am serious about the fact that I don't see "T" Total depravity to in any way contradict the Arminian POV - since we have the supernatural "DRAWING of ALL MEN" by God that more than compensates for the "problem" of depravity in terms of the will - it ENABLES what depravity DISABLES - (as even Calvinists are forced to agree).

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Frogman]

From the Calvinist POV - we must conclude that EITHER Calvinists are the only ones that are saved - OR God has sovereignly ordained that his chosen, saved and born-again spirit-filled saints shall expose the errors of Calvinism and show it to be utterly refuted by scripture. As in my case

I disagree with this.

For obvious reasons.

God Bless.
Bro. dallas

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by ScottEmerson:
I don't think so. I think they have a different view of sin nature than you, but they haven't said they don't believe in such a nature. You're putting words into their mouths.

Perhaps you're right. So what do they mean by "fall" and what do they mean by "sin nature"? What do you mean by these things?

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Frogman:
I disagree with this.

For obvious reasons.

God Bless.
Bro. dallas

So do I. You know, what I said was just a joke. I can't believe people have gotten so much mileage out of it.

 

[William C]

From the Calvinist POV - we must conclude that EITHER Calvinists are the only ones that are saved - OR God has sovereignly ordained that his chosen, saved and born-again spirit-filled saints shall expose the errors of Calvinism and show it to be utterly refuted by scripture. As in my case [/qb]

Actually you bring up an interesting point.

If Calvinism is right and God doesn't grant us the freedom to choose our belief, but he instills that belief (faith) within us, then why are there variations in our beliefs? The differences in our beliefs show God's willingness to allow us the freedom to choose our belief based upon the testimony of the apostles and the Holy Spirit. Both the HS and the apostles were chosen by God as the means of giving testimony of the truth, it is our choice as to what aspects we will believe in that testimony.

 

[Frogman]

Originally stated by Yelsew:

you still choose by not choosing.

Once again God's design is foiled by the master riddler!!

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

I'm trying...but nothing is coming out

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Frogman:
Originally stated by Yelsew:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />you still choose by not choosing.

Once again God's design is foiled by the master riddler!!

</font>[/QUOTE]Yeah, but what if you didn't choose not to choose? Is that still choosing? What if you chose not to be able to choose? My bird chews on my shirt when she sits on my shoulder. Does she choose what she chews, or was this predestined and cannot choose what she chews? And if she cannot choose, does that mean she chose by not choosing what she chews?

Details at 11...

 

[BobRyan]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the Calvinist POV - we must conclude that EITHER Calvinists are the only ones that are saved - OR God has sovereignly ordained that his chosen, saved and born-again spirit-filled saints shall expose the errors of Calvinism and show it to be utterly refuted by scripture. As in my case [/qb]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill
Actually you bring up an interesting point.

If Calvinism is right and God doesn't grant us the freedom to choose our belief, but he instills that belief (faith) within us, then why are there variations in our beliefs? The differences in our beliefs show God's willingness to allow us the freedom to choose our belief based upon the testimony of the apostles and the Holy Spirit. Both the HS and the apostles were chosen by God as the means of giving testimony of the truth, it is our choice as to what aspects we will believe in that testimony.

True - it does show choice. BUT if God has absolute knowledge of the future, and has absolutely taken control of my life (since I was dead in sin and he MAKES me alive in Christ - TURNS me into a believer) then as the sovereign of all the universe and all time - He ALSO must be "determining" that I should continue to expose the gross errors of Calvinism as it so directly opposes God's Word in certain cases.

At least that "appears" to be the Calvinist view of the Arminian Christian.

The Arminian view of the Calvinist Christian is simply that a born-again saved believer is exercising free will in opposition to the Gospel on certain points. Choosing not to harmonize his beliefs with God's Word in all cases.

But the fascinating thing is - that For a Calvinist to debate an Arminian - is to debate the sovereign will of God in controlling that Arminian. (From the Calvinist POV).

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Frogman]

And Yelsew said I am confusing...he obviously doesn't read your posts

Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

BobRyan makes perfect sense to me!

You have pretended to be Calvinist too long Frogman! It's time you came home to the truth of Non Calvinism. Make the switch, it will put your spirit at ease with God's word.

 

[Frogman]

It won't put my spirit at ease with God's word, that I am sure of. But will put me in variance to God's word.

Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

Consider what your position says of God.

Consider the recently deposed regime of Iraq. Saddam was God, and there were three catagories of people the Sunies, the Sheites and the Kurds. The Sunies received Saddam's favor, the Sheites received Saddam's disfavor, and the Kurds were those Saddam hated. In the arena of Election the Sunies were the elect, the Sheites and Kurds all others.

The doctrine of Election equates to Saddam, and I add all other dictators.

God does not have a democracy, but he also does not have a dictatorship. God accepts into his favor all who believe in Him and those who believe in his Only begotten Son, Jesus.

 

[BobRyan]

Yelsew -

I absolutely agree. The monster Saddam is made a wonderful "poster boy" for the doctrine of election as interpreted by Calvinism, just as you say.

For once we agree on this subject.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Yelsew's excellent point about the monster known as Saddam - deserves a follow up illustration.

When the 5-point-Calvinist finds himself in heaven enjoying the perfect love, unity and selfless concern for others that is not possible here on this sinful earth - and then peeking over the ramparts of heaven - observes his OWN precious sweet daughter who passed the age of accountability as the MANY of Matt 7 -- now writhing in the agony of eternal roasting in hell - he may well run to his sovereign lord with the cry "Oh My Lord, my great God and Savior! Couldn't you have done Something for my precious child??"

And of course the answer will come back that Calvinism so loves to hear - "Why of course I COULD - IF I had Cared to"!

"Hallelujah!" cries out the Calvinist - that IS the Gospel I was proclaiming!! Ahh that blissful eternity with calvinism's God that unfairly saved you but not your precious daughter - and you will be praising through all eternity that YOU were spared though she was not. (For it IS all about You in the end) Blessing the fact that He chose You - that it was "unfair" as you say - but it was graciously unfair IN YOUR favor - just not your precious daughter's. So just enjoy! Enjoy! Unjust Mercy - oh the Calvinist bliss.

You see the problem when the Calvinist model is not allowed the "luxury" of disregarding the fate of the lost - as in the case above?

God who arbitrarily selects out the FEW of Matt 7 and loves THEM alone - and then represents that to Calvinists as "So Loving the World". Oh the pure joy that thought must cause the calvinist mind.

All well and good for the Cavlinist position - but what about the Arminian view?

And for us Arminians - well we will just have to be content with the fact that God really DOES "So Love the World" not merely the "Few " of Matt 7 - and He is the "Atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT our sins only - but for those of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2::2.

We will have to be consistent in all eternity with the God that DOES Love ALL and died for ALL and "IS not WILLING for any to perish but for ALL to come to Repentance". Somehow that will have to help us enjoy eternity too. I wonder how we will fair by comparison.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Frogman]

yeah, I can see how giving to God the Sovereignty that is his is equal to the nature of a sinful man seeking to establish his power and authority over his fellow man.

You two cannot stop with the comparison a holy God to a sinful creature and have no qualms about it do ya?

Bro. Dallas

 

[Yelsew]

I did not equate Sovereign God to evil man!

I did equate the Doctrine of Election to the doctrine of Dictatorship.

 

[William C]

Dallas,

What they are condemning is Saddam's act of election. His act of arbitrarly loving some people and hating others. His act of treating some with kindness and others with vengence without regard to their behavior. His arbitrary choice to have some groups of people killed while sparing others.

These are acts of a barbarian dictator, yet Calvinism attributes these acts to the God of scripture and that is repulsive to the human mind.

Before, you say, "Yes, its repulsive to the human mind, but that's because we are depraved and sinful." Let me point out that it is repulsive to most believers. It was repulsive to John Wesley, it is repulsive to Billy Graham, and if most of you are honest it was repulsive to you before you adopted your theologicial dogma.

God's revelation of himself should not repulse those who believe and follow him. It should not cause the mass of those in the church to cry out "injustice" in the face of God. And don't go turning to Romans 9:18-21 as your rebuttal because that is not about God's arbitrary choice to impute depravity upon all humanity while selecting a few to be spared, its about God's hardening of Israel who were already unwilling to come to him (Matt. 23:37) and how that squares up with God's OT promise to save the seed of Abraham. So, don't go there.

How do you live under this dogma?

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Brother Bill:
What they are condemning is Saddam's act of election. His act of arbitrarly loving some people and hating others.

It's not arbitrary at all. If anything Saddam was extremely selective about those to whom he granted favor, because he was (deservedly) paranoid.

Originally posted by Brother Bill:
His act of treating some with kindness and others with vengence without regard to their behavior. His arbitrary choice to have some groups of people killed while sparing others.

Again, it wasn't arbitrary at all. And Saddam's approach fits your soteriology very well. If they made the right free will choice, he rewarded them. If not, he hardened, tortured and killed them.

Originally posted by Brother Bill:
God's revelation of himself should not repulse those who believe and follow him.

So now you know what God's revelation "should" or "should not" do? Have you informed God of your superior knowledge of how things "should" be? Perhaps you think He needs your advice.

 

[William C]

Originally posted by npetreley:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Brother Bill:
God's revelation of himself should not repulse those who believe and follow him.

So now you know what God's revelation "should" or "should not" do? Have you informed God of your superior knowledge of how things "should" be? Perhaps you think He needs your advice. </font>[/QUOTE]So, your now arguing that God's revelation of himself should repulse believers? You must be making that argument if your disagreeing with me on this point.

I know what God's revelation of Himself does because of what I see in scripture. He is the author of peace not confusion. When people in scripture come to believe they are filled with joy not repusion to God's ways.

The gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing, not to those who believe and are saved. The only way you can believe that God's revelation of himself should be repulsive to his bride is by giving examples of that in the scripture. You can't. Yet, that is the reaction most believers have to Calvinism. Revealing.