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
Matt 16:18
ksen: What about Joshua's household? Did Joshua poll everyone in it to see if they would serve the Lord, or did he decide for them?
And more to the point, what type of decision was Joshua proclaiming? I see nothing in Joshua's account that speaks to the issue of eternal salvation. I see Joshua speaking to the issue of obedience to the commandments.
Webber, are you arguing that obedience is a (prior) condition of salvation?
That probably provides commentary on itself.
I think a God who knows "Everything" would also know who it is that will eventually accept Jesus Christ as Savior and LORD, so of course they were "chosen" before the world began. That's not "sovereign" predistination, that's knowing ahead of time who would confess their sins to God the Father, and receive Jesus Christ as LORD and Savior.
Fot the sake of argument let's say that God hasn't created anything yet. Let's say further that God has limited His creative options to two: 1) Creation "A" where Webber is saved and ksen is damned, and 2) Creation "B" where Webber is damned and ksen is saved.
God decides(dare I say God Elects?) to create Creation "A". Hasn't God decided, by the very act of choosing "A" over "B", that Webber would be saved and ksen lost?
If God Almighty is the one who "Sovereinly chooses" who will be saved, then, if He is also a "Just" God, should not condemn, or Judge any unbeliever because he had no choice but be an unbeliever because according to "your gospel", man cannot choose Jesus.
First, I assume by your term "your gospel" that you think I am a Calvinist. I am not. You can ask any of the others. I am resisting that title.
Second, if God were fair, or to use your word "Just", then we would all be going to Hell.
Third, it is not that man cannot choose God, it's that man will not choose God.
So neither can God cast the unbelievers into the "Lake of Fire". BUT HE DOES! Which means your "religion" makes GOD UNJUST, UNHOLY, UNMERCIFUL, UNGRACIOUS, UNLOVING..... and I for one DO NOT BELIEVE THAT! So that means your "sovereign predistination" religion is Blasphemy, Heresy, Abomination, Lies, of the Devil, Apostacy!!
Once again, I am not a Calvinist, although I am closer to their side of the debate.
I think it is valid to the extent that in my experience with Calvinism, the majority of those most concerned with the TULIP exclude the practice of the commandment.
It is not across the board. My boss is a Calvinist and a member of the church I used to attend. He is one of the most gentle and kind human beings I know. He's got his politics all screwed up, but that's a different story.
My best friend since college (best man in my wedding) is a Calvinist (and he survived in a Wesleyan college). We did manage to get his politics straightened out.
But if my opinions of Calvinism were based solely on my experiences here at FR...well...
Can you do it without the sarcasm and the "You might be an Arminian shtick?"
Do you really want the answer or are you prepared to respond with some kind of emotional fit or something?
I guess not.
Again, that works both ways, and as I've told you neither Arminians nor Calvinists are exempt from prideful behavior.
Evaluation of a system of doctrine based on the words of a dozen or so followers of that system in a web forum is hardly what I would call well-reasoned. It is no doubt an emotional issue that we debate, but at the end of the day our emotion has no bearing either way on the actual truth of our positions.
Two interesting points:
My first argument on this subject here was with the_doc (aacck! ptui!) over that very same thing. Told him and the swarm of the day that if I ever became a Calvinist, and I certainly do not anticipate that I will, it will not be because of conversations here.
Second, if I implied that this was my only impression of Calvinism, I did not mean to. I spent 3 1/2 years in a Reformed Presbyterian Church (solid on all five points). While most of the people were most receptive to the oddball Wesleyans, I saw in a lot of the people there a harshness and a pride. Not as strident as we find here, and I suspect that none of us would be a strident in person. But still, I saw a family destroyed because the pastor told a young wife, a believer of less than a year "your husband is probably not one of the elect."
But, before long, he began attending church with her and supporting her in the activities there with the children.
When they couple having some struggles, she was booted off a worship team and told to come back when she had her life straightened out. Of course that was after the elders told her she dressed like a tramp (not in those exact words).
Today, that family is still together, but not in church. In fact the husband has forbidden her to take the kids to church.
Is the doctrine of Calvinism responsible for that? No, of course not. But it is what I have seen as the fruits of the doctrine.
And that is why I will contend until the day I die that Calvinism is a doctrine, it is man's interpretation. It is not "the gospel."
We ALL see through a glass darkly. We all struggle and try to understand the Word. Sometimes we get it right. Sometimes we don't.
I have not been convinced of the "truth" of Calvinism. More and more my experiences here simply reenforce my preconceived ideas.
I'm guessing that Webber is some variation of either Independent or Restoration Baptist (ie CoC for the latter).
The issue has never been whether or not I have a right to complain about your sarcasm. I have on countless occasions acknowledged that I have gone over the line. Have you ever?
But the real issue is whether or not you can defend your belief without the sarcasm. I think you can.
But you won't.
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.