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
Today I'm ok. Who knows about tomorrow?
IF a group want to join a denomination and the pastor wants to affiliate with an established church body , and if then he is asked to affirm all the pillars of that church and he affirms them to the leaders even though he does not believe them is that no a lie?
Baptists have independent churches. The AOG . like the UM or the COTN do not.
It is one thing to have occasion to change a doctrinal stand after membership, it is another to to lie to get the affiliation .
The AOG say CLEARLY that their are NON negotiable . That is a very clear statement on what they want taught in their churches.
Everyone has to pick some denomination. There's some things about each one where you've gotta hold your nose and drive forward.
This applies for MEMBERS as well as pastors.
Perhaps since the discussion of my church prompted this, I should attempt to clarify (however, part of me acknowledges the fact that I will live to regret this).
RN, we left the Calvinist church based on the doctrine of election. The day we heard the pastor say from the pulpit "there is no one in Hell whom Jesus loved," was the day we had to leave. As a former Wesleyan, you understand why that was troublesome.
But as I have also tried to explain, we are content to agree on specifics. Other issues are negotiable.
I believe:
I also believe in the statement: "Free salvation for all men. Full salvation from all sin."
- The Bible is inspired, infallible
- There is one God who became incarnate
- Christ's death is substitutional
- Our future is linked to Christ's Resurrection
- One day Christ will Return
Beyond that I think (pretty much) anything else is gravy. And I don't happen to like gravy.
That the Calvinist church I attended believed in infant baptism and I did not didn't bother me. As I explained, I couldn't serve as an officer of the church, but it didn't mean I couldn't fellowship there.
On the list of AOG beliefs you posted I noted that I'm not sure about #13 and #14 (I think those are the ones) that deal with the end times. While I think it's a fascinating study, I don't think it's an essential. When I read the words of Jesus that said "No man knows the day our the hour" I can say okay and not worry about it. I think it far less important to try to figure it out than to make sure my heart is in tune with God's.
In the haste of posting I possibly implied that my church does not believe in the Baptism of the Spirit. I did not mean to do that. But we are very different in the practical application of that. AFAIK, that doctrine is only taught in membership classes and or possibly other specific classes.
But, we do differ from other AOG churches in application of that belief. We have nine pastors. In the 6 years I've been there I have never seen any of the pastors exhibit the gift of tongues (that would also include two former pastors). They have, on the (less than a dozen) occasions (in six years) that tongues have been present in a Sunday morning service provided an interpretation. More often than not the interpretation has come from the congregation.
I'm in the choir. That's two services every Sunday. Six years. A dozen manifestations.
You do the math. Is that your typical AOG?
We have sister churches who are far more pentecostal in that regard. We have planted at least 9 churches over our church lifetime. Some specifically drew the members who sought the more traditional pentecostal experience.
You remember the story of the boys killed in the car accident. Since that time our youth group has doubled. We have over 300 kids every Wednesday night. And it has remainded consistent. Many of those new kids come from no church background at all. A local newspaper ran a survey and our youth group was voted "best youth organization in the city." In the town that's the HQ of the Southern Baptist Mission Board would a bunch of babbling pentecostals gain that recognition?
So, yes, I can tell you with confidence that in our youth group and in our Sunday school, while the doctrine may be explained, it is not being actively taught as a public manifestation.
And, out of those 11 folks I mentioned above, I can only name four who I recall actually speaking about their experience with the gifts. Granted the senior pastor speaks from the pulpit more than 80% of the time, so I don't often hear the others. But those examples were in the context of a prayer language. I assure you that no one lied to get their affiliation. I believe that probably all 11 have had the experience.
My wife, my older son and I have a very visible presence in the church through choir, through our music and fine arts production and through our leading of worship on Wednesday nights. We have been members officially for about four years.
We have NEVER been told that we are required to have the experience of tongues.
Are you implying that Calvinists are racists? How pathetic. Perhaps the Catholics and Lutherans religions were responsible for the holocaust ??
Yesterday I asked my email group not to "swarm " on you (yep we can be tough) because I thought you were just bantering and really did not understand Calvinism.
What I see in this mail is you have no interest in understanding Calvinism, your interest is solely to slander . I have released them from their agreement ...that may swarm all they like..that low blow deserves a few bites
BTW duck I have family members of all races do you?
The Apostles Creed explicitly declares, "whence (Heaven) he (Jesus) shall come (2nd coming) to (for the purpose of) judging the living and the dead.
"Everyone can affirm that "he's coming back and he will judge." "
AH! But you have to change the words to get there!
The Apostles Creed does not tell us merely that "he's coming back and he will judge"!
It is specifically and explicitly telling us that Jesus is returning in order to judge the living and the dead.
Now, according to pre-millennial theology, it cannot be honestly said that Jesus is coming "to" Judge the living and the dead. After all, that will happen ONE THOUSAND YEARS later. Jesus, according to premillennial theology, is not coming "to" judge the living and the dead, but is coming "to" set up the millennial kingdom.
Jean
LOL no you are not..that was exactly the response you wanted.
It was primarily Calvinists that fought the revolution and won the freedom you enjoy today. It was Calvinists that had the primary role of writing the constitution you live under .
ping
LOL No you don't. You were just handed your head on a platter of your own making, so now your are backing away ...we will not let you
Good Post OP
No Angelicans USED to be Calvinists , They no longer use the 35 articles , like the wesleyans they abandoned Calvinism . Look at the fruit in the Anglican church . Gay bishops, marring homosexuals . woman pastors , approval of abortion..
There is no where to go but down when a people leave the doctrines of grace.
Ok! So when do we move?
How disingenuous of you ..of course you did ..Calvinists are literate people , we can read quite well
Note the sarcasm and the emphasis of your words
This topic is SO interesting to research. I am learning now about the relationship between apartheid and Calvinism as it has been practiced by the Dutch Reformed in South Africa. Fascinating and SO educational.
We will not allow you to back out of this by claiming innocence
Do they or do they not say that these are NON negotiable tenets ?
They CLEARLY state that , no waffle on it .
YOU may say that there is no biblical evidence of it..but obviously they think there is . Seeing you are not one of the leaders of the AOG , I think what you think is unimportant . They clearly state their position lest there be any mistake. Unlike some people that are ashamed of the doctrine they are not.
On the day they change that part of the doctrine then having a pastor that does not believe the doctrine has a place in the church . Until that having a renegade church is not the desire of the leaders .
Xzins what if the pastor said that God had a body , and he taught that in the church ..could he be a UM? Perhaps the UM is just behind the curve..
It's not deceptive. It's growth and Christians are subject to it.
Spoken like a true liberal..There is no absolute truth ..all truth is decided by people . Maybe we can all "grow into" gay marriage and abortion rights..we really have to get with it..
Otherwise, you are wrong to switch from one belief to another regarding calvinism. You were a member of your previous church, weren't you? There's no affirmation made by a pastor that isn't made by a member
Quite the opposite..IF I had stayed there and taught Calvinism in the Sunday school in opposition to the doctrines of the church I would have been out of order , just like the pastor that denies the authority and tenets of his church.
I've indicated I haven't staked a claim in the millenial debate, but I think there's a flaw in your logic Jean.
I could say, "Monday I am going to Georgia in order to attend a wedding. The wedding is on Saturday."
I don't find the Apostle's Creed saying "He's coming back in order to judge the living and the dead that day."
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.