amyraldianism

[JM]

William Styles:

The determination which the Lord asserts had influenced Him. “I would have gathered you.” Does this express His will as one of the great Sacred Three, or His will as a man, with that independence of judgment and decision with which His human nature necessarily invested Him? The will of Christ as God, to save His elect is eternal and immutable, but the attributes of the human nature of Christ while on earth were often affected by local and relative considerations—in proof of which consult Mark 10:21, Luke 19:41, and 22:42. The will referred to was not eternal and continuous as the adverb “often” demonstrates. The verse therefore, does not teach that Jesus determined and endeavoured to effect the spiritual and eternal salvation of these people, but that He frequently attempted to gather them around Him that He might instruct them.

The persons mentioned in the verse, “the children of Jerusalem,” and the Scribes and Pharisees, addressed by the pronoun “ye.” Two distinct parties are contemplated. The verse is often quoted, “How often would I have gathered you, but ye would not.” This suits a theological purpose, but perverts the meaning of the verse. Notice then the persons alluded to—“thy children.” This may be understood literally or metaphorically. Literal children may be intended. Jesus received little children on one memorable occasion (Matt. 19:14-15), nor can we say that it was an isolated one. If this view be adopted, Jesus is here rebuking the Scribes and Pharisees for putting obstacles in the way of children who would have received His teachings. Surely Jesus must have been popular with the children. Never once do we read of an insult offered to Him by a child. The word “children” may, again, be used metaphorically, in the sense of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. “The common people heard Him gladly,” until they were prejudiced against Him by the scribes and Pharisees. It will be noticed that the latter supposition really embodies the former. Children were comprehended in the whole population. Notice the persons addressed, “ye.” The Scribes and Pharisees were determined that the people, young and old, should not be gathered to Christ (John 12:42.)

end quote

 

[Edward65]

Tradition is a hard task master to buck. Perhaps John Gill's comments are more helpful:

Don’t you think there’s a contradiction between Christ teaching us that we should love our neighbour and do good to those who hate us if God at the same time doesn’t also love us and want to save us all? Since we are instructed to love our enemies it can’t be that God doesn’t also love us (i.e. everyone) even when we are His enemies, and want the best for us, which is for us to inherit eternal life. I can’t read the Scriptures without seeing that Christ desires to save everyone.

I’m not an Arminian as I showed in my first post. I hold that the Scriptures teach predestination to heaven and hell and that we don’t have free will. Yet at the same time I hold that the Scriptures teach that God also desires to save everyone through Christ, and that “world” in “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him” (John 3:17 ESV) refers to everyone in the world.

I don’t agree with Gill’s interpretation that “Jerusalem” refers only to the religious rulers in Jerusalem. Christ says “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it!” (Matt. 23:37) which I understand to be referring to all the unbelieving Jews in the city. Also Christ’s lament conveys the meaning that He wished that they hadn’t rejected the prophets, but rather had listened to them in order to be saved, which shows that He desired that they should all be saved. I also hold that the Scriptures teach universal atonement and that everyone is forgiven through Christ’s death, but that in order to be saved one must accept the offered forgiveness through faith - which one can’t manufacture oneself but which must be given to one by God.

Calvinism is correct in believing that one’s destiny is fixed in eternity, but I don’t accept it’s correct when it argues that God doesn’t also desire everyone’s salvation, and that Christ hasn’t atoned for everyone’s sins, but only the elect’s - I don’t believe that the Scriptures teach this.

 

[JM]

Edward, let me encourage you to continue reading and studying. I have answered similar objections too many times over the years on CF so forgive me for simply slipping in links and quotes to answer.

Quote, “Love many times in the Bible is used interchangeably with forbearance and mercy. God forbears with His enemies and is merciful towards them in lieu of them repenting. But this is not to be mistaken as God being genuinely disposed towards his enemy in a manner as He is disposed towards His Son Jesus and His children.

When we are commanded to love our enemy it must be taken within the context of the Old Testament Law as found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. In the law, God says, “If you see your enemy’s ox going astray, return it to him, or if you see your enemy’s ox struggling under his burden you shall help him”. The Bible does not contradict itself. David manifest how this ought to be fulfilled by only cutting off a piece of Saul’s cloak and not killing him.

Loving our enemy simply means being lawful towards them, nothing else. And being lawful at times means taking them to court if they act unlawfully towards you. What it does prohibit is taking up the sword to implement justice upon them. God specifically gave the civil magistrate the monopoly of the sword.” ~ Keon Garraway posted on the Puritan Board

Does God Love Everyone? - YouTube

 

[Edward65]

Does God Love Everyone? - YouTube

God is angry with sinners says Morey, but the Bible also says that God doesn’t desire the death of sinners but that they should turn from their way and live (Ezekiel 33:11), and Paul implores everyone to be reconciled to God, because God is now reconciled to everyone through the death of Christ (Romans 5; 2 Corr.5)

God I agree loves and hates people from eternity by his hidden will and predestines them accordingly to heaven and hell, but He also loves everyone through Christ and desires that they should all be saved. I don’t pretend to understand how this can be, but I’m convinced that this is the teaching of the Bible, so I don’t agree with Morey. Actually I should put this the other way round: since God is a God of love and teaches us to love our fellow man, it’s easy to understand that He should also love everyone and desire their salvation, and what isn’t easy to understand is how, in view of this love, He can at the same time predestine some to be damned.

 

[JM]

Hi Edward!

More cut and pastes:

Romans 5.18 is about the imputation of the righteousness of Christ to those who belong to Him. If, as you suggest, Christ's righteousness is imputed to all then all are saved...period. You would have to deny the biblical teaching of hell if you use 5.18 in this manner. If Adam's sin caused the fall of all men then the righteousness of Christ is imputed to all men and all are saved.

The passages from Ezekiel are references to physical distress, plague and pestilence. You are claiming too much when you reference them in support for God desiring what He can't have. God takes no pleasure in the temporal suffering of the wicked. For real, look it up...the context is death on earth and not eternal torment in hell forever. See The End of the Wicked Contemplated by the Righteous by Jonathan Edwards:

When the saints in glory shall see the wrath of God executed on ungodly men, it will be no occasion of grief to them, but of rejoicing.

It is not only the sight of God’s wrath executed on those wicked men who are of the antichristian church, which will be occasion of rejoicing to the saints in glory; but also the sight of the destruction of all God’s enemies: whether they have been the followers of antichrist or not, that alters not the case, if they have been the enemies of God, and of Jesus Christ. All wicked men will at last be destroyed together, as being united in the same cause and interest, as being all of Satan’s army. They will all stand together at the day of judgment, as being all of the same company.


And if we understand the text to have respect only to a temporal execution of God’s wrath on his enemies, that will not alter the case. The thing they are called upon to rejoice at, is the execution of God’s wrath upon his and their enemies. And if it be matter of rejoicing to them to see justice executed in part upon them, or to see the beginning of the execution of it in this world; for the same reason will they rejoice with greater joy, in beholding it fully executed. For the thing here mentioned as the foundation of their joy, is the execution of just vengeance: Rejoice, for God hath avenged you on her. [end quote]



If God loves everyone and everyone is not saved His love is ineffectual and meaningless.

____________________________

Edward, I like your spunk and willingness to engage. My answers and responses are not often found in "popular" or modern Calvinism but can be found in historic Calvinism and more importantly, the Bible. Please, do not be discouraged with me. Continue to read and dialogue here, perhaps twin will jump back in?

 

[Edward65]

Romans 5.18 is about the imputation of the righteousness of Christ to those who belong to Him. If, as you suggest, Christ's righteousness is imputed to all then all are saved...period. You would have to deny the biblical teaching of hell if you use 5.18 in this manner. If Adam's sin caused the fall of all men then the righteousness of Christ is imputed to all men and all are saved.

Romans 5:18 says: "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men" (ESV), but this justification or forgiveness must first be accepted through faith in order for Christ's righteousness to be imputed to each individual, otherwise it's like a judge declaring a person to be innocent and that person refusing to accept this verdict. If a person doesn't have faith then Christ's righteousness isn't imputed to that person.


Christian Gospel:
And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. Luke 2:10-11, ESV.

Calvinist gospel:
And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for some of the people. For unto them is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.

 

[JM]

Romans 5:18 says: "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men" (ESV), but this justification or forgiveness must first be accepted through faith in order for Christ's righteousness to be imputed to each individual, otherwise it's like a judge declaring a person to be innocent and that person refusing to accept this verdict. If a person doesn't have faith then Christ's righteousness isn't imputed to that person.

Faith receives justification, it is instrumental, but does not initiate salvation. The analogy of the Judge declaring a person innocent works against you. The authority is in the Judge, not the condemned, to grant the pardon. If the Judge declares one righteous it doesn't matter what the guilty may think about what the Judge has declared. In fact, the guilty maybe considered inocent even before hearing the pardon for the pardon does not find it's power in the acceptance of the condemned.

Christian Gospel: And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. Luke 2:10-11, ESV.

hy·per·bo·le (h

-pûr

b

-l

)

n. A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.

Words have different meanings and the meaning must be gleamed from the biblical text. Without a context you are just proof texting. Was it a great joy for Herod the Great? Is that why he committed the "Massacre of the Innocents?" Of course not. The Jews were so happy at this news they what? Murdered Christ! The birth of Christ did not make all people happy.

When will Christians struggle with the text!

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[Edward65]

Faith receives justification, it is instrumental, but does not initiate salvation. The analogy of the Judge declaring a person innocent works against you. The authority is in the Judge, not the condemned, to grant the pardon. If the Judge declares one righteous it doesn't matter what the guilty may think about what the Judge has declared. In fact, the guilty maybe considered inocent even before hearing the pardon for the pardon does not find it's power in the acceptance of the condemned.

Words have different meanings and the meaning must be gleamed from the biblical text. Without a context you are just proof texting. Was it a great joy for Herod the Great? Is that why he committed the "Massacre of the Innocents?" Of course not. The Jews were so happy at this news they what? Murdered Christ! The birth of Christ did not make all people happy.

When will Christians struggle with the text!

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Salvation is dependent on faith, so even though Christ has atoned for everyone’s sins a person can’t benefit from this unless he accepts it through faith. “Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God”. (Romans 5:1-2, ESV)

Whether people accept the news of Christ’s birth with joy isn’t really relevant, because the message of Christ’s birth is a joyious occurrence in itself even if no one accepted it with joy, because the provision of salvation is inherently joyious simply because it is salvation. Also the angel didn’t say that he brought good news that everyone would rejoice at, but he only addressed the shepherds when he said “I bring you good news of great joy”, the addition of “that will be for all the people” refers to the fact that Christ is the Saviour of everyone whether or not they accept Him as their Saviour and obtain the offered salvation.

I wish you joy in the Lord.
Eddie.

 

[JustAsIam77]

I have a quick question about Amyraldianism. From the reading I have done, this was a doctrinal approach that originated in French Reformed (Huguenot) circles. Some things I've read say it was a response to Arminianism and others say it is actually an approximation of Lutheran soteriology.

Anyway, are there Amyraldian churches/denominations or is it only maintained by individuals? Is it even tolerated among Reformed believers today?

Yes it's tolerated among Reformed believers, I sway between 4 point and 5 point Calvinism myself.