The Arminian "god" is not Worshippable

Status
Not open for further replies.
To be blunt - Matt's article leads to one logical conclusion:

A church that is not completely Calvinistic is not a true church, but a synagogue of Satan worshipping a false god.

Thoughts from the article:

If you believe Jesus died for all men, you are worshipping a false god.
If you believe faith precedes regeneration you are worshipping a false god.
If you do not believe in unconditional election you are worshipping a false god.
If you believe you can lose your salvation you are worshipping a false god.
If you believe fallen man is able to trust Christ of his own free will you are worshipping a false god.

Hence if you believe any of these things you are an idolator and cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.

Where was the church before TULIP??? How was the gospel preached before Covenant Theology had been codified??? How was the gospel preached before the Great Reformation???

All who worship while not embracing the five points are damned.

This is a new narrow low on the PB. It makes Calvinism the means of grace. If you don't believe the 5 points you are a heretic, damned, worshipping an idol of your own imagination.

And those of you who support this theological bull should be ashamed of yourselves. One can be saved while not a Calvinist, and not being a Calvinist does not automatically mean one is an arminian. One can know Christ and be immature - I mean, they are newborns!! You don't teach kindergartners Calculus!! You teach babies to feed themselves (read the Word), you teach them to talk (prayer), and you teach them how to walk (obey what they read in the Word).

And one can be a convinced Calvinist and STILL NOT KNOW Jesus!!

"depart from Me I never knew you"

It is about knowing Jesus and trusting Jesus and turning from your sin to Jesus. Eternal life is knowing Jesus (John 17:3). We preach Jesus. And just because someone does not have a ThD or a PhD does not mean then that they CANNOT BE SAVED - for even children can KNOW Jesus. Is a child that knows Jesus damned because he cannot recite the Puritan Catechism and sign a statement of agreement with Dordt???

Peter stood up and preached "this Jesus" without a wit of the formality of the doctrines of grace and 3000 people believed and were baptized, added to the church because they were saved. Read Acts 2 and see how much of TULIP is covered. We preach Christ.

I can hear it now - "come to Christ and be saved from your sin and the wrath of God. How? Well first admit that you are totally incapable of coming on your own unless the Spirit of God first regenerates you. This is faith in your own total depravity. Without it, you have no hope of salvation. Then admit that God unconditionally chose to save you in eternity past. Place your faith in this doctrine of unconditional election where you have no say in the choice, or you have no hope of salvation. Then admit that Jesus died only for those He chose. Without faith in His limited atonement there is no hope for your salvation. Then admit today that God's grace that might be working on your heart is irresistible, that you cannot refuse it. Without faith in this kind of grace, you have no hope of salvation. And finally, admit that once you are saved by God you will never fall away but will persevere. Without faith in this security, without this absolute assurance, you have no hope of salvation. For unless you place your faith in these things then you are worshipping a false god created in your own imagination for your own damnation to the darkness and blackness of hell forever."

No, Peter preached Christ. And so should we.

The article should be pulled from the web and re-written in order to be more inline with Scripture and more out of sync with this notion that to neglect any of the 5 points even out of ignorance is to believe a lie that leads to hell.

It is just more evidence of the doctrinal imbalance that rules this forum.


Phillip
 
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Originally posted by Puritanhead
I will leave it up to God's judgment... Though, I grant sticking up for sound soteriology is no less important than upholding the fundamentals, the Trinity, the incarnation, and the Deity of Christ, et al.

However, I think we should be weary of the trap of thinking someone's failure to exegete Romans 9 properly is damnable. I've ran into those intellectual assent Calvinists, and I don't think it is prudent to embrace.

Arminianism is darkness, because it gives man a cause to boast. The legalists and the false teachers will face God's judgment.

Yet I do think grace can abound all the more and Christ's blood can save regenerate man in spite of some dubious doctrines. God will give a great number of Christians a wake up call. Likewise, y'all might be surprised to find some Charismatics, Catholics and Catholics as risen souls when we get to Heaven. Of course, they will find out we were right all along. Soli Deo Gloria!

:ditto:

:amen:



I used to VERY strongly agree with Scott, Jeff, etc., that only Calvinists are saved. (Just read some of my posts from a few months ago!)

But I no longer believe that at all. Ironically, I believe that such a stringent "test of salvation" actually comes closer to denying the Gospel than Arminianism does.

. . . to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: "œTwo men went up to the temple to pray, one a Calvinist and the other an Arminian. The Calvinist stood and prayed thus with himself, "˜God, I thank You that I am not like other men"”extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this Arminian. I hold to the WCF; I believe TULIP.´ And the Arminian, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, "˜God, be merciful to me a sinner!´ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."


I agree with Ben, Jacob, and Ryan. Salvation is TOTALLY of grace. Some of us may be surprised at the number of Pentecostals, Nazarenes, Methodists, and Roman Catholics who end up in Heaven, saved by grace through their faith in Jesus. They knew that their sin made it impossible for them to deserve Heaven. And they knew that Jesus died on the cross to pay for their sin. And they trusted Jesus to forgive them of their sin. PERIOD.

And we also may be surprised by the nearly-theologically-perfect 5-point Calvinists standing among the goats, saying, "But Lord, I memorized Calvin, Berkhof, Bavinck, and I confessed the WCF without even taking any exceptions!" But then Christ will say, "Depart from Me; I never knew you", because they were more impressed with their theological prowess than with Christ Himself. (Note: This comment is NOT directed to any person in particular. I just think we will find out on judgment day that some Calvinists fit this description.)

Joseph,
Are you reading my posts? I am saying just the opposite. I am not cutting anyone off at the knee's. The ordo guarantee's that men whom are Christs will in fact bear the percentages of fruit he deems prior to their glorification. Those in error will in fact, by Gods word, the same word preached to the infant, rectify the error, prior to thier glorification. Men whom hold to illicit doctrine, i.e. clinical Arminianism, are heretics and will not find themselves in heaven, as the Spirit of truth has not, I repeat, has not spoken to those individuals.

The blind man above, by Gods grace and his believing was regenerated to Gods glory. If he held to the old wineskin at that time, the spirit of God over time will via knowledge correct that error. Eventually, everyone in heaven ends up Calvinistic in their theology.

[Edited on 2-9-2006 by Scott Bushey]
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey


What exactly does the bible say is required to be saved? It is not as complicated as everyone is making it out to believe. It is not algebraic! The infant dying in utero has all that God requires. What did this blind man know? What will the elect child know that dies having only known the song, Jesus loves me this I know, for the bible tells me so.

I think that is what I am trying to say.

Again, it is of my opinion that regeneration allows for assimilation of the information to convert. Assuredly elect men have died not understanding forensic justification. Their theological capacity, based upon the grace God grants, i.e. the soils: 30%, 60%, 100%, may trust Christ, i.e. leaning upon his death, yet not really understanding how it all works theologically, to their glorification.

Once again, I am not sure that I agree with you here. Objectively, one must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is all one must believe. I don't think that is dependant upon ones IQ or education. The thing is that heresy tends to get in the way of one believing on Christ as Savior. On the other hand, many people believe contradictory things. That is why the anti-Trinitarian heresy is objectively damnable; it is not possible to possess the real Christ and yet believe that Jesus is not Lord. I am not sure that semi-Pelagianism is on the same level; in fact I am quite sure it is not.
 
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
But I no longer believe that at all. Ironically, I believe that such a stringent "test of salvation" actually comes closer to denying the Gospel than Arminianism does.

It has nothing to do with a "test" so to speak, but with judging if the gospel they believe is a saving gospel or not. Remember, you are judging their gospel just as much as anyone else. To judge it to be saving is just as much a judgment as to judge it to be damning.

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
. . . to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: "œTwo men went up to the temple to pray, one a Calvinist and the other an Arminian. The Calvinist stood and prayed thus with himself, "˜God, I thank You that I am not like other men"”extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this Arminian. I hold to the WCF; I believe TULIP.´ And the Arminian, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, "˜God, be merciful to me a sinner!´ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted."

Arminians are indeed inconsistent (if that is what this blurb is supposed to suggest), but I appeal to you that they are not inconsistent Calvinists, but rather inconsistent Pelagians.

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
I agree with Ben, Jacob, and Ryan. Salvation is TOTALLY of grace.

Yes, but not apart from faith. Faith in the true gospel.

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Some of us may be surprised at the number of Pentecostals, Nazarenes, Methodists, and Roman Catholics who end up in Heaven, saved by grace through their faith in Jesus. They knew that their sin made it impossible for them to deserve Heaven. And they knew that Jesus died on the cross to pay for their sin. And they trusted Jesus to forgive them of their sin. PERIOD.

They may have "trusted Jesus" in their profession, but the crucial distinction which you forget my friend is that they do not trust Jesus ALONE! They trust in Jesus plus their free will, and Jesus plus their obedience, Jesus plus their good works. This is antithetical to the gospel, for the simple gospel of trusting Jesus ALONE is ruined by such mockery.

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
And we also may be surprised by the nearly-theologically-perfect 5-point Calvinists standing among the goats, saying, "But Lord, I memorized Calvin, Berkhof, Bavinck, and I confessed the WCF without even taking any exceptions!" But then Christ will say, "Depart from Me; I never knew you", because they were more impressed with their theological prowess than with Christ Himself. (Note: This comment is NOT directed to any person in particular. I just think we will find out on judgment day that some Calvinists fit this description.)

Professing Calivinists maybe. People who believe their "smartness" gets them into heaven...sure. But a true believer in the gospel?

Absolutely not.
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel


They may have "trusted Jesus" in their profession, but the crucial distinction which you forget my friend is that they do not trust Jesus ALONE! They trust in Jesus plus their free will, and Jesus plus their obedience, Jesus plus their good works. This is antithetical to the gospel, for the simple gospel of trusting Jesus ALONE is ruined by such mockery.

Congratulations for making gospel into law. I don't know if anyone is capable of fully trusting Christ alone. That is sanctification.
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Are you reading my posts?

Yes, and I think Pastor Way responded very well. (See above.)

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Those in error will in fact, by Gods word, the same word preached to the infant, rectify the error, prior to thier glorification.

Prove this from Scripture. I totally disagree with you. Rather, the time of a person's glorification is the SAME time at which all of their theological error will be corrected. It won't necessarily be fixed beforehand. A person may be a 5-point Arminian and be saved. He may die a 5-point Arminian and still be saved. But at the moment of his glorification, all remaining sin is purged, and the guy will walk into Heaven as a Calvinist.

But Scripture never says this will happen prior to death.

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Men whom hold to illicit doctrine, i.e. clinical Arminianism, are heretics and will not find themselves in heaven, as the Spirit of truth has not, I repeat, has not spoken to those individuals.

What an arrogant thing to say! I used to be guilty of believing the same thing you do. But I have repented, and I hope you do too.

Is justification by faith alone, or by faith plus TULIP?

The Gospel is simple:
1) Believe that Jesus is fully God and fully man.
2) Believe that your sin makes you unworthy of Heaven.
3) Believe that Jesus died to pay for your sin.
4) Believe that your sin is paid for by his blood.
5) Believe that Jesus rose from the dead.

THOSE are the only "5 points" that are necessary for salvation. And NONE of "TULIP" is in there anywhere.

Add anything to the 5 things listed above, and you turn away from the simple Gospel.


Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Eventually, everyone in heaven ends up Calvinistic in their theology.

:amen:

I agree with both you and Ryan on this point. Arminians are in error, so when any of them are glorified, they will be transformed into Calvinists. Heaven will be 100% populated with Calvinists. But that does NOT mean that they all became Calvinists prior to death, prior to glorification.



Like I said earlier:

Is justification by faith alone, or by faith plus TULIP?
 
Originally posted by raderag
Originally posted by Scott Bushey


What exactly does the bible say is required to be saved? It is not as complicated as everyone is making it out to believe. It is not algebraic! The infant dying in utero has all that God requires. What did this blind man know? What will the elect child know that dies having only known the song, Jesus loves me this I know, for the bible tells me so.

I think that is what I am trying to say.

Again, it is of my opinion that regeneration allows for assimilation of the information to convert. Assuredly elect men have died not understanding forensic justification. Their theological capacity, based upon the grace God grants, i.e. the soils: 30%, 60%, 100%, may trust Christ, i.e. leaning upon his death, yet not really understanding how it all works theologically, to their glorification.

Once again, I am not sure that I agree with you here. Objectively, one must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is all one must believe. I don't think that is dependant upon ones IQ or education. The thing is that heresy tends to get in the way of one believing on Christ as Savior. On the other hand, many people believe contradictory things. That is why the anti-Trinitarian heresy is objectively damnable; it is not possible to possess the real Christ and yet believe that Jesus is not Lord. I am not sure that semi-Pelagianism is on the same level; in fact I am quite sure it is not.

Again Brett, we are not on the same page in terms of definitions. You're talking about regeneration and I'm talking about conversion.
 
I have a few questions for Matt.

Reread your article and answer this:

Do you state in the article that to reject any of TULIP is to worship a false god?

Do you state that churches that are not Calvinistic are worshipping a false god?

Can a church that is worshipping a false god be a true church of Jesus Christ?

Can a person who is worshipping a false god be saved?

Your article defeats itself. In it, if it is left intact, you state unequivocably that to reject the doctrines of grace in any way is to worship a false god, making one an idolator, and hence damned.

Think about it.

Phillip

[Edited on 2-10-06 by pastorway]
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Originally posted by raderag
Originally posted by Scott Bushey


What exactly does the bible say is required to be saved? It is not as complicated as everyone is making it out to believe. It is not algebraic! The infant dying in utero has all that God requires. What did this blind man know? What will the elect child know that dies having only known the song, Jesus loves me this I know, for the bible tells me so.

I think that is what I am trying to say.

Again, it is of my opinion that regeneration allows for assimilation of the information to convert. Assuredly elect men have died not understanding forensic justification. Their theological capacity, based upon the grace God grants, i.e. the soils: 30%, 60%, 100%, may trust Christ, i.e. leaning upon his death, yet not really understanding how it all works theologically, to their glorification.

Once again, I am not sure that I agree with you here. Objectively, one must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is all one must believe. I don't think that is dependant upon ones IQ or education. The thing is that heresy tends to get in the way of one believing on Christ as Savior. On the other hand, many people believe contradictory things. That is why the anti-Trinitarian heresy is objectively damnable; it is not possible to possess the real Christ and yet believe that Jesus is not Lord. I am not sure that semi-Pelagianism is on the same level; in fact I am quite sure it is not.

Again Brett, we are not on the same page in terms of definitions. You're talking about regeneration and I'm talking about conversion.

Scott, can you show me the chronological distinction? If you think there are Christ denying regenerate out there, we are going to disagree.

CHAPTER X.
Of Effectual Calling.
I. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ: enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good; and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

II. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from any thing at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

III. Elect infants, dying in infance, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore can not be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess; and to assert and maintain that they may is without warrant of the Word of God.
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Ryan,
I believe the error would have to be corrected prior to their glorification.

I don't doubt legalists and the works-righteousness crowd will face judgment. I just leave it up to God, and just contend for sound doctrine, and the free and unmerited grace of God. I do think we should contend for orthodoxy and the Reformed fundamentals and bring those trapped in errant churches out those abodes.

[Edited on 2-12-2006 by Puritanhead]
 
Originally posted by pastorway
To be blunt - Matt's article leads to one logical conclusion:

A church that is not completely Calvinistic is not a true church, but a synagogue of Satan worshipping a false god.

I thought we destroyed that straw-man in an earlier post. :um:

Originally posted by pastorway
Thoughts from the article:

If you believe Jesus died for all men, you are worshipping a false god.
If you believe faith precedes regeneration you are worshipping a false god.
If you do not believe in unconditional election you are worshipping a false god.
If you believe you can lose your salvation you are worshipping a false god.
If you believe fallen man is able to trust Christ of his own free will you are worshipping a false god.

Hence if you believe any of these things you are an idolator and cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.

These are all straw-man arguments Phillip. Nowhere has anyone suggested that one must be a "five-pt." Calvinist to be saved. What they HAVE said is that one cannot be an ARMINIAN and be saved! There is a difference.

Originally posted by pastorway
Where was the church before TULIP??? How was the gospel preached before Covenant Theology had been codified??? How was the gospel preached before the Great Reformation???

They preached Christ ALONE! That is the gospel, and Calvinism is the only logical conclusion of such a gospel!

But Arminianism is not Christ-ALONE. It is Christ+something else.

Originally posted by pastorway
All who worship while not embracing the five points are damned.

Straw Man once again. Please demonstrate where Matt said this.

Originally posted by pastorway
This is a new narrow low on the PB. It makes Calvinism the means of grace. If you don't believe the 5 points you are a heretic, damned, worshipping an idol of your own imagination.

And those of you who support this theological bull should be ashamed of yourselves. One can be saved while not a Calvinist, and not being a Calvinist does not automatically mean one is an arminian. One can know Christ and be immature - I mean, they are newborns!! You don't teach kindergartners Calculus!! You teach babies to feed themselves (read the Word), you teach them to talk (prayer), and you teach them how to walk (obey what they read in the Word).

And one can be a convinced Calvinist and STILL NOT KNOW Jesus!!

"depart from Me I never knew you"

It is about knowing Jesus and trusting Jesus and turning from your sin to Jesus. Eternal life is knowing Jesus (John 17:3). We preach Jesus. And just because someone does not have a ThD or a PhD does not mean then that they CANNOT BE SAVED - for even children can KNOW Jesus. Is a child that knows Jesus damned because he cannot recite the Puritan Catechism and sign a statement of agreement with Dordt???

Peter stood up and preached "this Jesus" without a wit of the formality of the doctrines of grace and 3000 people believed and were baptized, added to the church because they were saved. Read Acts 2 and see how much of TULIP is covered. We preach Christ.

I can hear it now - "come to Christ and be saved from your sin and the wrath of God. How? Well first admit that you are totally incapable of coming on your own unless the Spirit of God first regenerates you. This is faith in your own total depravity. Without it, you have no hope of salvation. Then admit that God unconditionally chose to save you in eternity past. Place your faith in this doctrine of unconditional election where you have no say in the choice, or you have no hope of salvation. Then admit that Jesus died only for those He chose. Without faith in His limited atonement there is no hope for your salvation. Then admit today that God's grace that might be working on your heart is irresistible, that you cannot refuse it. Without faith in this kind of grace, you have no hope of salvation. And finally, admit that once you are saved by God you will never fall away but will persevere. Without faith in this security, without this absolute assurance, you have no hope of salvation. For unless you place your faith in these things then you are worshipping a false god created in your own imagination for your own damnation to the darkness and blackness of hell forever."

Originally posted by pastorway
No, Peter preached Christ. And so should we.

No...Peter preached Christ ALONE as did Paul and the Lord Himself. This is something many in this debate seem to be leaving out.

Originally posted by pastorway
The article should be pulled from the web and re-written in order to be more inline with Scripture and more out of sync with this notion that to neglect any of the 5 points even out of ignorance is to believe a lie that leads to hell.

It is just more evidence of the doctrinal imbalance that rules this forum.


Phillip

All of the rest of the arguments are pretty much the same ol' straw-man arguments.

Please refute this syllogism if you wish to make your point:

1) Arminians believe in Christ+something else for salvation (i.e. it is up to THEM to be saved)

2) A gospel of Christ+something else is not the gospel of the Scriptures, and is damning accordingly.

3) Believing the true gospel of Scripture (i.e. Christ alone) is the only way to heaven

Conclusion: Arminians are not saved.
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Some of us may be surprised at the number of Pentecostals, Nazarenes, Methodists, and Roman Catholics who end up in Heaven, saved by grace through their faith in Jesus. They knew that their sin made it impossible for them to deserve Heaven. And they knew that Jesus died on the cross to pay for their sin. And they trusted Jesus to forgive them of their sin. PERIOD.

They may have "trusted Jesus" in their profession, but the crucial distinction which you forget my friend is that they do not trust Jesus ALONE! They trust in Jesus plus their free will, and Jesus plus their obedience, Jesus plus their good works. This is antithetical to the gospel, for the simple gospel of trusting Jesus ALONE is ruined by such mockery.


Jeff,

According to what you are saying, a person is damned if he is fuzzy on justification. You are suggesting that it's not enough to cast yourself upon the mercy of Christ, fully recognizing that you can't be saved except by His sacrifice.

If your thinking is correct, then NOBODY was a Christian between 100 A.D. and 1517.

If you disagree, then please be my guest: Show me all the clear "justificiation by faith alone" teaching prior to the Reformation.

I just frankly don't think justification was as clearly understood for the 14 centuries prior to the Reformation. I myself have looked, and have not found clear sola fide teaching prior to the Reformation. I even talked to Dr. John Hannah, church history professor at Westminster Theological Seminary, and asked him for evidence of "justification by faith alone" teaching prior to the Reformation. He flatly said that you cannot trace that teaching from the apostles to the Reformation. For 14 centuries, the church was confused on this doctrine.

It is a very very important doctrine. But if you have to clearly understand it in order to be saved, then everybody went to hell between 100 A.D. and 1517.

Are you willing to relegate the entire early church and medieval church to hell?
 
Originally posted by raderag
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel


They may have "trusted Jesus" in their profession, but the crucial distinction which you forget my friend is that they do not trust Jesus ALONE! They trust in Jesus plus their free will, and Jesus plus their obedience, Jesus plus their good works. This is antithetical to the gospel, for the simple gospel of trusting Jesus ALONE is ruined by such mockery.

Congratulations for making gospel into law. I don't know if anyone is capable of fully trusting Christ alone. That is sanctification.

I am offended by this charge. Apparently, you need to take heed to Scripture if this is what you think.

The Westminster Confession summerizes scripture on this:

Chapter XIV Of Saving Faith
II. By this faith, a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word, for the authority of God himself speaking therein;[5] and acteth differently upon that which each particular passage thereof containeth; yielding obedience to the commands,[6] trembling at the threatenings,[7] and embracing the promises of God for this life, and that which is to come.[8] But the principal acts of saving faith are accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of grace. [9]

5. II Peter 1:20-21; John 4:42; I Thess. 2:13; I John 5:9-10; Acts 24:14
6. Psa. 119:10-11, 48, 97-98, 167-168; John 14:15
7. Ezra 9:4; Isa. 66:2; Heb. 4:1
8. Heb. 11:13; I Tim. 4:8
9. John 1:12; Acts 15:11, 16:31; Gal. 2:20; II Tim. 1:9-10
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Please refute this syllogism if you wish to make your point:

1) Arminians believe in Christ+something else for salvation (i.e. it is up to THEM to be saved)

2) A gospel of Christ+something else is not the gospel of the Scriptures, and is damning accordingly.

3) Believing the true gospel of Scripture (i.e. Christ alone) is the only way to heaven

Conclusion: Arminians are not saved.

Jeff, I believe it refutes itself as it mixes law and Gospel, especially when you phrased it as not trusting Christ alone is damnable. If that is damnable, then one must perfectly resist idolotry to be saved. That is mixing law and gospel. Thus you have a major contradiction.
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Originally posted by raderag
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel


They may have "trusted Jesus" in their profession, but the crucial distinction which you forget my friend is that they do not trust Jesus ALONE! They trust in Jesus plus their free will, and Jesus plus their obedience, Jesus plus their good works. This is antithetical to the gospel, for the simple gospel of trusting Jesus ALONE is ruined by such mockery.

Congratulations for making gospel into law. I don't know if anyone is capable of fully trusting Christ alone. That is sanctification.

I am offended by this charge. Apparently, you need to take heed to Scripture if this is what you think.

The Westminster Confession summerizes scripture on this:

Chapter XIV Of Saving Faith
II. By this faith, a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word, for the authority of God himself speaking therein;[5] and acteth differently upon that which each particular passage thereof containeth; yielding obedience to the commands,[6] trembling at the threatenings,[7] and embracing the promises of God for this life, and that which is to come.[8] But the principal acts of saving faith are accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of grace. [9]

5. II Peter 1:20-21; John 4:42; I Thess. 2:13; I John 5:9-10; Acts 24:14
6. Psa. 119:10-11, 48, 97-98, 167-168; John 14:15
7. Ezra 9:4; Isa. 66:2; Heb. 4:1
8. Heb. 11:13; I Tim. 4:8
9. John 1:12; Acts 15:11, 16:31; Gal. 2:20; II Tim. 1:9-10

And:
CHAPTER XIV.
Of Saving Faith.
...

III. This faith is different in degrees, weak or strong; may be often and many ways assailed and weakened, but gets the victory; growing up in many to the attainment of a full assurance through Christ, who is both the author and finisher of our faith.


The problem is that you are positing some theory that anything that could possibly make your faith imperfect, such as Arminianism, is damning.
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Please refute this syllogism if you wish to make your point:

1) Arminians believe in Christ+something else for salvation (i.e. it is up to THEM to be saved)

2) A gospel of Christ+something else is not the gospel of the Scriptures, and is damning accordingly.

3) Believing the true gospel of Scripture (i.e. Christ alone) is the only way to heaven

Conclusion: Arminians are not saved.


Please refute this syllogism if you wish to make your point:

1) Jeff believes in Christ+something else to be saved. (i.e. you also have to believe all 5 points of TULIP to be saved)

2) A gospel of Christ+something else is not the gospel of the Scriptures, and is damning accordingly.

3) Believing the true gospel of Scripture (i.e. Christ alone) is the only way to heaven

Conclusion: Jeff is not saved.



Jeff, I really do believe you are saved. I do believe you are a Christian.

This post is just meant to be a satirical reductio ad absurdum. Your same "logic" can be turned against you.
 
Originally posted by pastorway

This is a new narrow low on the PB. It makes Calvinism the means of grace. If you don't believe the 5 points you are a heretic, damned, worshipping an idol of your own imagination.

And those of you who support this theological bull should be ashamed of yourselves. One can be saved while not a Calvinist

:ditto:

You preach it, Pastor Way!!!
 
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Please refute this syllogism if you wish to make your point:

1) Arminians believe in Christ+something else for salvation (i.e. it is up to THEM to be saved)

2) A gospel of Christ+something else is not the gospel of the Scriptures, and is damning accordingly.

3) Believing the true gospel of Scripture (i.e. Christ alone) is the only way to heaven

Conclusion: Arminians are not saved.


Please refute this syllogism if you wish to make your point:

1) Jeff believes in Christ+something else to be saved. (i.e. you also have to believe all 5 points of TULIP to be saved)

2) A gospel of Christ+something else is not the gospel of the Scriptures, and is damning accordingly.

3) Believing the true gospel of Scripture (i.e. Christ alone) is the only way to heaven

Conclusion: Jeff is not saved.



Jeff, I really do believe you are saved. I do believe you are a Christian.

This post is just meant to be a satirical reductio ad absurdum. Your same "logic" can be turned against you.

All hail to reductionism!!!
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel


All of the rest of the arguments are pretty much the same ol' straw-man arguments.

Please refute this syllogism if you wish to make your point:

1) Arminians believe in Christ+something else for salvation (i.e. it is up to THEM to be saved)

2) A gospel of Christ+something else is not the gospel of the Scriptures, and is damning accordingly.

3) Believing the true gospel of Scripture (i.e. Christ alone) is the only way to heaven

Conclusion: Arminians are not saved.

BTW Jeff, a syllogism usually has a major and minor premise. Three premises are not a good syllogism as it is a logical jump. Anyway, I have made the same error myself.

[Edited on 2-9-2006 by raderag]
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel
Arminus was a heretic to be sure, but today's "Arminianism" is not nearly as well thought out as the ancient idolater. One major difference is that Arminus did not deny predestination, but rather said that God predestined based upon forsight. Ask any "Joe" in the fundamentalist church what he thinks about predestination, and you'll get your head chopped off.

I think that Arminius (coming from a Calvinist background) possibly had more sense of his guilt than modern arminians. The Arminians that I deal with on a day-to-day basis are so close to Pelagian that even Arminians might consider them not saved!

:ditto:
Full denial of original sin is now common.
 
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Jeff,

According to what you are saying, a person is damned if he is fuzzy on justification. You are suggesting that it's not enough to cast yourself upon the mercy of Christ, fully recognizing that you can't be saved except by His sacrifice.

Catholics believe that. Jehovah´s Witnesses believe that. Mormons believe that. They all recognize the necessity of Christ´s death for salvation. What they don´t understand, is that it is Christ ALONE who saves sinners. This is their damnable heresy.

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
If your thinking is correct, then NOBODY was a Christian between 100 A.D. and 1517.

Are you suggesting that nobody believed in sola gratia or sola fide in that time period?

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
If you disagree, then please be my guest: Show me all the clear "justificiation by faith alone" teaching prior to the Reformation.

Wow. I would start in part 4 of John Gill´s The Cause of God and Truth where he gives MASSIVE amounts of quotes for just such a challenge. Here is the table of contents for that part of the book:

PART 4.
Introduction


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 1. OF PREDESTINATION
Introduction
SECTION 1. - Clemens Romanus
SECTION 2. - Ignatius
SECTION 3. - Justin
SECTION 4. - Minutius Felix
SECTION 5. - Irenaeus
SECTION 6. - Clemens Alexandrinus
SECTION 7. - Tertullian
SECTION 8. - Origenes Alexandrinus
SECTION 9. - Caecillius Thascius Cyprianus
SECTION 10. - Novatianus
SECTION 11. - Athanasius
SECTION 12. - Hilarius Pictaviensis
SECTION 13. - Basilius Caesariensis
SECTION 14. - Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus
SECTION 15. - Gregorius Nazianzenus
SECTION 16. - Hilarius Diaconus
SECTION 17. - Ambrosius Mediolanensis
SECTION 18. - Joannes Chrysostomus
SECTION 19. - Hieronymus

CHAPTER 2. OF REDEMPTION.

Introduction
SECTION 1. - Clemens Romanus
SECTION 2. - Barnabas
SECTION 3. - Ignatius
SECTION 4. - Justin
SECTION 5. - Ecclesia Smyrnensis
SECTION 6. - Irenaeus
SECTION 7. - Tertullian
SECTION 8. - Origenes Alexandrinus
SECTION 9. - Cyprian
SECTION 10. - Lactautius
SECTION 11. - Paulinus Tyrius
SECTION 12. - Eusebius Pamphilius Caesariensis
SECTION 13. - Julius Firmicus
SECTION 14. - Athanasius
SECTION 15. - Macarius AEgyptius
SECTION 16. - Hilarius Pietaviensia
SECTION 17. - Basilius Caesariensis
SECTION 18. - Optatus Milevitanus
SECTION 19. - Victorinus
SECTION 20. - Marcus Eremita
SECTION 21. - Faustinus
SECTION 22. - Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus
SECTION 23. - Gregorius Nazianzenus
SECTION 24. - Didymus Alexandrinus
SECTION 25. - Gregorius Nyssenus
SECTION 26. - Pacianus Bareinonensis vel Barcilonensis
SECTION 27. - Hilarius Diaconus
SECTION 28. - Ambrosius Mediolanesiss
SECTION 29. - Epiphanius
SECTION 30. - Gaudentius Brixiensis
SECTION 31. - Joannes Chrysostomus
SECTION 32. - Ruffinus Aquileiensis
SECTION 33. - Hieronymus

CHAPTER 3. OF ORIGINAL SIN, THE IMPOTENCE OF MAN´S FREE WILL, ETC.

Introduction
SECTION 1. - Clemens Romanus
SECTION 2. - Barnabas
SECTION 3. - Ignatius
SECTION 4. - Justin
SECTION 5. - Irenaeus
SECTION 6. - Clemens Alexandrinus
SECTION 7. - Tertullian
SECTION 8. - Origenes Alexandrinus
SECTION 9. - Gregorius Neocaesariensis
SECTION 10. - Cyprian
SECTION 11. - Arnobius
SECTION 12. - Lactantius
SECTION 13. - Eusebius Caesariensis
CHAPTER 3. OF ORIGINAL SIN, THE IMPOTENCE OF MAN´S FREE WILL, ETC. (CONT.)
SECTION 14. - Macarius Egyptius
SECTION 15. - Athanasius
SECTION 16. - Hilarius Pietaviensis
SECTION 17. - Victorinus Afer
SECTION 18. - Optatus Milevitanus
SECTION 19. - Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus
SECTION 20. - Basilius Caesariensis
SECTION 21. - Gregorius Nazianzenus
SECTION 22. - Gregorius Nyssenus
SECTION 23. - Hilarius Diaconus
SECTION 24. - Ambrosius Mediolanensis
SECTION 25. - Epiphanius
SECTION 26. - Marcus Eremita
SECTION 27. - Joannes Chrysostomus
SECTION 28. - Hieronymus

CHAPTER 4. OF EFFICACIOUS GRACE

Introduction
SECTION 1. - Clenems Romanus
SECTION 2. - Barnabas
SECTION 3. - Justin
SECTION 4. - Irenaeus
SECTION 5. - Clemens Alexandrinus
SECTION 6. - Tertullian
SECTION 7. - Origenes Alexandrinus
SECTION 8. - Cyprian
SECTION 9. - Eusebius Caesyreinsis
SECTION 10. - Athanasius
SECTION 11. - Marcus Egyptius
SECTION 12. - Hilarius Pictaviensis
SECTION 13. - Basilius Caesariensis
SECTION 14. - Gregorius Nazianzenus
SECTION 15. - Didymus Alexandrinus
SECTION 16. - Gregorius Nysseuus
SECTION 17. - Hillarius Diaconus
SECTION 18. - Ambrosius Mediolanensis
SECTION 19. - Marcus Eremita
SECTION 20. - Joannes Chrysostomus
SECTION 21. - Hieronymus

CHAPTER 5. OF PERSEVERANCE.

Introduction
SECTION 1. - Clemens Romanus
SECTION 2. - Barnabas
SECTION 3. - Ignatius
SECTION 4. - Irenaeus
SECTION 5. - Epistola Martyrum Galliae
SECTION 6. - Clemens Alexandrinus
SECTION 7. - Tertullian
SECTION 8. - Origenes Alexandrinus
SECTION 9. - Cyprian
SECTION 10. - Lactantius
SECTION 11. - Eusebius Caesariensis
SECTION 12. - Chronomatius
SECTION 13. - Athanasius
SECTION 14. - Macarius Egyptius
SECTION 15. - Hilarius Pictaviensis
SECTION 16. - Basilius Ceasariensis
SECTION 17. - Gregorius Nazianzenus
SECTION 18. - Oregorius Nyssenus
SECTION 19. - Hilarius Diaconus
SECTION 20. - Ambrosius Mediolanensis
SECTION 21. - Joannes Chrysostomus
SECTION 22. - Hieronymus

CHAPTER 6. OF THE HEATHENS.

Of the Heathens
A Vindication OF The Book Entitled Of the Cause of God and Truth

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
I just frankly don't think justification was as clearly understood for the 14 centuries prior to the Reformation. I myself have looked, and have not found clear sola fide teaching prior to the Reformation. I even talked to Dr. John Hannah, church history professor at Westminster Theological Seminary, and asked him for evidence of "justification by faith alone" teaching prior to the Reformation. He flatly said that you cannot trace that teaching from the apostles to the Reformation. For 14 centuries, the church was confused on this doctrine.

It is a very very important doctrine. But if you have to clearly understand it in order to be saved, then everybody went to hell between 100 A.D. and 1517.

Good question, but I would not dismiss the idea before 1517 as easily as you have done. An infant can believe solo christo. The reformation was exactly that"¦reforming the church to it´s proper state. They didn´t introduce anything new.

Originally posted by biblelighthouse
Are you willing to relegate the entire early church and medieval church to hell?

No"¦but we should be willing to condemn anyone who does not believe the true gospel of Christ Alone.

Phi 3:8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ.

I for one count my "œconversion" as an Arminian as dung that I may gain Christ. All things are dung compared to Christ ALONE!
 
Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

No"¦but we should be willing to condemn anyone who does not believe the true gospel of Christ Alone.

That's an anthrocentric twist on God's sovereignty.
 
Scott, can you show me the chronological distinction? If you think there are Christ denying regenerate out there, we are going to disagree.

Brett,
Regeneration does not necessarily require anything other than Gods elective decree.

Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.


Having said that, there are no 'Christ denying' regenerates out there.
 
Originally posted by biblelighthouse
1) Jeff believes in Christ+something else to be saved. (i.e. you also have to believe all 5 points of TULIP to be saved)

I have never suggested any such thing. Please substantiate your claim, or recant.

You are mis-representing the position that Matt and I have been trying to make. It has nothing to do with "You must be a 5pter to be saved" but instead it has to do with "You must trust Christ ALONE to be saved." Arminians do not trust Christ alone. That is their charge.
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Scott, can you show me the chronological distinction? If you think there are Christ denying regenerate out there, we are going to disagree.

Brett,
Regeneration does not necessarily require anything other than Gods elective decree.

Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.


Having said that, there are no 'Christ denying' regenerates out there.

I wonder though... It seems as if the normative means of regeneration is through the preaching of the Gospel. That seems to be the Biblical understanding.
 
Joseph writes:
Yes, and I think Pastor Way responded very well. (See above.)

Pastor Way did not respond to anything I posted. So, I don't know where you got that. Believe it or not, Matt and I are two seperate people. We are not the PB siamese twins! :banana:

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Those in error will in fact, by Gods word, the same word preached to the infant, rectify the error, prior to thier glorification.

Prove this from Scripture. I totally disagree with you. Rather, the time of a person's glorification is the SAME time at which all of their theological error will be corrected. It won't necessarily be fixed beforehand. A person may be a 5-point Arminian and be saved. He may die a 5-point Arminian and still be saved. But at the moment of his glorification, all remaining sin is purged, and the guy will walk into Heaven as a Calvinist.

.........and as well, the buddhist, the Moslem, the devil worshipper may die a devilworshipper and still be saved???? Arminianism is heresy. Heretics perish. Buddhism is heresy, buddhists perish. Hinduism is heresy, hindu's perish. What you are saying is that God possibly regenerates and converts these individuals on their deathbed to His glory. Wrong!
 
Originally posted by raderag
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Scott, can you show me the chronological distinction? If you think there are Christ denying regenerate out there, we are going to disagree.

Brett,
Regeneration does not necessarily require anything other than Gods elective decree.

Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.


Having said that, there are no 'Christ denying' regenerates out there.

I wonder though... It seems as if the normative means of regeneration is through the preaching of the Gospel. That seems to be the Biblical understanding.

Again, definitions. Regeneration is fully of the spirit blowing where he wills and conversion is under Gods preached word.
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Joseph writes:
Yes, and I think Pastor Way responded very well. (See above.)

Pastor Way did not respond to anything I posted. So, I don't know where you got that. Believe it or not, Matt and I are two seperate people. We are not the PB siamese twins! :banana:

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Those in error will in fact, by Gods word, the same word preached to the infant, rectify the error, prior to thier glorification.

Prove this from Scripture. I totally disagree with you. Rather, the time of a person's glorification is the SAME time at which all of their theological error will be corrected. It won't necessarily be fixed beforehand. A person may be a 5-point Arminian and be saved. He may die a 5-point Arminian and still be saved. But at the moment of his glorification, all remaining sin is purged, and the guy will walk into Heaven as a Calvinist.

.........and as well, the buddhist, the Moslem, the devil worshipper may die a devilworshipper and still be saved???? Arminianism is heresy. Heretics perish. Buddhism is heresy, buddhists perish. Hinduism is heresy, hindu's perish. What you are saying is that God possibly regenerates and converts these individuals on their deathbed to His glory. Wrong!

Oh yeah! Islam and Arminianism. That is a fair comparison. LOL.
 
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Originally posted by raderag
Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Scott, can you show me the chronological distinction? If you think there are Christ denying regenerate out there, we are going to disagree.

Brett,
Regeneration does not necessarily require anything other than Gods elective decree.

Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.


Having said that, there are no 'Christ denying' regenerates out there.

I wonder though... It seems as if the normative means of regeneration is through the preaching of the Gospel. That seems to be the Biblical understanding.

Again, definitions. Regeneration is fully of the spirit blowing where he wills and conversion is under Gods preached word.

I agree, but I don't believe scripture teaches that God regenerates apart from the preaching of the word. Otherwise, inclusivism would be true.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top