The Christ of Arminianism

A Puritan's Mind ^ | unknown | Rev. Steven Houck

[webber]

Your religion is BLASPHEMOUS. That's the definition of blasphemous.

[nobdysfool]

Notice how you seem to change words to support your "Blasphemous Religion"? Just like ALL Heresy's. They just never seem to get the right words in there. I wonder why? Maybe it's because it will destroy their argument for what they perceive to be "their" truth.

Maybe you'd better pay a little more attention to who is talking to whom. As for your attitude toward me, ratchet it down about 50 notches. What are you so worked up about? Do you think God is going to give you brownie points for yelling at the "heretic"? I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Read your bible (this time without the sunglasses in the dark).

Calling names will get you a one-way ticket out of here. I'm not kidding.

[webber]

Why don't you explain John 3:16-17?

PLease, don't be shy, I can read your reply tomorrow and reply.

[nobdysfool]

Well, it will be tomorrow before I reply because I must get to bed....5:30 comes way too early. If you don't see it, remind me.

[CARepubGal]

What does webber mean by blasphemous? From what perspective is webber coming? I would hit abuse but honestly don't get the answers he? gave.

[nobdysfool]

What does webber mean by blasphemous? From what perspective is webber coming? I would hit abuse but honestly don't get the answers he? gave.

Your guess is as good as mine....I'll deal with it tomorrow....hitting the sack for now....

[RnMomof7]

Are you advocating simple foreknowledge? Yep.
I would submit that God's knowledge of His elect is much more intimate.
I agree, simple but also personal. BigMack

Mack how is foreknowledge different than predestination in practice?

[sola gracia]

If God "chose" who will be saved and will "not be saved" "Sovereignly, then why did Jesus tell his disciples to "Go into all the world, and preach the gospel to EVERY CREATURE, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, baptizing them in the name of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost"?

What you're saying is that Jesus told His disciples to do something that would absolutely worthless, waste of time, and even blasphemous since it is God who will choose who is saved, According to "The Gospel According to nobdysfool".

The God who predestines the end, also predestines the means to which the end will be attained. He chooses who will be saved and He also chooses how they are to be saved - through the preaching of the Gospel. Quite simple really.

[Cvengr]

I've noticed over the past couple of months what appears to be a full court press by Satanists to represent Satanism as imaginary, paganism and neo-paganism as natural, and Christianity as extreme idiotic zealots.

I suspect there may be some very active Satanists who have dedicated themselves to promoting Calvinism, have studied it, found linkages between Calvinist doctrines, and have honed the ability to link between doctrines whenever refuted by Scripture, then if the argument relaxes to doctrine they will quote Scripture and twist context to speak back in terms of misguided doctrine.

The theology being presented supports the soulish man and I wouldn't be surprised if many soulish people begin to look to Calvinism as a panacea for a relationship with God, because they attempt to satisfy their conscience (soul) by placing faith in Calvinism first, then identifying Calvinism with God and reading Scripture, believe they have self justified their position from God. All the while numbing themselves in scar tissue of the soul.

Limited vs unlimited atonement is a good example. The Calvinist of today, confuses unbelievers going to hell as justification for a limited atonement. They fail to realize He has already been judged for ALL sins. The cross was all judgement. Forgiveness occurs upon acceptance of Him through faith. If one sins again, the believer is still indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but no longer filled and acts in a reprobate fashion. For many of today's Calvinists, this nicely explains their lack of any love for their fellow man.

It also explains why they never exhibit any desire to communicate good news in a Christ like fashion to unbelievers. They could care less if they insult unbelievers, because they sincerely don't believe their message will ever lead the listener to consider Christ, because only God will lead the unbeliever to faith. Accordingly in their hatred of their fellow man, they blindly render insult after insult to him, unwittingly serving a false god, dissuading some future believers from receiving Christ.

Not all who study Calvin act in that fashion, but it seems to be a present day doctrine being used by the Adversary to attack the faith.

[Cvengr]

webber isn't worked up and nbdyf again has been to first to call names and then accuse others of his vice.

Your soul is scarred with these same weaknesses as from many posts before.

Rejoice Christian.

[Corin Stormhands]

Ah yes, the Calvinist schoolyard bullies once again feel the need to proclaim "My Christ is better than your Christ."

Sad that they actually think this is the "gospel."

[drstevej]

***Limited vs unlimited atonement is a good example. The Calvinist of today, confuses unbelievers going to hell as justification for a limited atonement. They fail to realize He has already been judged for ALL sins. The cross was all judgement. Forgiveness occurs upon acceptance of Him through faith. If one sins again, the believer is still indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but no longer filled and acts in a reprobate fashion. For many of today's Calvinists, this nicely explains their lack of any love for their fellow man.***

Having read this several times, it makes no sense. The rest of the post wasn't much better.

[RochesterFan]

Thank you for your reply. Gotta go to work soon so I'll have to be brief. I suggest you consult an interlinear (Greek/English) on John 3:16-17. The phrase is literally 'all the believing ones shall not perish.' It says nothing about who will and will not believe, simply that every believing one will be saved. Both Calvinists and Arminians agree that there will be no believers in hell and no unbelievers in heaven. You asked about my understanding of the word 'world' ('kosmos')in v. 17. A study of the semantic domain of the term 'kosmos' by John is fascinating. He certainly uses the full range of meanings throughout his writings. I believe that the term here is in the same sense as Rev 5:9, that there will be believers from every people, tribe, tongue, and nation. It clearly cannot mean 'all people, without exception' because we know from other Scriptures that some are lost. John, himself writes in 1 John 2:15-16

Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. (NAS95)

If you would like to hear a full exposition of this, check out the real audio file by James White here. Gotta run...

[Wrigley]

I suspect there may be some very active Satanists who have dedicated themselves to promoting Calvinism,

C'mon C, you can do better than that. Take the next step, libel all Calvinists with that statement. You know you want to.

[Gamecock]

I stand on scripture, I gave you the text. It's all there. Read it.

[RochesterFan]

I knew I shouldn't post when rushed... I meant that those who don't believe are lost... Again, the text simply means that all who believe wiil be saved. Calvinists afirm this.

[Corin Stormhands]

Take the next step, libel all Calvinists with that statement.

Yeah, careful Cvenger, you wouldn't want to "libel" the Calvinists by implying they worship a false Christ.

[Frumanchu]

Your religion is BLASPHEMOUS. That's the definition of blasphemous.

Can't get around that logic. I'm stumped. You?

[Frumanchu]

I'm sorry...I must have missed that. What name did nobdysfool call webber again? I was too busy reading the word 'blasphemous' coming from webber.

Unless you can show me what name he called webber, I'll call your post for what is...an attempt to discredit nobdysfool's character with false accusations. In short, an ad hominem attack.

[Frumanchu]

No. Just like your poor, unfounded interpretation of the words to suit your "Blasphemous religion".

Bold accusations. Care to back any of that up? I'll gladly provide an explanation of 2 Peter 3:9 in context for you.