Where Arminians should critique Calvinism

[BobRyan]

ScottJ
Every time you quote the whole thing, you quote the part where we are told that the "goodness of God" leads us to repentance. I have explained that no other goodness can be recognized in man outside of this relationship. I have pointed out that God's goodness leads... it isn't in response to man's request.

I never claimed that the DRAWING OF ALL and the CONVICTING OF ALL (which IS God's goodness calling all mankind everywher to repentance) was IN RESPONSE to some request by mankind -- "so you make that up" and then pretend that you have "refuted" something??

What is that all about?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Scott J]

I realize that you and some of the other Calvinist posters see no point in actually noticing the disconfirming and devastating details in Romans 2 (that I keep quoting) so you don't quote them, don't exegete them and don't respond to the devastating case they make against Calvinism - when the SHOW the context for God's impartiality.

Either A) you are willfully ignoring my responses because you can't answer them or B) you are being dishonest.

I have responded to your interpretation from the text. You shouldn't deny it. I have pointed out numerous times that the context says that God's goodness, not ours, results in repentance. Without repentance and reconciliation to God, He does not recognize any deed as "good" since it is done for the wrong motive (something other than His glory).

I am not exactly sure what your deal is but if you aren't going to engage my responses but rather pretend that they didn't occur then we should stop now.

 

[BobRyan]

As already posted by Scott

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1540/7.html#000096


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ScottJ
That is partiality.

There may have been hundreds hanging on a cross that day in Judea. Why did God choose to put Christ beside this one fellow? The guy didn't ask for it and certainly didn't deserve it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


As already responded by Bob --


http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1540/7.html#000096

You simply attempt to misdirect and obfuscate away from the point AS IF the only way to have a last minute conversion is to have Christ literally crucified next to you.


"Again" it is shown that the Calvinist assumption is false and yet it is the "BASIS" for the point they make.

They "assume" that the ONLY last hour conversions are those where Christ literally dies next to the person being converted.

FALSE!

That is not the point of Luke 23:42. The text does NOT SAY (as in pay attention to the text and do some exegesis for this one) that "BECAUSE Christ was there the theif was enabled to repent whereas all other humans could not".

Your attempts to avoid the confronting "details" of Romans 2 are not helping your case. IMAGINING that ONLY those with Christ literally dying next to them "CAN repent" (so that you can muster a case for impartial and arbitrary limited-salvation) has not held water so far.

As the links point out - this was already noted on page 7 of this thread. But you keep going on as if you had not read the point.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />ScottJ
Every time you quote the whole thing, you quote the part where we are told that the "goodness of God" leads us to repentance. I have explained that no other goodness can be recognized in man outside of this relationship. I have pointed out that God's goodness leads... it isn't in response to man's request.

I never claimed that the DRAWING OF ALL and the CONVICTING OF ALL (which IS God's goodness calling all mankind everywher to repentance) was IN RESPONSE to some request by mankind -- "so you make that up" and then pretend that you have "refuted" something??

What is that all about?

</font>[/QUOTE]What is it all about? It is about saying what the text says and then refuting the alternative. Either the text means what it says or it means that somehow God's leading of one to repentance is dependent on the man's first choosing that leading.

The text doesn't relate to the drawing and convicting of all.

It says that the goodness of God leads you to repentance. It doesn't say leads you after you choose to follow. It doesn't say leads you if you make a good choice/believe/have faith. It doesn't say leads everyone but some don't repent but rather defy God's sovereignty successfully.

God's goodness is the direct cause for repentance. The very next phrase starts dealing with why men don't believe.

 

[BobRyan]

I have responded to your interpretation from the text. You shouldn't deny it. I have pointed out numerous times that the context says that God's goodness, not ours, results in repentance. Without repentance and reconciliation to God, He does not recognize any deed as "good" since it is done for the wrong motive (something other than His glory).

I have pointed out that the devastating case against Calvinism in Romans 2 is that IT IS IN THE CONTEXT of THAT repentance that we SEE both the good and bad deeds and we SEE some going to heaven and some hell and we SEE the judgement based on DEEDS in Romans 2!!!

See the "details" IN the text -- apparently for the first time.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Notice that my response to your comments on Romans 2:4 (which is the only verse in all of Romans 2 that you seem to be interested in lately - but "I'll take it" as better than nothing) -- I have NOT argued that the goodness of God, or God's DRAWING of ALL (John 12:32) or the CONVICTING of the WORLD of sin and righteousness and that impartial Judgment (John 16) or the fact that God is "Calling all mankind everywhere to REPENT" -- is an "act of man" or is the "response of God to man's request".

But you keep "going there" as if that was the Arminian point made from Romans 2.

It is not.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said --
I never claimed that the DRAWING OF ALL and the CONVICTING OF ALL (which IS God's goodness calling all mankind everywhere to repentance) was IN RESPONSE to some request by mankind -- "so you make that up" and then pretend that you have "refuted" something??

What is that all about?

Scott said --

What is it all about?
... It says that the goodness of God leads you to repentance.

It doesn't say leads you after you choose to follow. It doesn't say leads you if you make a good choice/believe/have faith. It doesn't say leads everyone but some don't repent but rather defy God's sovereignty successfully.

So you "need" it so say "God's goodness FORCES you to repentance INSTEAD OF LEADING you to it"

You ignore the obvious fact of ROMANS 2 that IN the CONTEXT of the LEADING -- SOME go to hell and some to HEAVEN though ALL are being LED to repentance.

Your entire argument for FORCED to REPENT - (as a calvinized-redefinition of LEAD) failed in Romans 2.

See the "details".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by BobRyan:


FALSE!

That is the one true thing in your post. You have falsely characterized my argument... again while completely ignoring my point.

That is not the point of Luke 23:42. The text does NOT SAY (as in pay attention to the text and do some exegesis for this one) that "BECAUSE Christ was there the theif was enabled to repent whereas all other humans could not".

That was not the point of my post (as in pay attention to what I have actually written and stop with the dishonest tactics).

My point was simply that two men, one who believed and one who didn't were unique in all of history in their opportunity. Not only that but 100's and 1000's died on a cross during the life of Christ without having that same opportunity or even any opportunity to know Him.

God was providentially partial to those two men in comparison to the others.

In the same respect, Americans have a better opportunity to hear the gospel than a Saudi woman. God could certainly change this fact if He willed. He is showing partiality... that is a privilege of sovereignty... He can show mercy on whom He will have mercy. Is the woman none the less guilty per Romans 2? Yes. Why? Because God is no respecter of persons but judges people either on their knowledge of His Law by hearing/seeing or else because the law is written in their hearts.

Your attempts to avoid the confronting "details" of Romans 2 are not helping your case.

Your attempts to avoid the details of my responses which address the details of Romans 2 are not helping your case.

IMAGINING that ONLY those with Christ literally dying next to them "CAN repent" (so that you can muster a case for impartial and arbitrary limited-salvation) has not held water so far.

Only thing is... I didn't imagine that. I said that no one else had an opportunity of that unique quality. In fact, no two people have exactly the same opportunity... and this is directly subject to God's providence. God doesn't treat anyone impartially with respect to their opportunity to hear and believe. His impartiality in this passage deals directly with His judgment of men under the law. If you think the "works" and "deed" here are the cause of salvation then please cross reference to Ephesians 2 and tell us all what is meant by "not of works lest any man should boast".

As the links point out - this was already noted on page 7 of this thread. But you keep going on as if you had not read the point.

In Christ,

Bob

I keep pointing it out because you keep addressing what you apparently would have liked for me to have said rather than what I actually said.

[ August 10, 2005, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Scott J ]

 

[Scott J]

So you "need" it so say "God's goodness FORCES you to repentance INSTEAD OF LEADING you to it"

Nope. Only have to recognize that God's leading does fail to accomplish His purpose.

 

[Scott J]

Your entire argument for FORCED to REPENT

This is absolute, pure deception on your part. I have not said nor suggested that God forced man to repent.

FTR, many commentators think that this portion of Romans 2 was addressed to the Jews while Romans 1 indicts the gentiles. They think this because of the way it is written and because it is addressed to "o man" who judges but does the same.

By not resorting to this explanation of the context, I have actually given your argument more credit, merit, and latitude than it actually deserves. You pick out one word- "impartial"- that you need to support your belief then interpret the rest of the chapter on your presuppositions about what this term means and how it applies per this context.

The claim by you that this interpretation of yours is "devastating" to calvinism is laughable.

 

[philg]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
The interesting thing here is that your system requires that God not be impartial. His favor is dependent on the "choice", "faith", or positive act of "free will" by a human being.

You are simply proving my point - Calvinists have a hard time with the word "Impartial".

THE WHOLE POINT of an impartial judge is to provide a leveling factor and then let the events decide rather than YOU forcing person-A to choose life rather than person-B.

By DEFINITION - impartiality does not allow you to favor A over B -- NOT FOR ANY REASON!

In a free will system A and B "get to decide" something OR ELSE there is nothing BUT partiality when the result is "A is identical to B but A gets selected"!!

This just isn't that hard to get.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]I think this goes perfect with what you are saying Bob
34 ¶ Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

35 but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
acts 10:34-35

 

[King James Bond]

Scott J,

I have read through quite a few of your posts.

I want to encourage you to keep up the good work! You post very well, and they are very understandable posts.

God has blessed you!

May He continue to bless you!

KJB

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by philg:
I think this goes perfect with what you are saying Bob
34 ¶ Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

35 but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
acts 10:34-35

Good point Phil. Peter could have said "in every nation God selects OUT some to fear him" -- but He did not.

God presents it in the Arminian fashion - on purpose - as He shows repeatedly that He is NOT partial when it comes to salvation!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[timothy27]

Just like he wasn't partial with the people of Sodam and Gommora, or with Noah, or with the people in the entire Book of Isaiah. I cannot believe you cannot see God's sovereignty in all these. God shows partiality al over the bible.

 

[BobRyan]

You need to "reread" Romans 2 that INSISTS that your point is false. God shows IN HIS JUDGEMENT (according TO THE TEXT) that He is NOT partial.

And His JUDGEMENT results in "Judgement passed in favor of the saints".

The spin that Calvinism has is to totally obfuscate the judicial system SUCH THAT a fair and impartial judgment rendered IN FAVOR of the saints is "being partial".

I guess when you are "Free to redefine everything" all for Calvinism - anything goes - eh?

IN Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Lets pay special attention to the details of the starting Context that PAUL gives in his letter to the Romans and SEE how "choice" plays out in this IMPARTIAL system where the IMPARTIAL God calls ALL to repentance.

Rom 2

4 or do you think lightly of the riches of his kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?[/b

.

Vs 4 shows us that the mercy - kindness - grace leads us to repent. This chapter starts with the Gospel basics of God's offer to grant repentance and that all need to repent.

Note: The Context for Romans 2 is STARTING with judgment, AND of the mercy of God that leads to repentance.

Let's continue letting the scripture speak for itself;

Rom2:
5 but because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who will render to each person according to his deeds:

Paul is adamant that there is a future judgment “according to deeds”. Paul here identifies the “impartial” basis of God’s judgment. Instead of His simply “arbitrarily selecting” some to favor and others to ignore – ALL are judged according to deeds IN the context of the “call to repentance” of vs 4.

He speaks of this again in 2Cor 5 talking about future judgment and judged based on deeds “whether they be good or evil”.

Notice that in these first 6 verses we have an Arminian-style motivation - not to engage in man's faulty judgment of others. And there is no sense or expectation that this sin is not to stop or just to continue because we are totally depraved. Rather the argument is to stop.

Romans 2 - if this chapter is only about the failing case, only about the wrath of God - then we will not find success, mercy, reward but only condemnation, wrath, punishment. Let's now let the text reveal which way it will go.

Rom 2:
7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;

Here is the “succeeding case” explicitly listed by Paul. And it is in the context of God - leading to repentance. We also have the people of God - persevering, doing good and seeking glory and honor. What is the result? The text says immortality and eternal life.

Some have supposed that a “judgment” that is impartial as Paul points to in vs 6 and 11 must “only have failing cases”. But Paul shows in vs 7 that such is not the case. The “Good News” does not require God to arbitrarily be “partial to the FEW of Matt 7” as some have supposed. Rather it allows for God to be “impartial” and to SAVE mankind on that basis!

Rom2:
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

The “Failing case”: Clearly a contrast is being introduced "but to those who are selfish" - contrasted with what? Those who repent, seek eternal glory and honor and persevere. Persevere in what?

You must be on the right path to be approved in perseveringly staying on the right path. It is obvious I know, but worth noting.

So God has now contrasted the good and the wicked, those who persevere on the right path and those who are not even on it.

We already know that in the judgment there are two classes - those that receive immortality and those that do not. If it is not clear to us by now that this chapter is dealing with both classes - we need to engage in some remedial reading comprehension.

Rom2:
9 there will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 for there is no partiality with God.

At this point Paul seems to ask that we "be not deceived" into thinking that some can do evil but find "preferred treatment" because God will “favor the few over the many”. He does not let us suppose that others are lost for doing evil while the “favored” ones do evil and go to heaven. Rather Paul argues that God has called all to repentance and all must comply - there will be no preferred treatment based on status (or magic phrase) allowing some of the rebels in.

But basic to Paul’s solution is the affirmation that God is NOT partial when it comes to the Gospel – when it comes to Salvation. That means that He is NOT favoring the “few” of Matt 7 over the “many” so that He can save the “Few”. Rather – impartiality demands that ALL be given the same salvation-sequence. ALL have the Holy Spirit convicting of sin and righteousness and judgment (John 16:8) and ALL have the Drawing of God (John 12:32) and ALL have the Lord Jesus Christ standing at the door and knocking – and ALL have the SAME promise of the New Covenant that “changes the TREE itself” Matt 7 and writes the Law of God on the heart (Heb 8).

Rather than simply “favoring some over others” the system defined above is “impartial” as God HIMSELF is “Impartial”. This Gospel truth was a huge problem for the Jews and is a big problem for Calvinism.

 

[BobRyan]

No Partiality – for Christians –

God shows no partiality between unsaved people. (Unsaved Jews vs Unsaved Gentiles)

Acts 10:34
[ Gentiles Hear Good News ] Opening his mouth, Peter said: "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality,

God shows no partiality in determining who goes to heaven – who is justified.
Romans 2:11
For there is no partiality with God.


No partiality in God between believers.
Ephesians 6:9
And masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him.

We are to SHOW no partiality.
1 Timothy 5:21
I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.
James 2:1
[ The Sin of Partiality ] My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism.

Many are reading that section of Romans 2:1-11 above for the first time – with eyes open to details.

Notice the "text" perhaps for the first time – as it speaks about our IMPARTIAL God whose process of judging in the matter of salvation (and IN the context of the call to repentance (Rom 2:4)) "results" in some saved and some lost JUST as He describes IN Romans 2...

Rom 2
5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:

7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.
9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

11 For there is no partiality with God.
12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Let "the text" speak.

#1. Romans 2 provides BOTH successful and failing cases for BOTH Jews and Gentiles.

#2. Romans 2 SAYS they are ALL judged based on DEEDS and the RESULT of that impartial judgment is that SOME fail and some succeed.

This is devastating to Calvinism.

#3. Romans 3 is IN the GOSPEL CONTEXT of the kindness and goodness of God - and the call to repentance.

This means that WITHIN the Gospel scenario there IS impartial JUDGMENT that results in SOME having eternal life and some not.

#4. Paul declares that the JUDGMENT is "according to my gospel". The judgment he speaks of is part of the Gospe.

#5. The Judgment results in "JUSTIFICATION" according to the text. It does not simply happen in a Gospel VOID where ALL those judged are condemned because of course - ALL are sinners.

#6. The DEEDS mentioned are the same FRUITs of MAtt 7 that Christ shows as "determining" outcoming.

#7 The ENTIRE thing is said to occur in an impartial manner and is GUARANTEED to be impartial because GOD HIMSELF is impartial when it comes to salvation according to Rom 2:11

The "obvious" point in both Romans 2 and Matt 7 is that it is NOT a scenario where God "arbitrarily selects out from among the doomed a few to FAVOR".

Both texts are going out of their way to START within the context of the Gospel and to SHOW that in that context of the goodness of God as our Father - and the call to repentance and forgiveness - WE HAVE a judgment of "deeds" where some fail and some pass.

It is NOT the more "general" case of Romans 3 where ALL are condemned WITHOUT the need for a "future judgment" since ALL have sinned.

Why treat ALL in this way?

ANSWER: Because "God is not partial"??


How then does Calvinism accept this chapter?

ANSWER: It does not.

 

[ascund]

Hey Bob

I see you are up to your old tricks: posting cut and paste stuff that has been critiqued and dismissed elsewhere.

Mindless cut and paste exchanges are one step away from insults.

Your first few points on Romans 2 are totally false because you cannot grasp that 1:18-3:19 are one unit. When you are able to understand this, then you will see that the so called proof of works obedience is only a potential that strongly denounced in all self-righteous attempts to please God.

Chapter 3 shows that only Christ's righteousness pleases God.

So when you suggest a method that adds to Christ - you unwittingly deny Him and His Cross. While your mouth cries "Lord! Lord!" your theology denies Him.

I wouldn't want to face Christ in judgment after posting TEN THOUSAND messages ignorant of context that blatantly (but unwittingly) denies Christ.

But maybe you like that sort of thing?!?

Consistency is the hallmark of theology.
Christianity should praise and honor Christ - not deny Him!

Lloyd

 

[BobRyan]

"Dismissed" - yes. But not actually "answered".

More like "Avoided" from the cut-and-run model that you were using before.

Maybe you like that sort of thing! I myself prefer not to "avoid scripture" as you have done with Romans 2 and Romans 11.

With that scripture-avoidance model that you are using - how do you hope to discuss a point with an Arminian?

Just curious.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

In spite of the many scriptural points given in my previous posts - the most "consistent" reply I am getting from Calvinists - is whining in the form of Lloyd's excellent example above.

What's up guys!

Any interest in scripture left out there?