Replies

Thank you for stating that. Most Arminians don't, in the many, many posts I've seen. The question is, when did God give man that ability? Was it there all along, or was the ability given when God called him? That is important. As I see it, Arminians argue for man having that ability to choose God without regard to God's Election or calling. I believe that man cannot choose God UNLESS God first chooses him.

All choices are limited, but that does not mean that they are not still choices even if limited to only two alternatives!

Yes, but the Arminians I've encountered set up a hue and cry the moment I, or any other Calvinist, states that for the sinner, the alternatives are not to choose or reject God. Without God having first chosen the sinner and opening his eyes and ears to the Gospel, the sinner cannot choose God, nor does he want to. That is the heart of the matter. Choosing God is not one of the alternatives for him.

Even if all that were true, the fact is that Romans 5 makes it very clear that we are dead in Adam but all savable by the Second Adam (Rom.5:18)

What do you mean,"even if all that were true"...of course it's true! It's God's Word! Jesus' work on the cross is sufficient for all whom God calls. It is efficacious only for those whom God calls. Show me where it says any different.

No one underestimates the depravity of man, both Arminius and Wesley were strong in making it clear that man was helpless in his own salvation. However, that does not mean that man cannot make a choice, once God seeks him, and man is able to make that choice because God gave him that ability. Thank you for stating that. Most Arminians don't, in the many, many posts I've seen. The question is, when did God give man that ability? Was it there all along, or was the ability given when God called him? That is important. As I see it, Arminians argue for man having that ability to choose God without regard to God's Election or calling. I believe that man cannot choose God UNLESS God first chooses him.

God must initiate the grace.

Both Wesley and Arminus held that.

The only difference is that they believed that one could say 'no' to the call and reject it.

It was the Pelegians who stated that man could move towards God under some system of works.

All choices are limited, but that does not mean that they are not still choices even if limited to only two alternatives! Yes, but the Arminians I've encountered set up a hue and cry the moment I, or any other Calvinist, states that for the sinner, the alternatives are not to choose or reject God. Without God having first chosen the sinner and opening his eyes and ears to the Gospel, the sinner cannot choose God, nor does he want to. That is the heart of the matter. Choosing God is not one of the alternatives for him.

Choosing God is not an alternative for Him until God gives Him light and shows him the alternatives between darkness and light.

Thus, at that point, man can reject the call of the Holy Spirit, who is shedding light into the soul, the entrance of thy word giveth light...(Psa.119:30)

Even if all that were true, the fact is that Romans 5 makes it very clear that we are dead in Adam but all savable by the Second Adam (Rom.5:18) What do you mean,"even if all that were true"...of course it's true! It's God's Word! Jesus' work on the cross is sufficient for all whom God calls.

Yes, and God calls all men to Him (Jn.12:32)

It is efficacious only for those whom God calls. Show me where it says any different.

Jn.3:16, Rom.5:18, 1Jn.2:2, Heb.2:9 are passages that show that all men are savable because Christ died for all men.

1Tim.2:4 and 2Pet.3:9 show that God wants all men to be saved, Jn.3:39 and Rom.1:21 shows why those who Christ died for aren't saved.

'ye would not' (Matt.23:37)