Arminian Aberrations

We do things for God because we are saved, not to earn our salvation like those who believe their works save them.

Faith causes action

We do not need to understand to trust in Jesus, but trust in the Lord and He will direct your path.

 

Do hear how childish this sounds?

We both believe our interpretation of the scriptures and statements like this only reflect poorly on you and this board.

Actually, it says we cannot submit to his law, but you assume that to mean we can't believe in the one who fulfilled the Law for us. And, yes, we are at enmity with God, but why assume, as you do, that a DIVINE message sent with the purpose of bringing reconciliation with enemies is somehow insufficient to do so unless one's enmity is first defused by some other working? It makes little sense and its not biblically founded.

Beating on that straw-man again I see. If you want to call the powerful Holy Spirit wrought Gospel message sent to make appeal to all the world to be reconciled to God "a little outward manipulation," then knock yourself out. :tear: Sad.

No, in my system it affects everyone who hears it by enabling them to come to Christ. It doesn't return void for one single hearer and those who reject it will be judged by those very words.

In your system, however, the gospel is impotent for the mass of humanity, as only the preselected few have their enmity removed so that they can accept the appeal to be reconciled....so God, according to your system, has to virtually reconcile a man so as to make the appeal for reconciliation have any effect....interesting indeed.

 

I'm not the one who believes in pre-regeneration, so don't impose that standard onto my view please.

I believe the gospel enlightens and empowers those who hear it so that they can freely respond to its appeal. New life (regeneration) comes through faith...as SCRIPTURE says:

John 20:31:
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Interesting, when the hearer refuses the appeal you insist the difference is the hearer, which is it? Meow!

I think you have a double standard.

Nevertheless, as I've said countless times, and as you have ignored countless more, a gift doesn't have to be effectually applied for the giver to get the credit for giving it. God clearly gives us the means for faith, but if we choose to trade that truth in for a lie then we are truly without defense. To suggest that God didn't grant them what was needed to believe only gives them the perfect defense for their unbelief.

 

Apparently, you don't either.


Eph 4:15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ—

 

What we teach is demonstrated in the disciples we make. Otherwise we are not teaching. It's called applying Mt. 28:19, 20 and Acts 20: 28, "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood."

 

Thin that you have to understand that the spiritual heart of sinners are deceitful wicked, not seeking after God, cannot be tamed by god, so that is why he has to do the enabling work to make sure ANY of us will get saved!

jesus died to offer specific salvation unto thom who are the elect of God, not general salvation to sinners who will not be able to receive Christ!

 

To believe in God, truly, is to fulfill the First Commandment.

It's not an assumption. Christ said just that.

Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.​

This, right after He preached the Gospel, and not in parables, that many rejected.

So thought those who forsook Christ after that saying.

If God does nothing in the heart of a man before he "chooses" to believe, then it was outward. You have no other choice.​

You keep saying that, but you're lying. When pressed about this "powerful, spirit wrought" enabling, it turns out that you're describing a man, unchanged, who was presented with a choice, in the exact same way I would put the choice of white milk or chocolate to my daughter. There is no enabling, no power is exercised, no work is being done.

In my Gospel, which is Christ's Gospel, a man must be born again, and he does not birth himself. Now there is a powerful work of the Spirit. A real one, and one performed not by the will of man.

 

QF

Are you saying now...that you do not see a problem with NPP/Federal Vision
or Open theism also...is okay to you ???? I am not sure I am understanding you correctly.

Are you saying that both these ideas are okay?
or that you are not sure where the trouble is?

 

Notice this "act upon faith in order to be saved" business that distinguishes the semi-pelagian from the Calvinist.

It is so subtle that I think most of us miss this. It is so subtle that many Calvinists embrace this language of "acting upon your faith in order to be saved." But the fact is that God's Word does not say salvation comes by ACTS we perform but by grace through faith.

Most have heard the chair illustration of faith. They say, "I can stand and look at the chair and believe in it and it not help me at all. It is when I SIT IN IT that it helps me. And so it is with salvation. You can believe (be fully persuaded, to trust in it) that Jesus Christ is Lord but until you ACT upon that faith you are not saved."

I think this is dangerous.

The Bible indicates that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone.

The tricky thing is that it is ABSOLUTELY TRUE that REAL FAITH will cause you to ACT.

But the ACTING is not part of what is required for salvation. The ACTING is ONLY proof that you have been saved by grace alone through faith alone.

 

In this, I agree with Luke; as it says in Eph 2:10, we are saved unto good works.

 

I am saying the "brief" that I posted which mentioned the NPP is perfectly acceptable to me. As for OT, I do not consider that to be correct, although, some of the thoughts from Mr. Boyd I concur with. I don't know all the "streams" or interpretations of each NPP or OT.

As for NPP, I am perfectly comfortable with the idea that Paul in Romans is in fact addressing the exclusivism and "works" based corruption plaguing the Jewish religious leaders and nation.

 

Can you tell us who said that? You put it in quotes so I assume someone actually said that? Or is that your perception of what someone said? If so, can you quote what they said so we can see if you correctly understood what was said?

Thanks.

 

We couldn't fulfill the law, so God sent Christ to do it on our behalf, we couldn't understand his plan of redemption, so he sent the gospel. You assume His gracious provisions are insufficient. I don't.

We both believe God does something to help us believe, you just believe he does it for a preselected few irresistibly, and I believe he does it for all but it may be rejected. You know, that pesky little distinction you dismiss as being irrelevant?

More later....

 

Seems like the last time you asked someone (me, in fact) to demonstrate that someone ACTUALLY wrote something that you disagreed with you failed to respond once demonstrated. Now, you're asking again?

Sticking one's head in the sand is hardly the way to deal with "SOME" of what transpires in the anti-cal movement.

(I will from now forward start calling the movement what it is -- "Anti-Cal" for it is patently obvious now that it is not "pro-" something else -- by Skandelon's own admission -- so it is "anti-" for this position is only against another and those holding this position cannot make a positive statement for their own own doctrine.)

 

I am in agreement with you on Christ fulfilling the Law. He did.

We should discuss whether the "gospel" was because "we could not understand" or whether it is what it purports to be in Scripture -- the kerygma of "good news" of what Christ has actually done. You seem to take it from an historical record into some "act" that stands alone as powerful in its own right instead of words that represent actions done by Christ. I suspect a bit of Barth in there somewhere...

And, we do agree that "God does something to help us believe." We seriously disagree on what that "something" is. I suspect for you it is "words" (based on your interpretation of "the gospel" above) while for us it is actual atonement and imputed righteousness, justification, regeneration, adoption, effectual call, and yes, election into all the above.

 

Actually taking something out of context and pressing for an answer you like is not demonstrating anything...but I think we both know that.

 

OK GL, if so then we will just have to begin the terminology of anti- non - cal,