You tell me?
Jesus said that only the sick seek a doctor. If you sincerely DON'T believe you deserve God's wrath; than salvation means nothing. And this is why I asked you that question. It's easy for people to parrot: "Oh yeah, everyone deserves God's wrath." but until YOU have a personal conviction about YOUR OWN sin, intellectual knowledge of theology is useless.
If one does not know what atonement has saved them from; than what good is it? Cheap grace!
Correct me if I'm wrong here; but don't arminians believe:
1. Man can respond to God and God does not interfere with man's freedom of will. Man's freedom consists of his ability to choose God. Man does not need the Holy Spirit's regenerating work to believe. Man can naturally do that himself. Faith is man's gift to God and his contribution to his salvation.
(Opposite of "total depravity")
2. God elected those He foresaw would accept Him and God only selected those that He knew would believe. God choosing someone was not a result of the Holy Ghost regenerating them; but by human natural willingness to respond. Thus it is the sinner's choice of God, not God's choice of the sinner that is the ultimate cause of salvation.
(Opposite of "unconditional election")
3. Christ's atonement covers everyone and no one at the same time; because in order for the atonement to be enacted upon, the will of the sinner has to comply. Atonement is not specific to the sinner. The sinner takes atonement and applies it to self via belief.
(Opposite of "limited atonement")
4. The Holy Ghost can not regenerate someone who does not agree to / display faith to that end. God's grace is not invincible. Man can and does thwart God's will. Man's will is sovereign over God's will.
(Opposite of "irresistible grace")
5. Those who once believed can lose that salvation if they again choose not to believe. (Not all arminians hold to this particular point. Many believe "once saved, always saved".)
(Opposite of "perseverance of the saints")
It doesn't appear to me that my understanding of Arminian theology is the real issue here!
Now it's interesting that Charles Wesley; (being claimed to be arminian) wrote some hymns with some rather "calvinistic" flavor to them. The original intent of the "methodist movement" was "this is the method to obtain salvation".
John and Charles Wesley obviously had a huge impact on what is historically called "The Great Awakening". Three major contributions they made were:
1. Church should not be stratified by wealth. The custom of the time was that families paid a "pew fee" and he who paid the largest fee got to sit closest to the heat source during the winter time. People who were too poor to afford a pew fee, stood or sat on the floor, even when there were pews available. "Free Methodist" meant "first come, first served". If you got there first; you sat where you wanted.
2. The "ministers of the church" are the church members themselves. The congregants were to support each other and help each other; not leave that up to "pastoral care". One of the extremely successful ministries Methodists started were called "letter writing campaigns". And these consisted of people in congregations writing other congregations in support of their spiritual as well as physical well being. Congregations in both Britain and the North American colonies wrote extensively and sent things to each other.
Another entity that was on the receiving end of much letter writing were families in the British army. This revival was originally called "The Great Awakening" (it was the 1st of many awakenings that happened and started in 1740 with Jonathan Edwards; who was a puritan "Calvinist" preacher. The second major preacher to come on the scene was George Whitefield; who was also a "Calvinist". Whitefield was a British Anglican preacher who traveled extensively and preached to more people (prior to the mass media era) than any other single person outside of the apostles.)
The Great Awakening had a profound impact on the American Revolution. Not only did this religious revival hit both Britain and the colonies; it hit the British army too. And just in this very unusual 50 year period; made the American Revolution probably the most civil "civil war" humanity has ever seen. The vast majority of crime committed in the American Revolution was not committed by either army. It was committed by colonial civilians who had vendettas against other colonial civilians. The Great Awakening single handedly saved Britain and the colonies from the fate the French saw in the French Revolution. If you compare the French and the American Revolutions; you will see a very stark difference! The French Revolution was incredibly bloody and violent; and basically collapsed French society.
3. Now John and Charles Wesley's biggest contribution to the Great Awakening was their stance that faith meant a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Now many other preachers held to this position too; John and Charles were the most vocal about it though.
In this line; Christ pursued (the writer) to death.
Well, wait a minute? Wasn't Christ just sitting back waiting for Charles to respond?
So was Charlie really an arminian? Well, if you dig through the vast number of songs that he wrote; you might not come to that conclusion.
1. That God, from all eternity, hath decreed to elect to everlasting life, all those who, through His grace, believe in Jesus Christ, and in the same belief, and obedience of faith, persevere to the end. But the unconverted and unbelieving He had resolved to reject to everlasting damnation. [cf.
John 3:16,
17,
36]
2. That in consequence of this decree, Christ the Saviour of the world, died for all and every man, so that by His death, He hath obtained reconciliation and pardon of sins for all men, nevertheless, in such a manner that none but the faithful really and effectually enjoy the benefits thereof.
3. That man could not [i.e., does not possess the capability to] obtain saving faith of himself, or by the strength of his own free will, but stood in need of God’s grace, through Christ, to be made the subject of its power.
4. Therefore this grace is the cause of the beginning, the progress, and the completion of man’s salvation, in so much that no one could believe, or persevere in faith, without this operating grace, and consequently, that all good works must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. Nevertheless, the manner of the operation of this grace was not irresistible.
5. That true believers had sufficient strength, through divine grace, to resist and overcome Satan, sin, the world, and their own lusts, but whether they might not, through their negligence, apostatize and lose the power of holy saving truth, the testimony of a well-directed conscience, and forfeit that grace, must first be more fully inquired into, under the guidance of the holy scriptures, before they could, with confidence and unhesitating minds, assert and teach it.
A few notes:
Obviously, this point rejects the unwarranted theory of irresistible grace (cf.
Isa. 1:2;
30:1,
2,
3,
9,
12,
13;
Jer. 2:5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
20,
29;
Ezek. 2:4,
5,
7;
3:7,
18,
20,
26,
27;
5:5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
11), that regeneration must precede faith in Christ (contra
John 1:12,
13;
Col. 2:13), an eminently philosophical notion without a biblical context, which is, then, a mere pretext in search of a proof-text. God has decreed to save and thus regenerate by grace those who believe in Christ: faith and grace, then, precede salvation and regeneration. (
John 3:15,
16,
36;
4:14;
5:24,
40;
6:47;
6:50-58;
20:31;
Rom 3:21-30;
4:3-5;
4:9,
11,
13,
16;
4:20-24;
5:1,
2;
9:30-33;
10:4;
10:9-13;
1 Cor 1:21;
15:1-2;
Gal 2:15-16;
3:2-9;
3:11;
3:14,
22,
24;
3:26-28;
Eph 1:13;
2:8;
Phil 3:9;
Heb 3:6,
14;
3:18-19;
4:2-3;
6:12;
1 John 2:23-25;
5:10-13,
20)
Tragically, what these Calvinists claim to be Arminian theology on free will is repeated
ad nauseum by other Calvinists; for example, Calvinist Michael Marlowe states the following on Arminianism and free will, “Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness” (
link); Martin Zender repeats the error, “Free will is a doctrine that teaches that man can act independently of God” (
link); and a host of other Calvinists too numerous to cite perpetuate the same.
The general atonement6 is so painfully obvious in the New Testament (
Rom. 5:15;
1 Tim. 2:6; cf.
John 1:29;
3:16;
6:51;
Rom. 14:15;
2 Cor. 5:14,
15,
19,
20,
21;
1 Tim. 4:10;
Heb. 2:9;
2 Pet. 2:1 1 John 2:2;
4:14) without conceding applicatory universalism: “none but the faithful really and effectually enjoy the benefits thereof.” A general atonement is provided by God, in Christ, and a general atonement is offered to all.
“3. True believers can fall from true faith and can fall into such sins as cannot be consistent with true and justifying faith; not only is it possible for this to happen, but it even happens frequently.” They also argue: “4. True believers are able to fall through their own fault into shameful and atrocious deeds, to persevere and to die in them; and therefore finally to fall and to perish.” Such has been “the Arminian” view on the subject since 1618. More so, this view is also advocated by the early Church fathers, though Calvinists will argue otherwise.
