Why I Am Not an Arminian

I agree with much of what you write. What caught my attention was this line:

That's the part I disagree with. When the Lord saves us, we do not get rid of our old nature. It's still there. We are given a new nature, which frees up our will to battle the desires of the old nature.

 

Well, eternal security is the sticking point. Arminians believe you can lose your salvation. Since Baptists don't, they don't want to be called Arminian. Actually I don't blame them. But the only alternative is to label them non-Calvinists.

Some believers try to avoid the issue by saying they don't want to be labeled. That's okay, but they are what they are, and the labels are handy shorthand.

 

Seems to me the Arminian point is widely held by Wesleyans and Methodists; and God forbid if any Baptist associates him/herself with the Methodists. :smilewinkgrin:

Me, I think I'm more in the area of semi-Armenian/semi-Calvinist...which, in political terms, I think makes me a moderate?

 

Most other Arminians, that don't believe in the doctrine of eternal security, believe a Christian can forfeit, but not lose their salvation.

 

I don't have any trouble with the Arminian "label", what it seems I have the most trouble with are folks who think they know what Arminianism is and the conclusions they jump to based on their incorrect assumptions. You know much in the same way Calvinists are always fighting the "they are evangelistic".

Both are a form of reformed theology in the wider sense and both have contributed to the greater good of christian thought. No need to play divide and conquer as far as I am concerned

 

This is a hypothetical that is very unreasonable to believe would ever happen. Why would someone who truly believes they are a sinner, that the wages of sin is eternal seperation from God in hell, and that only Jesus who died for their sins and rose can save them ever willingly choose not to believe on Jesus?

The will is affected by belief. If you really believe what the scriptures say, I cannot imagine anyone later deciding to reject Christ and willingly go to hell, unless they were suffering from some real and severe mental disorder.

Cals love to post hypotheticals like this as some sort of proof that their doctrine is correct. It does no such thing.

 

This is a more consistent theology than those that believe in free will before salvation unto salvation and deny it post salvation.

 

Asking why does not answer a question Winman.

Why would they? Because of sin. Because of the pleasures of sin. Because of doubt.

There are billions of reasons why a person could freely choose to opt OUT of salvation just as easily as he chose to opt IN if his will is still just as free as it was before he was saved.

 

I disagree, no one who sincerely and truly believes in eternal condemnation in a real hell loves sin. Oh, people can get caught up in sin and even bound by it, but no true believer can love sin because they know the end result of sin, eternal damnation.

And any person who truly and sincerely believes in Jesus loves him and would not reject him later.

You know, sometimes a fellow will leave his wife because he meets someone else who he thinks might bring him greater happiness. But no man in his right mind would leave a wife who has shown him great love and kindness to run off with a woman that he absolutely knows will cause him torment and anguish.

So why would anybody who truly believes in Jesus and knows he will give them eternal peace and happiness run off to the Devil whom he knows will cause him everlasting torment?

So, this is an unreasonable and very unrealistic hypothetical.

 

Then the option doesn't exist and by your definition the believer has no free will.

Then the option doesn't exist and by your definition the believer has no free will.

Then the option doesn't exist and by your definition the believer has no free will.

Then the option doesn't exist and by your definition the believer has no free will.

Then the option doesn't exist and by your definition the believer has no free will.

 

Of course it exists. Let's see, I can choose Jesus and have everlasting life with him in paradise, or... I can choose Satan and burn in horrible torment with him in the lake of fire forever.

Hmmm.... Boy, this is a tough decision here.

I think I'll go with Jesus.

I'll tell you what, you find a person who used to truly trust in Jesus and now willingly wants to go to hell and have them post here. I would love to see that.

 

That MAY be what you would do if your will is perfectly free still- but that is not necessarily what everyone else will do.

You are still making my point for me.

Your faith removes the other option. Murdering my best friend is not an option for me. Why? Because I love him and I do not want to go to prison.

So am I really FREE to murder him?

No.

Neither are you really FREE to choose to reject Christ. God's revelation of the truth to your heart has so convinced you and his love for you has so overcome you that to choose to reject him is not really an option for you anymore. Your will has been affected. It is no longer free to reject Christ.

 

False dichotomy and complicated question fallacies in play Winman...

What if the person simply refuses to believe in Satan or hell and opts out of Christianity?

 

I am still waiting for a response to post 34.

 

Thanks and amen Bob.

HankD

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: