Arminianism -- False Doctrines of the "Pope" of Modern Pelagianism

Response to: Calvinism- False Doctrines of the "Pope" of Geneva ^ | August 13, 2003 | OP

[Gamecock]

Post 154 If God can make a new creation in Christ before a person believes or repents, then why was the cross necessary?

A Covenant is a contract. One party does his part and the other party does their part.

That is right, a contract. And God is the salesman, selling salvation. Only those who have the sales pitch burned into their hearts by the Holy Spirit will sign up...

[RnMomof7]

Is there a separation between God and man because of sin? Is not repentance a pre-requisite for forgiveness? How then can a man be regenerated while he is yet a sinner? Is he forgiven before he repents? Scripture please.

Without the grace of regeneration a man can not even see his sin , let alone repent it. He is more than separated from God he is dead to God

Eph 2:1 And you [hath he quickened], who were dead in trespasses and sins;

  Eph 2:5   Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) <

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Dead men can not repent . God has to quicken men and lead them top repent. Repentance is a gift

 Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life

2Cr 7:10   For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

Godly

theos {theh'-os} TDNT Reference Root Word TDNT - 3:65,322 of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with 3588) the supreme Divinity

Outline of Biblical Usage

1) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities 2) the Godhead, trinity a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity b) Christ, the second person of the trinity c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity 3) spoken of the only and true God a) refers to the things of God b) his counsels, interests, things due to him 4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way a) God's representative or viceregent

Sorrow

lupe {loo'-pay} TDNT Reference Root Word TDNT - 4:313,540 apparently a root word

Outline of Biblical Usage

1) sorrow, pain, grief, annoyance, affliction a) of persons mourning

Godly sorrow, sorrow that comes from God, not self generated sorrow . leads to repentance

One can try to self generate repentance , but it will be of no effect

Hbr 12:17   For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.

Rom 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Oh, gee, It's KINDERGARTEN THEOLOGY time!! ~~ Well thanks for the reminder that God has called me to better things than "debating" with you and your crowd.

Mister Rogers was a devout and morally-constructive Presbyterian Elder who did more good for the Kindergarteners of America than 100 years of Publik Skooling and 50 years of PBS combined. America would do well if she still had "Kindergarten Theology" such as this (compared to most Publik Skooling, anyway). So what are you complaining about?

At any rate, you're just whining, Corin.

You actually think that Christians should be ALL UP IN A HUFF over matters which the Roman Church debated, from Augustine to Gottschalk, for some 600 years. As if Christians are incapable of Debating Theology without taking it Personally.

Well, shucks -- you know what? Take it personally, brother. I never said one word against you personally, but you can accuse me if you want to.

Just assume that God intended to replace the Church of Jesus Christ with the HERETIKOS Church of Arminianism. And assume that any criticism thereof constitutes a "personal attack" on you. Just assume it.

If you want to believe that constitutes a "Personal Attack" -- hey, I can't stop you.

[Gamecock]

And I know the same number that have fled from their Arminian churches in the last 6 months to attend our new church. They were tired of not worshiping a Soveriegn God... (Their words, not mine)

Sounds like we are even.

[RnMomof7]

**Let's examine your temporary order.

A person according to Marlowe's dictum may be declared righteous (J) an still not be born-again (R).

A person according to Marlowe's dictum may be a believer (F) an still not be born-again (R).

Granted this is a very short time, but there is a time when these are true in your TEMPORAL system**


Dead men walking

[connectthedots]

If you, like most extreme Calvinists can offer nothing more than an "I don't know" to the problem of reconciling a belief that God predestined those who would have eternal life and those who would be condemned to Hell with the concept of a loving and just God; you lose the debate at the outset.

I'm just not impressed with you anymore, CTD.

Spoken like a true intellectual light-weight. Debating you would be like shooting an unarmed man in the back. Your biggest problem is that you are the stereo-typical Calvinist. You believe you have a monoploy on the truth, yet you can't even offer a rational explanation for the logical problem I mention in the above paragraph.

[RnMomof7]

He's wrong. Even Arminius insisted that God knows everything from the foundation of the earth. Your Arminian friend is not an Arminian.

So God knowing the choices of all men before the foundation of the world predestines those that do not choose correctly to

Those that choose correctly make God their debtor and those do not choose have no IOU from God so He ordains their destruction

BTW Jean this is one of the strange positions of modern Arminians

[connectthedots]

Bingo. You CANNOT admit what Jesus Christ said:

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

It was you who put words in my mouth that I did not say. Here is what I actually said: "I think one must be born again before one can truly comprehend the Kingdom of God." Please explain how this is materially different than the words of Christ.

Learn how to read, idiot. You are so arrogant and defensive of your cultish belief in Calvinism, you are blinded to the words of others who might agree with you on a point just because they don't by Calvinism hook, line and sinker. Take the plank out of your own eye before attempting to remove the specks from the eyes of others.

[connectthedots]

For if Man must be Born Again in order to even SEE (let alone "truly comprehend") the Kingdom of God, what objection have you against Calvinism?

Have you been livimg under a rock? My objection to Calvinism is predestination as it applies to all men and the unBiblical Calvinist proposition that a man cannot choose to either accept or reject the Gospel message. I do not dispute that in 'special circumstances' such as Paul that God's intervention in his life was certainly predestined to further God's plan for mankind. I just don't think there is any Biblical justification to extrapolate that or other special circumstances to all of mankind. I have been very claer about that all along, but your memory and reading comprehension skills need a lot of work.

I admit I expect I'll be waiting a long, long time.

Once again, you are wrong!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

"man is fallen, and only God saves"...I believe this also.

Then we're getting muddled in the definition of "depraved."

"Fallen" equals "depraved," only "depraved" sounds so much more licentious and Hannibal Lechter-ish.

If all men are fallen, they are dead in sin and cannot right themselves without first receiving the strong arm of God's grace.

This is what OP's been saying all night. First regeneration by the Holy Spirit; then salvation through God's gracious gift of faith.

[connectthedots]

You are not saying anything I didn't already know. My point was that at least in the CRC a number of years ago, Salvation messages just were not preached. I would also venture to say that I could go to a number of CRC churches today and would likely not hear a salvation message for months. With all the time spent preaching Calvinism, there is hardly enough time to bothered with something so simple as the Gospel message. Not saying this is true of all Calvinist Churches, but it is typical enough that a reasonable person could hardly dispute it.

[connectthedots]

I'm not an Arminian, so what is your point. Are there churches within the Arminian category that teach a perverted Gospel? Absolutely. Are there hyper-Calvinists who teach a perverted Gospel? Absolutely.

[Codie]

Go to church listen to the sermon, maybe listen to Christian music and read our daily bread..that is the extent of their spiritual lives.

And what is wrong with that? Is not reading the Bible daily a sin? Do you think that by pouring over the Bible day after day you'll come across some new unexplored teaching that was perhaps overlooked?

[connectthedots]

"Fallen" equals "depraved," only "depraved" sounds so much more licentious and Hannibal Lechter-ish.

That man is depraved is not really debatable however the word 'Total' is conspicuous by its absence in your statement.

[Corin Stormhands]

Mister Rogers was a devout and morally-constructive Presbyterian Elder who did more good for the Kindergarteners of America than 100 years of Publik Skooling and 50 years of PBS combined.

I am well acquainted with Mr. Rogers. I have a friend who on a number of occasions escorted him around her city on PR tours. I have a great deal of respect for him.

If you want to believe that constitutes a "Personal Attack"

You guys have a history of trying to say I've called something an "attack" or a "threat." Please point me to the link where I said you "personally attacked" me.

You did provide a chart that lists Calvinists as "believers" and Wesleyans as "heretics." So, I guess it is kinda personal, but I never said you attacked me.

I did note that I believe you and many of your compatriots, while you say otherwise, don't really consider us Wesleyans to be saved. If what we believe hinges on what you call "the lie of Eden" how can we trust you when you call us heretics out of one side of your mouth and "brethren" out of the other?

So you see, I'm not whining at all. Just pointing out the way I see things.

I actually came here to agree with you that Servetus is irrelevant to the teachings of Calvin. I shoulda stopped there.

Instead, I'll stop here.

[Wrigley]

My point was that at least in the CRC a number of years ago, Salvation messages just were not preached.

Based on how many congregations? I grew up in the CRC. I heard a "salvation" sermon on a weekly basis. And I've been to many CRC churches in all parts of the country.

. I would also venture to say that I could go to a number of CRC churches today and would likely not hear a salvation message for months.

Horse Hillary.

With all the time spent preaching Calvinism, there is hardly enough time to bothered with something so simple as the Gospel message.

Once again, I grew up in the CRC. Your statement is not true. Pure speculation on your part from a small sample size.

Not saying this is true of all Calvinist Churches, but it is typical enough that a reasonable person could hardly dispute it.

Good grief. Now a person who disagrees with you is not reasonable? What a huge amount of pride you have. With pride like that its no wonder you keep your quest up.

[RnMomof7]

And what is wrong with that? Is not reading the Bible daily a sin? Do you think that by pouring over the Bible day after day you'll come across some new unexplored teaching that was perhaps overlooked?

I think if your were engaged to a girl that wrote love letters to you that you would pour over them. The scripture is a love letter.

How deep is ones spiritual life?

Luk 10:27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

now this like the ten commandments is impossible to keep perfectly, but it sets God's standard.

What is important to you?

I think that reading the bible does exactly what it says it does. It builds our faith

Rom 10:17 So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God

It convicts us of our sin

Hbr 4:12   For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

It teaches us how God would have us walk

2Ti 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

I know mature Christians when I meet them they are obedient to the command of God

Psa 1:2 But his delight [is] in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

Hey you guys get time off purgatory when you read it..I would think that would motivate you:>)

[CARepubGal]

Good points. The bias of the surveyor come into play here as well as the sample size. What is a "salvation" sermon to you CTD? I know what Greg Laurie and Chuck Smith say it is but would be interested in a further definition of the term.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

If you, like most extreme Calvinists

Ooooooooh, "extreme Calvinists". Tell us of whom you speak, CTD, and define your terms. Surely you know the differences between the Calvinist Camps, theonomic and ecclesial; soteriological; liturgical; surely you at least meant a definite and particular English term, now, didn't you CTD. You weren't just trying to impress us all as to your faux brilliance with the term "extreme Calvinists", you actually MEANT something by that... didn't you?

Do tell us, CTD; THRILL us with your acumen. Explain precisely what you meant -- if you are able, that is, I cynically request?

can offer nothing more than an "I don't know"

Well, I think it should be very fine indeed if you could offer us more than an "I Don't Know" to the identification of the so-called "Extreme Calvinists", before you were to offer us a precise critique of their beliefs. After all, is it not fitting that we should know precisely and exactly whom you are talking about, before you presume to hold forth on what "they" are about?

You've much to say in your additional paragraphs... haven't you, CTD?

So please do explain, as you surely understand so well, the particular subject of the first sentence of your first paragraph -- these malevolent "extreme Calvinists", their persons, and the particular Doctrines which uniquely distinguish them from Calvinist adherents of John Calvin in general.

Please, my gentle friend: do not force us, your loving patrons.... to think you a Fop, a Clown, an Idiot Jester who is making this up as he goes along.

Enrapture me with your sagacity, CTD; tell me I'm a "true intellectual light-weight"; spank me like the Manly Man you are, big boy.

And while you're at it, explain your precise definition of "extreme Calvinists" in terms of persons, associations, and intellectual derivations of beliefs.

Because surely you can precisely define the very first subject of your very first sentence, before you go on to write two whole paragraphs on the subject. Surely you can do that -- without being made a fool (hey, what's a little criticism?).

After all, we're all so very convinced of your comprehensive erudition and incisive grasp of these subjects, CTD. We really are.

We're all so very convinced.

[drstevej]

extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism = extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism = extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism = extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism = extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism = extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism = extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism = extreme Calvinism = hyper Calvinism

... and there you have CTD's insight fully explained.