Why Do Arminians Keep Saying Such Things?

Rippon said:

The whole chapter of Romans 9 is contrasting faith vs. works. Election is clearly defined in this chapter.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Election is clearly defined right there. God does not elect those who try to justify themselves through works, but those who come by faith.

Rom 9:6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.

It was to this that they objected. And if you ever shared the gospel with people you will hear this objection many times. I have told people they can only be saved by trusting in Christ and they will say they believe that "good" people are saved regardless of what they believe.

I work with an elderly Polish lady who's whole family was shipped to Siberia in WWII. Her father was shot by the Russians because he was an officer. Her mother was imprisoned for 10 years because she refused to become a Russian citizen. Her husband was in a German concentration camp and suffered tremendously.

Anyway, I had the opportunity to tell this lady the gospel one day. I explained that even the worst sinner could be saved, even the horrible Germans and Russians that killed her father and tortured her mother.

Well, she about blew a fuse. She could not believe such evil people could be saved. She also refused to believe that "good" people who believe in other religions could not be saved. She felt that it didn't matter what religion you believed in, if you were a good decent person God would take you to heaven. And this lady (RC) truly is a very good and nice person herself.

But this was the objection raised in Romans 9, they were objecting to those saved by faith versus works.

Moses is a example of faith. Go to Hebrews 11 and read. Pharaoh is the great example of someone who resists God. He saw miracle after miracle and still hardened his heart against God. The Pharaohs believed themselves to be decendents of the gods, and there was no way he was going to humble himself.

Exo 10:3 And Moses and Aaron came in unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? let my people go, that they may serve me.

God did not make Pharaoh so that he could not believe. God hardened Pharaoh's heart simply by confronting him. The more God brought plagues on Egypt, the more obstinate Pharaoh became. But Pharaoh could have humbled himself if he so chose.

And then the chapter again shows that the subject being addressed is faith versus works.

Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

You cannot pull verses out of context to prove your false doctrine. Read the chapter over again, the whole chapter is contrasting faith versus works, and shows God has elected to save those who come by faith and reject those who try to come by works.

 

This one has

 

Have sinned...past tense.

 

So you are saying Christ had an imperfect soteriological view as well?

 

So, Rip, here's what I get from this post:

1. There's no appreciable difference between Arminians and Semi-Pelagians (A deliberate untruth - as has been demonstrated to you before)

2. A "God" who MUST determine and control all things is superior to a God who knows ALL things WITHOUT having to determine or control every detail, aspect or nuance.

3. You despise Arminians.

4. Arminians are blatant, sacreligious blasphemers.

You didn't say so succinctly, but do you believe Arminians like me -- who KNOW your views are as aberrant as they are abhorrent -- are not really saved? Do you believe I am a "false teacher?"

Finally, may I suggest you change your screenname from Rippon to Diotrephes? It certainly matches the spirit you are manifesting.

JDale

 

An excellent example of eisegesis - an interpretation, esp. of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text. And a HUGE dose of arrogance to boot.

JDale

 

Don't you love the HUBRIS of Calvinists? It is SO sweet how they talk down to us ignorant Arminians (not all, of course). Thank you for condescending to educate us poor fools....

Heavens, spare us the kind of intellectual pride displayed in the previous post...

 

Spurgeon isn't scripture. He was wrong.

JDale

 

Hey, if you are going to pull scripture out of context, I am going to call you on it. I have showed numerous times that Romans chapter 9 is clearly contrasting faith vs. works, and that election is defined in the chapter.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

I wasn't trying to be sarcastic or funny, you Calvinists should do some studying. Not to find a verse here or there you can pull out of context to fit your bias, but all the word of God.

 

Rippon

I guess when you believe that you, not GOD, are the author of your own salvation you can feel free to say anything about GOD!

 

Wow...where have I heard this strawman before...oh, I know...every other post of yours. :BangHead:

 

All excellent points Winman, well said. :thumbs:

Darren

 

I believe very strongly in the doctrines of grace and sovreignty of the Lord. Yet, I object in the most extreme terms that I can to your arrogance and holier than thou attitude. You do our side no favors. Your arguments are not even that good.

It seems that more than being interested in Biblical doctrine, you seem fascinated with John Calvin, who in essence, was nothing but a theological thug and an advocate of infant baptism.

Do us all a favor and join the Arminian side.

 

FTR, the indivdual who first brought up "blasphemy" in this thread is Rippon.

However, my question is - "Why do differing POVs even get labeled in such a manner?"

Ed

 

What you think its bad enough accusing someone of blasphemy because they don't side with Calvinism?

Darren

 

I believe very strongly in the doctrines of grace and sovreignty of the Lord. Yet, I object in the most extreme terms that I can to your arrogance and holier than thou attitude. You do our side no favors. Your arguments are not even that good.

It seems that more than being interested in Biblical doctrine, you seem fascinated with John Calvin, who in essence, was nothing but a theological thug and an advocate of infant baptism.

Do us all a favor and join the Arminian side.
__________________