Arminians, why are you Arminian?

[OzSpen]

Genesis 1: 26. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


Is God a Calvinist?

How do you reach that question based on those 2 verses from Genesis?

 

[now faith]

How do you reach that question based on those 2 verses from Genesis?

How do you define the Image of God?
If you believe in God being three distinct beings yet each one being God ,the statement let us make man in our Image would elude to man as well being Spirit ,Soul and Flesh or body.
God is a Spirit ,do we know what God looks like?
Yet we are made in his image.
God is love.
Man loves , and through Christ Man has the love of Christ in him.

Galatians 4: 6. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. 7. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
Now the reason for the question:
Does God have freewill?
Of course he does, God does not live within the confines of his creation, on any level.
Did God make man in His image ?
Yes.
How many beings are in the Godhead?
Three.
Therefore can we limit God to making man based solely on physical appearance?
No.
This would only be one aspect of God , yet the terminology God used was plural.
Why would God give us the lack of freewill , when God Himself is not confined to a pseudo logical theology of predestination?

Note: I am not teaching, any theology I simply answered a question posed by a member.

 

[now faith]

It is a logical fallacy to determine that Man is limited to two definitions concerning how God has set in place our knowlage of Him.
Monergism states that the regeneration of an individual is the work of God through the Holy Spirit alone, as opposed to Synergism, which, in its simplest form, argues that the human will cooperates with God's grace in order to be regenerated.

Free Will is not Synergism, Free Will allows Man optional paths that go beyond the presumption of such limitations.

Grace in its self can be offered and removed , if a person chooses not to believe.
Why would God offer something He predestined you to walk away from.
What reasonable purpose could that serve?
Yet God chooses to consider the unbeliever reprobate at his good pleasure.
Why would God permit a Man to receive Grace by the spirit, then walk away whoring after other God's, and give him eternal security with God looking upon sin for eternity?

So much enlightenment on God's Devine nature is esoteric knowledge, with no solid foundation on God's Word.

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

Genesis 1: 26. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


Is God a Calvinist?

Yes

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

It is a logical fallacy to determine that Man is limited to two definitions concerning how God has set in place our knowlage of Him.
Monergism states that the regeneration of an individual is the work of God through the Holy Spirit alone, as opposed to Synergism, which, in its simplest form, argues that the human will cooperates with God's grace in order to be regenerated.

Free Will is not Synergism, Free Will allows Man optional paths that go beyond the presumption of such limitations.

Grace in its self can be offered and removed , if a person chooses not to believe.
Why would God offer something He predestined you to walk away from.
What reasonable purpose could that serve?
Yet God chooses to consider the unbeliever reprobate at his good pleasure.
Why would God permit a Man to receive Grace by the spirit, then walk away whoring after other God's, and give him eternal security with God looking upon sin for eternity?

So much enlightenment on God's Devine nature is esoteric knowledge, with no solid foundation on God's Word.

The example you gave of the sinner whoring after other God's, is clearly not a believer.

Many will say Lord, Lord, but They never knew Him.

They never belonged to the Lord.

God is just in throwing us all in hell, He does not need to offer salvation to anyone. We are all sinners, deserving punishment

 

[now faith]

The example you gave of the sinner whoring after other God's, is clearly not a believer.

Many will say Lord, Lord, but They never knew Him.

They never belonged to the Lord.

God is just in throwing us all in hell, He does not need to offer salvation to anyone. We are all sinners, deserving punishment

Is offering salvation ,contrary to the God of Calvinism?

 

[OzSpen]

Is offering salvation ,contrary to the God of Calvinism?

But the Calvinistic decision has already been made BEFORE the offer of salvation is stated. Isn't that what unconditional election means?

 

[OzSpen]

Hi my Arminian friends! I was just wondering, why are you an Arminian? Have you considered the historic position of Bible believing Christians and perhaps, considered that your position is a form of humanism? Was the Arminianism you profess a tradition like Dispensationalism and the PreTrib Rapture?

Thanks,

jm

JM,

There seems to be a trick to your question. You ask those of us who are Arminian to tell you why we are Arminian. But you are imposing your own will on what you think Arminianism means, 'a form of humanism'.

This may be how you see Arminianism, but it is false. It's as false as those who associate Classical Arminianism with Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism.

I am a 'leaky' Reformed/Classical Arminian who accepts most of the teaching of Jacob Arminus, which is based on the Bible.

I'm a 'leaky' Reformed Arminian because I do not consider that infant baptism is biblical. Arminius believed in infant baptism, as do many Calvinists.

Arminius was a Dutch Reformed minister to his dying day (which was much too young, IMO), so his position is that of a Reformed theologian.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

I tend to look at it like this:
a) We are slaves to sin
b) Unless we are regenerated, we can not see or understand the things of God

Adam & Eve were slaves to sin after they fell into sin (Gen 2) but they could still hear God:

Then the man and his wife heard the Lord God walking in the garden. It was during the coolest time of the day. They hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden (Gen 3:8 NIRV).​

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

I don't hold to the "foreseen faith" view of election (though I do hold that God foreknows all things, just that foreknowledge is not the basis of election), but this reasoning of yours is based on some pretty seriously unfounded assumptions.

How, then, do you understand 1 Peter 1:2 (NIV):

who have been chosen [elected] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood:​

Grace and peace be yours in abundance?​

Oz

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

Is offering salvation ,contrary to the God of Calvinism?

Salvation is offering to God's elect, whom are already chosen, not based on works

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

Adam & Eve were slaves to sin after they fell into sin (Gen 2) but they could still hear God:

Then the man and his wife heard the Lord God walking in the garden. It was during the coolest time of the day. They hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden (Gen 3:8 NIRV).​

Oz

Once sin entered the world, 3 types of death occured:
a) Physical Death - people now would die
b) Spiritual Death - They are now spiritually dead
c) Separated from God - Now our sins separated us from God

God spoke to his people at times through an audible voice at times, but that doesn't change that are separated from God, and slaves to sin, and spiritually dead.

 

[JM]

This is the kind of melee you can expect when non Baptists jump in.

Thread needs to be scrubbed.

 

[OzSpen]

Once sin entered the world, 3 types of death occured:
a) Physical Death - people now would die
b) Spiritual Death - They are now spiritually dead
c) Separated from God - Now our sins separated us from God

God spoke to his people at times through an audible voice at times, but that doesn't change that are separated from God, and slaves to sin, and spiritually dead.

But Adam & Eve could still hear God walking in the garden after they ate of the forbidden fruit and became sinners.

 

[OzSpen]

This is the kind of melee you can expect when non Baptists jump in.

Thread needs to be scrubbed.

JM,

I'm baptistic as I'm ordained with the Christian & Missionary Alliance, Australia, and we baptise believers by immersion. There is no category for the C&MA on this forum so I have used Baptist as this is a close denomination theologically. I could have put Presbyterian as the founder of the C&MA, A B Simpson, was a Presbyterian, but the C&MA does not promote paedobaptism.

What have I written here that has contributed to what you call 'the kind of melee'?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Salvation is offering to God's elect, whom are already chosen, not based on works

Andy,

How can it be 'offering' to the elect when they are already chosen through unconditional election and they cannot resist this offer because of irresistible grace (Calvinistic view)?

Surely 'offering' should not be used when Calvinistic, compatibilistic determinism is meant.

Oz

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

But Adam & Eve could still hear God walking in the garden after they ate of the forbidden fruit and became sinners.

Because they could hear God, that doesn't mean they weren't spiritually separated from God, spiritually dead etc... - Because they were.

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

Andy,

How can it be 'offering' to the elect when they are already chosen through unconditional election and they cannot resist this offer because of irresistible grace (Calvinistic view)?

Surely 'offering' should not be used when Calvinistic, compatibilistic determinism is meant.

Oz

The call is to anyone who hears and follow, but those that hear and follow belong to Him.

My sheep hear My voice and they follow Me.

Non believers are spiritually dead, without the Holy Spirit, they can not understand or see the things of God.

Natural man is a slave to sin with a heart of stone.

Faith and Repentance is grace, a gift from God

 

[PrettyboyAndy]

Andy,

How can it be 'offering' to the elect when they are already chosen through unconditional election and they cannot resist this offer because of irresistible grace (Calvinistic view)?

Surely 'offering' should not be used when Calvinistic, compatibilistic determinism is meant.

Oz

The only way for what I think your implying to be true - is for Total Depravity to not be true.

However we are Totally Depraved, we can not come to God, because we have a stone of heart, and we are dead in our sins

God initiates salvation, salvation is from the Lord - Jonah 2:9

No one can see the kingdom unless he is born from above. John 3:3

Ephesians 2, faith and repentance is a gift from God

Romans 9 Salvation is not from works, or by any human effort, but by Gods will alone.

 

[now faith]

Salvation is offering to God's elect, whom are already chosen, not based on works

How do you know if you are truly, part of the Elect?
If you do have a emotional experience, what conditions were the reason and can you trust your emotions?
Wouldn't it be far more reasonable to consider the Elect, those who have salvation already , but not excluding others from the gift of Salvation ?
How is it a person can determine who goes where ?
Why would God be so angry with the deeds of people, that He would turn his back on them once and for all?
He destroyed this World long ago over sin.

Quote: Wikipedia

In a religious context, sin is the act of transgression against divine law.[1] Sin can also be viewed as any thought or action that endangers the ideal relationship between an individual and their God or Gods; or as any diversion from the perceived ideal order for human living. "To sin" has been defined from a Greek concordance as "to miss the mark".[2]
Unquote.
What about sanctification?


Sanctification is the act or process of acquiring sanctity, of being made or becoming holy. ... To sanctify is to literally "set apart for particular use in a special purpose or work and to make holy or sacred."
Sanctification - Wikipedia
Wikipedia › wiki › Sanctification

Both are verbs, and both have a causative effect.

You have a choice on what color clothes you put on ,if you put on blue pants and a black coat ,can you determine whether you should do This?
Or possibly once you look in the mirror you put on a blue coat as well.
Did God choose the miss match ,or did God correct the miss match.
If God wanted the miss match , how do you know?
If God predestined you, can you choose to move from his will in a act of flesh?
Can you commit adultery and feel right?
What about Pagan Idols can you sit with the company of Baal, and remain holy?

What about people who take the mark of the Beast in end times?
Will they still be cleansed by the Blood ?
Since a Child inherits Blood from his Father , wouldn't Christ's Blood Be God's Blood?
Would God suffer so much to save those who were already Elect?
Would He go so far as to pour His Blood over those who worshiped the Beast?


1 Timothy 2: 1. I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2. For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4. Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6. Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Ah but the Mark of the Beast, how does God's Word tell us God's will for those who take it.

Revelation 14: 9. And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10. The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11. And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

It seems that there is a conflict among Calvinist.
John MacArthur's teaching is that people will have to take the mark or none will be saved at the tribulation.

We see God's will in the scriptures....

But we see a prominent Calvinest who seems to put his own take into a apparition of the Bible.

Theologically, MacArthur is considered a Calvinist, and a strong proponent of expository preaching.[2] He has been acknowledged by Christianity Today as one of the most influential preachers of his time,[3] and was a frequent guest on Larry King Live as a representative of an evangelical Christian perspective.[4]

Wikipedia