Thoughts on Arminianism (for a change)

"Old Regular" comes to mind. He informs us that when the Calvinist insists that "Regeneration must come before Conversion" this is what is meant.

 

Of course. But that doesn't mean you can take any one verse and say it means anything you want it to mean. 2 Timothy 3:16 isn't a liscense to take the rest of the bible out of context.

 

The full "sequence" for Calvinism was stated by OldRegular as the following

Some numbered sections were shortened to make this in one post

 

Each time Calvinists try this wild solution they get tangled up in their own answer.

1. Is it your position that Christ DOES NOT stand at the door of the lost and knock - only the SAVED ALREADY IN CHURCH are being asked to OPEN the door?

NO EVANGELISM???

2. Is it your position that the SAVED condition is the condition of "BEING ALONE on the INSIDE with Christ on the OUTSIDE waiting to come in and have fellowship"??

3. Is it your position that the NT view of the LOST world was NOT the evangelistic view of Rev 3:20 but rather it was that God was ONLY INSIDE the chruch KNOCKING on doors waiting on the ALREADY SAVED to open?

For those Calvinists that suppose that UNION WITH CHRIST is delayed after salvation such that Christ is STILL ON THE OUTSIDE knocking on the door AFTER salvation (as the author above seems to suggest) I refer you to the post above this one where OldRegular shows us the way Calvinists reject that idea.

In Christ,

Bob

 

If you put a period (.) behind the word "God" in the second sentence, you've got it.

But after the word God, you contradict everything that precedes it.

What Godly "condition" could possibly exist in the malefactor's heart that was not first conditioned by God?

 

I'll answer each one in order, since you numbered them.

First off, you're missing the point entirely. The context of the verse denies your position. Christ is addressing the churches in the surrounding passages. Nowhere in the text in question says anything about Christ knocking on the door of every unconverted heart in the world. Your position doesn't stand in the context of the passage, no matter what you want that one individual verse to say.

1. It IS my position that Christ doesn't stand at the door of the lost and knock, waiting, most times in vain, for the lost person to open the door. The context doesn't allow such a view. In the passage, Christ is calling the elect in the church of Laocidea to repent because they claimed ( v. 17) that they were in need of nothing (they had much material possessions) and in good standing with God, but they were really weren't at all. Christ, in verse 19, is rebuking and chastening them because He loves them, and tells them to be zealous and repent. NOWHERE in ANY of these passages is an exhortation for evangelism, as it's lately been erroneously taught, or does it specifically say that Christ is calling the entire unconverted world to repentence. It's just not there.

NO EVANGELISM? No, not in this passage Bob.

2. Another misreading of the verse based on presuppostions dealt with in the first question.

3. Same as number 2.

Your whole view of the passage is twisted because you still think Rev 3:20 is an evangelistic passage.

That's it.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

Well...I was going to "draw" this out for a while, but as you can tell, my posting time is limited right now. Sorry about that.

So I'll cut to the chase..

I just posted on this on another thread.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=927633&postcount=234

As you will see, the logic will not work in the freewill view. Sorry about that.



In Christ...James

 

HP: Can you explain yourself here? The conditions of salvation are not something God does, or something God coerces, or something God forces upon man in any way shape or form. We are responsible moral agents, created that way by God, and as such are responsible to formulate, i.e., create, our intents dealing with such as ideas as repentance and faith.

Both faith and repentance are acts of the will chosen by the will as ultimate intents of the heart in response to God's influence upon our lives. They are both works that God commands man to perform. God does not do them for us. We are responsible agents and as such are the creators of our moral intents. No one can have faith or repent for us, not even God. God commands us to do those things in response to the influences He places upon us. His influences in these realms, as in all moral issues, are of a passive nature as opposed to coercive influence.

 

HP: First, does the drawing all men receive consist of knowledge of God, ability to understand and comprehend His moral law to some degree, or is it being drawn to salvation? I say it is not that all men are drawn to salvation, for all have not heard the gospel message. If you think they have, or can show us a passage that tells us they have, I would be interested in reading it.

I say the KJV does NOT say that all men are drawn to salvation. You have refuted nothing in relationship to man having a free will that I can see.

 

Hello HP,

Refuted nothing? Hummmmm. How about the whole free-will idea?

If what you say is the case, then free-willers will have to stop saying this passage is talking about drawing all men to salvation. Right?

This is why i asked...

When Bob said this...

and....

and Bob even said...

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=925225&postcount=3


again here...
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=925300&postcount=10


So which is it? It seems free-willers want to have it both ways.

What is the drawning? If its not to salvation, then one MAJOR point falls on the freewill side.

Now...when it comes to this statement.."for all have not heard the gospel message." I and all other Calvinist would say amen brother. This is only part of why we believe in election. Why did some hear, and some do not? No answer...other then election.


So...Are all men drawn to God....to salvation.....or are they not?


OK..there were "3 major points"...going by Bob. Thats one down...two to go.


In Christ...James

 

HP: All men are not all drawn to salvation in any completed sense. I suppose that moral guilt is a necessary part of salvation’s offer. This all men have, yet guilt alone is not synonymous with the gospel message IMO. I totally disagree with BR on this point. Scripture is clear. God presents the offer of salvation to those whom He wills without the least shred of being a respecter of persons. God is under obligation to save no one. He can offer it to whomever He so desires.

Knowing full well I will be taken to task for saying so, I would still say that it is God’s will that NONE should perish, but that all would come to repentance and be saved. God, in His sovereign will, for reasons unknown to any but Himself, has decided that the task of sharing the gospel be placed upon the shoulders of His children. He has limited Himself and his gospel message, for reasons known only to Him, to those that hear and respond to the message. Only in eternity will we if ever understand all the reasons He has chosen to present His gospel to mankind in the manner as He has obviously chosen to so. I propose no reasons or pat answers the many questions that can be raised.

Just the same, there are other truths I know to be true as well. Man’s will is involved without any coercion from God, and that there are some things that man must do in order to be saved. God’ election works in tandem with, not in spite of, or in opposition to, the conditions of salvation God has called upon man to perform. God allows His election to work without the destruction of mans’ freewill. Proof of that is that God, being the Just God He says He is, blames and punishes man for his intents. That is living proof that we are indeed the creators of our moral intents and the author of the intents to respond to His plan of salvation by freely fulfilling the conditions of salvation He has set forth. Those conditions are initially repentance and faith, without which no salvation will be accomplished. We are not saved on for the sake of our repentance and faith, but we will not be saved apart from them either.

 

I'd skip the big words. They don't work well for you.

Will Christ raise up those who do not come? Of course not. When you read the verse, without your presuppositions, you see that those who are drawn, come, and are raised up. When you combine that with the whole chapter, it seems undeniable ... unless you approach this chapter with a position that you must maintain. In that case, you are likely to see your position in it.

When Jesus says "All that the Father gives me will come," it is clear that he is referring to the totality of the drawn. In context, the drawing and the giving are clearly synonymous. And there are not drawn or given who do not come.

If you think all are drawn the same, then explain Christ's words about Tyre and Sidon compared to Chorazin and Bethsaida. He says, "If I had done these works there, they would have repented." Christ clearly did not do everything in Tyre and Sidon that he could have to get them to repent. Is that less of a drawing? How do you explain that?

 

HP: There has been a claim that Scripture implies that only the elect are drawn and all that are drawn will come to salvation. These are clearly two points of Calvinism that are NOT supported in Scripture. One point is the ‘L’ in tulip standing for limited atonement, and the other is the ‘I’ in Tulip standing for irresistible grace. It has been floated on the list that these are both substantiated in the passage in question being John 6. I have asked for proof of these assertions by pointing us directly to the passage in this chapter or any other that would substantiate these points.

Pastor Larry gives it a shot with his last post to me. Does he point us to the clear passage that establishes his point? No way. Rather than to do so, Pastor Larry has come to the defense of those claiming that both L and I are set forth in this chapter by claiming first that it is I that must have a preconceived presupposition in order not to see both L and I in this passage as a fact. May I ask the reader how this establishes ‘his’ claim? It shows to me the lack of evidence he has for his own position due to the fact all he can do is beg the question concerning some presupposition he claims I approach the Scripture with. Some evidence that is.

He does make one futile attempt to prove his point by suggesting there is evidence to support his claims, but establishes it by reading into the text his own presupposition. He said,

Let the reader read the text. Can PL make such a claim logically from the text alone apart from his own presuppositions? Let me illustrate.

If I were to say that “All the students that were chosen to participate came to the game,” or that “All the students that played in the game were chosen to participate,” can I logically assume that ‘only’ the students that were chosen to participate came to the game, or that only the students that were asked to participate in the game came to the game, or that every student that was invited and asked to come came to the game?

The truth is that there is no logical or exegetical basis that substantiates the points of I or L in this text. Possibly PL or others have another text that would substantiate such claims. We shall see.

 

Heavenly Pilgrim,

Repentance and faith are essential for salvation, no Calvinist would disagree with that. Those things are given by God. One can't truly repent if he doesn't have faith, and one can't have faith if God in His grace does not give it to him. Augustine used to say, "Give what thou commandest and command what thou wilt." Man, in and of himself, cannot have faith and repent, without God working it in him. When Paul says "by grace you have been saved", he's saying that the basis of salvation is unmerited favor from God (i.e.The only reason you are saved is God's grace). Grace is the basis for faith and repentance, and faith and repentance are the God given means of salvation, Christ Jesus is the God given object of the faith He has given us.

How's that?

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobRyan
Each time Calvinists try this wild solution to Rev 3:20 "I Stand at the Door and Knock -- if anyone OPENS the Door" they get tangled up in their own answer.

1. Is it your position that Christ DOES NOT stand at the door of the lost and knock - only the SAVED ALREADY IN CHURCH are being asked to OPEN the door?

NO EVANGELISM???

nope - i ask the question above assuming your position and asking you to explain your POV -- please answer the question.

It is facinating that Calivinism must deny that Christ on the OUTSIDE knocking on the door of the sinner who is ALONE and ON THE INSIDE -- as Christ is WAITING for that person to OPEN THE DOOR so that He will then COME In and FELLOWSHIP is NOT Evangelism not in the church nor outsidef of it!! Amazing!!

In the mean time I can show that ALONE on the inside WITHOUT Christ -- is in fact NOT in fellowship with Christ which even by Calvinist standards is LOST.

Find then you define the SAVED state as being separated from Christ - alone and having Christ on the outside waiting and knocking with the big IF "IF ANYONE hears and OPENS the door I WILL THEN COME IN".

No such definition for SAVED=Separated from Christ... Gospel=sepearated from Christ... so you simply make it up.

Is it your position that each time a saved person sins they LOSE christ - LOSE fellowship with Christ -- and are ALONE and on the inside WITHOUT Christ - with Christ on the OUtSIDE knocking and saying "IF ANYONE hears and OPENS the door I WILL COME in and engage in fellowship with them"??

i.e. they are saved - but APART FROM CHRISt even though Christ said "I will never leave you or forsake you" and even though Paul says that we only stand by our faith in Rom 11?? "You TOO FEAR for if he did no spare them NEITHER will he spare you"???


Bob Said
2. Is it your position that the SAVED condition is the condition of "BEING ALONE on the INSIDE with Christ on the OUTSIDE waiting to come in and have fellowship"??

3. Is it your position that the NT view of the LOST world was NOT the evangelistic view of Rev 3:20 but rather it was that God was ONLY INSIDE the chruch KNOCKING on doors waiting on the ALREADY SAVED to open?

For those Calvinists that suppose that UNION WITH CHRIST is delayed after salvation such that Christ is STILL ON THE OUTSIDE knocking on the door AFTER salvation (as the author above seems to suggest) I refer you to the post above this one where OldRegular shows us the way Calvinists reject that idea.

The bottom line is that Calvinism's twisted confused doctrinal position on salvation, fellowship AND evangelism is fully exposed in their attempts to obfuscate and confuse the text of Rev 3:20 in favor of Calvinism.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Limited Atonement (or Particular Redemption):http://www.freegrace.net/scriptures/limited_atonement.htm
Irresistable Grace (or Effectual Calling):http://www.freegrace.net/scriptures/irresistible_grace.htm

For more on these and the other points:http://monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/doctrinesofgrace.html

Hope this helps.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

Bob, you're flying everwhere but to the issue here. The issue I have, is that, in context, Revelation 3:20 isn't evangelistic. Plain and simple. Your position hinges on the suppostion that is is. Hence, you are kicking around a strawman.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

 

Here's what John Macarthur (calvinist) says

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"





Adam Clarke

http://www.godrules.net/library/clarke/clarkerev3.htm

Be zealous] Be in earnest, to get your souls saved, They had no zeal; this was their bane. He now stirs them up to diligence in the use of the means of grace and repentance for their past sins and remissness.

Verse 20. Behold, I stand at the door and knock] There are many sayings of this kind among the ancient rabbins; thus in Shir Hashirim Rabba, fol.


25, 1: "God said to the Israelites, My children, open to me one door of repentance, even so wide as the eye of a needle, and I will open to you doors through which calves and horned cattle may pass." In Sohar Levit, fol. 8, col. 32, it is said: "If a man conceal his sin, and do not open it before the holy King, although he ask mercy, yet the door of repentance shall not be opened to him. But if he open it before the holy blessedGod, God spares him, and mercyprevails over wrath; and when he laments, although all the doors were shut, yet they shall be opened to him, and his prayer shall be heard." Christ stands - waits long, at the door of the sinner's heart; he knocks - uses judgments, mercies, reproofs, exhortations, &c., to induce sinners to repent and turn to him; he lifts up his voice - calls loudly by his word, ministers, and Spirit.
If any man hear] If the sinner will seriously consider his state, and attend to the voice of his Lord.



http://www.godrules.net/library/clarke/clarkerev3.htm
[/quote]

Amen and Amen

 

The confused reasoning of some Calvinists does not show up in what Clarke said -- but he DOES agree with MacArthur!

 

He that has an ear let him hear – not “just the already saved who are going to heaven” as some Calvinists would claim.
.