Thoughts on Arminianism (for a change)

Matthew Henry --

http://www.godrules.net/library/henry/henryrev3.htm

If religion is worth anything, it is worth every thing. Christ expects men should be in earnest. How many professors of gospeldoctrine are neither hot nor cold; except as they are indifferent in needful matters, and hot and fiery in disputes about things of lesser moment! A severe punishment is threatened. They would give a false opinion of Christianity, as if it were an unholyreligion; while others would conclude it could afford no real satisfaction, otherwise its professors would not have been heartless in it, or so ready to seekpleasure or happiness from the world. One cause of this indifference and inconsistency in religion is, self- conceit and self-delusion; "Because thou sayest." What a difference between their thoughts of themselves, and the thoughts Christ had of them! How careful should we be not to cheat our owns souls! There are many in hell, who once thought themselves far in the way to heaven. Let us beg of God that we may not be left to flatter and deceive ourselves

 

Professors grow proud, as they become carnal and formal. Their state was wretched in itself. They were poor; really poor, when they said and thought they were rich. They could not see their state, nor their way, nor their danger, yet they thought they saw it. They had not the garment of justification, nor sanctification: they were exposed to sin and shame; their rags that would defile them. They were naked, without house or harbour, for they were without God, in whom alone the soul of man can find rest and safety.

 

Matt Henry continued

Good counsel was given by Christ to this sinful people. Happy those who take his counsel, for all others must perish in their sins. Christ lets them know where they might have true riches, and how they might have them. Some things must be parted with, but nothing valuable; and it is only to make room for receiving true riches. Part with sin and self- confidence, that you may be filled with his hidden treasure. They must receive from Christ the white raiment he purchased and provided for them; his own imputed righteousness for justification, and the garments of holiness and sanctification. Let them give themselves up to his word and Spirit, and their eyes shall be opened to see their way and their end. Let us examine ourselves by the rule of his word, and pray earnestly for the teaching of his Holy Spirit, to take away our pride, prejudices, and worldlylusts. Sinners ought to take the rebukes of God's word and rod, as tokens of his love to their souls. Christ stood without; knocking, by the dealings of his providence, the warnings and teaching of his word, and the influences of his Spirit. Christ still graciously, by his word and Spirit, comes to the door of the hearts of sinners.
http://www.godrules.net/library/henry/henryrev3.htm

 

Clarke the Wesleyan and Darby the dispy, the muck keeps seeping in.

Show me where in the context of the passage in debate where it says that Christ's statements to the Laodicean church are applied to the whole unconverted world.

Who is speaking in the passage? Christ.
Who is He speaking to? The members of the Laodicean church.
What is He telling them? That he knows thier works, and He will spew them out of His mouth as one would lukewarm water. He says as many as He loves, He rebukes and chastens, to be zealous and repent.

Where is the whole unconverted world in that passage?

Find it, and surely I will recant. I'm conformed by the Word, I can't say that God's Word means something it doesn't. Stop setting up strawmen to clobber and deal with the text.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

edit: Bob, Matthew Henry commentary is definatly always a treat. Thank you, I enjoyed it. But still the statements are to those in the Laodicean church, those that were in error, professing Christians in the visible church. The context doesnt allow the statements to be extended to the entire unconverted earth.

 

Indeed you are right.

Does the passage in Rev 3: 20 “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.” speak to the elect/church, or is it speaking to all mankind.

This is a MAJOR point in free-willism. We see it used all the time by those that would have us think it does apply to all mankind. Is what they say true, or are they misleading? As it is in most cases, when you see the whole text it is clear.


Rev 3:

NOTE: This is clearly to the church. Verse 14 tells us this. This should end the misleading alone. But there are more reasons to believe this. This passage adressing Laodiceans (a church) also follows 6 other address to other churches. Two other churches are addressed in this chapter alone.

We also know its believers for Christ is watching the works of the members. Works are address at the beginning of each letter. Salvation is not based on works, so for Christ to be addressing non-believers and how their works must change, would not jive with the gospel of grace. Even those that say we can lose our salvation would have to agree that works is not part of the salvation plan.

So why would Christ ALWAYS address the works of the non-blievers as if He was checking on them. If they are lost, then all works are dead, and a lost person can do nothing to change that, by changing what they do. Why was not He telling them they must believe, as He did so many times in the 4 gospels? Why? Well...it is clear he was not addressing the non-believer.

Yet the book of James does tell us that God cares about what believers are works. Believers are to work for the King and for the kingdom. Not the non-believer.

Also... Hebrews says, whom He loves He also chastens. There would be another side to this statement. This statement limits Gods love and chastening hand to those He loves. So, those He does not love, He lets go their own way. (Rom 1) In fact this is what we see in the next verses.

NOTE:
Notice verse 15…I know about your works..
Notice verse 18…..I counsel you…
Notice verse 19…I love you…I chasen you….repent!!

It is clear this is talking to believers.

Now read the verse...

It is clear many have mislead when it comes to this passage. In this church they had lift Christ out. Christ is asking them to fellowship with Him again..."and will sup with him".


In Christ...James

 

Thank you for further exploring the issue so thoroughly, James. Very edifying, I'm going to go through your post again in my studies. I find it amazing how a few presuppositions can alter ones theology so much. We have to use discernement when we read the Scriptures, and may God grant us all discernment and all understanding of the fullness of His Word. God bless your studies, brother.


On a nother note, here is C.H. Spurgeon, the "Prince of Preachers", on Arminianism.

"What the Arminian wants to do is to arouse man's activity: what we want to do is to kill it once for all---to show him that he is lost and ruined, and that his activities are not now at all equal to the work of conversion; that he must look upward. They seek to make the man stand up: we seek to bring him down, and make him feel that there he lies in the hand of God, and that his business is to submit himself to God, and cry aloud, 'Lord, save, or we perish.' We hold that man is never so near grace as when he begins to feel he can do nothing at all. When he says, 'I can pray, I can believe, I can do this, and I can do the other,' marks of self-sufficiency and arrogance are on his brow." - C. H. Spurgeon


Amen and Amen.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

They have been ably defended by centuries in print.

I have never floated any idea that John 6 speaks of limited atonement. John 6 very clearly testifies to an effectual call.

Larry has done no such thing. You need to read again.

The text is clear. My presuppositions were yours years ago when I started taking this issue seriously. I tried everything to believe as you did, and the text would not let me.

This is typical of your approach in that you do not use the words of Scripture. Let’s use your “playing the game” and insert it into the verse to see what it actually says.

 

You have proposed that the SAVED state is that of being OUT of fellowship with Christ - OUT of union with Christ ALONE and on the inside WITHOUT Christ.

I have shown from OldRegular's definitions that this does not agree with what EVEN CALVINISTS are saying - yet you freely leap off that cliff inspite of having NO Bible statement saying that such a condition is the "SAVED condition" thus you deny that this is evangelism to the lost.

No matter how glaringly obvious that both scripture AND Calvinists posting have debunked that notion.

THEN I point to well known Bible scholars including MacArthur and Matt Henry and Adam Clarke and Darby etc people on ALL SIDES of the fence ALL agree that this is the condition of the UNSAVED needing salvation -- so while you stand without a shred of evidence that this Rev 3 condition is EVER stated in scripture to be the GOSPEL picture of SALVATION -- you simply adopt a "deny everything" posture no matter what the evidence to the contrary.

Basically it is time for you to throw away the shovel and stop digging that hole for your argument.

Is that the SAVED condition according to SCRIPTURE??

No!

It is the condition of CHRIST ON THE OUTSIDE and the sinner alone on the inside.

EVEN in this very text that is what we see.

Indeed for "God so LOVED THE WORLD that HE GAVE".

And "God is not willing for ANY TO PERISH but for ALL to come to repentance".

The fact that you have to deny the concept of evangelism as you see God urging for Repentance based on HIS Love for the lost is very instructivce.

It speaks volumes about where Calvinism is leading you.

 

In these words of Matthew Henry we see him describe the person as Lost and the role of Christ as making an Evangelistic soul-saving invitation to the lost.

How blind are those who simply will not allow themselves to see --


Matt Henry --
Professors grow proud, as they become carnal and formal. Their state was wretched in itself. They were poor; really poor, when they said and thought they were rich. They could not see their state, nor their way, nor their danger, yet they thought they saw it. They had not the garment of justification, nor sanctification: they were exposed to sin and shame; their rags that would defile them. They were naked, without house or harbour, for they were without God, in whom alone the soul of man can find rest and safety.

Good counsel was given by Christ to this sinful people. Happy those who take his counsel, for all others must perish in their sins.

 

Red herring from Calvinists seem to be in endless supply.

ONCE we admit to the obvious in Rev 3:20 -- that the GOSPEL condition of being SAVED is NOT the condition of being alone and without Christ (as Matthew Henry describes this for us in faithfully rendering the text) -- then the vapid arguments of both 4 and 5 point Calvlinism perish.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Red herring from Calvinists seem to be in endless supply.

ONCE we admit to the obvious in Rev 3:20 -- that the GOSPEL condition of being SAVED is NOT the condition of being alone and without Christ (as Matthew Henry describes this for us in faithfully rendering the text) -- then the vapid arguments of both 4 and 5 point Calvinism perish.




Here's what John Macarthur (5 point calvinist) says


Quote:
Revelation 3:20 "Rather than allowing for the common interpretation of Christ's knocking on a person's heart, the context demands that Christ was seeking to enter this church THAT BORE HIS NAME BUT LACKED A SINGLE TRUE BELIEVER. ..."


From MacArthur's study Bible comments on Rev 3, page 1997.

MacArthur has this as the LOST inside the church of Laodicea -- "NO true Believers in Christ"


Even Pastor Larry argues that REaL belief preceeds salvation

In Christ,

Bob

 

Did I type any of those things in any of my posts Bob?

No, I did not.

Your are confusing the issue which I brought up, which was, that Revelation 3:20 in it's proper context was not an evagelistic passage to the whole unconverted earth. The text simply DOES NOT ALLOW IT. The passage is is from Christ to a particular group of people in Laodicea. James, Pastor Larry, and myself have all given answers refuting your faulty position from Scripture in it's proper context, and now I'm an anti-evagelistic hyper-Calvinist? God forbid!

That is pure slander, and cannot be further from the truth. There is nothing edifying about such accusations, it is offensive beyond expression. That's a serious charge to be throwing around, and it shouldn't be thrown around so lightly. If your position is refuted by Scripture, then you need to change your position, not make up strawmen to discredit those who don't agree with you.


Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

Johnny Mac is right, the lost INSIDE THE CHURCH, not the entire unconverted world.

It's a specific statement to a specific group of people.

I wasn't arguing whether they were lost or not, I was arguing that in proper context, that verse cannot be considered an evangelistic verse towards the entire unconverted world.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

Is there anyone here who denies this?


As an aside, Bob, would you please right in all black and in all the same size. This myriad of colors is distracting and useless. It does not help. If your point will not be made in black and white (or blue as the case is), then it certainly will not help to put it in color.

 

Hello Bob,

Thats no bird Bob, that happens to the the truth of the text. The decoy we see in your reply. No talk of the text. You are asking us to take the words of man, over the words of God.

Great men you quote there Bob. Should we uphold each word they say? If so, I would like to post some other quotes by them to see what you think. Yet I think you fail to see what even this does to your ideas. Lets say John Mac is right. What are we left with but this... you have removed the "Christ's knocking on a person's heart" and it is limited to a church.

Therefore another MAJOR point in your doctrine falls. Now I will stay I do not agree with John Mac on this. It would be nice to see you address the text in your support of your view. Other wise your 2nd MAJOR point remains fallen.

Two down....one to go.


In Christ..James

 

HP: One of the most prevalent notions of Calvinism is the maelstrom of confusion it breeds. In this quote by Spurgeon, we see it clearly at work. On the one hand he chides the Arminian for arousing man’s activity(whatever that means to him) and on the other hand he himself is guilty of arousing man’s activity by stating that man needs to submit himself to God and cry out to God. If man is dead, how can one cry out to God? Was Spurgeon suggesting that man could do something on his own ??????

You see, fair play and representation of the others views are not a strong point for the Calvinist. If the Arminian preaches to cry out to God in humility, the Calvinist cries foul! You are just trying to arouse man’s activity! But of course if the Calvinist admonishes one to cry out to God in humility, that is a proper approach as long as it is the Calvinist doing the teaching.

Spurgeon suggests that if a man can say “I can pray… believe….or do this it is arrogance,” but if the Calvinist, dead and unable to do anything, yet humbles himself and seeks God in prayer and humility, that is fine and dandy. How is this anything but utter hypocrisy?

If the Calvinist would attempt to be consistent with their true sentiments, man is capable of nothing, let alone getting humble before God. If they have any complaints they should take it up with God as He is the only one in their scheme of things that has any power to do anything besides doing nothing.

 

HP: I see. Does that mean that Larry believes God precedes Himself? If belief is a work of God, and salvation is a work of God, can either in reality precede the other?

Is Larry to say that salvation takes place at the time of belief? If so, when does one become one of the elect? Are the elect saved, and that from eternity, or does God make them one of the elect when they believe?

Is it not true that the true Calvinist like Larry REALLY believes that our salvation experience is really just when we become cognizant of God’s foreordained plan for our life, and that the point and time we call salvation is really nothing more or less than the point in time WE become cognizant of what God had already done from eternity past?

In reality, according to the Calvinist, man has absolutely NOTHING to do with their salvation. If anything is done, whether or not it is belief, repentance, or anything else, it is really God doing the work, not man in any way shape or form.

I would ask you and Larry again, can or does God precede Himself?

 

You didn't get it. But that's ok. Go back a few pages (I think) and check out those links I posted specifically for you, and maybe Bob too, if he wants to.

Calvinism was utterly offensive to me when I first heard the concept (on THIS very board, no less). I was a free-will, "make your decision" baptist attending a heretical Pentecostal church. So I read papers on it and read the Bible, trying to disprove it. But the more I read, the more I prayed, the more I studied, I realized that most of my theology was wrong. I ended up embracing it because the text didn't allow the theology I held to. I began studying Reformed theology, then took a 5 or so month hiatus from this board. God was gracious to bless my studies, and I repented of and retracted my former stance. I now attend a Presbyterian church.

So, while I was trying to disprove Calvinism, I became convinced of it. Thanks be to God that He has turned me away from man-centered theology, and saw fit to open my eyes to good doctrine. So baptistboard ,the preaching of Alan Cairns(a Free Presbyterian), a good dose of Phil Johnson and C.H. Spurgeon's sermons were all factors that covinced me of the sovereignty of God, and the error of free willers, and Wesleyans and Arminians.

So in a way, I'm now Presbyterian because of the Baptist Board. Who would have ever thought? :godisgood:

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

HP: It seems a bit strange for me to be called an Arminian, for I am not of that stripe, but just the same, I am OK if it seems to you that I am. I thank the Lord for those Arminians, even though I disagree with most all of them. I am sure closer to that camp than the Calvinistic one.

With that aside, feel free to continue to point out these ‘errors’ you see in the Arminians. I very seldom read much of the links posted, for this is a discussion group. I like to discuss one on one. If you feel a certain link presents the truth, read it and put it in your own words and present it for discussion. Fair enough? Thanks!

 

Great line...

BTW.. any Free Presbyterian church that I know of, is a very good church.