With the difference that the Calvinist preacher does not conflate the means with God's sovereign work of election. We call on all who hear to respond but know that all cannot. The Arminian's theology takes God out of the equation in regards to salvation. It makes Him passive. God can do nothing unless the sinner chooses. The Arminian preacher finds himself convincing instead of convicting. That is what Finney did. He had to become a salesman to "win souls". It's the same thing when there is an altar call with 10 stanzas of "Just as I am"; it is preying on the emotions , not trusting in the converting work of the Spirit.
I understand there isn't much you can say to defend the obvious that I point out. What I would like to know is once you decided "God showed you" TULIP was Divine Revelation, how did this change your Christian walk? Did you then begin to believe God was Sovereign, did you then begin to believe God was merciful, did you then begin to believe you were saved by Grace, did your witnessing to the lost become more urgent, etc.?
My walk with God never changed. I witness to the lost the same. I preach Christ in the stand, just as I always did before. :eek:
You just take what we say and it warp it into that which we didn't...myself, Iconoclast, Reformed et al. You're like a bull with his head down, pawing the dirt. You're not out for debate...only to defame...
I never studied Arminian theology so I cannot speak to these things you raise. However, I would find it very deceiving to tell a person they must repent and not at the same time tell them they cannot unless God makes them. Telling half truths is a trademark of Satan. You want to be a Calvinist preacher, then don't play around with their souls, tell them the whole truth as you see it.
God told the Jews of the OT to keep the Law or die. Did He know they could not, of themselves, keep it? Was He unjust in doing this? He knew they couldn't, and they died anyways. In your book, that makes God unjust...
I don't think I warp anything you guys say. I mean I have the exact quotes and provide them and you guys never repent of what you say. Icon makes it perfectly clear he believe no TULIP equals no Sheep. I give exact word for word quotes and you guys act like you never said it. Puzzling indeed.
Now I have your quote at the bottom of my page, how God hates the non-elect. I was wondering if you once loved everyone until you embraced TULIP, but now hate the non-elect like God does. I would think this would follow seeing how we are to follow the attributes of God.
Are you sure you know "my book"? God is just because God provided Grace and Mercy for those who would believe. From Genesis to Revelation, all God wants is to be believed......
If you believe that man possess the free will to accept/reject the gospel, then you are Arminian in your view of soteriology (salvation). There are a few on the free will side on this board who proudly accept the Arminian label, but for some reason the majority who hold to the free will view bristle at being called 'Arminian'. Being Arminian does not mean believing everything that passes for Arminianism. I am a Calvinist in my soteriology but not in my eccelesiology. Still I have no problem wearing the Calvinist label because it accurately describes my soteriological view.
Based on the totality of what I have read in your posts since I have been on this board I would confidently state that you are Arminian in your view of salvation.
Then you would have to show were I ever stated God was passive in one's salvation......I also hold to OSAS...which causes many to call me a Calvinist. Go figure
So says your opinion, correct? Passive means no involvement.
I believe the Father draws, the Holy Spirit convicts and points to Jesus Christ, and then regenerates those who call upon the name of the Lord. That is hardly "passive".
So your comments about Arminians may be correct if so be they believe God is indeed passive in salvation, but like I said, I never studied it, but if they believe as you said, then I am not one by any stretch of the imagination.
The call to freely choose the God of the bible is all throughout the Scriptures. But God being passive certainly is not.
Yeah, I'm a one pointer. You see, we are all Calvinist, most of Christendom just doesn't know it...:smilewinkgrin:... it takes Divine Enablement....Matt 13, John 10. (see OP, thread 1&2) The Holy Spirit is very busy though, He hasn't gotten to everyone yet.....:tongue3:
I think the problem Arminians have that are not SDA or Methodist for example is that it does not make sense to insist that you choose to accept the Gospel - but cannot later lose your salvation because of some choices you make after being saved.
At least I have seen one or two Arminians on this board in the past use that as their reason for being non-Calvinist-not-quite-Arminian.
Don't remember if Steaver is reasoning along those lines or not.
If that is the definition of "Arminian" that some use - then I suggest that we define our own term for "Arminian" one where God is incredibly active - but is doing so in a way that preserves (in fact enables) - free will for all.
I think there are 20 million or so SDAs that would join me on that one.
and in taking the action to "STAND at the door AND knock so that if ANYONE hears my voice AND OPENS the door I WILL come in" Rev 3
So as to enable free will and the opportunity of accepting the Gospel.
The 4 and 5 point Calvinist evangelist faithful to his model of salvation the state of fallen man and the sovereignty of God can only say at his evangelistic meeting "I do not say that God loves you - for He may not, I do not say that God will have you be saved at this meeting or that he died for you for in your case -- he may not have ... for indeed he might not have just so happened to select you... I do not say that your eternal destiny depends on what I say here today - or what you choose to do today. So lets all just have a seat quietly and wait for 30 minutes to see if God just might save someone while we wait".