Posted on 09/07/2003 6:36:06 PM PDT by nobdysfool
The Christ of Arminianism
The Bible warns us that in the last days in which we live there will be many false Christs-those who claim to be Christ but who are imposters. Jesus said, "Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying I am Christ; and shall deceive many." (Matt. 24:4-5). We who profess to be Christians must take heed. We must be very careful that we are not deceived. Our calling is to trust, love, and follow the true Christ and Him only. We may have nothing to do with the false Christs who are so numerous in our day.
We know about the Christ of the cults and other religions. He is a good man, a prophet, the first creation of God, a great spirit, a divine idea, or even a god himself. But he is not true and eternal God. He receives his existence from another who is greater than he. He is not the Christ of the Bible. We are not deceived by this Christ. He is a false Christ.
We know about the Christ of Roman Catholicism. They profess that He is true God. He suffered and died for the forgiveness of sin. He arose again, ascended into heaven, and is coming again. But he is not a complete Savior. The Christ of the Roman Catholics can not save sinners without their own good works and the intercession of priests. He is not the Christ of the Bible. We are not deceived by this Christ. He is a false Christ.
There is, however, another false Christ who is much more dangerous than the Christ of the cults and the Christ of Roman Catholicism. He has deceived people for many years and he continues to deceive millions. This Christ is so dangerous that, if it were not impossible, he would deceive the very elect (Matt. 24:24). He is the Christ of Arminianism.
This false Christ is extremely dangerous because in many ways he appears to be the True Christ. They say that he is true God, equal with the Father and the Holy Spirit. They say that he died on the cross to save sinners. They even say that he saves by his grace alone, without the work of man. This Christ will have nothing to do with the Christ of the cults and the Christ of Roman Catholicism.
But watch out! Be warned! The Christ of Arminianism is not the Christ of the Bible. Do not be fooled!
1. The Christ of Arminianism - loves every individual person in the world and sincerely desires their salvation.
The Christ of the Bible - earnestly loves and desires the salvation of only those whom God has unconditionally chosen to salvation. (Ps. 5:5, Ps. 7:11, Ps. 11:5, Matt. 11:27, John 17:9-10, Acts 2:47, Acts 13:48, Rom. 9:10-13, Rom. 9:21-24, Eph. 1:3-4)
2. The Christ of Arminianism - offers salvation to every sinner and does all in his power to bring them to salvation. His offer and work are often frustrated, for many refuse to come.
The Christ of the Bible - effectually calls to Himself only the elect and sovereignly brings them to salvation. Not one of them will be lost. (Isa. 55:11, John 5:21, John 6:37-40, John 10:25-30, John 17:2, Phil. 2:13)
3. The Christ of Arminianism - can not regenerate and save a sinner who does not first choose Christ with his own "free will." All men have a "free will" by which they can either accept or reject Christ. That "free will" may not be violated by Christ.
The Christ of the Bible - sovereignly regenerates the elect sinner apart from his choice, for without regeneration the spiritually dead sinner can not choose Christ. Faith is not man's contribution to salvation but the gift of Christ which He sovereignly imparts in regeneration. (John 3:3, John 6:44 & 65, John 15:16, Acts 11:18, Rom. 9:16, Eph. 2:1,Eph. 2:8-10, Phil. 1:29, Hebr. 12:2)
4. The Christ of Arminianism - died on the cross for every individual person and thereby made it possible for every person to be saved. His death, apart from the choice of man, was not able to actually save anyone for many for whom he died are lost.
The Christ of the Bible - died for only God's elect people and thereby actually obtained salvation for all those for whom He died. His death was a substitutionary satisfaction which actually took away the guilt of His chosen people. (Luke 19:10, John 10:14-15 & 26, Acts 20:28, Rom. 5:10, Eph. 5:25, Hebr. 9:12, I Peter 3:18)
5. The Christ of Arminianism - loses many whom he has "saved" because they do not continue in faith. Even if he does give them "eternal security," as some say, that security is not based upon his will or work but the choice which the sinner made when he accepted Christ.
The Christ of the Bible - preserves His chosen people so that they can not lose their salvation but persevere in the faith to the very end. He preserves them by the sovereign electing will of God, the power of His death, and the mighty working of His Spirit. (John 5:24, John 10:26-29, Rom. 8:29-30, Rom. 8:35-39, I Peter 1:2-5, Jude 24-25)
As you can see, although the Christ of Arminianism and the Christ of the Bible may at first seem to be the same, they are very different. One is a false Christ. The other is the true Christ. One is weak and helpless. He bows before the sovereign "free will" of man. The other is the reigning Lord Who wills what He pleases and sovereignly accomplishes all that He wills.
If you believe and serve the Christ of Arminianism, you must recognize the fact that you do not serve the Christ of the Bible. You have been deceived! Study the Scriptures and learn of the True Christ. Pray for grace to repent and trust Christ as your sovereign
You on the other hand are doing precisely what you're chastising him for...accusing and engaging in personal attacks, which as you pointed out does nothing to bring any conversation to Christ or be faithful to him.
There is a word for this type of behavior, cvengr.
If you're going to keep using that term "soulish" you are going to have to define exactly what you mean by it, or stop using it.
Yeah, I had to look that one up too. My Webster's Collegiate Dictionary didn't have it; Happily, some commentaries use it in context and my Logos System X software found it. The New Bible Dictionary says
Indeed the 'soulish' man is one directing his life toward the perishing old age, the 'soulish' body one controlled by the Sheol-power dominating the old age.
The NKJV adds it as a marginal note to the word translated 'sensual' in Jude 19. I think theyre trying to transliterate
5591 - psuchikos adj. From 5590; TDNT 9:661; TDNTA 1342; GK 6035; Six occurrences; AV translates as “natural” four times, and "sensual" twice. 1 of or belonging to breath. 1a having the nature and characteristics of the breath. 1a1 the principal of animal life, which men have in common with the brutes. 1b governed by breath. 1b1 the sensuous nature with its subjection to appetite and passion.
We would probably use the terms 'carnal' or 'natural'. Is that what you had in mind Cvengr? If so, I find it offensive and inappropriately applied to those of us who hold the Calvinist position.
Some people might take that foreknowledge as a hint that perhaps they should insure they are in fellowship with God and the information posted would tend to bring people to Him rather than promote contrived arguments.
It occurs to me that by your own standards as put forth you are exhibiting soulish behavior and should retreat to prayer in a concerted effor to renew your fellowship with the Lord.
Also by your own words, those things which incite emotional response or hurt must necessarily be true or they would not elicit such a response.
In one post you've managed to further expose your hypocrisy, paint yourself into the corner of disfellowship with God, and validate the truth of the original article in this thread.
Keep up the good work, Cvengr!
Ref Jude 19, 1stCor 2:14, 2ndCor 5:17
The name calling began in post 1. There's no need to accuse Arminians or Catholics of worshipping false Christs. Do we agree on this?
Looking for the word 'soulish' and not finding it. Keep quoting 1 Cor 2:14 though...
The name calling began in post 1. There's no need to accuse Arminians or Catholics of worshipping false Christs. Do we agree on this?
No. These are accusations and they are backed up by an argument. Now, if you wish to provide Scriptural support for the notion that nobdysfool is like Bill Clinton, I'm all ears.
Webber put forth accusations of blasphemy, but gave no support to back it up. Furthermore, it seems it's acceptable to attack the person who posted the article in lieu of attacking the author themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.