Featured Historic VS Contemporary Arminianism

That's one way to get the lame to walk,,,,I mean flee..

 

EWF...
you posted...

Huh??

Good grief, talk about an OVER REACTION.

What I posted was LAME as can be. No more problmatic that calvinists accusing us of preaching a works salvation.

The robot analogy very very common in calvinism/non cal conversations, and this is the 1st time I have ever in any way seen this kind of reaction.



I am sorry I upsetted you to this degree. Even so...

God bless you

 

Think asiest way to seperate these 2 schools of theology is on what basis is the election of God made?

Individual or corporate?
Based upon Will of God foremost, or based upon what man decides to do?

One is pro active, other re active!

 

saved by the object of the faith though, not by the faith!

 

Oh boy! I would be in trouble ordering anyhting from that store, as I am BOTH calvinistic and Dispy!

 

Yesua1

you posted...

Agreed

And the sinner, personally, is the only one who can enter into the saving relationship with Christ.

 

yes, we all hold that a sinner must receive jesus by faith to get saved, but the fact that he can even do that would be the result of Gods election of/towards Him!

 

Yesua1...

You posted...

That is correct, in the sense that God is calling EVERYONE to come to Him. no exceptions. Everyone, not just certain *Lucky* ones.

The scriptures proclaim that it is "Not Gods will that ANYONE be lost, but that ALL come to repentance." (many scriptures support)

Everyone, not just certain *Lucky* ones. EVERYone are called.

 

A rare moment but yes I'm joking

 

I'm also but I'm starting to have second thoughts about the Calvin part.

 

Why would that be?

 

I have not made up my mind about limited attonement.

 

I do believe that Salvation is ALL Grace and is 100% of the Lord.

But if limited atonement is true--that would make Christ's Power look weak and limited--which we know is NOT true.

God's desire and purpose and will was always that ALL men be saved--Men like to use that word all and say that it just means some--well I agree in the fact that God chooses some men in this generation and some in the next and so on--But ALL was lost in the fall through Adam,and God placed all under sin through adam.

Christ came to seek and save THAT(all mankind that was lost through adam)which was lost,He never said he would bring them in all at the same time(there is still Judgement)but he did say that ALL men would be drawn unto his self if he be lifted up.And God's word does not go out and fail in what it purposes to do according to his will :love2::love2::love2:

 

I understand, for when I moved from being an Evangelical Arminian to a calvinist, was stuck on 4 points, with limited atonement sticking me!

Now realise I misunderstood that view, for I thought mrant that death of Christ was limited to how effective it was to save, bu actually, means that the effect to save was intended for just the Elect of God, that He did not die to atone for the sins of those who were to remain in their sins .

IF Jesus really died for ALL men, as many hold here, that would mean either univeralism, or else jesus death purchased a potential salvation only, and up to us in the end to get saved or not!

 

Arminianism like Calvinism are identical in McMahon's description according to history. I've found that most of those who would reform the RCC are so much like it them selves they don't have any idea on what to reform. In fact most have forgotten that it was the Catholic faith they originally wanted to reform. They ended up reforming them selves in to something other than true Calvinism or Augustinianism which they originally clung to. Giving up infant baptism and inherited election. Wavering in the wind like a reed from one doctrine to another. Well at least Calvin said there is no Salvation apart from the Holy Roman Church. Therefore it is no surprise that Calvinist today are flocking back into the old RCC
MB

 

Are you sure calvin was not referring to the Holy cathlic Church, in the sense of the true saved of God?

Hard to believe a fervant reformer would end up agreeing with same church that he saw as being NOT taeching the true Gospel of Christ!