Non-Calvinists and Eternal Security

[AITB]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
That is orthodox theology. It makes perfect sense to me and it gives great hope becuase it makes salvation by grace possible. It is the point of Romans 5:12-21. Think of it this way: If I became a sinner by my own acts, then I must become righteous by my own acts.

So are you saying Adam is an exception to this - because didn't he become a sinner by his own act yet he couldn't become righteous again by his own act...?

The point is found in Romans 5.

I find Romans 5 tricky because it says "As in Adam all died so in Christ all are made alive"

That sounds like universalism.

(But, to be fair, that chapter has some awesome verses in it

)

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Well, which is it? Did Adam make the choice as 'federal head' or do they make it?

And it's not a choice if it's the only thing they can do.

Yes ... and sure it is. They don't want to do anything else. They are sinning of the own free will. They can do anything they want to do. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes but...the point is [Calvinistically speaking], God made them unable to want anything else but sin didn't He?

And I have a problem with seeing that as 'good'.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If people cannot not sin then how is it appropriate to punish them for that any more than to punish someone for not buying a red car when the only car shop there is, only sells blue ones???

Because we are not buying cars; we are talking about sin against God. People have a moral inability to not sin. They sin freely and willfully. That is what they want to do and that is why punishment is appropriate.</font>[/QUOTE]I think my point still applies which is that if God makes it so you can only do one thing, why is it appropriate to punish you for not doing something else?

I suppose it comes down to - I think it's fundamentally inconsistent to say that people who cannot not sin yet freely choose sin. Whereas you see no inconsistency there.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />What I have trouble with is the idea that God created people who are destined for hell who will never have any choice but hell. I question the goodness of a God who would do such a thing as create people for eternal torment

But your position has the same problem as Ken pointed out. You responded to him something along the lines of the "comfort of your thinking." I suggest that is a bad way to do theology. It is not our prerogative to align God with our thinking. We must align our thinking with God.</font>[/QUOTE]Yes but I find that way of thinking scary. To me it seems like saying "turn your brain and heart off if they don't seem to agree with what someone else says God says".

And once my brain and heart are turned off I have turned off my 'danger warning' systems against what is evil so I cannot do that. I have to contend with what they seem to be saying to me because God gave them to me. I can't just set them aside...even if they are fatally affected by sin, so I must be careful about what they seem to be saying to me...

AITB

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by AITB:
So are you saying Adam is an exception to this - because didn't he become a sinner by his own act yet he couldn't become righteous again by his own act...?

Adam was the only totally "free" person. Yet when he sinned, the consequences were built in ... he would die. There was nothing he could do about that. So yes, Adam was the only exception to that.

I find Romans 5 tricky because it says "As in Adam all died so in Christ all are made alive"

That sounds like universalism.

It can be a little bit tricky but is very ahrd for arminians to deal with because "all" doesn't really mean "all." It throws a monkey wrench in it. I posted a lenthy post on this some time back. Perhaps you can find it by searching. The point of Rom 5 is the modus operandi of sin and righteousness. The "all" refer to all in Adam and all in Christ. All who are in Adam are made sinners in the same way that all who are in christ are made righteous ... by imputation, not action.

(

]Yes but...the point is [Calvinistically speaking], God made them unable to want anything else but sin didn't He?

No. Their inability to want to do anything else is because of sin.

I think my point still applies which is that if God makes it so you can only do one thing, why is it appropriate to punish you for not doing something else?

Because sin is sin. The motivation or reasoning behind it does not change its nature. Furthermmore, God did not make it so that they could only do one thing. Don't blame that on God.

To me it seems like saying "turn your brain and heart off if they don't seem to agree with what someone else says God says".

It is not about what someone else says God says. It is about what God said. Our understanding is consistent with everything that God said. I would urge you not to trust what man says. I tell my church all the time to study it for themselves. Do not take my word for it. Check up on me. I have seen many change their beliefs. I have never had one come to me and try to change mine.

 

[KenH]

AITB wrote:
"But I find it easier to think about God knowing but yet He still gives them a real opportunity to choose otherwise - the Arminian position - than that He never gave them any choice but hell forever."

Sister AITB,

Everyone, and I mean everyone, has the opportunity to choose to obey God. Anyone who damns themselves to hell does so by their own choice. No one, and I mean no one, is prevented from coming to Christ except by his own sin.

Opportunity is not an issue to be debated between Calvinists and non-Calvinists. We all agree that everyone has the opportunity.

Ken

 

[AITB]

Originally posted by Ken Hamilton:
Sister AITB,

Everyone, and I mean everyone, has the opportunity to choose to obey God. Anyone who damns themselves to hell does so by their own choice. No one, and I mean no one, is prevented from coming to Christ except by his own sin.

Opportunity is not an issue to be debated between Calvinists and non-Calvinists. We all agree that everyone has the opportunity.

Ken

But how can that be since in Calvinism, Jesus only died for certain people.

So how can the rest be thought of as having an opportunity to come to Him?

AITB

 

[AITB]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
Furthermmore, God did not make it so that they could only do one thing. Don't blame that on God.

But if God didn't make it that way, who did?

AITB

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by AITB:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
Furthermmore, God did not make it so that they could only do one thing. Don't blame that on God.

But if God didn't make it that way, who did?

AITB</font>[/QUOTE]Adam sinned and his nature was confirmed in sin as a result.

 

[KenH]

AITB wrote:
"But how can that be since in Calvinism, Jesus only died for certain people."

Sister AITB,

How does that stop anyone from repenting and believing who wants to do so?

Please remember, both Calvinists and non-Calvinists are pleading with everyone to repent and believe the gospel. Our disagreement is about why does one person accept and another person reject the gospel. But we all are telling lost sinners the same message of repentance and faith.

Ken

[ September 16, 2002, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]