Why do you think arminians teach falsehoods?

[Rebekah30]

Yeah that's what I thought, they embrace Calvinsim, unless there is a rouge sect.

If there is a rouge sect, they wouldn't really be presbyterian (according to prsbyterians I presume) I don't know for I am not one.

 

[NorrinRadd]

Are you an Arminian?

I generally describe myself as "Arminianish" or "Arminian, more or less." My soteriology is closer to Arminian than any other system I've seen. However, I have a general overall perspective that NO theological "system" (or for that matter, no creed or confession) is completely unequivocally consistent with Scripture.

Here is what Arminians teach:

(I'll paste the section in, since the software won't do nested quotes.)

Arminianism holds to the following tenets:

• Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation (see also prevenient grace).
• Salvation is possible only by God's grace, which cannot be merited.
• No works of human effort can cause or contribute to salvation.
• God's election is conditional on faith in the sacrifice and Lordship of Jesus Christ.
• Christ's atonement was made on behalf of all people.
• God allows his grace to be resisted by those who freely reject Christ.
• Salvation can be lost, as continued salvation is conditional upon continued faith.
  

Salvation is condition on faith and submitting to the Lordship of Christ, and can be lost on those same conditions.

Earlier, you said this:

Arminians believe that one must live a holy life doing the will of the Father remaining on the narrow rode to receive eternal life.

And that was the part I characterized as not being mainstream Arminian.

Neither of your statements is consistent with the cited "tenets" show. They explicitly say that election is conditional on FAITH in the sacrifice and Lordship of Christ, and that continued salvation is contingent on continued FAITH. They do NOT say salvation is contingent on "living a holy life" or "doing the will of the Father" or "submitting."

 

[ArcticFox]

(I'll paste the section in, since the software won't do nested quotes.)

Arminianism holds to the following tenets:

• Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation (see also prevenient grace).
• Salvation is possible only by God's grace, which cannot be merited.
• No works of human effort can cause or contribute to salvation.
• God's election is conditional on faith in the sacrifice and Lordship of Jesus Christ.
• Christ's atonement was made on behalf of all people.
• God allows his grace to be resisted by those who freely reject Christ.
• Salvation can be lost, as continued salvation is conditional upon continued faith.
  

Umm...

How do those tenets even work? They are contradictory. Humans are unable to make any efforts towards salvation, but then they have to learn about Christ and muster up faith in him to qualify? Yet, this act of learning (knowledge) and faith does not qualify as any sort of effort or action to acquire salvation?

I don't understand... I see the mule talking out of both ends

 

[NorrinRadd]

Umm...

How do those tenets even work? They are contradictory. Humans are unable to make any efforts towards salvation, but then they have to learn about Christ and muster up faith in him to qualify? Yet, this act of learning (knowledge) and faith does not qualify as any sort of effort or action to acquire salvation?

I don't understand... I see the mule talking out of both ends

When it comes right down to it, I would say that NO theological "system" is able to be both internally consistent AND consistent with the most natural reading of Scripture. The very nature of God and His work involves some degree of "mystery" that transcends human intellect and language, in addition to the fact that Scripture was never written as a "system." I would even allow that some teachings of Scripture are so tightly in tension that they could reasonable be termed "contradictions"; I would maintain they are true nonetheless.

In regard to the particular points of your quandary --

-- Probably the first important thing to note is the sixth point among the Arminian "tenets." It points out that Arminians believe grace may be *resisted.* The traditional Arminian view is that indeed salvation cannot be "acquired," but its free offer may be rejected. The point is that "faith" is for lack of a better word, "passive," in that it does not "take" but only does "not reject."

-- Because of their theological framework, Calvinists believe "saving faith" comes from God, lest man have grounds for boasting. Arminians believe that the Scriptures usually adduced as proof-texts do not support this.

---- In 1 Cor. 12-13, "faith" is of the Spirit, but the context is that of a special enablement for those already saved. Whether or not this particular "version" of faith is applicable to the salvation experience can't be determined from the context.

---- In Gal. 5, "faith" is a (or an aspect of the) fruit of the Spirit, but the context is that it is a "character trait" of those *already* saved. Again the context doesn't address whether this is related to "saving" faith. Besides that, and for related reasons, there is disagreement as to whether in this context pistis should even be translated as "faith," as opposed to "faithfulness" or "fidelity."

---- In Eph. 2:8, touto probably refers to "by grace you are saved," and not to "faith."

---- Calvinists like to maintain that "Regeneration Precedes Faith," but this is inconsistent with the plain teaching of John 1, where "receiving" and "believing" precede "becoming children" and "being born."


-- In Paul, the contrast is between "faith" and "works." Works are things we "do"; they are explicitly deeds, actions, results of some sort of effort or expenditure of energy. From our POV, "faith" is not in that category. We expend no effort to "believe," so we don't "do" anything to be saved, nor to stay saved. (OTOH, one could successfully expend effort to resist salvation, or even to abdicate it once saved.)

-- Interestingly, Jesus as quoted by John uses words differently. For Him (or "them," assuming the language also reflects John's theology), in 6:29, eternal life is indeed conditioned on "faith" or "belief," but there faith IS a "work."

 

[ArcticFox]

That is perhaps the best explanation I have ever read...

But I still don't agree with the basic teachings behind it . I see God's grace as effectual, meaning that when it is extended it is effective for salvation. I believe this based on a variety of verses, within their contest, spread throughout the Bible, but particularly in the gospel of John, Philippians, Ephesians, and more.