Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: nobdysfool; xzins
The only difference is that they believed that one could say 'no' to the call and reject it. I find that to be questionable. If one knows his true condition before God (because God has revealed it to him), why would he reject the only escape route there is? That would be irrational. That raises the question that if the man chose to reject God, did he truly have a revelation from God concerning his true condition? I think at this point the standard for measurement rests with God, and not with our own perception.

Man is responsible for responding to God's revelation of Himself in nature and desiring to know God

That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him and find Him, though he be not far from every one of us (Acts.17:28)

Now, if man rejects that free offer, displayed in nature, God will turn that same man over to his own lusts (Rom.1)

Choosing God is not an alternative for Him until God gives Him light and shows him the alternatives between darkness and light. You're the first Arminian I've encountered who would make that statement. Thank you. That is a point that many of us have been trying to emphasize all along.

Amen.

I did not know an Arminian who did not believe the above.

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) Here's where I disagree. I don't believe that anyone to whom God has revealed the true condition of his soul could reject God's offer of salvation. It has to do with God's calling and election. To whom God gives grace, He gives grace such that the decision is a forgone fact from God's side, but freely made from man's side. Even when there is only one real choice, the man must still choose to respond, even though he can really do nothing other, due to the compelling nature of God's call. If he even considers rejectiong the call, he would immediately dismiss such an obviously crazy idea out of hand.

Well, it would be a crazy idea to resist such a call, but the Gospel goes out to all men yet, all do not respond, some reject it.

Now, it might be at the point of hearing that the rejection occurs, not allowing the light to penetrate, while those who do let the light in, all respond to that same light.

However, man's volition is involved somewhere in the process, since it is God's will that none perishes and thus, man is resisting what God wants for him.

Explain to me how God could harden Pharaoh's heart, yet hold Pharaoh accountable for all that he did.

Pharoah hardened his own heart as well (Exo.8)

Moreover, God will harden all those who do not respond to Him and turn them over to their own lusts.

This is spoken of throughout the Bible.

2Thess.2:11, Rom.1:24, 1Ki.22:20-22, Pr.1:26-32, Psa.106:14-15).

66 posted on 03/07/2003 1:47:14 PM PST by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: fortheDeclaration; Frumanchu; xzins
Man is responsible for responding to God's revelation of Himself in nature and desiring to know God

I don't know that I would put it quite that way. God's revelation of Himself in nature is a witness against man, more than anything, I think. As to man's ability to desire to know God, I don't think unregenerate man has that ability. In fact, just the opposite, he is afraid of God, and wants to hide from Him. A desire to know God would be part of the Grace and Calling (Election) of God, upon those whom He has chosen. In other words, as the scripture says, "It is God working in you, both to will and to do of His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13)

I did not know an Arminian who did not believe the above. (referring to the statement that the alternative to choose God is not available to man until God reveals Himself to man)

You'd be surprised at how many times that very statement has been attacked by Arminians arguing for a free and unlimited will on the part of man. If that is what Arminians believe (that the alternative to choose God is only available to those whom God reveals Himself to), then we're closer than we thought.

However, man's volition is involved somewhere in the process, since it is God's will that none perishes and thus, man is resisting what God wants for him.

We're back to the same old tired argument about limited vs unlimited atonement. There is ample evidence in scripture that God has created some for destruction (AntiChrist comes to mind right off...), and that God has designed the whole plan of salvation in such a way that only some will be saved. Our own observation bears this out. We all know of people who have died unsaved, and unpleasant though it may be, we know what their final end is. Now, does it make sense that God would will something, and not bring it to pass? If God wills that all men be saved, why cannot His will be carried out? I know you will say that God has granted man a free will which can reject God, but that is not quite accurate. Because of Adam's sin, all men are born in the position of already having rejected God. It is not a decision they make sometime after their birth, it is the condition they are born into. It's not a matter of choosing OR rejecting God, because the choice is already set initially, and it is only possible to change that condition by an act of God's active, elective Grace toward those whom He chooses. Those whom He does not choose are already judged, and only await the carrying out of the sentence. And scripture is plain that God does not choose everyone, for His own reasons, and ultimately for His own Glory.

67 posted on 03/08/2003 7:52:53 AM PST by nobdysfool (No matter where you go, there you are...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson