The Arminian "god" is not Worshippable

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

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.

John 3 is clear. It says that regeneration allows for sight. The HS regenerates, likened to a wind..........Rom 10 says that faith comes by hearing.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

Sir, I believe that is blasphemous to relegate some of those in God's church to the heathen. Christ has purchased those outside of TULIP also.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

Sir, I believe that is blasphemous to relegate some of those in God's church to the heathen. Christ has purchased those outside of TULIP also.

Brett,
Again, definitions. Arminianism is heresy, and those whom hold to it perish rightly. I have never met a clinical Arminian. Those holding to error is another issue, but I am not speaking of them at this point. We are talking Arminians.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

Sir, I believe that is blasphemous to relegate some of those in God's church to the heathen. Christ has purchased those outside of TULIP also.

I'll add: You being Presbyterian should know that there are 'heathens' in Christs church.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

Sir, I believe that is blasphemous to relegate some of those in God's church to the heathen. Christ has purchased those outside of TULIP also.

I'll add: You being Presbyterian should know that there are 'heathens' in Christs church.

Well, you should know that I mean the invisible Church.

If you think that Arminianism is the same as Islam or eastern theology...

I think I have had enough of this thread.

[Edited on 2-9-2006 by raderag]

 

[ChristopherPaul]

A problem arises when we apply the term "Arminian" to anyone who is not a Calvinist or who does not know what either term means.

A Hindu believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

A Muslim believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

Likewise an Arminian believes that they are saved by something other than Christ (that is, Christ plus works). They believe it and will profess such.

Be careful in labeling a non-Calvinist as an Arminian. The people I know who attend non-reformed churches and know nothing of Calvinism are not Remonstrant believing Arminians either. They are ignorant, immature Calvinists as far as belief goes.

Ask *those people* who they are saved by and they will profess that they believe they are saved by Christ alone. They believe it and will profess such.

Take those same people and explain the 5 points of Calvinism an they may bulk and fight and scratch their heads at first, but they still believe they are saved by Christ alone, they just don't understand how it all works out yet.

So, with that said, I agree that a true Arminian who believes and professes that they are saved by anything other than Christ alone is anathema. But I do not believe all non-calvinists are thus remonstrant professing Arminians

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

Sir, I believe that is blasphemous to relegate some of those in God's church to the heathen. Christ has purchased those outside of TULIP also.

I'll add: You being Presbyterian should know that there are 'heathens' in Christs church.

Well, you should no that I mean the invisible Church.

If you think that Arminianism is the same as Islam or eastern theology...

I think I have had enough of this thread.

Heresy is heresy. Whats the difference? All heresy condemns! Whether Islamic theology or illicit forms of Christianity, i.e. Jehovahs Witnesses, it's all the same.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by ChristopherPaul
A problem arises when we apply the term "Arminian" to anyone who is not a Calvinist or who does not know what either term means.

A Hindu believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

A Muslim believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

Likewise an Arminian believes that they are saved by something other than Christ (that is, Christ plus works). They believe it and will profess such.

Be careful in labeling a non-Calvinist as an Arminian. The people I know who attend non-reformed churches and know nothing of Calvinism are not Remonstrant believing Arminians either. They are ignorant, immature Calvinists as far as belief goes.

Ask *those people* who they are saved by and they will profess that they believe they are saved by Christ alone. They believe it and will profess such.

Take those same people and explain the 5 points of Calvinism an they may bulk and fight and scratch their heads at first, but they still believe they are saved by Christ alone, they just don't understand how it all works out yet.

So, with that said, I agree that a true Arminian who believes and professes that they are saved by anything other than Christ alone is anathema. But I do not believe all non-calvinists are thus remonstrant professing Arminians

I think ANY Arminian including Jacob himself would say he was saved by Christ alone. This is another straw man phoney baloney example that attempts to make the logical consequences of TULIP onlyism not seem so ridiculous.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by ChristopherPaul
A problem arises when we apply the term "Arminian" to anyone who is not a Calvinist or who does not know what either term means.

A Hindu believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

A Muslim believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

Likewise an Arminian believes that they are saved by something other than Christ (that is, Christ plus works). They believe it and will profess such.

Be careful in labeling a non-Calvinist as an Arminian. The people I know who attend non-reformed churches and know nothing of Calvinism are not Remonstrant believing Arminians either. They are ignorant, immature Calvinists as far as belief goes.

Ask *those people* who they are saved by and they will profess that they believe they are saved by Christ alone. They believe it and will profess such.

Take those same people and explain the 5 points of Calvinism an they may bulk and fight and scratch their heads at first, but they still believe they are saved by Christ alone, they just don't understand how it all works out yet.

So, with that said, I agree that a true Arminian who believes and professes that they are saved by anything other than Christ alone is anathema. But I do not believe all non-calvinists are thus remonstrant professing Arminians

I agree. That has been my point all along.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

Sir, I believe that is blasphemous to relegate some of those in God's church to the heathen. Christ has purchased those outside of TULIP also.

I'll add: You being Presbyterian should know that there are 'heathens' in Christs church.

Well, you should no that I mean the invisible Church.

If you think that Arminianism is the same as Islam or eastern theology...

I think I have had enough of this thread.

Heresy is heresy. Whats the difference? All heresy condemns! Whether Islamic theology or illicit forms of Christianity, i.e. Jehovahs Witnesses, it's all the same.

Once again, you are reducing this to a level of absurdity. How many here don't believe that Mary is the mother of God? Many from my estimation. To not believe this is a certain heresy, yet I don't think these folks are damned.

 

[non dignus]

Originally posted by biblelighthouse

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

You preach it, Pastor Way!!!

No. We are saying that the Christian is responsible for what God has revealed at this point in redemptive history and what He is calling him to personally vis a vis doctrine. A child is different than an adult, and the post-modern era is different than the pre-reformation era.

"I will build my church." It is a process.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by ChristopherPaul
A problem arises when we apply the term "Arminian" to anyone who is not a Calvinist or who does not know what either term means.

A Hindu believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

A Muslim believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

Likewise an Arminian believes that they are saved by something other than Christ (that is, Christ plus works). They believe it and will profess such.

Be careful in labeling a non-Calvinist as an Arminian. The people I know who attend non-reformed churches and know nothing of Calvinism are not Remonstrant believing Arminians either. They are ignorant, immature Calvinists as far as belief goes.

Ask *those people* who they are saved by and they will profess that they believe they are saved by Christ alone. They believe it and will profess such.

Take those same people and explain the 5 points of Calvinism an they may bulk and fight and scratch their heads at first, but they still believe they are saved by Christ alone, they just don't understand how it all works out yet.

So, with that said, I agree that a true Arminian who believes and professes that they are saved by anything other than Christ alone is anathema. But I do not believe all non-calvinists are thus remonstrant professing Arminians

I think ANY Arminian including Jacob himself would say he was saved by Christ alone. This is another straw man phoney baloney example that attempts to make the logical consequences of TULIP onlyism not seem so ridiculous.

Brett,
Can I make a suggestion. Do not use the term 'arminian' on theological discussions unless the person is a clinical Arminian. It would help the conversation if we kept our ducks in the correct row. What Jacob was referring to was not a person whom holds to Arminian theology, but someone whom is not Calvinist and is in error, for whatever reason. Maybe they are new to the faith. The church where they reside is poorly taught, etc. This does not make them by default, practicing Arminians. They are just in error.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by ChristopherPaul
A problem arises when we apply the term "Arminian" to anyone who is not a Calvinist or who does not know what either term means.

A Hindu believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

A Muslim believes that they are saved by something other than Christ. They believe it and will profess such.

Likewise an Arminian believes that they are saved by something other than Christ (that is, Christ plus works). They believe it and will profess such.

Be careful in labeling a non-Calvinist as an Arminian. The people I know who attend non-reformed churches and know nothing of Calvinism are not Remonstrant believing Arminians either. They are ignorant, immature Calvinists as far as belief goes.

Ask *those people* who they are saved by and they will profess that they believe they are saved by Christ alone. They believe it and will profess such.

Take those same people and explain the 5 points of Calvinism an they may bulk and fight and scratch their heads at first, but they still believe they are saved by Christ alone, they just don't understand how it all works out yet.

So, with that said, I agree that a true Arminian who believes and professes that they are saved by anything other than Christ alone is anathema. But I do not believe all non-calvinists are thus remonstrant professing Arminians

I think ANY Arminian including Jacob himself would say he was saved by Christ alone. This is another straw man phoney baloney example that attempts to make the logical consequences of TULIP onlyism not seem so ridiculous.

Brett,
Can I make a suggestion. Do not use the term 'arminian' on theological discussions unless the person is a clinical Arminian. It would help the conversation if we kept our ducks in the correct row. What Jacob was referring to was not a person whom holds to Arminian theology, but someone whom is not Calvinist and is in error, for whatever reason. Maybe they are new to the faith. The church where they reside is poorly taught, etc. This does not make them by default, practicing Arminians. They are just in error.

Most non-Calvinist Christians in my circle are well developed Arminians. What I get here is that I need to tell them to repent or perish. I object to this notion that most Arminians are just baby Christians in need of meat. I think that is patronizing, unrealistic, and just plain false.

When I say Arminian, I mean to say someone that understands and embraces the error.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

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!

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.

It is a fair comparison. Both are works driven theologies.

Sir, I believe that is blasphemous to relegate some of those in God's church to the heathen. Christ has purchased those outside of TULIP also.

I'll add: You being Presbyterian should know that there are 'heathens' in Christs church.

Well, you should no that I mean the invisible Church.

If you think that Arminianism is the same as Islam or eastern theology...

I think I have had enough of this thread.

Heresy is heresy. Whats the difference? All heresy condemns! Whether Islamic theology or illicit forms of Christianity, i.e. Jehovahs Witnesses, it's all the same.

Once again, you are reducing this to a level of absurdity. How many here don't believe that Mary is the mother of God? Many from my estimation. To not believe this is a certain heresy, yet I don't think these folks are damned.

The defining difference is based upon ignorance. Heretics know the difference, yet hold to their heresy and this is what damns them. That is why i am saying that there is a difference between heresy and error.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey


The defining difference is based upon ignorance. Heretics know the difference, yet hold to their heresy and this is what damns them. That is why i am saying that there is a difference between heresy and error.

So, you think heretics know they are in error?

 

[ChristopherPaul]

Originally posted by raderag
Most non-Calvinist Christians in my circle are well developed Arminians. What I get here is that I need to tell them to repent or perish. I object to this notion that most Arminians are just baby Christians in need of meat. I think that is patronizing, unrealistic, and just plain false.

When I say Arminian, I mean to say someone that understands and embraces the error.

Ask *those people* if they are saved by Christ alone. Even if they are "well developed" in their non-Calvinistic views they will hesitate to proclaim that they are saved by Christ plus anything if they truly believe the gospel. What do you think?

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey


The defining difference is based upon ignorance. Heretics know the difference, yet hold to their heresy and this is what damns them. That is why i am saying that there is a difference between heresy and error.

So, you think heretics know they are in error?

I believe they know that there are differences in what they believe and what the orthodox hold to. For example, Arminius knew what Calvin believed. Roman Catholic priests know that protestants hold to justification by faith alone.

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

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by ChristopherPaul

Originally posted by raderag
Most non-Calvinist Christians in my circle are well developed Arminians. What I get here is that I need to tell them to repent or perish. I object to this notion that most Arminians are just baby Christians in need of meat. I think that is patronizing, unrealistic, and just plain false.

When I say Arminian, I mean to say someone that understands and embraces the error.

Ask *those people* if they are saved by Christ alone. Even if they are "well developed" in their non-Calvinistic views they will hesitate to proclaim that they are saved by Christ plus anything if they truly believe the gospel. What do you think?

Yes, I think you are right, and this demonstrates the absurdity of your example. In reality, there are no Arminians as all will proclaim they are saved by Christ alone.

 

[ChristopherPaul]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by ChristopherPaul

Originally posted by raderag
Most non-Calvinist Christians in my circle are well developed Arminians. What I get here is that I need to tell them to repent or perish. I object to this notion that most Arminians are just baby Christians in need of meat. I think that is patronizing, unrealistic, and just plain false.

When I say Arminian, I mean to say someone that understands and embraces the error.

Ask *those people* if they are saved by Christ alone. Even if they are "well developed" in their non-Calvinistic views they will hesitate to proclaim that they are saved by Christ plus anything if they truly believe the gospel. What do you think?

Yes, I think you are right, and this demonstrates the absurdity of your example. In reality, there are no Arminians as all will proclaim they are saved by Christ alone.

So has Scott met any?

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Scott Bushey


The defining difference is based upon ignorance. Heretics know the difference, yet hold to their heresy and this is what damns them. That is why i am saying that there is a difference between heresy and error.

So, you think heretics know they are in error?

I believe they know that there are differences in what they believe and what the orthodox hold to. For example, Arminius knew what Calvin believed. Roman Catholic priests know that protestants hold to justification by faith alone.

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

Ok, then it is time that you admit that Arminians actually know their theology and embrace it. That is what I find troubling, that you seem to imply that this animal doesn't exists. If you think they are damned by their error, I can respect that, but just pretending they are a rare breed of pigmies seems a bit odd.

On the other hand, for you to say that someone embracing Arminianism can't hold to salvific faith is problematic to the Gospel itself. Unless you hold that salvation in Christ alone is by intellect alone, and that one must perfectly trust Christ alone. I dare say that a valid criticism of many of the Puritans is that too much emphasis is given to works. I read Pilgrams Progress, and I see almost no mention of justification. I am quite sure that some puritans had too much faith in their own works. Yet their imperfect mustard seed faith was enough to justify them despite there heresy. I would say the same for an Arminian as they hold to the right Christ.

 

[Arch2k]

Originally posted by raderag

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.

I don't know where you've studied logic, but a syllogism can have as many premises as it takes. The point is if the syllogism is valid and sound, which mine is.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag

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.

I don't know where you've studied logic, but a syllogism can have as many premises as it takes. The point is if the syllogism is valid and sound, which mine is.

Hmmm. I could be wrong, but that is my understanding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

 

[Arch2k]

Originally posted by raderag
Ok, then it is time that you admit that Arminians actually know their theology and embrace it. That is what I find troubling, that you seem to imply that this animal doesn't exists. If you think they are damned by their error, I can respect that, but just pretending they are a rare breed of pigmies seems a bit odd.

I have to agree with you on this point. There are many people out there today who are "four-point" Arminians...the exact same as degree as the Remonstrance condemned by Dort.

Originally posted by raderag
On the other hand, for you to say that someone embracing Arminianism can't hold to salvific faith is problematic to the Gospel itself. Unless you hold that salvation in Christ alone is by intellect alone, and that one must perfectly trust Christ alone. I dare say that a valid criticism of many of the Puritans is that too much emphasis is given to works. I read Pilgrams Progress, and I see almost no mention of justification. I am quite sure that some puritans had too much faith in their own works. Yet their imperfect mustard seed faith was enough to justify them despite there heresy. I would say the same for an Arminian as they hold to the right Christ.

You act as if resting on Christ Alone is a hard thing to comprehend. It is simple enough for a child to understand, but the implications can be so deep that theologians can study it forever.

That being said, it is not our own striving that causes us to rest on Christ Alone, but the it is Christ himself who is the author and finisher of our faith. He gives us the eyes to see that He is the ONLY way to Heaven (not just a helper).

Christ alone is the gospel.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag
Ok, then it is time that you admit that Arminians actually know their theology and embrace it. That is what I find troubling, that you seem to imply that this animal doesn't exists. If you think they are damned by their error, I can respect that, but just pretending they are a rare breed of pigmies seems a bit odd.

I have to agree with you on this point. There are many people out there today who are "four-point" Arminians...the exact same as degree as the Remonstrance condemned by Dort.

Originally posted by raderag
On the other hand, for you to say that someone embracing Arminianism can't hold to salvific faith is problematic to the Gospel itself. Unless you hold that salvation in Christ alone is by intellect alone, and that one must perfectly trust Christ alone. I dare say that a valid criticism of many of the Puritans is that too much emphasis is given to works. I read Pilgrams Progress, and I see almost no mention of justification. I am quite sure that some puritans had too much faith in their own works. Yet their imperfect mustard seed faith was enough to justify them despite there heresy. I would say the same for an Arminian as they hold to the right Christ.

You act as if resting on Christ Alone is a hard thing to comprehend. It is simple enough for a child to understand, but the implications can be so deep that theologians can study it forever.

That being said, it is not our own striving that causes us to rest on Christ Alone, but the it is Christ himself who is the author and finisher of our faith. He gives us the eyes to see that He is the ONLY way to Heaven (not just a helper).

Christ alone is the gospel.

Jeff, do you believe that you ever violate the first commandment?

 

[Arch2k]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag

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.

I don't know where you've studied logic, but a syllogism can have as many premises as it takes. The point is if the syllogism is valid and sound, which mine is.

Hmmm. I could be wrong, but that is my understanding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

Where does it state that only two premises may be used to build a sound argument?

 

[Arch2k]

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag
Ok, then it is time that you admit that Arminians actually know their theology and embrace it. That is what I find troubling, that you seem to imply that this animal doesn't exists. If you think they are damned by their error, I can respect that, but just pretending they are a rare breed of pigmies seems a bit odd.

I have to agree with you on this point. There are many people out there today who are "four-point" Arminians...the exact same as degree as the Remonstrance condemned by Dort.

Originally posted by raderag
On the other hand, for you to say that someone embracing Arminianism can't hold to salvific faith is problematic to the Gospel itself. Unless you hold that salvation in Christ alone is by intellect alone, and that one must perfectly trust Christ alone. I dare say that a valid criticism of many of the Puritans is that too much emphasis is given to works. I read Pilgrams Progress, and I see almost no mention of justification. I am quite sure that some puritans had too much faith in their own works. Yet their imperfect mustard seed faith was enough to justify them despite there heresy. I would say the same for an Arminian as they hold to the right Christ.

You act as if resting on Christ Alone is a hard thing to comprehend. It is simple enough for a child to understand, but the implications can be so deep that theologians can study it forever.

That being said, it is not our own striving that causes us to rest on Christ Alone, but the it is Christ himself who is the author and finisher of our faith. He gives us the eyes to see that He is the ONLY way to Heaven (not just a helper).

Christ alone is the gospel.

Jeff, do you believe that you ever violate the first commandment?

Absolutely, but if you mean by that I am denying the gospel, then it is you who is mixing law with gospel.

Q104: What are the duties required in the first commandment?
A104: The duties required in the first commandment are, the knowing and acknowledging of God to be the only true God, and our God;[1] and to worship and glorify him accordingly,[2] by thinking,[3] meditating,[4] remembering,[5] highly esteeming,[6] honoring,[7] adoring,[8] choosing,[9] loving,[10] desiring,[11] fearing of him;[12] believing him;[13] trusting,[14] hoping,[15] delighting,[16] rejoicing in him;[17] being zealous for him;[18] calling upon him, giving all praise and thanks,[19] and yielding all obedience and submission to him with the whole man;[20] being careful in all things to please him,[21] and sorrowful when in anything he is offended;[22] and walking humbly with him.[23]

1. I Chr. 28:9; Deut 26:17; Isa. 43:10; Jer. 14:22
2. Psa. 29:2; 95:6-7; Matt. 4:10
3. Mal. 3:16
4. Psa. 63:6
5. Eccl. 12:1
6. Psa. 71:19
7. Mal. 1:6
8. Isa. 45:28
9. Josh. 24:15, 22
10. Deut. 6:5
11. Psa. 73:25
12. Isa. 8:13
13. Exod. 14:31
14. Isa. 26:4
15. Psa. 130:7
16. Psa. 37:4
17. Psa. 32:11
18. Rom. 12:11; Num. 25:11
19. Phil. 4:6
20. Jer. 7:28; James 4:7
21. I John 3:22
22. Jer. 31:18; Psa. 119:136
23. Micah 6:8

Q105: What are the sins forbidden in the first commandment?
A105: The sins forbidden in the first commandment are, atheism, in denying or not having a God;[1] Idolatry, in having or worshipping more gods than one, or any with or instead of the true God;[2] the not having and avouching him for God, and our God;[3] the omission or neglect of anything due to him, required in this commandment;[4] ignorance,[5] forgetfulness,[6] misapprehensions,[7] false opinions,[8] unworthy and wicked thoughts of him;[9] bold and curious searching into his secrets;[10] all profaneness,[11] hatred of God;[12] self-love,[13] self-seeking,[14] and all other inordinate and immoderate setting of our mind, will, or affections upon other things, and taking them off from him in whole or in part;[15] vain credulity,[16] unbelief,[17] heresy,[18] misbelief,[19] distrust,[20] despair,[21] incorrigibleness,[22] and insensibleness under judgments,[23] hardness of heart,[24] pride,[25] presumption,[26] carnal security,[27] tempting of God;[28] using unlawful means,[29] and trusting in unlawful means;[30] carnal delights and joys;[31] corrupt, blind, and indiscreet zeal;[32] lukewarmness,[33] and deadness in the things of God;[34] estranging ourselves, and apostatizing from God;[35] praying, or giving any religious worship, to saints, angels, or any other creatures;[36] all compacts and consulting with the devil,[37] and hearkening to his suggestions;[38] making men the lords of our faith and conscience;[39] slighting and despising God and his commands;[40] resisting and grieving of his Spirit,[41] discontent and impatience at his dispensations, charging him foolishly for the evils he inflicts on us;[42] and ascribing the praise of any good we either are, have, or can do, to fortune,[43] idols,[44] ourselves,[45] or any other creature.[46]

1. Psa. 14:1; Eph. 2:12
2. Jer. 2:27-28; I Thess. 1:9
3. Psa. 81:11
4. Isa. 43:22-24
5. Jer. 4:22; Hosea 4:1, 6
6. Jer. 2:32
7. Acts 17:23, 29
8. Isa. 40:18
9. Psa. 1:21
10. Deut. 29:29
11. Titus 1:16; Heb. 12:16
12. Rom. 1:30
13. II Tim. 3:2
14. Phil. 2:21
15. I John 2:15-16; I Sam. 2:29; Col. 3:2, 5
16. I John 4:1
17. Heb. 3:12
18. Gal. 5:20; Titus 3:10
19. Acts 26:9
20. Psa. 78:22
21. Gen. 4:13
22. Jer. 5:3
23. Isa. 42:25
24. Rom. 2:5
25. Jer. 13:15
26. Psa. 19:13
27. Zeph. 1:12
28. Matt. 4:7
29. Rom. 3:8
30. Jer. 17:5
31. II Tim. 3:4
32. Gal. 4:17; John 16:2; Rom. 10:2; Luke 9:54-55

33. Rev. 3:16
34. Rev. 3:1
35. Ezek. 14:5; Isa. 1:4-5
36. Rom. 1:25, 10:13-14; Hosea 4:12; Acts 10:25-26; Rev. 19:10; Matt. 4:10; Col. 2:18
37. Lev. 20:6; I Sam. 28:7, 11; I Chr. 10:13-14
38. Acts 5:3
39. II Cor. 1:24; Matt. 23:9
40. Deut. 32:15; II Sam. 12:9; Prov. 13:13
41. Acts 7:51; Eph. 4:30
42. Psa. 73:2-3, 13-15, 22; Job 1:22
43. I Sam. 6:7-9
44. Dan. 5:23
45. Deut. 8:17; Dan. 4:30
46. Hab. 1:16

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag

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.

I don't know where you've studied logic, but a syllogism can have as many premises as it takes. The point is if the syllogism is valid and sound, which mine is.

Hmmm. I could be wrong, but that is my understanding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

Where does it state that only two premises may be used to build a sound argument?

It says there are three articles, a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. I have never heard of a syllogism with more than 2 premises.

 

[raderag]

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag

Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel

Originally posted by raderag
Ok, then it is time that you admit that Arminians actually know their theology and embrace it. That is what I find troubling, that you seem to imply that this animal doesn't exists. If you think they are damned by their error, I can respect that, but just pretending they are a rare breed of pigmies seems a bit odd.

I have to agree with you on this point. There are many people out there today who are "four-point" Arminians...the exact same as degree as the Remonstrance condemned by Dort.

Originally posted by raderag
On the other hand, for you to say that someone embracing Arminianism can't hold to salvific faith is problematic to the Gospel itself. Unless you hold that salvation in Christ alone is by intellect alone, and that one must perfectly trust Christ alone. I dare say that a valid criticism of many of the Puritans is that too much emphasis is given to works. I read Pilgrams Progress, and I see almost no mention of justification. I am quite sure that some puritans had too much faith in their own works. Yet their imperfect mustard seed faith was enough to justify them despite there heresy. I would say the same for an Arminian as they hold to the right Christ.

You act as if resting on Christ Alone is a hard thing to comprehend. It is simple enough for a child to understand, but the implications can be so deep that theologians can study it forever.

That being said, it is not our own striving that causes us to rest on Christ Alone, but the it is Christ himself who is the author and finisher of our faith. He gives us the eyes to see that He is the ONLY way to Heaven (not just a helper).

Christ alone is the gospel.

Jeff, do you believe that you ever violate the first commandment?

Absolutely, but if you mean by that I am denying the gospel, then it is you who is mixing law with gospel.
...

No, I mean by that you are not trusting in Christ alone. What I am saying is that the implication that ARminians trust in Christ + free will can be leveled at every Christian to some degree. I know that I trust in my own works far too much. The Gospel is that by trusting in Christ, we are forgiven for even this wicked heresy.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Ok, then it is time that you admit that Arminians actually know their theology and embrace it.

Thats exactly what I have asserted. However, I have never met an Arminian.

That is what I find troubling, that you seem to imply that this animal doesn't exists.

I never said that! I said, "I have never met an Arminian".

If you think they are damned by their error, I can respect that, but just pretending they are a rare breed of pigmies seems a bit odd.

I never implied that either. If they are out there, I have never met one. I have met people whom are not Calvinist and whom have tendencies that resemble Arminianism in singular components, but a full fledged Arminian- nope!

On the other hand, for you to say that someone embracing Arminianism can't hold to salvific faith is problematic to the Gospel itself.

The problem is that Arminius held to a works based salvation, to name one of his errors.

Unless you hold that salvation in Christ alone is by intellect alone, and that one must perfectly trust Christ alone.

I hold to the doctrine of Justification by faith alone. The regenerate man may not yet understand that principle, but he will eventually.

I dare say that a valid criticism of many of the Puritans is that too much emphasis is given to works. I read Pilgrams Progress, and I see almost no mention of justification. I am quite sure that some puritans had too much faith in their own works. Yet their imperfect mustard seed faith was enough to justify them despite there heresy.

The book of James is clear. Show me a man with no works and I will show you a man with dead faith! Are you saying Bunyan was a heretic?

I would say the same for an Arminian as they hold to the right Christ.

Arminianism is at odds with God as they believe the God of the scriptures is weak and cannot guarantee any of His sheep.