Convince me of Arminianism

[fhansen]

God can be totally sovereign and still allow mature adults to have the limited free will they need to fulfill their earthly objective.

Yes, God can sovereignly deem that part of His creation-humans and angels-can oppose His own will. That can be said to be the essence of our free will in fact.

 

[DeaconDean]

But from my understanding Calvinism would deny the notion that man could reject the grace of salvation, believing that man is saved first, without being able to will otherwise.

This part, also relates to the Calvinist understanding of "election". (cf.: Irresistible Grace is the idea that the elect, those who Calvinists believe have been unconditionally elected to eternal life, cannot resist the grace of God and heaven's determination to save them.) They go hand-and-hand.

Calvinist believe in the Sovereignty of God.

And, we also believe that man, has a free will. Although we differ on just how "free" mans free will is with Arminianism.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[bling]

This part, also relates to the Calvinist understanding of "election". (cf.: Irresistible Grace is the idea that the elect, those who Calvinists believe have been unconditionally elected to eternal life, cannot resist the grace of God and heaven's determination to save them.) They go hand-and-hand.

Calvinist believe in the Sovereignty of God.

And, we also believe that man, has a free will. Although we differ on just how "free" mans free will is with Arminianism.

God Bless

Till all are one.

You stated the huge contrast as being:
Calvinism=God's Sovereignty

Arminianism=Mans free-will.

Now your saying Calvinist believe both is true and I am say Arminianist believe both is true, so please stat the difference?

 

[fhansen]

This part, also relates to the Calvinist understanding of "election". (cf.: Irresistible Grace is the idea that the elect, those who Calvinists believe have been unconditionally elected to eternal life, cannot resist the grace of God and heaven's determination to save them.) They go hand-and-hand.

Calvinist believe in the Sovereignty of God.

And, we also believe that man, has a free will. Although we differ on just how "free" mans free will is with Arminianism.

God Bless

Till all are one.

In any case, for the purpose of salvation, man's will is irrelevant for all practical purposes according to Calvinist doctrine. And this, IMO, guts the heart out of much of the gospel message.

 

[DeaconDean]

You stated the huge contrast as being:
Calvinism=God's Sovereignty

Arminianism=Mans free-will.

Now your saying Calvinist believe both is true and I am say Arminianist believe both is true, so please stat the difference?

As stated above, both Calvinism and Arminian agree that man has a "free-will". Where the difference lies is in the belief on Total Depravity.

Calvinism: Man is totally depraved. His will is enslaved to sin. Or as Paul put it: "ye were the servants of sin," (cf. Rom. 6:17) Prior to salvation, we sin because it is our will to sin. (cf. "then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. -Jer. 13:23)

Arminianism, on the other hand teaches that the fall only "fractured' mans will. Arminianism teaches:

"Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man's freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God's Spirit and be regenerated or resist God's grace and perish."

Nearly everything in Arminanism hinges on man, not God.

It is mans free will that accepts or rejects God's grace.

Arminianism also teaches that based upon mans free will to accept or reject, is the basis of election.

Like I said, where Arminianism and Calvinism differ, separate are on God's Sovereignty and Free will.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

In any case, for the purpose of salvation, man's will is irrelevant for all practical purposes according to Calvinist doctrine. And this, IMO, guts the heart out of much of the gospel message.

Whatever, but the "doctrine of election" begins in the Old Testament, and continues through the New.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[fhansen]

Whatever, but the "doctrine of election" begins in the Old Testament, and continues through the New.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Whatever, but God's commands and warnings to choose good over evil begin in the Old Testament, and continue through the New. If God were going to make the choice for him, why not just stock heaven with the elect and hell with the rest and preclude the massive quantities of pain, suffering, and evil that followed man's first wrong choice, his original sin?

 

[DeaconDean]

choose good over evil

Before I go any further, please supply me verses where God instructs mankind to "choose good over evil" in the Old Testament.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[fhansen]

Before I go any further, please supply me verses where God instructs mankind to "choose good over evil" in the Old Testament.

God Bless

Till all are one.

It's a principle, set forth in Deut 30:
"See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, 18I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.

This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."

 

[DeaconDean]

It's a principle, set forth in Deut 30:
"See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, 18I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.

This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."

You said:

"God's commands and warnings to choose good over evil begin in the Old Testament."

I have not seen that in any verse(s).

Like I said, before I go further, show me specific verses where God instructed mankind:

"to choose good over evil".

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[fhansen]

A better translation from my understanding:

"I have set before you today life and good, death and evil, in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments, His statutes, and His judgments, that you may live and multiply; and the Lord your God will bless you in the land which you go to possess. But if your heart turns away so that you do not hear, and are drawn away, and worship other gods and serve them, I announce to you today that you shall surely perish; you shall not prolong your days in the land which you cross over the Jordan to go in and possess. I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; that you may love the Lord your God, that you may obey His voice, and that you may cling to Him, for He is your life and the length of your days; and that you may dwell in the land which the Lord swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them.”

 

[DeaconDean]

A better translation from my understanding:

"I have set before you today life and good, death and evil, in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments, His statutes, and His judgments, that you may live and multiply; and the Lord your God will bless you in the land which you go to possess. But if your heart turns away so that you do not hear, and are drawn away, and worship other gods and serve them, I announce to you today that you shall surely perish; you shall not prolong your days in the land which you cross over the Jordan to go in and possess. I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and your descendants may live; that you may love the Lord your God, that you may obey His voice, and that you may cling to Him, for He is your life and the length of your days; and that you may dwell in the land which the Lord swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them.”

That still does not prove your point. Neither does it back up your point of:

""to choose good over evil".

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

Also, please understand I am not be obstinate about this.

I have an expressed purpose for getting you to show these verses.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[fhansen]

That still does not prove your point. Neither does it back up your point of:

""to choose good over evil".

God Bless

Till all are one.

No, the passage has no other meaning, in fact.

 

[DeaconDean]

No, the passage has no other meaning, in fact.

Since you take that position,

Point 1, to whom was Moses addressing? He was speaking to the Hebrews whom God led out of captivity. His chosen people.

Now, having said that, Paul reiterates a number of times that the Gentiles were never under the Law.

Your taking a message to the Hebrews and trying to apply it "universally".

John Gill comments:

"INTRODUCTION TO DEUTERONOMY 30

This chapter contains some gracious promises of the conversion of the
Jews in the latter day, of their calling things to mind that have
befallen them, of their repentance, and the circumcision of their
hearts to love the Lord, of the return of them to their own land, and
of the great increase of them, and of their enjoyment of plenty of good
things, \\#De 30:1-10\\; in it is an account of the Gospel, or word of
faith, which at this time should be brought near to the Jews, and be
received by them, \\#De 30:11-14\\; and for the present Moses desires them
to consider what he now set before them, and what would be the
consequences of receiving or rejecting it, and so what it would be most
proper for them to make choice of, \\#De 30:15-20\\.

Source

So, I'm sorry, but according to the principles of sound biblical hermeneutics, I cannot accept your assessment of Deut. 30 in applying it "universally".

Is there another verse you think applies?

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

There are only 4 verses in the entire Old Testament, where "choose and good" appear together.

"Job 34:4
Let us choose to us judgment: let us know among ourselves what is good.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Psalm 65:4
Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Isaiah 7:15
Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Isaiah 7:16
For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations "

Source

In Job 34:4, you have Elihu trying to instruct Job.

Psalms 65:4, is about God choosing.

Isaiah 7 is about the coming Messiah.

So I have not seen specific verses which tell mankind to "choose good over evil".

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

Aminianism teaches that the "fall" only fractured mans will. But without God, he still would be lost.

On the other hand, Arminianism is also very heavily dependent on the actions of man. Specifically, on what man will or will not do. Here is where "free-will" in Arminiamism comes into play.

But lets get specific, James Arminius, taught that God used His "foreknowledge" of who would accept and believe, and who wouldn't as the determining factor in his view of predestination.

Thus ultimately making salvation, entirely dependent on man. Jesus' death on the cross only made salvation "possible".

So lets look at what the scripture says.

No person here has argued that man does not have a free-will. Certainly man was given a will, but where we disagree is to the extent to its freeness.

In Gen. 6:5 we read:

"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

After the flood, we read:

"And the Lord smelled a sweet savour; and the Lord said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth;" -Gen. 8:26 (KJV)

Jumping ahead in time, we read:

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" -Jer. 17:9 (KJV)

Jumping further ahead in time, we read:

"But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things which defile a man:" -Mt. 15:18-20 (KJV)

We even read:

"Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life." -Prov. 4:23 (KJV)

How can the will be truly free, if everything that defiles a man comes from the heart and the thoughts of the heart are only continuously evil from his youth up?

If man will is free to makes choices which concern life and death, and it lies in his intellect, how is it scriptures dictate that it is the heart which makes decisions?

If mans will is truly free, how is it scriptures make it subject to the heart?

How can mans will be free when it is subject to, servant of, the heart?

How can the will be both servant and sovereign?

If the will is subject to the heart as scriptures say in Prov. 4:23, how can it be "free" as Arminians suggest?

Calvinists stand accused of:

God has not given man free-will

And that simply isn't true.

It is my arguement that mans will is only "free" on the glourious day of salvation;

"Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power" -Psa. 110:3 (KJV)

Before man is saved by Christ, he is in bondage to sin. And if in bondage to sin, then his will is not, nor ever was "free".

Arthur W. Pink is right when he says:

The sinner's will is enslaved because it is in bondage to and is the servant of a depraved heart.

It is only after the point of salvation that mans will is truly free:

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." -Jn. 8:32 (KJV)

Free from the bondage to sin, and free to serve God as He wants.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[fhansen]

Since you take that position,

Point 1, to whom was Moses addressing? He was speaking to the Hebrews whom God led out of captivity. His chosen people.

Now, having said that, Paul reiterates a number of times that the Gentiles were never under the Law.

Your taking a message to the Hebrews and trying to apply it "universally".

John Gill comments:

"INTRODUCTION TO DEUTERONOMY 30

This chapter contains some gracious promises of the conversion of the
Jews in the latter day, of their calling things to mind that have
befallen them, of their repentance, and the circumcision of their
hearts to love the Lord, of the return of them to their own land, and
of the great increase of them, and of their enjoyment of plenty of good
things, \\#De 30:1-10\\; in it is an account of the Gospel, or word of
faith, which at this time should be brought near to the Jews, and be
received by them, \\#De 30:11-14\\; and for the present Moses desires them
to consider what he now set before them, and what would be the
consequences of receiving or rejecting it, and so what it would be most
proper for them to make choice of, \\#De 30:15-20\\.

Source

So, I'm sorry, but according to the principles of sound biblical hermeneutics, I cannot accept your assessment of Deut. 30 in applying it "universally".

Is there another verse you think applies?

God Bless

Till all are one.

Like I said, a general principle was set down. God's plan of salvation meant delivering the Hebrews to the promised land, which obedience would obtain for them. But ultimately, as we know, that plan involves a non-earthly promised land and the whole world rather than the Hebrews alone. Obedience is still required. I can't imagine why anyone would object, unless they prefer evil to good for some reason, or think it's good for God to be a sugar-daddy for some and not for others. Isaiah 5:20 pertains to this discussion:
"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter."
What difference does it make what we call them if we're not to choose between them?

 

[DeaconDean]

Like I said, a general principle was set down. God's plan of salvation meant delivering the Hebrews to the promised land, which obedience would obtain for them. But ultimately, as we know, that plan involves a non-earthly promised land and the whole world rather than the Hebrews alone. Obedience is still required. I can't imagine why anyone would object, unless they prefer evil to good for some reason, or think it's good for God to be a sugar-daddy for some and not for others. Isaiah 5:20 pertains to this discussion:
"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter."
What difference does it make what we call them if we're not to choose between them?

Here again, you forget three words:

1. Context
2. Context
3. Context

My problem with your view is trying to use Moses' words as if they applied to Gentiles. Which they didn't.

In fact, there is very, very little of the Old Testament that directly applied to those who were not Hebrew.

At the time of your context, if you would be willing to look back, that land they were about to take possession of was to the Hebrews.

"And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land:" -Gen 12:7 (KJV)

Canaan, was to be a land for the Hebrews.

But, by the same token, here one verse where it applies to everybody:

"and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;' -Gen. 26:4 (KJV)

Like I said, my problem is that you are taking a verse/chapter that was directly addressing the Hebrews specifically, and applying it to Gentiles, which the text does not support.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[fhansen]

Here again, you forget three words:

1. Context
2. Context
3. Context

My problem with your view is trying to use Moses' words as if they applied to Gentiles. Which they didn't.

In fact, there is very, very little of the Old Testament that directly applied to those who were not Hebrew.

At the time of your context, if you would be willing to look back, that land they were about to take possession of was to the Hebrews.

"And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land:" -Gen 12:7 (KJV)

Canaan, was to be a land for the Hebrews.

But, by the same token, here one verse where it applies to everybody:

"and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;' -Gen. 26:4 (KJV)

Like I said, my problem is that you are taking a verse/chapter that was directly addressing the Hebrews specifically, and applying it to Gentiles, which the text does not support.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Do the New Covenant prophecies of Jer 31 and Ez 36 apply to Israel only? Christians understand the OT through their own set of lenses as I'm sure you know.