• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Still a Tough Question for Arminians

Foghorn

Saved by grace
Mar 8, 2010
1,186
126
New England
Visit site
✟44,586.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I found this online and though I would present it here. Also, if there are any Arminians who would like to take a crack at it, be my guest.
 

Foghorn

Saved by grace
Mar 8, 2010
1,186
126
New England
Visit site
✟44,586.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Foghorn, now you've created an oddly formatted topic. The page is too wide! Stop doing that!
I'd love to stop. Please tell me how?
I don't know what I am doing wrong?
 
Upvote 0

gmm4j

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2012
2,631
12
SC
✟2,859.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hey Foghorn,

First let’s clear up the analogy:

Imagine the following: A father allows his two-year-old son (Let us make man in our image, in our likeness), to go outside to play knowing full well that their house is next to a lake. (In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.)


He also knows that his son has a habit of not listening when told to stay away from the water. Still, this father doesn't want to be the kind of parent that smothers his kid. The little rascal will have to grow up sometime, so he is given great freedom to make his own choices. (And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.)


Sure enough, as soon as he sets foot outside, the boy heads straight for the water. (She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.)

His father sees this, but does nothing. He just stares out the window and watches. The child steps onto the dock, and still the father looks on. It isn't until the boy slips and falls into the water that the father rushes to the rescue. But he doesn't jump in after him. (YES HE DID)( John 1:14, The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.)(John 1:10-11He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.)

He takes a life preserver from the boat that's tied to the dock and tosses it to his son. (A better analogy would be: the Father swam to the boy longing to rescue and gather him unto himself)(Matt 23:37-38"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.)

"Grab it!" he shouts. The boy continues to splash and scream for help. "Grab the life jacket, son! It's all up to you.(No, it is not all up to you. The child didn’t throw himself the life jacket. Synergism)

If you want to be saved, just reach out and take it."(Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.)

Eventually, the young boy ceases to struggle and sinks below the surface. The life jacket floats where the father threw it. "Son!" he cries. "Can't you hear me? All you have to do is hold on and I can pull you in." No response.(This section is not analogous because a spiritually dead person in their sins and a corpse are not the same. Can a corpse eat pizza? A spiritually dead person can.)

(Your analogy highlighted in blue suggests that it is not within the ability of the child to grab the life jacket. I as I understand Scripture the child does have the ability to grab hold of it (see Total Ability http://www.christianforums.com/t7680596/ ), but instead he resists and pushes it away.)

The father turns and heads back to the house. Words cannot describe the sadness he feels, but there just wasn't anything he could do. He offered life, but his offer was rejected, and that ultimate act of disobedience resulted in his child's death. (Gal 6:7-8,God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.)(Ezek 33:11 I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!)(Gen 6:6, The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain.) (Matt 23:37-38"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.)

Now, if that really happened, there isn't a single court in the country that would let the father off the hook. At the very least, he would be found criminally negligent for his son's death. But in the minds of most people, the father would be just as guilty as if he had pushed his son into the water in the first place.

You would hold the father guilty? If the father jumped into the water to save the child, providing himself as an adequate means for rescue, but the child purposefully rejected and pushed the father away – You would hold that father guilty? Not in any court I know.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

gmm4j

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2012
2,631
12
SC
✟2,859.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Then it is asked,

If a sovereign, loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God, who neither ordains nor causes bad things to happen but allows them to happen according to his permissive will, creates mankind with the foreknowledge that every human will fall into sin, then how could such a God escape responsibility for the pain and suffering of his creatures, much less the eternal damnation of those who don't respond to his free offer of salvation?


God who is sovereign, loving, all-powerful, and all-knowing, never ordains nor causes unrighteous or evil things to happen. He does allow them to happen according to His permissive will, but He is not the direct cause. God, allowing room for genuine free-will loving relationships, created mankind with the potential for evil. With the foreknowledge that every human would fall into sin, He created them. Knowing this, He provided Himself as the remedy for sin so genuine free-will loving relationships with His creation would be restored.

The pain and suffering of His creatures, as well as eternal damnation, should not be attributed to God, but is directly a result of man’s rejection of God and His Salvation. God is Just. Nay, God is Just, Gracious, and Merciful!

I submit that you cannot answer that question without abandoning your own Arminian worldview.

Arminian or not, I don’t know. I’ve only posted what I believe Scripture teaches.

You cannot answer it without resorting to the same theological gymnastics you accuse Calvinists of performing.

I don’t know about gymnastics. I was just out for a walk!

And you certainly cannot answer it if you have a problem conceiving of a truly sovereign God who works all things for his ultimate glory

I think everything I just described is His sovereign plan that He is working out flawlessly for His ultimate glory!

Blessings and good night!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Foghorn

Saved by grace
Mar 8, 2010
1,186
126
New England
Visit site
✟44,586.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hey Foghorn,

First let’s clear up the analogy:
Lol, after reading it again, I see all sorts of problems with it myself. If anything I think it would be better for a Pelagiest.
 
Upvote 0

Arcoe

Do This And Live!
Sep 29, 2012
2,051
11
Texas
✟2,356.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Lol, after reading it again, I see all sorts of problems with it myself. If anything I think it would be better for a Pelagiest.

I think the analogy fits the Reformed view better. The father has sons who are in the water and the father swims out to save one while giving the other a weight.

How would the father fare in court if he does indeed have the means and opportunity to save the drowning son, but yet, leaves him to himself to drown?

And to make matters worse, before the son was born, the father decided beforehand, he would throw his son into the water and let him drown.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0