• 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!

Why Do Arminians Keep Saying Such Things?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Winman

Active Member
Rippon said:

It is due to His good pleasure. God has the right to do whatever He wants with people. He doesn't need your permission to do things that you think are unfair.You sound like the objector in Ro. 9:14 (among other places) who charges God with being unjust. Paul had previously said that Jacob was chosen instead of Esau. The objector didn't like that. Paul responded with 'I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."

The whole chapter of Romans 9 is contrasting faith vs. works. Election is clearly defined in this chapter.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Election is clearly defined right there. God does not elect those who try to justify themselves through works, but those who come by faith.

Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.

It was to this that they objected. And if you ever shared the gospel with people you will hear this objection many times. I have told people they can only be saved by trusting in Christ and they will say they believe that "good" people are saved regardless of what they believe.

I work with an elderly Polish lady who's whole family was shipped to Siberia in WWII. Her father was shot by the Russians because he was an officer. Her mother was imprisoned for 10 years because she refused to become a Russian citizen. Her husband was in a German concentration camp and suffered tremendously.

Anyway, I had the opportunity to tell this lady the gospel one day. I explained that even the worst sinner could be saved, even the horrible Germans and Russians that killed her father and tortured her mother.

Well, she about blew a fuse. She could not believe such evil people could be saved. She also refused to believe that "good" people who believe in other religions could not be saved. She felt that it didn't matter what religion you believed in, if you were a good decent person God would take you to heaven. And this lady (RC) truly is a very good and nice person herself.

But this was the objection raised in Romans 9, they were objecting to those saved by faith versus works.

Moses is a example of faith. Go to Hebrews 11 and read. Pharaoh is the great example of someone who resists God. He saw miracle after miracle and still hardened his heart against God. The Pharaohs believed themselves to be decendents of the gods, and there was no way he was going to humble himself.

Exo 10:3 And Moses and Aaron came in unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? let my people go, that they may serve me.

God did not make Pharaoh so that he could not believe. God hardened Pharaoh's heart simply by confronting him. The more God brought plagues on Egypt, the more obstinate Pharaoh became. But Pharaoh could have humbled himself if he so chose.

And then the chapter again shows that the subject being addressed is faith versus works.

Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

You cannot pull verses out of context to prove your false doctrine. Read the chapter over again, the whole chapter is contrasting faith versus works, and shows God has elected to save those who come by faith and reject those who try to come by works.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JDale

Member
Site Supporter
There's not a dime's worth of difference.



For a non-Cal to charge our view of election as being just a capricious act of the Lord is blasphemous. Full-stop.



The view that the Lord tries but can't quite do it because the will of humans is too strong? That is utter rubbish.



When you have to look up to see the bottom -- yeah, that's stooping alright.



One that Paul rebuked in Romans nine.



Agreed.



He doesn't merely know. He determines,establishes,decrees,directs. The Arminian view waters-down God to a passive role. And give up that garbage of God knowing our "many potentialities". That's pathetic.




That's rich. Mind if I quote you on that? I would like to use it in reference to nonsensical non-Cal doctinal views.




Basically Paul deals with them throughout the chapter. But specifically verses 14,19-21 for starters.


So, Rip, here's what I get from this post:

1. There's no appreciable difference between Arminians and Semi-Pelagians (A deliberate untruth - as has been demonstrated to you before)

2. A "God" who MUST determine and control all things is superior to a God who knows ALL things WITHOUT having to determine or control every detail, aspect or nuance.

3. You despise Arminians.

4. Arminians are blatant, sacreligious blasphemers.

You didn't say so succinctly, but do you believe Arminians like me -- who KNOW your views are as aberrant as they are abhorrent -- are not really saved? Do you believe I am a "false teacher?"

Finally, may I suggest you change your screenname from Rippon to Diotrephes? It certainly matches the spirit you are manifesting.

JDale
 

JDale

Member
Site Supporter
Of course they were Arminian objections that Paul dealt with in Romans 9. And if someone tells me that I am speaking anachronistically --- so be it. No Calvinist would have issues with Paul's words to the objector(s) -- only Semi-Pelagians/Arminians.

Yes, you'd have to be Pauline=Calvinistic.



An excellent example of eisegesis - an interpretation, esp. of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text. And a HUGE dose of arrogance to boot.

JDale
 

JDale

Member
Site Supporter
The little sarcastic try at being funny by saying we "should study [our] Bible" only shows that you don't understand Calvinism yet.
You and many (not all) of the Calvinist bashers on this forum are a long ways from being able to do that.


Don't you love the HUBRIS of Calvinists? :) It is SO sweet how they talk down to us ignorant Arminians (not all, of course). Thank you for condescending to educate us poor fools....

Heavens, spare us the kind of intellectual pride displayed in the previous post...
 

Winman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Lux et veritas

The little sarcastic try at being funny by saying we "should study [our] Bible" only shows that you don't understand Calvinism yet.
You and many (not all) of the Calvinist bashers on this forum are a long ways from being able to do that.

Hey, if you are going to pull scripture out of context, I am going to call you on it. I have showed numerous times that Romans chapter 9 is clearly contrasting faith vs. works, and that election is defined in the chapter.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

I wasn't trying to be sarcastic or funny, you Calvinists should do some studying. Not to find a verse here or there you can pull out of context to fit your bias, but all the word of God.
 

OldRegular

Well-Known Member
Many non-Cals (Arminians/Semi-Pelagians) here keep making the same old charges. "If the Calvinistic view of election is true, then the Lord is just indiscriminately picking people willy-nilly. God is just being random -- He's being arbitrary."

Please, reconsider your blasphemous representations. Calvinists believe that the Lord is a God of order. He doesn't do anything capriciously. Everything that He does is righteous. His ways are always straight. However, His ways are beyond our ways and thoughts. Please don't charge our view of God as being haphazard in His dealings with the eternal destinies of people.

We get the fact that you do not like our understanding from the Word of God of the doctrine of election. Yet you don't have to resort to such blatant sacrilegious comments knowing full-well that we have no such conception of God or that our understanding of biblical election could ever imply such a monstrous thing as a God who rules in a will-o'-the-wisp fashion.

Mortals can be guilty of being arbitrary -- why would you even dare to say that Calvinists think that God is running around the universe playing fast-and-loose with eternal destinies?

Can't you disagree with what you think we believe without stooping to the level many of you have lowered yourselves to?

By saying such things you have more and more confirmed that you are the objectors who Paul dealt with in Romans chapter nine.

Rippon

I guess when you believe that you:rolleyes:, not GOD, are the author of your own salvation you can feel free:rolleyes::rolleyes: to say anything about GOD!
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Rippon

I guess when you believe that you:rolleyes:, not GOD, are the author of your own salvation you can feel free:rolleyes::rolleyes: to say anything about GOD!
Wow...where have I heard this strawman before...oh, I know...every other post of yours. :BangHead:
 

Darrenss1

New Member
Rippon said:



The whole chapter of Romans 9 is contrasting faith vs. works. Election is clearly defined in this chapter.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Election is clearly defined right there. God does not elect those who try to justify themselves through works, but those who come by faith.

Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.

It was to this that they objected. And if you ever shared the gospel with people you will hear this objection many times. I have told people they can only be saved by trusting in Christ and they will say they believe that "good" people are saved regardless of what they believe.

I work with an elderly Polish lady who's whole family was shipped to Siberia in WWII. Her father was shot by the Russians because he was an officer. Her mother was imprisoned for 10 years because she refused to become a Russian citizen. Her husband was in a German concentration camp and suffered tremendously.

Anyway, I had the opportunity to tell this lady the gospel one day. I explained that even the worst sinner could be saved, even the horrible Germans and Russians that killed her father and tortured her mother.

Well, she about blew a fuse. She could not believe such evil people could be saved. She also refused to believe that "good" people who believe in other religions could not be saved. She felt that it didn't matter what religion you believed in, if you were a good decent person God would take you to heaven. And this lady (RC) truly is a very good and nice person herself.

But this was the objection raised in Romans 9, they were objecting to those saved by faith versus works.

Moses is a example of faith. Go to Hebrews 11 and read. Pharaoh is the great example of someone who resists God. He saw miracle after miracle and still hardened his heart against God. The Pharaohs believed themselves to be decendents of the gods, and there was no way he was going to humble himself.

Exo 10:3 And Moses and Aaron came in unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? let my people go, that they may serve me.

God did not make Pharaoh so that he could not believe. God hardened Pharaoh's heart simply by confronting him. The more God brought plagues on Egypt, the more obstinate Pharaoh became. But Pharaoh could have humbled himself if he so chose.

And then the chapter again shows that the subject being addressed is faith versus works.

Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

You cannot pull verses out of context to prove your false doctrine. Read the chapter over again, the whole chapter is contrasting faith versus works, and shows God has elected to save those who come by faith and reject those who try to come by works.

All excellent points Winman, well said. :thumbs:

Darren
 

saturneptune

New Member
Umm, the previous post, #46 was yours!
I believe very strongly in the doctrines of grace and sovreignty of the Lord. Yet, I object in the most extreme terms that I can to your arrogance and holier than thou attitude. You do our side no favors. Your arguments are not even that good.

It seems that more than being interested in Biblical doctrine, you seem fascinated with John Calvin, who in essence, was nothing but a theological thug and an advocate of infant baptism.

Do us all a favor and join the Arminian side.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So, Rip, here's what I get from this post:

1. There's no appreciable difference between Arminians and Semi-Pelagians (A deliberate untruth - as has been demonstrated to you before)

You're right. There is no appreciable difference between Arminianism and Pelagianism. Arminianism is just Semi-Pelagianism revived. Arminianism sure can't be described as Semi-Augustinianism. A and S-P are not identical in all respects -- but the similarities are pronounced. Both are synergistic.

I have not told a "deliberate untruth" Mister.

2. A "God" who MUST determine and control all things is superior to a God who knows ALL things WITHOUT having to determine or control every detail, aspect or nuance.

Of course. God is not a bystander.

3. You despise Arminians.

That's a deliberate lie.

4. Arminians are blatant, sacreligious blasphemers.

No. Read the OP again. I was specifying something. You need to take deep breaths.

You didn't say so succinctly, but do you believe Arminians like me ...

Thanks for your candor here.

-- who KNOW your views are as aberrant as they are abhorrent

Watch your tongue there Bud.

-- are not really saved? Do you believe I am a "false teacher?"

I don't know you, period.

Finally, may I suggest you change your screenname from Rippon to Diotrephes? It certainly matches the spirit you are manifesting.

Your words are rather harsh in comparison to my OP.
 

EdSutton

New Member
Rippon said:
Please, reconsider your blasphemous representations. (Post #2 on "Why do Arminians Keep Saying Such Things?")
FTR, the indivdual who first brought up "blasphemy" in this thread is Rippon.

However, my question is - "Why do differing POVs even get labeled in such a manner?"

Ed
 

saturneptune

New Member
Umm, the previous post, #46 was yours!

I believe very strongly in the doctrines of grace and sovreignty of the Lord. Yet, I object in the most extreme terms that I can to your arrogance and holier than thou attitude. You do our side no favors. Your arguments are not even that good.

It seems that more than being interested in Biblical doctrine, you seem fascinated with John Calvin, who in essence, was nothing but a theological thug and an advocate of infant baptism.

Do us all a favor and join the Arminian side.
__________________
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I believe very strongly in the doctrines of grace and sovreignty (sic)of the Lord. Yet, I object in the most extreme terms that I can to your arrogance and holier than thou attitude. You do our side no favors. Your arguments are not even that good.

So you don't think it is wrong for folks to say that Calvinists believe in a God that haphazardly picks and chooses whom He may -- willy-nilly style?! You have no problem with that?

My arguments? They are weak you say? Have you even read the OP?

It seems that more than being interested in Biblical doctrine, you seem fascinated with John Calvin,

When was the last time I mentioned the man from Geneva? It's a fact that you bring him up repeatedly in a most denigrating at every opportunity.

who in essence, was nothing but a theological thug

Case in point.

and an advocate of infant baptism.

I'm an advocate of believers baptism. However, there are many others who advocate I.B. who you could learn from in many other areas of theology.

Do us all a favor and join the Arminian side.

You are one strange person.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top