Arminian Grace

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Luke2427, May 25, 2011.

  1. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    "Arminian 'grace!' How strange the sound, Salvation hinged on me. I once was lost, then turned around, Was blind, then chose to see.

    "What 'grace' is it that calls for choice, Made from some good within? That part that wills to heed God's voice, Proved stronger than my sin.

    "Thru many ardent gospel pleas, I sat with heart of stone. But then some hidden good in me, Propelled me toward my home.

    "When we've been there ten thousand years, Because of what we've done. We've no less days to sing our praise, Than when we first begun."

    That pretty well nails it, imo.:thumbs:
     
  2. kyredneck

    kyredneck
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    10,548
    Likes Received:
    273
    :) :thumbsup: (I though it was funny, but then sometimes my sense of humor 'just ain't rite')
     
  3. Earth Wind and Fire

    Earth Wind and Fire
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    18,912
    Likes Received:
    94
    I have always likened that movement to alcoholism.....go into a hospital with some alcoholics liver hanging out of his body, jaundice & just dieing & ask them if their drunks.....your answer will be " But you dont understand, Im not an alcoholic" pure stinkin denial.

    To get better you have to first admit your a drunk & then you have to turn it over to your Higher Power. Thats a tough path for humans to walk.
     
  4. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    What is tragic is that Skandelon and the other arms and nameless theology guys cannot respond to this post because they actually believe the vast majority of that version of the song.
     
  5. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0

    Just curious...

    By "nameless Theology" do you mean those of us who do not hold to a strict 5 point TULIP/High determinite calvinism then?
     
  6. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    You wanted a response? Huh, I just thought you needed an outlet for your sarcasm.

    :rolleyes:
     
  7. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    114
    What's there to respond to? A smart-mouth criticism that's not even true - that's not even what non-Calvinists believe? A purposeful lie about what people believe that was only intended to get a rise out of people? And you want people to respond to that?

    Why should people respond in serious debate or serious conversations that could edify when the original post was nothing more than a mocking attack that gives NO evidence of desiring a response?

    I'm only responding to tell you that I am quite good with words. I'm sure that in the next 30 minutes that I could come up with some little poem that cruelly satires and mocks Calvinists and really goes for the jugular. But I won't. That type of thing doesn't appeal to me.

    Non-Calvinists do not believe in "hidden good" that saves. They do not believe that salvation "hinges" on them and they do not believe that they will go to heaven because of what they have "done."

    At least be intellectually honest ......

    ... all you are looking for with that OP is a fight.
     
    #7 Scarlett O., May 25, 2011
    Last edited: May 25, 2011
  8. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    There are Arminians, Calvinists, Amyraldians, Molinists, etc... and then there is this new hodge podge of ecclectic doctrines where folks pick and choose various doctrines from the above like a buffet line- doctrines that do not go together. So on their plate they have ice cream on top of guacamole covered in barbecue sauce- you get the picture.

    These folks, who have in the last hundred years become the majority of the SBC and IFB, have NO NAME for their theology.

    So we call it nameless.
     
  9. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    And yet you respond.

    I figured I might at least get some opposition. I thought perhaps you guys might want to distance yourself somehow from the above.

    But apparently even you recognize that this pretty well sums up your belief system.
     
  10. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    114
    Nice try ..... but no cigar. Just because MK or anyone else does not reply to your post in the manner that you choose does not mean that they agree with your post.

    And just because you taunt them further and claim that their non-response supports your supposition does not make it so. It's just further evidence of a taunt.
     
  11. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    And here is another problem. Since you guys do not have nameable theology you cannot say that it is not what "non-cals" believe.

    A "non-cal" is anyone who is not Calvinist.

    Catholics are "non-cal".

    Jehovah's Witnesses are "non-cal".

    Satan worshipers are "non-cal".

    And many Baptists are "non-cal".

    So you don't KNOW what "non-cals" believe.

    All you can say is what "non-cals" do NOT believe.

    Addressed above.




    Pin a rose on your nose.

    Yes they do.
     
    #11 Luke2427, May 25, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2011
  12. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    Possible. But at least EQUALLY as possible is the idea that you just can't respond because you really pretty much believe the above.

    You have to admit that EITHER is a real possibility.

    The only way to prove your side is to do the work of differentiating yourself from the song.

    I contend that you cannot.
     
  13. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, I'll bite.

    Your OP doesn't describe what I believe. There now, feel better. Good. Now answer a question for me:

    Why do we need we a name for our theology?
     
  14. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    114
    Ah, but the burden of proof is upon you to cite evidence that such Christians believe that they go to heaven because they are "good" and such Christians actually believe that their salvation is all dependent upon them and that such Christian actually preach, teach, and believe that, when in heaven, they will be patting themselves on the back.

    You brought it up. You prove it.
     
  15. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can't speak for others, but that is certainly not what I believe.

    I believe man of himself cannot possibly conceive of the gospel. This is actually very evident in the world. Look at all the established religions, or go to the darkest jungle and consider the pagans, and you will see the same religion. It is the religion that thinks man can earn salvation through his own merit. I certainly do not agree with that.

    I do believe man retained the ability to respond to God, but man cannot respond to what he does not know. This is what Paul meant when he asked, "and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" (Rom 10:14).

    Now, what does this question imply? Does it imply man lacks the ability to believe? No. What it directly implies is that man cannot believe in something he has no knowledge of. And Paul makes this more clear when he says "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God". What man needs to believe is to hear the gospel, to be informed and taught. Without this knowledge man could not possibly believe in Christ.

    And Jesus said this himself.

    John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

    In order to come to Jesus, you must have heard of him. How do you hear about Jesus? From God's word given to us by the Father. And every man who hears, that is listens and believes, who is taught, shall come to Christ.

    So, how in the world is that saving myself? If God did not reveal his Son Jesus to me I would be hopelessly lost.

    If I am drowning and cannot swim, and you throw me a life preserver (the gospel), I grab hold of it and you pull me to safety, how is that saving myself? No one would ever claim to have saved themselves in such a situation.

    And that is how the gospel is, without it I would drown in my own sin. I am not able to merit my salvation because of my sins. But the gospel comes to me like a life preserver. I grab hold of it and am pulled in by Jesus. He gets 100% of the credit.

    I could refuse to grab the life preserver. I could try to swim to safety and save myself. If so, I would drown. This is how salvation is.

    And this is not a no-name theology. The Eastern Orthodox church always believed man cooperates with God in salvation. God offers the grace, man accepts it. They believed this well before Augustine. This from Wiki

    I basically agree with this. God's grace through his written word showed me I was a sinner in danger of hell fire. It also showed me that Jesus died for my sins and rose from the dead. It also tells me if I call on him he will save me. My calling is not a work of merit, in fact, my calling is an act of submission that confesses that only Jesus can save me. But Jesus has promised to respond to those who call on him and save them. Jesus saved me, not myself, and unless God had revealed Jesus to me, I could have never been saved.
     
    #15 Winman, May 25, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2011
  16. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    It is the natural outworking of your theology.

    I'll prove it.

    John goes to heaven. Jack goes to hell. Why?

    John believed. Jack did not.

    Why?

    John chose to believe. Jack did not.

    Why did John choose and Jack did not?

    Because John humbled himself before God and Jack did not.

    What was it about John that enabled him to humble himself that Jack lacked?


    Ultimately it gets down to the fact that John is a better man than Jack.

    He is wiser, more humble, less depraved. These are GOOD things.

    If they were equally wise, equally humble and equally depraved they would have chosen the same thing.

    So John goes to heaven because there is some good in John that Jack lacked.
     
  17. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,833
    Likes Received:
    114
    Not even close. I don't know anyone who believes that. I never heard it preached, taught, sung, or whistled.

    In your scenario, JACK is the one with the "good" problem. He thinks he's "good enough" without God. Just like the rich, young ruler thought that he was good enough and personally and up close rejected the words of Christ. Just like Cain, AFTER God warned him about sin and explained to him how to be accepted - he went ahead and lived in open rebellion and rejected God's words.

    John is NOT wiser, more humbled, or less depraved. It's when the Holy Spirit revealed to him that he was a filthy sinner before God - UNABLE to save himself -, he believed Him. And he believed in his heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and he confessed Jesus Christ as Lord.

    Because he was better than Jack? Less depraved? No.

    Because he acknowledged his depravity and believed God. Jack, too, knew exactly what he was, yet like Cain and the rich young ruler - decided he was good enough on his own.
     
    #17 Scarlett O., May 25, 2011
    Last edited: May 25, 2011
  18. Earth Wind and Fire

    Earth Wind and Fire
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    18,912
    Likes Received:
    94
    And how about the guy who hears but doesnt comprehend...or worse ignores?

    Winman said:

    "In order to come to Jesus, you must have heard of him. How do you hear about Jesus? From God's word given to us by the Father. And every man who hears, that is listens and believes, who is taught, shall come to Christ."
     
  19. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    I put him on ignore. I don't respond to his stuff.

    He's convinced himself that it is because he gives me fits.

    Since I leap at the opportunity to debate Skandelon, I guess that means that Winman thinks of himself as a cut above skandelon.

    We know better.
     
  20. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    Which is proof that it is.
     

Share This Page

Loading...