Where Arminians should critique Calvinism

Again - just stating the obvious.

Notice that in the quote from Romans 2 - the point IN THE TEXT Goes far beyond saying "Everyone must enter judgment" it is that WHEN God is judging EVERYONE - DURING that Judgment process -- AS He does His work with everyone - HE IS NOT partial towards the ELECT - towards the FEW of Matt 7, towards SOME but not others.

Again - this is too obvious to ignore - but I suppose we could "pretend".

Notice that the focus in Rom 2:4 is "Judged ACCORDING TO THEIR DEEDS". Impossible to ignore if one if paying attention to "the details" IN the text of Romans 2 for the context.

Your circular argument is a kind of marketeering not used in the text of Romans 2. LOOK at Romans 2 and SEE that it does not use the gimmick you suggest to define "Impartial".

Your idea of a teacher that grades impartially - except that all the teachers' PETS are not to be graded using the same standard as those who are "not favored". That bogus calvinized definition of "impartial" is not used in scripture.

In fact it IS the definition of PARTIAL!

Notice the "text" perhaps for the first time.

Let "the text" speak.

They are all judged "According to deeds".

They are ALL judged and it is not the "HEARERS of the law but the DOERS that WILL be JUSTIFIED".

Why treat ALL in this way?

Because "God is not partial"??

How then does Calvinism accept this chapter?

It does not.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Again - just stating the obvious.


Notice the "text" perhaps for the first time.

Let "the text" speak.

[/QUOTE]

Very Good idea...

1 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, whoever you are, when you

judge another; for in passing

judgment upon him you condemn yourself, because you, the

judge, are doing the very same things. 2 We know that the

judgment of God rightly falls upon those who do such things. 3 Do you suppose, O man, that when you

judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself, you will escape the

judgment of God? 4 Or do you presume upon the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not know that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? 5 But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous

judgment will be revealed. 6 For he will

render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. 9 There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. 11 For God shows no partiality. 12 All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be

judged by the law. 13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be

justified. 14 When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God

judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. 17 But if you call yourself a Jew and rely upon the law and boast of your relation to God 18 and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed in the law,


Now right in the middle of the context "judging" you will find your text

you are right again...it is very clear. no spin needed. just context


In Christ...james

 

Are you saying that ONLY Arminians define impartiality as BEING IMPARTIAL??</font>[/QUOTE] Bob, Is this another attempt to set up a straw man or did you not read what I wrote before you responded?

I said "interpretation and application", not definition.

Romans 2 in context is saying that God doesn't accept anyone's failure to meet the standards of the law. It is not saying that God never favors one person over another without regard to anything the person has done.

God was not impartial concerning Paul. God chose him out of all the pharisees and holy men of his time... though he was the biggest hater of Christ. The others didn't get a physical visit from Jesus.

This whole line of argument by you all is ridiculous. The text simply says that God is not partial concerning who is guilty- all are.

No. I am saying that arminians are the ones who have need to strip the scripture of its context regardless of the fact that it does not prove universal impartiality by God while the rest of scripture clearly dispels that form of error.

 

James thanks for being willing to talk about a select few details in Romans 2. Lets look at all the rest of them in the first half of the chapter -- the part you skipped over.

Let's continue letting the scripture speak for itself;

Paul is adamant that there is a future judgment “according to deeds”. Paul here identifies the “impartial” basis of God’s judgment. Instead of His simply “arbitrarily selecting” some to favor and others to ignore – ALL are judged according to deeds IN the context of the “call to repentance” of vs 4.

He speaks of this again in 2Cor 5 talking about future judgment and judged based on deeds “whether they be good or evil”.

Notice that in these first 6 verses we have an Arminian-style motivation - not to engage in man's faulty judgment of others. And there is no sense or expectation that this sin is not to stop or just to continue because we are totally depraved. Rather the argument is to stop.

Further - if this chapter is only about the failing case, only about the wrath of God - then we will not find success, mercy, reward but only condemnation, wrath, punishment. Let's now let the text reveal which way it will go.

Here is the “succeeding case” explicitly listed by Paul. And it is in the context of God - leading to repentance. We also have the people of God - persevering, doing good and seeking glory and honor. What is the result? The text says immortality and eternal life.

Some have supposed that a “judgment” that is impartial as Paul points to in vs 6 and 11 must “only have failing cases”. But Paul shows in vs 7 that such is not the case. The “Good News” does not require God to arbitrarily be “partial to the FEW of Matt 7” as some have supposed. Rather it allows for God to be “impartial” and to SAVE mankind on that basis!

The “Failing case”: Clearly a contrast is being introduced "but to those who are selfish" - contrasted with what? Those who repent, seek eternal glory and honor and persevere. Persevere in what?

You must be on the right path to be approved in perseveringly staying on the right path. It is obvious I know, but worth noting.

So God has now contrasted the good and the wicked, those who persevere on the right path and those who are not even on it.

We already know that in the judgment there are two classes - those that receive immortality and those that do not. If it is not clear to us by now that this chapter is dealing with both classes - we need to engage in some remedial reading comprehension.

At this point Paul seems to ask that we "be not deceived" into thinking that some can do evil but find "preferred treatment" because God will “favor the few over the many”. He does not let us suppose that others are lost for doing evil while the “favored” ones do evil and go to heaven. Rather Paul argues that God has called all to repentance and all must comply - there will be no preferred treatment based on status (or magic phrase) allowing some of the rebels in.

But basic to Paul’s solution is the affirmation that God is NOT partial when it comes to the Gospel – when it comes to Salvation. That means that He is NOT favoring the “few” of Matt 7 over the “many” so that He can save the “Few”. Rather – impartiality demands that ALL be given the same salvation-sequence. ALL have the Holy Spirit convicting of sin and righteousness and judgment (John 16:8) and ALL have the Drawing of God (John 12:32) and ALL have the Lord Jesus Christ standing at the door and knocking – and ALL have the SAME promise of the New Covenant that “changes the TREE itself” Matt 7 and writes the Law of God on the heart (Heb 8).

Rather than simply “favoring some over others” the system defined above is “impartial” as God HIMSELF is “Impartial”. This Gospel truth was a huge problem for the Jews and is a big problem for Calvinism.


No Partiality – for Christians –

God shows no partiality between unsaved people. (Unsaved Jews vs Unsaved Gentiles)
Acts 10:34
[ Gentiles Hear Good News ] Opening his mouth, Peter said: "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality,

God shows no partiality in determining who goes to heaven – who is justified.
Romans 2:11
For there is no partiality with God.
Romans 2:10-12 (in Context) Romans 2 (Whole Chapter)

No partiality in God between believers.
Ephesians 6:9
And masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him.

We are to SHOW no partiality.
1 Timothy 5:21
I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.
James 2:1
[ The Sin of Partiality ] My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism.


Many are reading that section above for the first time – with eyes open to details.

Notice the "text" perhaps for the first time.

Let "the text" speak.
They are all judged "According to deeds".
They are ALL judged and it is not the "HEARERS of the law but the DOERS that WILL be JUSTIFIED".
Why treat ALL in this way?
Because "God is not partial"??
How then does Calvinism accept this chapter?
It does not.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I have "alrady shown" in the "details" of my review of Romans 2 that in vs 4 God BEGINS the context - with the Gospel truth of "repentance".

He shows BOTH successes and failures in Romans 2 WITHIN that context of calling for repentance.

So far - you have ignored almost every detail explicitly identified in Romans 2.

Why?

Is this not a good chapter for you?

In Christ,

Bob

 

You are simply proving my point - Calvinists have a hard time with the word "Impartial".

THE WHOLE POINT of an impartial judge is to provide a leveling factor and then let the events decide rather than YOU forcing person-A to choose life rather than person-B.

By DEFINITION - impartiality does not allow you to favor A over B -- NOT FOR ANY REASON!

In a free will system A and B "get to decide" something OR ELSE there is nothing BUT partiality when the result is "A is identical to B but A gets selected"!!

This just isn't that hard to get.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]Well Bob,

Then you're saying that God's Choice of Israel cannot be viewed as Partiality?

Why Israel and not Egypt?

 

God never claimed that His choice of Abraham to head a nation was "impartial". But He does say WHY He chose Abraham in Genesis 18

.

And He shows WHY He continues to bless Jacob

But in Romans 2 He EXPLICITLY states that He is impartial when it comes to salvation.

In Christ,

Bob

 

my oh my.....

this sounds like wes "deed judgement" Did he get this idea off of you? Is this a staple of your "faith"?

 

Please don't confuse Bob with Context and Details of Scripture. You ruin his system of proof texting.

 

.

And He shows WHY He continues to bless Jacob

But in Romans 2 He EXPLICITLY states that He is impartial when it comes to salvation.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]So when the Bible says in Deu 7:6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.... that must mean:

A. God Chose Israel above all other nations.
B. God did not Choose Israel above all other Nations.

The correct answer is A.

Therefore that must mean that:

A. God is Partial to Israel.
B. God flipped a coin and Israel won.
C. Israel exercised its collective free will and chose God.

Well it can't be C because there is no Biblical support of such a position. It can't be B because it was a God thing and not Chance. It must be A.

God is partial to Israel because He chose them above all other nations - not because of any merit on their part but because God was pleased to choose them for his purpose(s).

Now you can call it impartiality all you want to, but it is clearly Partiality or as the Bible defines it ELECTION.

 

The "point remains" God never claims that the roles of priesthood or spiritual leadership or spiritual gifts are given out "impartially".

RATHER we see in 1Cor 12 that the Spirit gives out these roles/ministries to each one "as HE WILLS".

NOTHING is said there about an impartial distribution of all gifts roles ministries to all people.

NOR do we find such a theme in the OT.

(But then of course this is all "inconvenient details" for those trying to obfuscate and misdirect the clear teaching of Rom 2:11 by dragging in these other ideas -- eh?)

In any case - you already knew all this - so nothing new here.

I guess I only bring it up to point out that the trick for misdirection away from the clear point of Rom 2:11 is not really working.

(And of course - I have already raised this same point in my previous post- the one you quote but then ignore in your post above).

BTW - why do you use that kind of approach? It is confusing to me that you would think of doing such a thing.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob you have a number of verse you hold to...and kick out the rest.

Thanks God I have a faith that can take hold of the whole bible and not run from some of it

now that is the details..the facts...the truth.

 

If only I could get the Calvinists here to pay attention to the scriptures listed instead of glossing over them in post after post.

I raise the points - and they are simply ignored.

How is that supposed to be a "compelling form of response"??

What logic is used to defend such tactics?

In Christ,

Bob

 

This point of the "failing case" was made repeatedly in my post SHOWING how God condemned some of the Jews and ALSO some of the Gentiles based on that IMPARTIAL test used (as noted IN the TEXT).

BUT I ALSO paid ATTENTION to the DETAILS of the SUCCESSFUL cases (the ones that you gloss over in BOTH Jews and Gentiles) IN the TEXT!

I ALSO paid ATTENTION to the MECHANISM/Principle/Model that GOD declares He is using in Romans 2 - to GET that outcome of SOME saved and some lost. (the detail you ALSO choose to gloss over).

Your response takes the form of ONLY admitting to ONE of the details and then GLOSSING OVER the rest!!

How in the world do you think that repeatedly ignoring the VERY DETAILS I highlight in the TEXT is going to make it "appear" that you are admitting to them???!!

You repeat that same tactic as IF it is a compelling form of reason, debate, logic, response.

Why do that?

Why not advance your argument instead?

In Christ,

Bob

 

In your post you pretend to have interest in some other verses of Romans 2 going beyond vs 13.

I take that as 'genuine interes' and will post on that most devastating (to Calvinism) section of Romans 2 as well.

Let "the text" speak.

They are all judged "According to deeds".
They are ALL judged and it is not the "HEARERS of the law but the DOERS that WILL be JUSTIFIED".

Why treat ALL in this way?
Because "God is not partial"??

How then does Calvinism accept this chapter?

It does not.
=======================================================================================================

Interesting that there are two different systems – one to address those who HAVE scripture and one to address those who do not. But BOTH having the potential outcome of loss or salvation. To this point Paul presents BOTH failing cases AND successful cases.

Paul appears to be in harmony with Christ here as Christ said that those who knew there master's will and did it not receive many lashes but those that did not know the master's will and yet did deeds worthy of punishment - receive few

Notice that Christ does not assume everyone goes to hell (both those who KNEW the Bible and those who did not) anymore than Paul would make such an absurd statement in Romans 2. Rather the chapter is in context with the call for repentance as noted at the start.

Having shown us both the group that in the future obtain immortality and the group that in the future suffer the wrath after the future judgment of God - Paul now sums it up - the justification that is future will be for the doers and not for those who are proven to be merely hearers. The test is the same Matt 7 indicator “NOT everyone who SAYS Lord Lord – but he who DOES” for the good tree produces good fruit.

This is not a fact that Paul then goes on to deny in the rest of the book of Romans. Rather he continues to strongly endorse it (note particularly Romans 6). John McAarthur did an excellent series on this point - titled "the power over sin".

Paul now continues with the succeeding case! Yes that is right! His argument works and he gives a very simple proving case.

There actually were Gentiles that really did not have the Law of God! That is very important to understand. And there were those who did instinctively the things of the Law showing it was written on their heart!! Wow! So that means Paul really was right!

Even more interesting is the fact that this terminology regarding "the Law written on the heart" is new covenant terminology. Heb 8, 2Cor 3!!! Yes indeed we have the succeeding case as well as the failing case made in this non-myopic chapter of God's infallible word.

wow! Apparently the infallible word is telling us that it is gospel - good news that a future judgment, where the Gentiles are shown to be doers of the Law and not merely hearers only, is coming. A future Christ centered judgment!! What a Christ-centered gospel Paul has in this chapter!!

2Cor 5:10

=========================================

Notice the contrast between those that repent and persevere in doing good, and those that cause God's name to be blasphemed! It is a contrast based on what they “practice” relative to the Ten Commandments from which Paul quotes.

This is not a chapter claiming that all Jews cause God to be blasphemed. It is not a chapter declaring that all Jews have not repented. (Paul and the Apostles are Jews) It is not a chapter declaring that no Jews are saved in the judgment.

Rather it points to both the rebellion blasphemer on the one hand and the persevering and repentant on the other.

Let us "See" how much genuine interest there really is in all the "details" of Romans 2.

This is a great chapter for pointing out the IMPARTIAL judgment of God as it obtains the outcome of some saved and some lost IT SHOWS the "BASIS" of that outcome "clearly" and "explicitly" IN the text.

How shocking for the Calvinist system confronted by Roamns 2!

In Christ,

Bob

 

1st before i go on with this passage i ask for the 4th time....

what is your view on this "deed judgement" that you and wes talk about.

if you can not post...send me a PM.


Thanks..

In Christ..James

 

Wait...i have read this same post 4-5 times.

do you think if you post it 100 times you are then right?

bob..you have been shown many times by me..larry johnp, RC, Oldreg...and many others that this does not work. you think that after a few days we forget what we said before??

Get a new post...write some new lines. come up with a debate that works.

 

#1. Romans 2 provides BOTH successful and failing cases for BOTH Jews and Gentiles.

#2. Romans 2 SAYS they are ALL judged based on DEEDS and the RESULT of that impartial judgment is that SOME fail and some succeed.

This is a devastating to Calvinism.

#3. Romans 3 is IN the GOSPEL CONTEXT of the kindness and goodness of God - and the call to repentance.

This means that WITHIN the Gospel scenario there IS impartial JUDGMENT that results in SOME having eternal life and some not.

#4. Paul declares that the JUDGMENT is "according to my gospel". The judgment he speaks of is part of the Gospe.

#5. The Judgment results in "JUSTIFICATION" according to the text. It does not simply happen in a Gospel VOID where ALL those judged are condemned because of course - ALL are sinners.

#6. The DEEDS mentioned are the same FRUITs of MAtt 7 that Christ shows as "determining" outcoming.

#7 The ENTIRE thing is said to occur in an impartial manner and is GUARANTEED to be impartial because GOD HIMSELF is impartial when it comes to salvation according to Rom 2:11

Is this what you were looking for in asking about the "deeds" mentioned in Romans 2? Did I forget any of the "deeds" you find there?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Let us "See" how much genuine interest there really is in all the "details" of Romans 2.

This is a great chapter for pointing out the IMPARTIAL judgment of God as it obtains the outcome of some saved and some lost IT SHOWS the "BASIS" of that outcome "clearly" and "explicitly" IN the text.

How shocking for the Calvinist system confronted by Roamns 2!</font>[/QUOTE]In Christ,

Bob