The Case for Arminianism

You just called us heathen.

Some of you guys have no class- NONE. I was raised by drunkards and dope addicts and I don't insinuate that people on here are heathen.

You ought to be ashamed.

 

Don't be so touchy! I wasn't calling anyone "heathen." I was thinking about the "rage" that goes on here between the two camps. And frankly, you do seem to instigate most of it. It is as though to you the only thing about Christianity that matters is standing up for Calvinism. You are like a neighbor with a new car, it's all you talk about. After a while it gets old, especially when apparently your only goal is to change the minds of us non-Calvinist. What you fail to understand is that many of us are much older than you and we have heard this theology since you were wearing diapers.

 

I think evil is the absence of God. It is not a thing.

 

Election can only be if the man is in Christ, it's with out a doubt conditional. This is why scripture says it the way it does.

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

Even the Calvinist position isn't really unconditional election. If it were then election would be based on random selection making election dependent on the luck of the draw. IOW's fatalism. Actually there isn't 2 or 3 positions to choose from there is only one.

We are not chosen out of Him but in Him. Therefore we are not Elected while still in our sin. Simply because we have to be in Him inorder to be Elected at all. Calvinist love to skip right over those two words ("IN HIM")

Absolutely not true according to scripture. If it were no one would ever be saved. The inability to understand scripture is an imagined assumation originally from the Catholic Church. They believe there is no Salvation apart from the RCC.

• The atonement is for the whole world simply because we aren't elect until we are in Him. Jn 3: 16 says so. As well as.
• 1Jn 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

• This is what you do with this scripture here. The effectual working of His power mentioned in Eph3: 7 is
  
  Paul being apointed to ministeryEph 3:7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.
• However you rip this small part of a verse out of scripture and claim it says something different. This is awfully poor division of the word.

No one is arguing God's ability but you. You claim God has to save you because you claim to be elected. If that were so Election would have been our Salvation.
MB

 

First, I am not "kicked off" whatever that means. But trying to place me in the Arminian camp is exactly what I am talking about. This is all a Cal can see, either you are one of them, or you are an Arm. And the Arms are the bogieman to Cals.

I am not attacking you, I am pointing out a practice that you may not have been aware of.

Do Cals frequently call those who disagree with them an Arm or not? I am not making any sort of false accusation, you know as well as I do that non-Cals are often called Arms here. And that is a stereotype.

And what is the purpose of stereotyping? Why did Hitler stereotype the Jews? Was that for the Jews or for the German people? Was it to create fear of the Jews? Or was the greater purpose to unite the German people and control them?

But see, lots of folks are not aware they are being controlled and manipulated, they are simply swept away in the flow.

 

Is there a reason you feel this verse was directed at you?
MB

 

For the record, I am not "calling" you anything. I am contrasting your posted theology with that of others -- either Calvinism or Arminianism -- or in those places where you are neither, pointing that out.

I have also asked you to identify your position so that I get it right. I am actually trying to treat you with respect, but you have a hard time seeing that, largely because (both as I imagine, and as I have observed) ANY question about what you believe is taken as a direct threat.

I am not threatening you. I am ASKING you. With that, you can either defend what you believe or you cannot. If you cannot, then perhaps your theology is not as well defined as you imagine. I am not threatened in the least by Arminian theology, nor do I need to make anyone a "boogieman." You appear to be acting out of fear of something that you may not even understand very well.

So, here is one Calvinist (and I don't prefer that title) asking you to just state your theology clearly so that I get it right. Don't do so by attacking mine. That is not helpful. State your own theology in a positive manner instead of a negative against someone else's and perhaps we can find some common ground with which to celebrate the Lord who Saves. :thumbs:

 

This thread is ABOUT Calvinism and ARMINIANISM and the debate betwixt them.

What are we supposed to be talking about on this thread???????????

About four of you guys are obsessed with the fact that you are very old.

I think it is all you can muster that you have on the sharp young guys coming along- so you keep repeating it over and over again.


And it is a shame that these many years have not enabled you to go toe to toe with the whipper snappers on here.

What good is age if it does not make you smarter? It just makes you old and washed up, doesn't it?

And I don't CARE what you meant by the verse.

You said this thread reminds you of a verse that speaks of HEATHEN.

Now if you can't see how that is offensive then your many, many, many years have certainly not made you any wiser.

Age only impresses me and ALL thinking people if it causes one to behave and converse with wisdom.

I respect the age of Dr. Bob for example. And I respect the age of Ian Paisely, and John MacArthur and old people I know that you do not know.

Now, Mr. Snow, if you are not wiser than me, which is evident in our exchanges, and you can't beat me in arm wrestling or anything else- what do you have?

Oh, I know! You can keep demeaning me from a safe distance! That's it!

Congratulations on that!



But there are plenty of old Calvinists on this site as well- so it nullifies your "old" bit.

 

I am going to deal with just this for the moment. The rest is predicated on this premise, so answering what comes later will not really work for now.

Do you or do you not notice that Ephesians 1:4 says "before the foundation of the world?" How can one be in or out of Christ before creation even begins? I believe at that point, you have missed the main point of that passage.

Yes, we are "in Christ", and yes, we are only saved "by Christ." But the entire context of Eph 1:4 is "before the foundation of the world" and that "we were chosen" before we even existed, or before we could "act" so that God could see. Highlighting two words in this verse and building a theology upon them is probably not what the authors of Scripture would call "rightly dividing the Word."

I'll be happy to delve further into the "in him" (en autos) phrase if you like, but the phrase has to be seen in context first and I believe that you are rather jumping to conclusions.

 

Brains.

I have spoke as much as anyone on this thread.

 

How old are you?

 

It's not this thread alone, it's the dozens of threads like it. It looks like you aren't as sure about your theology as you propose, and you need some others here to prop you up.

We are old enough to take what a young man says with a grain of salt.

Who said you were "sharp" expect you?

It doesn't do any good to tell someone something they don't want to hear; especially when they have their minds made up on the matter.

I guess that's better than being young and "washed up."

Then why did you respond to this verse if you don't "CARE?"

Actually I a said this thread reminds me of Psalm 2; I didn't specify any particular verse. It must be your guilty conscience that brought up this aspect of Psalm 2.

I guess I'm not as good at veiled insults as you are.

That leave you out completely, doesn't it?

You only seem to be respectful to older people who you agree with.

Are you challenging me to arm wrestle? :laugh:

I may not have much, but then again, I'm not the one bragging about my supposed intelligence.

A safe distance? This sounds like a threat, as though if I were not a "safe distance" from you, you might get violent.

Your welcome.

Numbers doesn't always mean being correct.

 

I suppose I would be more considerate of the elderly if I were not a heathen, huh, Robert?

 

Ronald Reagan said to a younger Walter Mondale:

 

Just because you sometimes act like a heathen doesn't mean that is what you actually are. We all do it from time to time, I suppose.

 

Them's fightin' words!

 

No- I didn't introduce this age thing. But I figured that since Snow did we would just ask everybody how old they were and if they were not old enough we would just disregard anything they say.

That would really cut down on a lot of traffic here on baptistboard.

Someone begins to argue with our position, we ask, "How old are you" and if we are older- WE WIN!!!

DING! DING! DING! DING!

After all, everyone knows that young people have not contributed at all to our theology over the years.! :laugh:

 

I used to walk 5 miles to school, in the snow, uphill---both ways, in South Florida. Does that make me old?

 

Only if you liked it! :laugh:

 

Growing older is unavoidable, growing wiser is yes.....you guessed it....a choice.