Arminianism, Synergism, Free Grace theology

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I very much see your point here. It might be something like the prodigal son, right? The father never stopped loving the son, and never cast out the son, but the son cast himself out. For a time...but what if he'd never "come to himself?" He could have died in that far-off country, surrounded by swine. The father would still have loved him as a son, and the son...even if he denied the father's existence...would still be a son in fact though not in deed. Still, however, had that son died in his self-chosen exile, we would not say that he'd shown himself never to have been a son at all.


No but he would ever have been in exile separated from his father...Satan is called one of the sons of God, will he be in heaven for eternity? The scriptures say that God has prepared a place for him where He is not (in Heaven there can only be one Lord).

Paul
 
Upvote 0

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What I think people really disagree over with respect to fallen away believers, are those people who really do desire to be saved (from death, from nothingness, from wrath, from whatever). Who really do feel love and warmth in their hearts toward God, toward Christ, toward the saints. I have met these people too. They don't have stories of just wanting to "be respectable." They have stories of having endured all sorts of sadness and brokenness, of feeling that God abandoned them. Over time they became skeptical and then numb, beginning to wonder "If God is real, if God loves me, why doesn't he just show himself? Where is my sign? Where's my miracle?" Some lose interest. Some become agnostic. Some turn hostile toward Christianity altogether.

Denying that such a person ever had faith in God and love for Christ, would be something like denying that a person who's fallen out of love with a spouse after many years, ever actually loved that person at all.

But in God's case...considering the examples and language of the OT...God will never turn away from his bride, but his bride can turn away from him. In the NT the bride is the Church...and the Church is also the Body of Christ...the Church is humanity...and as such, humanity is already saved and united forever to God. The falling away of individuals does not equal the falling away of the Church. How to specifically link the promises of Christ never to forsake the Church, with specific individuals, I'm not entirely sure.


Well first off an adulterous generation demands a sign! And yes I understand this is where we do in fact differ some (actual genuine children of God do not cease being His children because He birthed them not themselves)...but say a Hitler who hated God and rejected God and did all that was abominable in His sight ever doing what was right in his own eyes getting eternal life without ever repenting or accepting the offer made through Christ?That is neither Biblical nor the doctrine passed down to any of the first couple of generations of fathers. It may be Orthodox but it is certainly NOT orthodox...

In His love

Paul
 
Upvote 0

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I guess the disconnect between the analogies of husband/wife and parent/child, is that in regeneration one is made anew. One is spiritually reborn. One cannot be un-born, but one can die. How, exactly, do we handle this? I think Peter's warning about a dog returning to its own vomit or a pig returning to the mire can be taken as descriptive of one who really did convert and commune with God, only to walk off again. (Interesting, too, that both "dog" and "pig" were associated with uncleanness and gentiles...perhaps he had in mind gentile converts who returned to their unchurched ways???).

Right and that cannot happen to the new man, the new creation...my heathen ways are abominable even to me...yes after coming to Christ for about ten years I wrestled with God believing if He did not want me to sin He would change me (pardon but I was a Calvinist so I believed even my sin was His will for me that was irresistible)...

Paul
 
Upvote 0

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Again I see your point, but it's hard for me to reconcile this with humanity, for this reason: a cow is not a pig, and a human is not a fish. But an unbeliever and a believer are both human.

Not so...the offspring of the first Adam and the offspring of the last Adam are two different creatures (or else the Apostles are incorrect)...the old has passed away, now all things have become new....one new man IN CHRIST!
 
Upvote 0

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I appreciate and love our exchange so please do understand I am not negating your understanding I just see it from a different perspecive. Even if I disagree on a few minors I know you are my brother and I myself am not above admitting I am incorrect when it is shown me (as has happened on this forum a couple of times)...so I am glad we can discuss and not disrupt the unity of the Spirit.

You said "In the end I trust in God never to walk away from me. I must take heed not to walk away from God."

Do you really believe you can? Honestly...can you now say you do not believe or become a pagan? Anyone can fall back into sin for a time, but we no longer practice it...we have Christ our advocate who offered Himself as a sacrifice once for all living inside of us.

While the English translations have John say the one born of God does not continue to sin the Greek actually says they do not practice sin, there is a huge difference...sin is the rare exception and not the rule and I do not know about you but I know it could never be the rule again...dominion has been reclaimed by the God man, sin no longer has dominion over those in Him as it has no dominion over Him (and we are in Him if you are filled with the Spirit)

Some could say by your definition that Judas Ishcariot is saved...he was chosen by Christ, an Apostle, tasted of the Holy Spirit, preached the Kingdom...yet in the end it was revealed...he was actually the son of perdition...saved? Nah! I don't believe it at this point but you can try to convince me...if the Lord be willing I will be. I do not simply submit to any church's traditions unless they meet this criteria:

Irenaeus of Lyons (160 A.D.) “Against Heresies” 3.1.1, p. 414.

"We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith."

Clement of Alexandria (CA. 150 – 215), Stromata, Book VII, Chapter 16
“But those who are ready to toil in the most excellent pursuits, will not desist from the search after truth, till they get the demonstration from Scripture themselves.”

Tertullian (CA. 155 – 220)
In refuting the heresy of Docetism (denying doctrine of incarnation), Tertullian writes, “But there is no evidence of this, because Scripture says nothing.” Furthermore, he writes, “If it is nowhere written, then let it fear the woe which impends on all who add or take away from the written word.”

Hippolytus (CA. 170 – 236)
Against the Heresy of One Noetus
“There is, brethren, one God, the knowledge of whom we gain from the Holy Scripture, and from no other source. . . . Whatever things, then, the Holy Scriptures declare, at these let us look; and whatsoever things they teach, these let us learn; and the Father will our belief to be, let us believe . . . Not according to our own will, nor according to our own minds, nor yet as using violently those things which are given by God, but even as He has chosen to teach them by the Holy Scripture, so let us discern them.”

Basil of Jerusalem
Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favour of that side will be cast the vote of truth."

Augustine (354 – 430)
On the Good of Widowhood
“What more can I teach you, than what we read in the Apostle? For holy Scripture setteth a rule to our teaching, that we dare not “be wise more than it behoveth to be wise.”

Basil the Great (368 A.D.) of Caesarea
The words are to be understood by their plain meaning, not allegorized.
‘I know the laws of allegory, though less by myself than from the works of others. There are those truly, who do not admit the common sense of the Scriptures, for whom water is not water, but some other nature, who see in a plant, in a fish, what their fancy wishes, who change the nature of reptiles and of wild beasts to suit their allegories, like the interpreters of dreams who explain visions in sleep to make them serve their own ends. For me grass is grass; plant, fish, wild beast, domestic animal, I take all in the literal sense. “For I am not ashamed of the Gospel”
[Rom. 1:16].’ (Homily IX:1)

To interpret Scripture otherwise is to put ourselves above God, the Holy Spirit, who inspired its writing. It is this which those seem to me not to have understood, who, giving themselves up to the distorted meaning of allegory, have undertaken to give a majesty of their own invention to Scripture. It is to believe themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and to bring forth their own ideas under a pretext of exegesis. Let us hear Scripture as it has been written.’ (Homily IX:1)


Gregory of Nyssa (394 A.D)
"The generality of men still fluctuate in their opinions about this, which are as erroneous as they are numerous. As for ourselves, if the Gentile philosophy, which deals methodically with all these points, were really adequate for a demonstration, it would certainly be superfluous to add a discussion on the soul to those speculations. But while the latter proceeded, on the subject of the soul, as far in the direction of supposed consequences as the thinker pleased, we are not entitled to such license, I mean that of affirming what we please; we make the Holy Scriptures the rule and the measure of every tenet; we necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings."

Cyril of Jerusalem (450 A.D.)
"This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures[/U]."

I think it is unanimous that any tradition not found therein is not essential or important or acceptable as true.

This is where my heart is anchored outside of God through my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit He has placed in me...

Paul
 
Upvote 0

Ignatius21

Can somebody please pass the incense?
May 21, 2009
2,237
321
Dayton, OH
✟22,008.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
but say a Hitler who hated God and rejected God and did all that was abominable in His sight ever doing what was right in his own eyes getting eternal life without ever repenting or accepting the offer made through Christ?That is neither Biblical nor the doctrine passed down to any of the first couple of generations of fathers. It may be Orthodox but it is certainly NOT orthodox...

In His love

Paul

Has anyone ever said anything about a wicked person, who makes no pretense about being a Christian, living a life of wickedness without any repentance...being saved apart from Christ.

Methinks I smell a herring... ;)
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
With all due respect to Ham...in whom I respect a lot, just a cursary reading shows that this one point where Arminianism, Synergists, and Free Grace all agree agree is...

"Foreknowledge"

In other words, why were people chosen in the first place.

In Arminian, Synergist, and Free Grace, it seems to me that people are chosen because God looked forward, saw who would or would accept and believe, and based his chosing on that.

That was expressly stated by both Arminus and Wesley.

That is an arguement I've heard for some 8 years now.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Ignatius21

Can somebody please pass the incense?
May 21, 2009
2,237
321
Dayton, OH
✟22,008.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Hey Paul,

Thanks for interacting. Couple points before I run off to my job...

Cyprian Treatise 1:11 “Although there can be no other baptism but one, they think that they can baptize; although they forsake the fountain of life, they promise the grace of living and saving water. Men are not washed among them, but rather are made foul; nor are sins purged away, but are even accumulated. Such a nativity does not generate sons to God, but to the devil. By a falsehood they are born, and they do not receive the promises of truth. Begotten of perfidy, they lose the grace of faith”.

If memory serves, Cyprian was a hard-liner on sacraments and church structure. My guess here is that he was not speaking in general terms, but of those who received baptism from separatists/schismatics, like the Donatists. My guess is that Cyprian may well have denied the true Christianity of one in such a group, even if he did practice righteousness and in all other respects was a pious Christian holding to orthodox doctrine. Not sure whether his example is the best to consult on this? Been a long while since I read any of his works though.

Right and that cannot happen to the new man, the new creation...my heathen ways are abominable even to me...yes after coming to Christ for about ten years I wrestled with God believing if He did not want me to sin He would change me (pardon but I was a Calvinist so I believed even my sin was His will for me that was irresistible)...

Hammster swore he wouldn't intervene in this thread and that it's not about Calvinism, but I too was a Calvinist, and can pretty well assure you that no Calvnist teaches that sin is ever God's will for a person. That's a different matter, though.

I hear you asserting that falling away, denying God, etc. CANNOT happen to a true child of God. You seem to be basing this (ok, not *basing* but maybe "substantiating") with an appeal to a person denying his biological parents. So I think your basis here is philosophical, as to what a person can or cannot do. OK, I'd agree that barring some loopy mental disintegration a person cannot claim "Bob and Sue aren't my parents anymore in a biological sense." But I've known people who eventually did "disown" their parents, not biologically of course, but in a familial sense. And vice-versa. I'm not sure your philosophical analogy holds here, because God is not a biological parent in that sense.

Do you really believe you can? Honestly...can you now say you do not believe or become a pagan? Anyone can fall back into sin for a time, but we no longer practice it...we have Christ our advocate who offered Himself as a sacrifice once for all living inside of us.

No, I don't believe I can...but by the same token I've known people who honestly believed they never could, or would, and then later did. Take heed, lest you fall. This is why I say that my belief either way, does not give me greater assurance. How can I prove beyond a doubt that I'm not just deceiving myself right now?

Not so...the offspring of the first Adam and the offspring of the last Adam are two different creatures (or else the Apostles are incorrect)...the old has passed away, now all things have become new....one new man IN CHRIST!

We will have to explore this further, but I cannot reconcile this statement with my understanding of the Incarnation. If Christ assumed something other than the nature that we all share, that Adam shared before and after his fall, then he saved something other that humanity.

That's all the time I have. Hope you have a blessed day :)
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Those views come from scripture interpreted according to Calvinist traditions of hermeneutics and philosophy. Yours come from scripture interpreted according to some other traditions of hermeneutics and philosophy. What one thinks is clear and irrefutable the other sees differently with no way to resolve the dispute. The dispute isn't about scripture. It's about whose interpretive methods (traditions) we should accept.
My view comes from what is clearly and unambiguously stated in Scripture.

Calvinism cannot do that.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
But if a person has faith in Jesus for 15 years, shows fruit, repents of sin, loves the brethren, attends church, does everything the Lord would have us do as a pattern of life, that is not mere mental assent. If the person then decides to stop believing, they have forfeited their salvation. Why do you say they were never saved in the first place?

It was not real! One cannot KNOW and then deny! see you pointed out the fact THEY DECIDED...that's not knowing Christ...that's deciding to believe and deciding not to believe....

Okay, for starters I want you right now to decide to stop believing your mother IS your mother...go ahead, do it...from now on for you you must believe she is not your mother. Make sense? God forbid!

Now hear and accept the word of God..."And this is life eternal, that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."

You cannot actually KNOW someone and then believe they are just a fairy tale...
The Bible is clear that faith may not persevere. Jesus Himself noted that the second soil "believed for a while". What does that mean, other than that they DID believe for a time, and then "fell away", meaning fell away from his faith. iow, he no longer believed.

There are examples all all around us. One is the evangelist Charles Templeton, who mentored Billy Graham when he got his start. At some point, his inability to reconcile some verses in the OT led him to doubt that God existed. He died not believing that God existed. Yet, he not only believed the gospel, he preached it for a long time, leading many people to Christ. He would have had to have been mentally ill or extremely deceptive to preach a gospel that he didn't really believe. He typifies the second soil: he believed for a while, but folded under the pressures of life (in his case being unable to reconcile something int he OT).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
With all due respect to Ham...in whom I respect a lot, just a cursary reading shows that this one point where Arminianism, Synergists, and Free Grace all agree agree is...

"Foreknowledge"

In other words, why were people chosen in the first place.

In Arminian, Synergist, and Free Grace, it seems to me that people are chosen because God looked forward, saw who would or would accept and believe, and based his chosing on that.

That was expressly stated by both Arminus and Wesley.

That is an arguement I've heard for some 8 years now.

God Bless

Till all are one.
Hi Deacon! Just a little correction: if God has to "look forward" to know who would accept/believe, that means He isn't omniscient.

Omniscience means that He has always known who will accept/believe. He doesn't need a crystal ball, which is what "looking forward" implies.

otoh, Calvinists claim that God knows who will believe because He determined (chose) who will. That's also not omniscience, but just a decision.

If God knows because He decides, that isn't omniscience either.

The reality is that God knows because He is omniscient; He knows intrinsically. He doesn't have to choose or look ahead in order to know. He just knows. :)
 
Upvote 0
C

crimsonleaf

Guest
The Bible is clear that faith may not persevere. Jesus Himself noted that the second soil "believed for a while". What does that mean, other than that they DID believe for a time, and then "fell away", meaning fell away from his faith. iow, he no longer believed.

There are examples all all around us. One is the evangelist Charles Templeton, who mentored Billy Graham when he got his start. At some point, his inability to reconcile some verses in the OT led him to doubt that God existed. He died not believing that God existed. Yet, he not only believed the gospel, he preached it for a long time, leading many people to Christ. He would have had to have been mentally ill or extremely deceptive to preach a gospel that he didn't really believe. He typifies the second soil: he believed for a while, but folded under the pressures of life (in his case being unable to reconcile something int he OT).
You might remember that Templeton, while still claiming to be an atheist, wept because he missed Christ. How many atheists do you personally know who weep for something they don't believe in?
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hi Deacon! Just a little correction: if God has to "look forward" to know who would accept/believe, that means He isn't omniscient.

Correct, but that is the position of the Arminians.

otoh, Calvinists claim that God knows who will believe because He determined (chose) who will. That's also not omniscience, but just a decision.

Incorrect.

That just shows how much of Calvinism you know.

If God knows because He decides, that isn't omniscience either.

The reality is that God knows because He is omniscient; He knows intrinsically. He doesn't have to choose or look ahead in order to know. He just knows. :)

But that ain't the position of scriptures either.

But out of respect for Ham, I shall not turn this into another debate.

I just point out, another point, and that was the different viewpoint on "foreknowledge" and "election".

And both Arminus and Wesley said it was because God looked forward, seen who would or would not accept and believe, and based His divine "election" on that.

If you wish, I can provide direct quotes.

I know Arminians and Synergists share this view, and I may be wrong, but I also believe Free Gracers accept this to.

But please feel free to prove me wrong on the Free Gracers.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Walter2013

Top of the mornin' to ya
Aug 12, 2013
88
4
United States
✟7,728.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
t was not real! One cannot KNOW and then deny! see you pointed out the fact THEY DECIDED...that's not knowing Christ...that's deciding to believe and deciding not to believe....

You're begging the question. You're basically saying "It wasn't real because it wasn't real!"

Okay, for starters I want you right now to decide to stop believing your mother IS your mother...go ahead, do it...from now on for you you must believe she is not your mother. Make sense? God forbid!

Ok, let's change the situation then. Let's say a person has faith in Jesus for 15 years, attends church, bible study, evangelizes, prays, repents of sin, etc. Then, all of a sudden they decide they hate God. They believe Jesus is God, and they hate him. They don't want him anymore. Are they saved? If not, what makes you think they weren't saved to begin with?

You cannot actually KNOW someone and then believe they are just a fairy tale...

See above.
 
Upvote 0

Ignatius21

Can somebody please pass the incense?
May 21, 2009
2,237
321
Dayton, OH
✟22,008.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
My view comes from what is clearly and unambiguously stated in Scripture.

Calvinism cannot do that.

I won't derail this thread, although if you'd like to discuss elsewhere I'd be happy to. Usually my discussions about this--the plain fact that everyone's interpretation is driven by tradition, and NOBODY bases their beliefs purely on "what is clearly and unambiguously stated in Scripture"--are toward Calvinists, who say exactly what you just said, only they believe everything you think is clearly not taught in the Bible. Anyway, I hold fully that your views are as much a product of traditions, as Calvinists, Catholics, Orthodox, or anyone else.

The Orthodox and Catholics just admit it :)

Maybe you can peruse the thread on "the early Christians said argument" in this forum. We can take up the subject later if you're willing to.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
G

guuila

Guest
I won't derail this thread, although if you'd like to discuss elsewhere I'd be happy to. Usually my discussions about this--the plain fact that everyone's interpretation is driven by tradition, and NOBODY bases their beliefs purely on "what is clearly and unambiguously stated in Scripture"--are toward Calvinists, who say exactly what you just said, only they believe everything you think is clearly not taught in the Bible. Anyway, I hold fully that your views are as much a product of traditions, as Calvinists, Catholics, Orthodox, or anyone else.

The Orthodox and Catholics just admit it :)

Maybe you can peruse the thread on "the early Christians said argument" in this forum. We can take up the subject later if you're willing to.

Yeah, it's really a stupid argument. "I'm just a Biblicist! All those other positions can't prove what they believe using the Bibal!! Those dumb Calvinists don't like the Bibal like I do RAWR!!!"

I fully acknowledge that most synergists get their beliefs from Scripture. I think it comes down to a difference in attention to logic, grammar usage, and hermeneutics that makes our interpretations of Scripture different. For example, to this day not one synergist I've dealt with on these forums will admit that the Greek word 'kosmos' has at least eight different meanings, one of them being 'elect'. Instead, they ignore this fact and continue to stomp their feet and demand it must mean 100% of the human race every single time. Kind of impossible to work with someone like that.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
You might remember that Templeton, while still claiming to be an atheist, wept because he missed Christ. How many atheists do you personally know who weep for something they don't believe in?
Yes, I'm aware of that statement towards the end of his life. What is your point?

Since he claimed to be an atheist after being an evangelist of the gospel, a Calvinist has to deny that he ever believed, in order to preserve the Calvinist doctrine of the perseverance of the saints.

If the suggestion is that he still really did believe, then that disproves the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, since he literally left the faith.

Seems there's a problem with either view.

Why do Calvinists deny that a believer can lose faith? The Bible is very clear about believers losing faith.

1 Tim 1:19-20: 19keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith. 20Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme.

1 Tim 4:1 - 1But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons

1 Tim 5:11, 15:
v.11 But refuse to put younger widows on the list, for when they feel sensual desires in disregard of Christ, they want to get married

v.15 for some have already turned aside to follow Satan

Paul is describing widows in the church. Notice no indication that he considered them unsaved, but that they lost their dedication to Christ and had turned to follow Satan, who is the master deceiver.

1 Tim 6:10 - For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

1 Tim 6:21 - which some have professed and thus gone astray from the faith.

2 Tim 2:18 - men who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and they upset the faith of some.

The word for "upset" is:
anatrepō

1) to overthrow, overturn, destroy
2) to subvert
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,197
25,222
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,729,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
My view comes from what is clearly and unambiguously stated in Scripture.

Calvinism cannot do that.

This thread isn't about Calvinism.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Correct, but that is the position of the Arminians.
Which is one of the reasons I'm not one of them.


Incorrect.

That just shows how much of Calvinism you know.
Are you denying that Calvinists explain God's knowledge is based on what He has determined?

But that ain't the position of scriptures either.
Huh? Of course Scripture teaches that God intrinsically knows everything. Which is what omniscience means.

And both Arminus and Wesley said it was because God looked forward, seen who would or would not accept and believe, and based His divine "election" on that.

If you wish, I can provide direct quotes.

I know Arminians and Synergists share this view, and I may be wrong, but I also believe Free Gracers accept this to.
I'd bet that if those in FG who used the "looked forward" phrase for what God knows heard the explanation of what it infers, I'm pretty sure they would agree with my point and cease using that lame term.

Point: God doesn't have to "look forward". That amounts to a crystal ball kind of thing.

But please feel free to prove me wrong on the Free Gracers.
Unable to. There's as much variability among the FGers as there is in the other theologies. Just different variabilities.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,197
25,222
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,729,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Hi Deacon! Just a little correction: if God has to "look forward" to know who would accept/believe, that means He isn't omniscient.

Omniscience means that He has always known who will accept/believe. He doesn't need a crystal ball, which is what "looking forward" implies.

otoh, Calvinists claim that God knows who will believe because He determined (chose) who will. That's also not omniscience, but just a decision.

If God knows because He decides, that isn't omniscience either.

The reality is that God knows because He is omniscient; He knows intrinsically. He doesn't have to choose or look ahead in order to know. He just knows. :)

This thread is not about Calvinism. Please stop inserting that into your posts.
 
Upvote 0