• 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!

The False Gospel of Arminianism

Silverhair

Well-Known Member
Paul goes on in Rom. 3, I believe it is, to say that man has a conscience, that even the Gentiles who have no Law as the Jews, do the things in the Law. The conscience of man reveals there is a Creator, man has no excuse not to to know this.

But this is not salvation, it's the awareness of God the Creator and right and wrong. Salvation can only be found in Jesus Christ.

That's where the hearing of the Gospel is so very important. It's the only way man can be saved.

I agree, but you said that man cannot trust what he hears and yet the bible say in Rom 1:16 the gospel is the power of God to salvation and Eph 1:13 & Rom 10:9-10 tell us that we can hear and respond.

Even Act 13:42-48 will lead you to the same point. We hear and respond.

But according to the C/R view that is not possible, Calvin's inability.

So a choice has to be made, trust Calvin or trust God.
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
They aren't.



No. As I previously stated, my position is justification from eternity.
Okay but you seem to be inconsistent in my opinion. If you believe in eternal justification, I dont see how you can believe an elect person can be born into the world condemned even though they are born sinners and ungodly. See Sonny believes the elect are born condemned for their sins and you seem to agree with that view even though u say you embrace Justification from eternity.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
Okay but you seem to be inconsistent in my opinion. If you believe in eternal justification, I dont see how you can believe an elect person can be born into the world condemned even though they are born sinners and ungodly. See Sonny believes the elect are born condemned for their sins and you seem to agree with that view even though u say you embrace Justification from eternity.

Huh? I specifically said that God's elect are not condemned in post #41 above. What I said in post #31 above, is that God's elect are born spiritually dead and that they do not have spiritual life until the Holy Spirit regenerates them(born again, born from above), and gives them the gift of faith in the finished work of Christ and the gift of repentance of dead works.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
See Sonny believes the elect are born condemned for their sins and you seem to agree with that view even though u say you embrace Justification from eternity.

Do you have a specific quote of Sonny Hernandez's that you can point me to where he said that God's elect are born "condemned"?
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
@KenH

Huh? I specifically said that God's elect are not condemned in post #41 above.

Okay I will recheck that Okay from what you said in post 8 ", so I have no problem with justification at the point of God-given faith, nor for that matter, with justification at the cross. Personally, I think all three positions are correct, while I hold to justification from eternity."

See I have a problem with Justification at the point of God given Faith, unless by that you mean Justification before ones own consciousness when Justification is being apprehended, but if you mean Justification b4 Gods Law and Justice at the point of God given Faith, that is a problem with me and arminianism.
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
Do you have a specific quote of Sonny Hernandez's that you can point me to where he said that God's elect are born "condemned"?

Well he says Gods elect aren't Justified from eternity, nor at the cross, but at the point of faith, so what does that men ?

He wrote this:


Bottom line: the elect were not regenerated in eternity or at the cross, but in time when the Spirit applies the merits of Christ to them. Similarly, God’s sheep are justified in time, not in eternity or at the cross.
ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE, ALL MEN, ELECT AND NON-ELECT, ARE BORN INTO THIS WORLD AS TOTALLY DEPRAVED, CHILDREN OF WRATH According to some, God’s particular people were justified in eternity or at the cross, and as a result, the elect of God for whom Christ died are not born into this world as children of wrath or under condemnation. Yet, the plain reading of Scripture teaches that the elect are born into the world as children of wrath, enemies, and under condemnation until the Spirit irresistibly and efficaciously applies the imputed righteousness of Christ to their accounts.


I agree with all this except the under condemnation portion
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
@Brightfame52

Okay. I will try to use excerpts from John Gill's Bible commentary to help explain my understanding, as he discusses all three positions on the timing of justification. Let me first say, that, as far I think as to what is necessary is that one understands that God "justifieth the ungodly"; it is not necessary for a true believer to get all caught up in the debate over the timing as to when God "justifieth the ungodly"; God had regenerated me back in 2021, well before I knew that there was a debate to be had to over the timing of justification. Now on to Gill.

Gill excerpt on Romans 4:5

but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly: or that ungodly one: particular reference is had to Abraham, who in his state of unregeneracy was an ungodly person; as all God's elect are in a state of nature, and are such when God justifies them, being without a righteousness of their own; wherefore he imputes the righteousness of another, even that of his own Son, unto them: and though he justifies the ungodly, he does not justify their ungodliness, but them from it; nor will he, nor does he leave them to live and die in it; now to him that worketh not, that is perfect righteousness; or has no opportunity of working at all; or what he does, he does not do, that he might be justified by it; but exercises faith on God as justifying persons, who, like himself, are sinners, ungodly and destitute of a righteousness.

Gill excerpt on Romans 5:9

Much more then being now justified by his blood
,.... The apostle here argues from justification by Christ to salvation by him, there being a certain and inseparable connection between these two; whoever is justified shall be saved; and speaks of justification "as being now by his blood". Justification in God's mind from eternity proceeded upon the suretyship engagements of Christ to be performed in time; the Old Testament saints were justified of God with a view to the blood of the Lamb which was to be shed; this blood was "now" shed, and an application of justification by it was "now" made to the persons spoken of; which is the reason of this way of speaking. The blood of Christ intends his death, as appears from the context, and shows it to be a violent death; death by the effusion of blood. There is an emphasis upon it, "his blood"; not the blood of bulls and goats, nor of a mere innocent creature, but of Christ the Son of God; which is therefore efficacious to all the purposes for which it was shed, and particularly justification. This being ascribed to it, shows the concern Christ had in it, his blood is here put for the whole matter of justification; the shedding of that being the finishing part of it; and that our justification before God proceeds upon the foot of a satisfaction made to the law and justice of God: hence such as are interested in it.

Gill excerpt on Romans 5:1

Therefore being justified by faith
,.... Not that faith is at the first of our justification; for that is a sentence which passed in the mind of God from all eternity, and which passed on Christ, and on all the elect considered in him, when he rose from the dead; see Romans 4:25; nor is it the chief, or has it the chief place in justification; it is not the efficient cause of it, it is God that justifies, and not faith; it is not the moving cause of it, that is the free grace of God; it is not the matter of it, that is the righteousness of Christ: we are not justified by faith, either as God's work in us, for, as such, it is a part of sanctification; nor as our work or act, as exercised by us, for then we should be justified by works, by something of our own, and have whereof to glory; but we are justified by faith objectively and relatively, as that relates to the object Christ, and his righteousness; or as it is a means of our knowledge, and perception of our justification by Christ's righteousness, and of our enjoying the comfort of it.

And I add a fourth position that I don't usually hear other people mention, but I think it is an additional position related to the discussion of timing.

Gill excerpt on Romans 4:25

was raised again for our justification
; he was raised again from the dead by his Father, to whom this is often ascribed; and by himself, by his own power, which proves him to be the mighty God; and this was done not only that he might live an immortal and glorious life in our nature, having finished the work he undertook and came about, but for "our justification". He died in the room and stead of his people, and by dying made satisfaction for their sins; he rose again as their head and representative, and was legally discharged, acquitted, and justified, and they in him. Christ's resurrection did not procure the justification of his people, that was done by his obedience and death; but was for the testification of it, that it might fully appear that sin was atoned for, and an everlasting righteousness was brought in; and for the application of it, or that Christ might live and see his righteousness imputed, and applied to all those for whom he had wrought it out.
 

Brightfame52

Well-Known Member
@Brightfame52

Okay. I will try to use excerpts from John Gill's Bible commentary to help explain my understanding, as he discusses all three positions on the timing of justification. Let me first say, that, as far I think as to what is necessary is that one understands that God "justifieth the ungodly"; it is not necessary for a true believer to get all caught up in the debate over the timing as to when God "justifieth the ungodly"; God had regenerated me back in 2021, well before I knew that there was a debate to be had to over the timing of justification. Now on to Gill.

Gill excerpt on Romans 4:5

but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly
: or that ungodly one: particular reference is had to Abraham, who in his state of unregeneracy was an ungodly person; as all God's elect are in a state of nature, and are such when God justifies them, being without a righteousness of their own; wherefore he imputes the righteousness of another, even that of his own Son, unto them: and though he justifies the ungodly, he does not justify their ungodliness, but them from it; nor will he, nor does he leave them to live and die in it; now to him that worketh not, that is perfect righteousness; or has no opportunity of working at all; or what he does, he does not do, that he might be justified by it; but exercises faith on God as justifying persons, who, like himself, are sinners, ungodly and destitute of a righteousness.

Gill excerpt on Romans 5:9

Much more then being now justified by his blood
,.... The apostle here argues from justification by Christ to salvation by him, there being a certain and inseparable connection between these two; whoever is justified shall be saved; and speaks of justification "as being now by his blood". Justification in God's mind from eternity proceeded upon the suretyship engagements of Christ to be performed in time; the Old Testament saints were justified of God with a view to the blood of the Lamb which was to be shed; this blood was "now" shed, and an application of justification by it was "now" made to the persons spoken of; which is the reason of this way of speaking. The blood of Christ intends his death, as appears from the context, and shows it to be a violent death; death by the effusion of blood. There is an emphasis upon it, "his blood"; not the blood of bulls and goats, nor of a mere innocent creature, but of Christ the Son of God; which is therefore efficacious to all the purposes for which it was shed, and particularly justification. This being ascribed to it, shows the concern Christ had in it, his blood is here put for the whole matter of justification; the shedding of that being the finishing part of it; and that our justification before God proceeds upon the foot of a satisfaction made to the law and justice of God: hence such as are interested in it.

Gill excerpt on Romans 5:1

Therefore being justified by faith
,.... Not that faith is at the first of our justification; for that is a sentence which passed in the mind of God from all eternity, and which passed on Christ, and on all the elect considered in him, when he rose from the dead; see Romans 4:25; nor is it the chief, or has it the chief place in justification; it is not the efficient cause of it, it is God that justifies, and not faith; it is not the moving cause of it, that is the free grace of God; it is not the matter of it, that is the righteousness of Christ: we are not justified by faith, either as God's work in us, for, as such, it is a part of sanctification; nor as our work or act, as exercised by us, for then we should be justified by works, by something of our own, and have whereof to glory; but we are justified by faith objectively and relatively, as that relates to the object Christ, and his righteousness; or as it is a means of our knowledge, and perception of our justification by Christ's righteousness, and of our enjoying the comfort of it.

And I add a fourth position that I don't usually hear other people mention, but I think it is an additional position related to the discussion of timing.

Gill excerpt on Romans 4:25

was raised again for our justification
; he was raised again from the dead by his Father, to whom this is often ascribed; and by himself, by his own power, which proves him to be the mighty God; and this was done not only that he might live an immortal and glorious life in our nature, having finished the work he undertook and came about, but for "our justification". He died in the room and stead of his people, and by dying made satisfaction for their sins; he rose again as their head and representative, and was legally discharged, acquitted, and justified, and they in him. Christ's resurrection did not procure the justification of his people, that was done by his obedience and death; but was for the testification of it, that it might fully appear that sin was atoned for, and an everlasting righteousness was brought in; and for the application of it, or that Christ might live and see his righteousness imputed, and applied to all those for whom he had wrought it out.
Oh Im quite familiar with John Gill and John Brine and many others, however these guys would never deny justification b4 God at the time of the Cross. Gill would I believe disagree with Sonny. Im not putting Sonny in hell, but he is inconsistent, other than that, he is relatively sound.
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
I agree, but you said that man cannot trust what he hears and yet the bible say in Rom 1:16 the gospel is the power of God to salvation and Eph 1:13 & Rom 10:9-10 tell us that we can hear and respond.

Even Act 13:42-48 will lead you to the same point. We hear and respond.

But according to the C/R view that is not possible, Calvin's inability.

So a choice has to be made, trust Calvin or trust God.

I'm not sure what you mean by "but you said that man cannot trust what he hears."

I can't place that in any of my posts.
 

KenH

Well-Known Member
Oh Im quite familiar with John Gill and John Brine and many others, however these guys would never deny justification b4 God at the time of the Cross. Gill would I believe disagree with Sonny. Im not putting Sonny in hell, but he is inconsistent, other than that, he is relatively sound.

Oh, I have issues with Sonny Hernandez myself. He had some remarks a while back about the late Henry Mahan that I did not appreciate.
 

Wesley Briggman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If Christ hath fulfilled all the conditions, how then do you explain the elect being condemned by God when they are born into the world as ungodly sinners ?
The idea that God's elect are ever condemned by Him is a new thought to me. Is there a scriptural reference to support this claim?
 

Silverhair

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure what you mean by "but you said that man cannot trust what he hears."

I can't place that in any of my posts.

Back in post # 54 you said "in other words as John Calvin rightly said, man is totally depraved."

According to Calvinism man can do nothing in the way of responding to the gospel message. Their total depravity is actually total inability. That is the C/R view. Man has to be saved before he is given faith to believe by God.

Calvinists teach that we must be born again with life from the Holy Spirit before we may respond to God in any way. “A cardinal point of Reformed theology is the maxim: ‘Regeneration precedes faith.’ [R.C. Sproul Chosen By God, pp.72-73]. “A man is not saved because he believes in Christ; he believes in Christ because he is saved”. [L. Boettner The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, Page 75]

Does this clear up the confusion, it was your reference to Calvin's total depravity.
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Back in post # 54 you said "in other words as John Calvin rightly said, man is totally depraved."

According to Calvinism man can do nothing in the way of responding to the gospel message. Their total depravity is actually total inability. That is the C/R view. Man has to be saved before he is given faith to believe by God.

Calvinists teach that we must be born again with life from the Holy Spirit before we may respond to God in any way. “A cardinal point of Reformed theology is the maxim: ‘Regeneration precedes faith.’ [R.C. Sproul Chosen By God, pp.72-73]. “A man is not saved because he believes in Christ; he believes in Christ because he is saved”. [L. Boettner The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, Page 75]

Does this clear up the confusion, it was your reference to Calvin's total depravity.

Yes, that clears it up, thanks.

The first point of Calvin's theory is the only one I agree with, total depravity. I separate myself from the other 4, as I can clearly see the free will of man choosing to accept or reject the Gospel.

Is my belief in total depravity what you wish to discuss?
 

Silverhair

Well-Known Member
Yes, that clears it up, thanks.

The first point of Calvin's theory is the only one I agree with, total depravity. I separate myself from the other 4, as I can clearly see the free will of man choosing to accept or reject the Gospel.

Is my belief in total depravity what you wish to discuss?

I can see the depravity of man every time that I turn on the TV.

The idea of the depravity of man, his sinful nature is biblical. This is how I understand the "total depravity of man"

Bible believers should readily admit to the depravity of man, but add that God provides sufficient grace to enable the totally depraved, lost, individual to receive His free gift of salvation through faith. The concept of total depravity, the idea that fallen man requires God’s grace from beginning to end of the salvation process is biblical.
Adam’s fall left us unable, of our own strength, to live a life pleasing to God. But total depravity is not utter depravity, we are not as bad as we could be, nor is it total inability to turn and trust in God for salvation.
Even as bad as we are the lost don’t commit the worst sins possible on every occasion.
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
I can see the depravity of man every time that I turn on the TV.

The idea of the depravity of man, his sinful nature is biblical. This is how I understand the "total depravity of man"

Bible believers should readily admit to the depravity of man, but add that God provides sufficient grace to enable the totally depraved, lost, individual to receive His free gift of salvation through faith. The concept of total depravity, the idea that fallen man requires God’s grace from beginning to end of the salvation process is biblical.
Adam’s fall left us unable, of our own strength, to live a life pleasing to God. But total depravity is not utter depravity, we are not as bad as we could be, nor is it total inability to turn and trust in God for salvation.
Even as bad as we are the lost don’t commit the worst sins possible on every occasion.

I agree! I see total depravity in somewhat the same manner.

Maybe the only difference would be me seeing that only the Word of God being heard by depraved man through the power of the Holy Spirit can break that barrier of depravity.
 

Silverhair

Well-Known Member
I agree! I see total depravity in somewhat the same manner.

Maybe the only difference would be me seeing that only the Word of God being heard by depraved man through the power of the Holy Spirit can break that barrier of depravity.

I would add the conviction of one's personal sin to that.
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The thing about Sonny is that he doesnt believe the elect are justified b4 God until they are regenerated and put faith in Christ. I see that as arminianism. He doesnt believe the elect are Justified b4 God from eternity or even at the cross when He shed His Blood for them in the time sense.
A lot of Calvinists don’t see justification prior to rebirth. A lot do. The disagreement is academic, but it changes absolutely nothing.
 
Top