# Arminian defence using Rev 4 and "dimensions" (and Dr. Who!)



## Eoghan (Jan 8, 2010)

I have a southern baptist friend who takes the view that I need to understand how God is outside of time. In Revelation 4 John is in heaven when Jesus arrives to open the scroll. John was taken outside of time (and back in time) to see Jesus at the Ascension arriving in heaven. Thus He knows the end from the begining and knows who will respond to the gospel. (Foreknowledge with a twist)

My comment that the we act according to our fallen natures and no we have no free will in the sense in which he means it. cut no Ice. ( I think I might have offended a little when I suggested that he had been watching too much Dr Who)

Yes I agree with the attributes of omniscience but to extend that to being outside of time and apply it to free-will...

It does however ignore the problem watching someone exercise free will/receive the gift of faith to become a christian. if Dr Who did zip forward in time to see my kids become christians (DV) would he be a calvinist watching a work of the Holy Spirit or an Arminian observing the exercise of free will? Returning to today would Dr Who be able to settle the argument?

?


----------



## KMK (Jan 8, 2010)

Eoghan said:


> Returning to today would Dr Who be able to settle the argument?
> 
> ?


 
It all depends on which Dr. Who you are talking about. If you are talking about Tom Baker, who is of course the best Dr. Who, then yes, his wisdom would be able to settle the argument.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 8, 2010)

Arminians attempt to define "predestined" and "foreknowledge" as synonyms. In other words, I was predestined to be the elect because God foreknew that I would choose him. Romans 9 on the other hand shows that God chose Jacob over Esau before either of them had performed any actions and John 1:13 says that the elect are not born again through the will of man or of the flesh, but out of God. 

In my humble opinion this destroys the Arminian view of foreknowledge equals predestination.


----------



## a mere housewife (Jan 8, 2010)

It seems like another problem with that view is that it not only makes our will more fundamental than Gods, but it makes what happens in time more fundamental than what happens in eternity. Eternity is just a blank screen reflecting decisions made in time, rather than time being a theater where eternal decrees are played out. But time is contained in eternity, and can't be more fundamental than it is, surely.

I agree that zipping forward in time to 'foreknow' future events wouldn't change the nature of salvation; but if your friend feels like he's explained away the nature of salvation being entirely of grace, by an inverted view of election, then pointing that out is insufficient?


----------



## JohnGill (Jan 9, 2010)

Anyone who has seen Doctor Who: The End of Time would know that he is an avowed Calvinist. They also would have known this from The Waters of Mars. 

In the DW world only some things are changeable. Many things aren't. However the events that the Doctor does "change" he understands that he was ordained to change that event.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 9, 2010)

Your friend is basically saying the same thing as C.S. Lewis does in Mere Christianity, which is what made me take that book and toss it across the room. It's a thoroughly Arminian statement and puts man in the driver's seat. Man's faith, originating within himself (if you wish, from the seedbed of grace that every man gets from God according to their view) is that thing that determines whether he is saved or not.. and he is saved by God's seeing (from all eternity) that he will come to faith. If the extent of God's authority over salvation is to grant it to worthy recipients who, totally independently of him, not only come to faith but practice faithful obedience and humble repentance in the face of sin, etc... then man is in charge from start to finish, and God is just responding to those who meet the criteria. It's a HORRIFIC picture of man-centered, man-initiated, God-dishonoring salvation. Your friend needs to go back to John's gospel and recognize that the same man who penned the words in Revelation 4 penned that gospel, wherein the full sovereignty of divine election and initiative is clearly presented.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jan 9, 2010)

God is indeed outside of time and does know (see) the beginning and the end. However, this is not a twist on the Arminian concept of foreknowledge (foreseeing who would believe of their own free will), it is the classic Arminian position and the heart of synergistic soteriology.

As such, it has been answered by all the great Calvinist theologians of the past (and present). It is simply the Arminian way of preserving autonomous free will -- and only stands if taken alongside a wimped out view of total depravity and the idea of a "prevenient grace" offsetting the noetic effects of the Fall for all mankind.


----------



## tt1106 (Jan 9, 2010)

Does God jump forward to the end of their lives? I mean, he can't just look forward to when we believe, he must look forward to the end of time to make sure we are still believing. 
The entire Bible is filled with God choosing for specific purposes. Adam, Moses, Noah, Noah's family, Jacob and Esau. Jesus, the disciples. 
Yet... when it comes to man, the most important matter for us to ever face, He leaves it up to us. Because we have made such good decisions up until now. I remember reading in Jeremiah.....God says, "I am tired of relenting". It sure doesn't sound (although I know it's not referring to salvation) as if he is not sovereign and not the orchestrator of everything.


----------



## ewenlin (Jan 9, 2010)

tt1106 said:


> Does God jump forward to the end of their lives? I mean, he can't just look forward to when we believe, he must look forward to the end of time to make sure we are still believing.



Is this a rhetoric to the OP?


> The entire Bible is filled with God choosing for specific purposes. Adam, Moses, Noah, Noah's family, Jacob and Esau. Jesus, the disciples.
> *Yet... when it comes to man, the most important matter for us to ever face, He leaves it up to us. Because we have made such good decisions up until now. * I remember reading in Jeremiah.....God says, "I am tired of relenting". It sure doesn't sound (although I know it's not referring to salvation) as if he is not sovereign and not the orchestrator of everything.


 
Are you being sarcastic? Not quite sure I'm getting what you're saying. Do you mind rephrasing?


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 9, 2010)

Ewen -

I'm fairly certain that Todd (one of the other Todd's) is speaking in the guise of the Arminian with that sentence "Yet when..."


----------



## ewenlin (Jan 9, 2010)

Ah. Thanks. I still marvel at times trying to grasp the level of epigrammatic rhetoric that is the PB.

Anyway, I was just reading John de Witt on his differentiating Remonstrant Arminianism and Wesleyan Arminianism. It seems Wesley was a proponent of Original Sin. Interesting stuff.


----------



## Der Pilger (Jan 11, 2010)

Chaplainintraining said:


> Arminians attempt to define "predestined" and "foreknowledge" as synonyms. In other words, I was predestined to be the elect because God foreknew that I would choose him. Romans 9 on the other hand shows that God chose Jacob over Esau before either of them had performed any actions and John 1:13 says that the elect are not born again through the will of man or of the flesh, but out of God.
> 
> In my humble opinion this destroys the Arminian view of foreknowledge equals predestination.


 
What also destroys it, in my opinion, is Rom. 8:29-30 (NASB, emphasis added):

"For those whom He foreknew, *He also predestined* to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified."

God not only foreknows but also predestines. They are two separate acts.

In fact, since God is sovereign, we could say that he foreknows because he predestines. He knows with complete certainty who will come to Christ because he predetermined that they will be conformed to the image of Christ. How can the one exist independently of the other?


----------

