Introducing myself... an arminianist

HS,

What distinguishes Paul's office of apostleship? What are the distinctives for apostleship?

 

Tatian,

Allow me to step back into my Calvinistic clothes for a moment

You wrote:He was made able to make a free choice for Christ.

By what means was he able to make a free choice? And does God allow for everyone to make a free choice? Can you back up your claims with scripture and if you have a pipe that would be good too.

 

What distinguished Paul's office of Apostleship was Christ revealing himself to Paul on the road to Damascus and subsequently through the Job Description given to Annias in Damascus.

The distinctive for the office of apostle is laid out in Acts 1 before the Disciples cast lots to chose Matthias.

 

Anyone who attributes salvation to "free will" has never had an experience with the grace of God because anyone who has been born from above knows that he or she could not come to Christ except he or she were drawn by the Father. (John 6:44) Period.

 

But you implied earlier that the supernatural experience of Paul on the road is the same as yours (I mean the supernatural part not the detailed circumstances)

Why would Paul list things that are common among all believers as distinctives for his authority as he does in Galatians 1 when he says he was set apart from birth etc? If we were all set apart from birth what is its significance in regard to his authority?

Don't you believe you learned the gospel from above, like Paul? Afterall, you believe that the Spirit is the only one who can teach you these things, right? Why would Paul mention that he was taught by God directly if all believers are taught directly from above?

 

But you implied earlier that the supernatural experience of Paul on the road is the same as yours (I mean the supernatural part not the detailed circumstances)

Why would Paul list things that are common among all believers as distinctives for his authority as he does in Galatians 1 when he says he was set apart from birth etc? If we were all set apart from birth what is its significance in regard to his authority?

Don't you believe you learned the gospel from above, like Paul? Afterall, you believe that the Spirit is the only one who can teach you these things, right? Why would Paul mention that he was taught by God directly if all believers are taught directly from above? </font>[/QUOTE]Skandelon, You ask so many questions in this post that I will have to number them to keep them straight.

1. Why would Paul list things that are common among all believers as distinctives for his authority as he does in Galatians 1 when he says he was set apart from birth, etc?

Because he cannot separate his Call as an Apostle from his Conversion Experience. It is all wrapped up into one reality – This Reality he is living is a God thing from beginning to end in his life and he is acknowledging that reality.

2. If we were all set apart from birth what is its significance in regard to his authority?

Again No significance other than Paul acknowledging that everything he is or does is of God because God chose him for salvation and for the task of preaching to the Gentiles.

3. Don't you believe you learned the gospel from above, like Paul?

We all received the Gospel just like Paul. From Above. The night I was saved the message was no different from any I had heard all my life but it WAS DIFFERENT because God empowered it through His Holy Spirit and revealed himself to me through that preacher’s words that night and I was saved.

Did we all get taught the gospel out in the desert like Paul? NO

Do we all get taught the Gospel by the Holy Spirit as we read, study, are taught by other Christians, etc? Of course.

4. After all, you believe that the Spirit is the only one who can teach you these things, right? Why would Paul mention that he was taught by God directly if all believers are taught directly from above?

Since you think you know what I believe I’d be interested to know how you found that out?

I believe that without the Grace of God intervening and residing in the lives of believers through His Holy Spirit none of us would be taught anything about the Bible, the Kingdom, the Godhead, or the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or any other spiritual subject, Paul included.

Paul is emphasizing the fact that he did not learn from the other Apostles from Jerusalem but from God himself. In Galatians he separates himself from the Apostles and then confirms that he is preaching the same message. He is simply reaffirming his Apostleship to the Galatians and reestablishing his Apostolic credibility by going through his story one more time with them.

 

Welcome to the party David.

The differences between Arminians and Calvinists (4 and 5 pt Calvinists) is that Arminians believe "God so Loved the WORLD that He gave..." and Calvinist do not.

Calvinist believe "God so arbitrarily selected the FEW of Matt 7 to love and elect that He Gave...".

Big difference.

As for the process of going from totally depraved to saved...

Romans 10 has it.

The action to choose and accept is ENABLED before the New birth.

Rev 3 has it.

The action to ACCEPT and Open while Christ is on the OUTSIDE knocking - is enabled fIRST - and then you are born again - with CHRIST in you.

The text is clear. Action is ENABLED prior to salvation, prior to Christ IN you, prior to the new birth, the new creation, the Saint.

It is the LOST that are called it is the LOST that must choose, it is the LOST that are drawn by the supernatural enabling act of God.

In Christ,

Bob

 

BobR -

With all due respect brother, having sat on both sides of this fence at one time or another, I have come to the conclusion that arminians differ from calvinists in that arminians more often mis-represent calvinist views than the other way around.

On whether or not God loves the world, we do not for a moment hesitate to affirm it - God loves Jews *and* Gentiles - the whole world, not just Jews as many in the early church believed. We have to remember to whom those words were originally written - the historical-gramatical method of interpretation. John was trying to point out that God shows no favoritism based on genealogical preferences. Your pedigree means nothing to God.
And, I believe, this is one of the reasons the genalogical records of the temple in Jerusalem were destroyed during that time...so no one could boast (they would have no proof of a lineage from Abraham). And it is why Paul goes into great depth to make it clear who the *true* sons of Abraham are - i.e., those who believe. But, that's a bit of a tangent so I'll stop there...

Dead men can't "choose" anything no matter how much they are commanded to do so. Bringing to life is the very substance of salvation - not a separate event.

 

Just as a side note that seems interesting to me -

Did God not choose/elect the Jews before calvary?

 

Because he cannot separate his Call as an Apostle from his Conversion Experience. It is all wrapped up into one reality – This Reality he is living is a God thing from beginning to end in his life and he is acknowledging that reality.

Exactly, which is what I believe has caused confusion for Calvinists. Because Paul's conversion is so wrapped up with his call to apostleship I believe some have taken that to mean that we are all saved like Paul was called. That is what has created the problems and confusion. Both effectual calling and ineffectual calling exists. Effectual calling for apostles to their appointed tasks has been wrongly applied to God calling unto salvation for who are saved.

Think about it. This explaination solves all the questions. It affirms that there is an effectual call and explains those passages but it also explains the passages that support a general (non-effectual) calling. There doesn't need to be the paradoxes that your dogma creates to reconcile the scripture. Even Calvinists admit the difficulty in accepting these things, this explaination removes that difficulty and is biblically consistant.

2. If we were all set apart from birth what is its significance in regard to his authority?

Again No significance other than Paul acknowledging that everything he is or does is of God because God chose him for salvation and for the task of preaching to the Gentiles.

I just believe that your view strongly undermines the apostolic authority because you have all believers being set apart just as Paul was and therefore there is no uniquness. Its like if someone claimed they were virgin born, it would undermine the uniqueness of Christ's birth.

3. Don't you believe you learned the gospel from above, like Paul?

We all received the Gospel just like Paul. From Above. The night I was saved the message was no different from any I had heard all my life but it WAS DIFFERENT because God empowered it through His Holy Spirit and revealed himself to me through that preacher’s words that night and I was saved.

Well, then the canon shouldn't be closed. If you are still learning directly from above as Paul did then you could speak with the same authority as he did. You could say I have learned this new doctrine from above and I have authority like that of the apostles. You see how you have undermined them?

Did we all get taught the gospel out in the desert like Paul? NO

As I said, I'm not talking about the circumstances and details. I'm speaking of the nature of the call itself.

Do we all get taught the Gospel by the Holy Spirit as we read, study, are taught by other Christians, etc? Of course.

The gospel was brought to this earth by the Holy Spirit. So anytime the words of the gospel are being preached or read that is a "WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT." But is there some kind of secret, irresistable working of the Holy Spirit while we read or hear the message? I don't see that taught in the text.

4. After all, you believe that the Spirit is the only one who can teach you these things, right? Why would Paul mention that he was taught by God directly if all believers are taught directly from above?

Since you think you know what I believe I’d be interested to know how you found that out?

I believe that without the Grace of God intervening and residing in the lives of believers through His Holy Spirit none of us would be taught anything about the Bible, the Kingdom, the Godhead, or the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or any other spiritual subject, Paul included.

In other words, we have been taught just as Paul was taught and therefore he has no more authority than we do, with the exception of what he claims to have. There is no distiction with what God has done to establish his authority if what you have said is true.

Paul is emphasizing the fact that he did not learn from the other Apostles from Jerusalem but from God himself. [/QB][/QUOTE]

That is just it! You believe that we learn from above and I believe that we learn through the Holy Spirit wrought message passed down to us.

They saw him, but "blessed are they who don't see him and still believe."

Christ didn't just pray for those who the father had given him to be apostles in John17, he also prays for those who will believe in Christ THROUGH THEIR MESSAGE.

See the difference? Those who believe because they recieve the message from above versus those who believe because they believe the message from other men. Those who recieve it directly from above HAVE THE AUTHORITY. Your doctrine teaches that we all have recieved the message from above thus undermining that authority.

 

Yes they were a chosen race, a holy nation a chosen people for God's own possession with "Forever promises" of His teaching Word and His Holy Spirit (see Isaiah 59 near the end)

John 1 says "HE came to HIS OWN and HIS OWN received Him NOT".

In Christ,

Bob

 

I have not noticed that -- but maybe you have some evidence where the "details" will support that claim.

You seem to have fallen off the track a bit. What you are "really" trying to say without actually coming right out and saying it - is that "God did NOT so love ALL Jews or ALL Gentiles in His So Loving the World. Rather God So loved SOME Jews and SOME Gentiles and then called THAT -- So Loving the WORLD". Indeed that would be a great marketing trick - to SAY that you so LOVED the WORLD when in fact you only love a FEW of the Jews and a FEW of the Gentiles.

Notice that Christ said "THE FEW" go to heaven while the MANY do not (Matt 7).

But what is "telling" in your response is that you seem to fully understand that "So LOVING THE FEW" is not really the accepted meaning of "So Loving the WORLD" - and that reworking the text so that it only means "So Loved the FEW" takes a lot of "work". You answer seems to be trying to "do that work".

In Christ,

Bob

 

For similar language about a "chosen" people reference see I Peter 2:9. Just as he *chose* and *appointed* in days of old, he still does so now.

For the "so loved the world" debat, I don't get how you come to the conclusion of summarizing my point out of that so I'm not sure how to respond. But, there is another point in it that I think is relevant to the text. Calvinists do not believe that God does not love some people (well, perhaps some do, I won't attempt to speak for all, just the ones I know do not believe that). He loves them just as the God of the Arminians does. And, it is still those who believe which will be saved. But "Whosoever will" does not imply that all can. Some will be drawn to believe and others will not.
God does not owe anybody a thing. If one chooses to give a gift, he is not called unrighteous for not giving gifts to everybody. He is not obligated to give gifts to anyone at all. It is purely his good pleasure and grace to give a gift to anybody. If he was obligated to give, then it would no longer be a gift but wages.

 

For another "chosen" reference, see Acts 13:48.

notice the KJV: "...as many as were ordained to eternal life believed."

and in the NKJV and NASB: "....as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed."

He may love them all but some were appointed/ordained/chosen/elected to eternal life and so they believed.

 

That is just it! You believe that we learn from above and I believe that we learn through the Holy Spirit wrought message passed down to us.

They saw him, but "blessed are they who don't see him and still believe."

Christ didn't just pray for those who the father had given him to be apostles in John17, he also prays for those who will believe in Christ THROUGH THEIR MESSAGE.

See the difference? Those who believe because they recieve the message from above versus those who believe because they believe the message from other men. Those who recieve it directly from above HAVE THE AUTHORITY. Your doctrine teaches that we all have recieved the message from above thus undermining that authority. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Sorry, I don't see that difference. You make a lot of implications that simply aren't true.

Because we are taught by the Holy Spirit even when we pick up the Bible and read it doesn't equate to the premise you make that we are somehow undermining Authority when we claim that!

I don't know how your Salvation and subsequent call to ministry occurred but both my Salvation and my Calling into the Ministry had a supernatural quality that I can't account for except to say that it was the Presence of God.

If I could say otherwise, I would not be a Christian nor would I be a Minister.

 

Well, well...I have been blessed today in reading the response to the orriginal post. Thanks! This is coming from a new baby "calvinist" Big *smile*...who was a long time arminianist.
Have a very blessed day!
CalifLady,
northcoastCalifornia

 

You are not getting it. The Holy Spirit divinely inspired the authors of scripture and therefore the words themselves contain the power from above. It by those words that all men will be judged. Paul claimed being set apart from birth, effectually called from above and taught directly from above. That is the same claim Calvinists make about themselves thus undermining Paul's unique authority as a divinly sent messenger.

Again, I have never said all the "supernatural" has been removed. Just because we are not effectually called doesn't make our conversion or call to ministry unsupernatural. Just because we learn from the apostles writings instead of directly from Christ doesn't make our teachings unsupernatural.

Wouldn't you say that any birth is a miracle of God? Of course, a life is being created. But virgin birth is uniquely divine thus setting Christ apart, right? So too, our salvation and call to serve him is supernatural, but it is not the same as the conversion and calling of Paul and the other uniquely called out messengers of God.

 

Skandelon,

What you're beating around the bush and not saying is that - You really don't know the extent of the Holy Spirit's supernatural presence and influecne at the conversion of a lost person.

While I readily agree that the Apostle Paul's conversion experience was different from mine just as yours was different from mine, I can testify that it was the same Divine Presence that brought about all our conversions in a very active not passive way.