"Summary Evaluation of Arminian Theology" -- Dr. Paul Enns

Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago, Ill.: Moody Press) 1996. | Paul Enns

[connectthedots]

So I was young and stupid once. At least I kept my sacred oath, even if the original decision was a mistake; something I do not regret for a minute. Next time, I will make sure this issue is discussed in detail prior to my next, and last, narriage.

[Jean Chauvin]

" What did they do; decide that women can actually preach the Gospel, have female deacons or elders, or some other apostacy? LOL"

Pretty much wholesale abandonment* of the reformed principles. (Becoming quite Romanist and Arminian)

*(in process)

(When one of the CRC pastors pastors over a funeral with an Universalist pastor without fear of discipline -would you call that orthodox?)

(When a retired CRC pastor writes publicly about his universalist tendancies without fear of discipline -would you call that orthodox?)

(When a Physics Professor at the denomination's own college teaches human evolution with official denominational support under the guise of academic freedom -would you call that orthodox?)

(When a retired CRC pastor (diff than the previous citation) writes an article in the denomination's periodical advocating abandoning TULIP with no mass outrage -would you call that orthodox?)

(When the denomination breaks its own rules while 'opening' up the offices to women -would you call that orthodox?)

(The women in office issue in and of itself is not a killer issue -the reasons it happened in the CRC are indicative of a far deeper problem.)

Jean

[RnMomof7]

I do not agree with much about the openness of todays young people but that is something of a positive for them..

It is honorable to honor the oath..God uses marriage as a type of relationship with the church..that is how we know how important the keeeping of that vow is in His eyes. We are often cold and unloving to Him...refusing to "roll over" and share ourselves totally with Him......but He stays faithful:>)

When I was newly married my mother in law was a very old woman (literally ). Once I said something a bit sexual to her . She drew her shoulders back to full stature and said "Con and I have been married 55 years and we have NEVER discussed sex" ...as only a 20 something could say I looked at her and said..."you may not have talked about it, but you did it"...LOL....looking back on it now I was a bold kid:>)) But there is a value in openness in a marriage..both on sexual and non sexual matters!

[connectthedots]

Amen to that, sister.

[Wrigley]

Excellent summary.

BTW, I was talking to my sister in law yesterday and she made this comment about her, and now my brother's, church, "The service last night was great. No sermon at all. We did some praise songs and a little meditation of the gift of a mother." She also says she hopes the church gets a pastor that doesn't like to preach too much. A short 5 minute sermon or a homily would be great.

If you think I am concerned for my brother, you're right.

[Jean Chauvin]

Yikes!

[JMJ333]

I am glad to see you. I am going to take your advice and give these threads another try. Actually, I enjoyed debating last night.

When you have the time [and inclination], will you to share with me your thoughts on predestination? Does it mirror Calvin's exactly, or do you like to cite other philosophers as well. What is the crux of your argument?

Regards. =)

[RnMomof7]

No theology major here ..But I believe all things are predestined by God..He is fully in charge (A reading of the Bible shows us that clearly.)

The question is HOW that sovereignity of God is expressed.

I accept that God knew me before I was born (actually before the foundation of the earth. ) He knew evey soul that would be made.He planned each of us..being our maker He know the choices we will make based on the way we are made...

So our "free will "choices are always in accord with His will, as he made us in such a way that those would be our choices...there are no surprises to God. (As I noted to someone yesterday that God knew we were not having green beans for dinner..now I have the free will to select the dinner menu..but God made me in a way to hate green beans....so it was predestined we would not have green beans:>))

Eithor God is sovereign and fully in charge of the affairs of man or he is not God..

[JMJ333]

Is this based on Calvin's teachings? I am just curious to the philosopher because I want to make sure I understand where the argument is stemming from, as there are many besides Calvin who believe[d] in predestination. This way, I feel better prepared for my reply.

[Wrigley]

Yep. And what it more interesting is that her father is a ordained in the CRC too. Her mother used to be PR.

[RnMomof7]

No that is coming from RNmomof7:>)) I came to a belief in the doctrine of election here on these threads..I had a kinnda assent to predestination from the day I was saved,..

I have read some Calvinist teachings ..but mostly my theology *grin* is eclectic.

I have flagged dr steve ..he is a theologian type that could tell you (and me) how close I line up to Calvin..

[JMJ333]

The difficulty I have with Calvin's teachings on predestination have to do with what I touched on in posts 21 and 49. Namely, I don't agree with his docrine that everything man does, even his sins, are predetermined but God. And that some are predetermined to be elect, while others are reprobates and are damned conclusively from conception.

I reject this because Jesus is a loving savior. If we accept the premise that he creates people only to be damned, then we have to ask ourselves what kind of behavior the "elect" will have toward ones they believe are "damned." Usually, it leads toward the elect screaming condemnation or insults at a reprobate without guilt because, after all, the person was predestined for hell, therefore all actions and words [whether Christian in nature or not] are justified in the eyes of the elect.

That isn't virtuous. And if something isn't virtuous, then it isn't "of God."

I also think that one can come to this truth by praying for knowledge of God's nature. Through grace one comes to know God intimately, and a personal relationship with Christ is indeed possible. Once one has established this personal bond, you come to realize that His nature is one of infinite and unfathomable mercy and love.

God is definitely omniscient and knows what you chose to have for dinner tonight before your conception--on this point I have no argument. You still have the will to choose what you want to eat. So it is with life decisions, and sin in particular. One can decide whether or not one wants to participate in practices they know or wrong, and can change, by grace, to become a better person. God wants everyone to go to heaven, which is why he expended himself on the cross. Not just for the elect...but ALL mankind.

[Wrigley]

I reject this because Jesus is a loving savior. If we accept the premise that he creates people only to be damned, then we have to ask ourselves what kind of behavior the "elect" will have toward ones they believe are "damned." Usually, it leads toward the elect screaming condemnation or insults at a reprobate without guilt because, after all, the person was predestined for hell, therefore all actions and words [whether Christian in nature or not] are justified in the eyes of the elect.

You assume we know who the elect are and who the elect are not. I don't have that knowledge, do you? Do some act like they are superior to those they feel are reprobate? Yes. Are they correct in that attitude? NO.

[Wrigley]

I also think that one can come to this truth by praying for knowledge of God's nature. Through grace one comes to know God intimately, and a personal relationship with Christ is indeed possible. Once one has established this personal bond, you come to realize that His nature is one of infinite and unfathomable mercy and love.

Who establishes that personal bond?

[JMJ333]

You assume we know who the elect are and who the elect are not. I don't have that knowledge, do you?

That particular philosophy is outlined in "The Institutes of the Christian Religion," by John Calvin. He taught that "The elect" are those who accepted his religious doctrine, and is why I used his teachings an example in my post.

[RnMomof7]

The difficulty I have with Calvin's teachings on predestination have to do with what I touched on in posts 21 and 49. Namely, I don't agree with his docrine that everything man does, even his sins, are predetermined but God. And that some are predetermined to be elect, while others are reprobates and are damned conclusively from conception

JM How do you think we believe that God is the author of sin? Man sins because he chooses to sin.Not one person will be in hell that did not choose it..

And my friend our eternities were decided LONG before our conception..the bible tells us before the foundations of the world were laid He knew each of us

That should not be a reason for fear or anger but for reassurence. Not a bird falls from the sky without His permission...

[JMJ333]

Who establishes that personal bond?

The Holy Spirit. After conversion we are sustained by grace, but it is not an bond to maintain. It is sustained by prayer and asking for knowledge, graces, and intimacy.

[JMJ333]

Well again, I have to respectfully disagree because I have the choice on a daily basis to freely worship God or not--to freely choose to engage in sinful pleasures, or not. I do what is right out of love...love that I give freely, not one that is taken from me without choice.

Jesus is a loving savior. He died for everyone, not just some. He did not create, only to condemn because He is all good.

[JMJ333]

but it is not an bond to maintain.

This should say: not an easy bond to maintain.

[JMJ333]

I think there needs to be a clear distinction between the concepts of omniscience and predestination.

Omniscience being that God has infinite awareness, understanding, insight and possesses universal and complete knowledge. Which is quite different from predestination which is the doctrine that God in consequence of his foreknowledge of all events infallibly guides those who are destined for salvation.

One implies that "some" are destined for salvation while others aren't. I don't accept that because God is pure love.