On Free Grace

Wesley Center of Applied Theology | 1740 | John Wesley

[Jerry_M]

Oh no, I do not consider animals to be filthy vile sinners. This is because they were not made in the image of God. Men were, but have so horribly marred that image as to virtually unrecognizable. No, it is not a filthiness based on difference (though I would not disagree with you that God and men are different), it is a filthiness based upon the sinful actions of men who have spat in the face of their Creator, and who have chosen to go their own way, regardless of His desires for them.

[CCWoody]

Yup, really satisfying it must be to know it all. That secret handshake is really nifty too. You guys have every reason to be proud and self-satisfied (in addition to being omnisicient of course). It is such a winning presentation of the Gospel.

Ummm, we have a presentation of the Gospel. You have: "I don't know how someone believes."

[Codie]

Become a Catholic.Life will make more sense.Trust me.

[Jerry_M]

I will also concur that xzin's "construct" (Now, why would he use that term?) is flawed in several points. As I have pointed out to him, his "U" is deficient in that it does not take into account at least one key component of my initial "first draft" response.

Let's discuss "T". xzins, what is your objection to "T"? (Succinct please, one sentence if possible.)

[CCWoody]

I don't know what that meant.

It means that if I was a natural man and somebody tried to kill me, I would be tempted to plot my revenge.

As a son of God, on August 25, 1999, when I was actually run from the highway by a violent man and left for dead, I did not seek my revenge. I asked the priest who came to see me to pray for him. In fact, I sent him away because I didn't need him. I have a Priest called Jesus Christ. He has appeased the Wrath of God which I deserve.

[stuartcr]

Thanks, I never heard of him before. I'm constantly amazed whenever I get involved in religious threads.

[Jerry_M]

Re. 653.

Why would you think that we would "paint a different picture" of Arminius? His character is of no more relevance to this discussion than that of John Calvin. Both theological systems predate these men by many, many centuries, the only connection to these men is the fact that the schools of thought wear their names.

(Now, why the insinuation? Was it really necessary for you to think the worst of us?)

[stuartcr]

OK, thanks for the explanation.

[CCWoody]

That's the most exciting news in the history of the world.

It is indeed. Unfortunately, only the Calvinist can explain how a man believes in Christ for the Calvinist seeks his answer in the word of God. All others seek the answer in the construct called "free will"! So, vaunted free willers, can a man "will" himself to believe?

[Ward Smythe]

I'm constantly amazed whenever I get involved in religious threads.

It can get pretty intense. We all have pretty passionately held beliefs.

The basic argument here goes back to the teaching of John Calvin who lived in the 1500s and Arminius as referenced above and their interepretations of scripture.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

Hebrews ch 9: 11-17, 28; ch 10: 6-9

[Ward Smythe]

Why would you think that we would "paint a different picture" of Arminius?

I'm sorry Jerry, really, I meant nothing more than you would take a different view of what he said as I pointed stuartcr to Wesley's article on Arminius. I obviously was not clear.

I was actually trying to be more charitable than it must've sounded. My apologies.

[Ward Smythe]

The basic argument here goes back to the teaching of John Calvin who lived in the 1500s and Arminius as referenced above and their interepretations of scripture.

But as Jerry correctly pointed out, the differences go back beyond both men.

[xzins]

The Five Basic Arminian Objections

These Arminian definitions are found in the Wycliffe Dictionary of Theology and are condensed in that work by a Calvinist, Roger Nicole(Gordon Divinity School). I will take some liberties with them for the sake of clarification. They are the views of Jacob Hermann (Armin) a former student of Calvin who came to doubt Calvin's theology.

1. - - God elects only on the basis of foreseen faith and condemns only on the basis of resistance to grace.

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Here, I'll save you the trouble. Nicole's summation:

• "I. God elects or reproves on the basis of foreseen faith or unbelief.
  -- Rejected, on the grounds that Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ. Ergo, no "faith" will ever be foreseen in the Natural Man, apart from sovereign regeneration.

• II. Christ died for all men and for every man, although only believers are saved.
  -- Rejected, on the grounds that Arminians believe that those who die in infancy are not Sinners; therefore, Christ did not die for them (or, if He did, then the Arminian must admit that the atonement is applied without decisional act of will, for those who die in infancy do not "choose to believe" -- after all, Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ. This must necessarily apply also to infants, if true).

• III. Man is so depraved that divine grace is necessary unto faith or any good deed.
  -- Point granted as True, if understood to mean that Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ.

• IV. This grace may be resisted.
  -- Indeed, if God "asks the sinner his opinion" of whether or not to "accept" Grace, it is certain that the unregenerate sinner will reject Grace, for the Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ.

• V. Whether all who are truly regenerate will certainly persevere in the faith is a point which needs further investigation.
  -- And is therefore, given Arminian ambivalence and confusion on the matter, irrelevant to the discussion.

ERGO, we see that all Arminian Objections are thereby reduced to a debate about Total Depravity: The Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ.

Have the Arminians a one-sentence objection to the Doctrine of Total Depravity?

[CCWoody]

Become a Catholic.Life will make more sense.Trust me.

Oh, I see! In order for one to believe in Jesus Christ, one must become a Catholic. So, how does being a Catholic accomplish this?

[xzins]

The Five Basic Arminian Objections to Calvinism

These Arminian definitions are found in the Wycliffe Dictionary of Theology and are condensed in that work by a Calvinist, Roger Nicole(Gordon Divinity School). I will take some liberties with them for the sake of clarification:

1. - - God elects only on the basis of foreseen faith and condemns only on the basis of resistance to grace.

2. - - Christ provided a universal opportunity by dying for all men and for every man such that ALL those who turn to him as true repentant believers are saved.

[xzins]

Don't worry, Ortho, you'll get your party. Be patient.

Besides, I like my formatting better than yours and my wording better than Nicole's.

[CCWoody]

The basic argument here goes back to the teaching of John Calvin who lived in the 1500s and Arminius as referenced above and their interepretations of scripture.

Incorrect! John Calvin is an Augustinian Presestinarian:

"But we say," say they, "that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work." But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, "We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things. He, therefore, worketh the beginning of our belief who worketh all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;" and of which it is said: "Not of works, but of Him that calleth"; and the election which the Lord signified when He said: "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe. But all the many things which we have said concerning this matter need not to be repeated. - Augustine

And Augustine is a Biblical Predestinarian: ... He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world...

[Ward Smythe]

Please see my post #673 addressed to Jerry. It would be helpful if you'd read all the posts before pouncing. I was simply trying to give stuartcr a very basic understanding of where the differences lie. For the debate on this thread the terms have largely been "Calvinist" vs. "Armininian."