A Question for the Arminian

[Eternally-Grateful]

Please notice my comment was not directed at you personally.

I said, "the Arminian".

I did not say Eternally-Grateful is an Arminian.

I just do not even understand the comment.

then again, I see this thread is a question for the Arminian. so please forgive me, it makes total sense now..

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I strayed from the topic.

"If Christ died for all, why did he predestinate only some to salvation?

Apologies

I am just as guilty

 

[Arial]

Can somebody else please say this for EG better than I can? He's not getting it.

It doesn't matter how it is said, @Eternally-Grateful will not get it because he is refusing to listen. It would undo his entire prevenient grace view of the gospel and he would then have acknowledge that he has been mistaken. He would have to acknowledge that the Doctrines of Grace as defined by Calvinism/Reformed are spot on with what Scripture teaches. He has already determined who God is to him. and that if the DoG are true, then his image of God would need some adjustment. When one has already stated that God would be unjust if he did not give everyone equal opportunity to choose their own destiny, and that would not be consistent with love, well, then, the human humbling of seeing it in its true light, might just be too much to bear.

That is the crux of the issue, and why so much effort is being put forth to disguise it by diversional wandering about in peripheral subjects and random scriptures.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

It doesn't matter how it is said, @Eternally-Grateful will not get it because he is refusing to listen. It would undo his entire prevenient grace view of the gospel and he would then have acknowledge that he has been mistaken. He would have to acknowledge that the Doctrines of Grace as defined by Calvinism/Reformed are spot on with what Scripture teaches. He has already determined who God is to him. and that if the DoG are true, then his image of God would need some adjustment. When one has already stated that God would be unjust if he did not give everyone equal opportunity to choose their own destiny, and that would not be consistent with love, well, then, the human humbling of seeing it in its true light, might just be too much to bear.

That is the crux of the issue, and why so much effort is being put forth to disguise it by diversional wandering about in peripheral subjects and random scriptures.

Very well stated.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Very well stated.

This is a joke..

I do not believe it because I do not see it in scripture

I have asked people awhile ago to not put me under some ISM. I second that request

If we can not agree. it is not because I am following some ism.. Its because I do not see it



{edit}

 

[Arial]

Very well stated.

Thanks.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

This is a joke..

I do not believe it because I do not see it in scripture

I have asked people awhile ago to not put me under some ISM. I second that request

If we can not agree. it is not because I am following some ism.. Its because I do not see it



But I see what I mentioned yesterday to another member exactly what I told her.

its sad people are so proud that they think they have the truth, and feel they need to talk down to others.

its why I refuse to acknowledge a certain persons post. and will continue to do so.

Also.. We ARE OFF TOPIC. A thread got closed down from that same member saying I took it off topic. even though all i did was answer other members questions. Should this thread be closed now until people can get back on topic? or is it just when I take it off topic?

its sad people are so proud that they think they have the truth, and feel they need to talk down to others.

I do not see this happening.

Back on topic.

How do you answer the OP question.

"If Christ died for all, why did he predestinate only some to salvation?

Either one is a synergist or a monergist, there is no in between.

How do you answer the OP?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I do not see this happening.

{edit: using a personal perception of a person's motives and actions as though it were fact, and making an accusation of the person}

Back on topic.

How do you answer the OP question.

I did already

Because he predestined according to his will

Whoever sees and believes

He predestined that they would be conformed to his image

Those who reject him in unbelief will not and they will remain condemned.

keep on reading

John 6: 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

the two go hand in hand, who has the father given Jesus. Those who see and believe.

How can one see and believe? Because God shows himself to them. and we see in this very chapter. even the disciples. who did not understand yet. understood.

what gives life (eternal) the words. in Peters words

68 But Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

Also in John 5:

24 ;“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life

who has passed from death to life (regeneration) but he who sees and believes

Either one is a synergist or a monergist, there is no in between.

This is according to reformed teaching or some doctrinal position

the word monergism or synergism is not found in scripture.

How do you answer the OP?

see above

 

[Arial]

I do not believe it because I do not see it in scripture

It isn't that difficult to see. One must be intentionally blinding themselves to it to not see it. However, because one doesn't see something does not mean that it is not there.

I have asked people awhile ago to not put me under some ISM. I second that request

If we can not agree. it is not because I am following some ism.. Its because I do not see it

However some of the things you report that you see, are also promoted by an "ism". But that request would need to go in response to a place where you were identified with an "ism". Your responses often have no bearing whatsoever on the post you quote. Just a heads up.

 

[makesends]

This is a joke..

I do not believe it because I do not see it in scripture

I have asked people awhile ago to not put me under some ISM. I second that request

If we can not agree. it is not because I am following some ism.. Its because I do not see it



{edit}

Do you not think that the majority on this site see things how they do because of their predisposition toward the Doctrines of Grace (or words to that effect)? I consider you a brother, but to me it is ludicrous for ANY human to consider their view to be the only truth, because, to me it is ludicrous to think that anyone's view is uncolored and unhindered by their humanity. We ALL have our predispositions. Yours is rather obviously that you see things from a self-deterministic point-of-view. Consider the following short list, just off the top of my head:

YOU have to be treated fairly by God, ("fairly", being according to YOUR judgement). God owes all humans that. God is not unjust.

YOU have the ability to make actual, capable, binding choices upon which God's decisions concerning you depend. After all, he doesn't force anyone. They happen somehow, first, though you deny it is by your force of will.

YOUR reading of Scripture is accurate. And you have spent many years fitting the pieces together. YOUR comprehension of the terms of the Gospel is valid. YOU cannot see how your faith is engendered within you by God himself, apart from your choosing him —it is SUCH a part of you!

YOU MUST BE the one to choose your salvation —not God, though he does so too— though you claim it is not a work; maybe you even claim the choosing is, as you seemed at one point to say, the result of God convincing you of his trustworthiness. The faith being yours to wield, YOU came to an end of yourself by your own assessment, and it was so.

YOUR view of fact, of language and thinking, of reality —though temporal, and though Scripture repeatedly differentiates the vaporous temporal from the solid reality of the eternal— is understood by you as reality, as THE way to look at the Gospel.


Granted, you could write a list for me to consider, since I readily admit to a POV, one that I have gained through a life of Bible Study, agonized prayer with tears, and hard experience that has taught me how small my trustworthiness is considered by God as valid. You can show me how my presumptions of God's absolute power, purity, purpose and sovereignty color my whole world. And you would be right —it does! I wish it would do so more, so that I could lose myself in him.

Yes, everyone has a bias on their view of fact.

 

[makesends]

I bring up an objection that this happens..

Yes, according to your logic. it is true

But I see no logic in this at all. and have been trying to show you why.

agreed you do not

If they have not yet believed THEY ARE IN SIN.

Jesus said they are still condemned

that means their condemnation has not yet been removed..

All, as you see it, according to TEMPORAL sequence of events

How is one born again.

again read John 3: 10 - 18

You have read John 3:10-18 no more than I have. Why would you consider me reading it again, as biased as I am in what comes across as the Reformed POV, to be any different in use that the last time I did? Again.

Can I honestly ask you a question.

You say I am not getting it as if it is a fact.

Can it not be I am not getting it because it makes no sense

and can it be. that maybe i am not getting it because it is not found in the word of God?

can It not be that I am not getting it. because I see something totally different?

You see things so little different from how I did, back a few years ago, that I know well how hard you must try to make the pieces fit. You do not want to deny human responsibility, and justice, fairness, by God, but you cannot see how God's sovereignty amplifies that responsibility and justice, rather than diminishing them.

I agree it makes no sense to YOU, and I also readily admit that I can be wrong, very wrong, and can fool myself, and believe what I do because for once, Scripture makes perfect sense to me without me feeling that I must stretch anything. Salvation is entirely of Grace, and not of my own doing in any way. And so I do what it does in me.

why do people have to talk down to others as if your truth is truth, and theirs is not?

My appeal was out of frustration. I dearly want you to look at Scripture from an eternal perspective. What drives me concerning the church, probably more than anything else, is valid, strong doctrine of the Person and Being of God. HE made us and not we ourselves. This is an eternal fact, permeating time, from beginning to end, and for all eternity, we are HIS creation, and not yet what he has completed.

I may be wrong. I most certainly don't see the whole picture, and no doubt grasp at many straws myself. But this has replaced even my concern —but for what time I insist to disobey— over my own salvation, this joy of seeing God at work, and his satisfaction in the work of his hands.

Its an honest question

Read post #30

 

[Carbon]

I may be out of my league asking this, but I see this as a crucial matter.

"If Christ died for all, why did he predestinate only some to salvation?

Because he didn't die for all.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Do you not think that the majority on this site see things how they do because of their predisposition toward the Doctrines of Grace (or words to that effect)?

do you presume I reject the doctrines of grace?

just because I may have a differeing view of what grace is. does not mean I reject grace.

I consider you a brother, but to me it is ludicrous for ANY human to consider their view to be the only truth

I agree 100%.

But I am not the one telling others to explain to a brother the truth, because my brother can;t see it (

, because, to me it is ludicrous to think that anyone's view is uncolored and unhindered by their humanity.

again 100%

We ALL have our predispositions. Yours is rather obviously that you see things from a self-deterministic point-of-view.

and here we go. You are stating your truth is correct. and mine is not

Nothing I say is self deterministic.. That's coming from your4 doctrine, from your theology, from your belief.

And it is insulting to continually get falsly accused of somethign that is not true.

I have explained this so many times I have lost count, yet you keep falsly accusing me of being self determined.

GOD DREW ME

GOD CONVINCED ME

GOD TAUGHT ME

GOD GAVE ME GRACE

GOD BROUGHT ME TO FAITH

all I did was not walk away in in belief.

You can not say everything you just insisted that we can not do or say these things about ourselves. then do the very thing you said we should not do

Consider the following short list, just off the top of my head:

YOU have to be treated fairly by God, ("fairly", being according to YOUR judgement). God owes all humans that. God is not unjust.

I never said this

YOU have the ability to make actual, capable, binding choices upon which God's decisions concerning you depend. After all, he doesn't force anyone. They happen somehow, first, though you deny it is by your force of will.

No it is not by my force of will. again, you have falsly accused me.

YOUR reading of Scripture is accurate.

I never said this either. I Gave my view of what scripture said, just like you did.

And you have spent many years fitting the pieces together.

I was saved when I was 8 years old.. many years? I did not know very much at that age. but again, thank you for once again falsely accusing me

YOUR comprehension of the terms of the Gospel is valid.

I never stated this.. once again, a glaring false accusation

I give a differing view. i never stated mine is completely correct. or stated you have a false gospel.

YOU cannot see how your faith is engendered within you by God himself, apart from your choosing him —it is SUCH a part of you!

Its all of God. again, misrepresentation of what I believe and have said since day one

YOU MUST BE the one to choose your salvation —not God, though he does so too—

God made the response not me, I just interpet God at what he says.

the gospel that is sent out in Jesus words is a gospel of repentance.

what good is the gospel if one does not repent?

and who causes the repentance?

though you claim it is not a work; maybe you even claim the choosing is, as you seemed at one point to say, the result of God convincing you of his trustworthiness. The faith being yours to wield, YOU came to an end of yourself by your own assessment, and it was so.

My faith is not in myself

the ONLY way your argument works is if my faith is in my work..

Again, Your reading what I say from your doctrine and theology. its why now you have falsly accused me how many times?

YOUR view of fact, of language and thinking, of reality —though temporal, and though Scripture repeatedly differentiates the vaporous temporal from the solid reality of the eternal— is understood by you as reality, as THE way to look at the Gospel.

You think your view is reality from the same bible

so it is ok for you to think this but not anyone else,.

is this not hypocricy at its finest. if I do it its ok, if anyone lese does it. bad boy.

Granted, you could write a list for me to consider, since I readily admit to a POV, one that I have gained through a life of Bible Study, agonized prayer with tears, and hard experience that has taught me how small my trustworthiness is considered by God as valid.

Thats great, I have done the same

does that mean God helped you and not me?

Again, is it ok if you did it. But not me?

and if I do not agree with you. damned be me??

come on man, listen to yourself..

I am not trying to be unkind or judgmental. But your whole post has judged me.

You can show me how my presumptions of God's absolute power, purity, purpose and sovereignty color my whole world. And you would be right —it does! I wish it would do so more, so that I could lose myself in him.

Yes, everyone has a bias on their view of fact.

yes.

and when we use a bias, one of the main indicators. is you are unable to hear the other person. and you interpret them based on your bias. and you falsly accuse them

again, In other threads. I am constantly accused of being a calvinist because I believe in eternal security.

Yes, I believe in eternal security, I believe alot of things a calvinist believes.

it does not make me a Calvinist.. but all they can see is what they believe through their lens. so they are unable to hear a word I say.

Lets all humble ourselves.. and stop thinking everyone is attacking everyone.

if I falsly accuse you. call me out

just like I have done how many times in this one post?

 

[Josheb]

Being what many would call Hyper-C, at least in this subject, I would ask it this way, "Why would Christ die for those whom he had planned to perish in unbelief." It points out the ludicrous-ness of the notion.

YEP!!!

Or.... how could God spend His own Son's blood so worthlessly? So ineffectively?

 

[makesends]

do you presume I reject the doctrines of grace?

Presume? I should think even you presume that you reject them.

just because I may have a differeing view of what grace is. does not mean I reject grace.

The Doctrines of Grace are a specific set of carefully studied and derived and rendered doctrines, specific to Calvinism/Reformed attendance. Not the same meaning as the word, "grace". I do not say you reject grace, when I say you reject the doctrines of Grace. Whether you reject grace or not, is a different question.

Nothing I say is self deterministic.. That's coming from your4 doctrine, from your theology, from your belief.

And it is insulting to continually get falsly accused of somethign that is not true.

I have explained this so many times I have lost count, yet you keep falsly accusing me of being self determined.

What I have said is that your view is self-deterministic. I don't say you are self-determined. In spite of anyone's best efforts, (or maybe better said, in use of their best and worst efforts), God determines absolutely all things. You are not self-determined. But your doctrine is along the lines of those who read and think and speak and even outright defend self-deterministic thinking. Whether you mean to or not, your thinking is self-deterministic at the root.

GOD DREW ME

GOD CONVINCED ME

GOD TAUGHT ME

GOD GAVE ME GRACE

GOD BROUGHT ME TO FAITH

all I did was not walk away in in belief.

GOD DREW ME, GOD CONVINCED ME, GOD TAUGHT ME, GOD GAVE ME GRACE, GOD BROUGHT ME TO FAITH
And so, it is left up to you to choose, no? Thus it is your choice, prior to regeneration, that effects your salvation, and upon which your destiny turns.

all I did was not walk away in in belief.
Was that not, as I say, a reaction to what God had already done in you? What is it that makes THAT ("not walking away in [unbelief]" causal of faith, belief, submission, salvation, regeneration, repentance, and all the virtues that accompany that 'moment' of salvation?

I don't mean to belittle you, but that sounds like equivocation to me, to say, "all I did was not walk away in [unbelief]." But even there, works is evident: "...I did...".

You can not say everything you just insisted that we can not do or say these things about ourselves. then do the very thing you said we should not do

Yes, we will all be measured by our own standard.

 

[Arial]

do you presume I reject the doctrines of grace?

just because I may have a differeing view of what grace is. does not mean I reject grace.

You do reject the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) as they are defined in Reformed theology. At best you redefine them and then say you accept them. That has nothing to do with you rejecting grace. You have in the past given your own definition of it by dictionary definition only and not considering its biblical use in connection with salvation. In doing so you make God's grace in salvation potential grace and not efficacious grace. Now to find out which is correct, the best most reliable place to look would be in God's word and what he says about himself. Leaving man and his will completely out of determining who God is, and how he acts in history.

 

[Carbon]

You do reject the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) as they are defined in Reformed theology. At best you redefine them and then say you accept them. That has nothing to do with you rejecting grace. You have in the past given your own definition of it by dictionary definition only and not considering its biblical use in connection with salvation. In doing so you make God's grace in salvation potential grace and not efficacious grace. Now to find out which is correct, the best most reliable place to look would be in God's word and what he says about himself. Leaving man and his will completely out of determining who God is, and how he acts in history.

Amen!

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I am off topic here, but I find with the Arminian, they say and defend that the know the doctrines of Grace but after talking with them over time, they are really clueless.

Many have appealed to Leighton Flowers and his drivel.

If these people really understood the 5 points from a Biblical standpoint, there would be no denying it.

 

[Rescued One]

I don't know why they would believe that. They would probably post John 3:16. You might want to ask, why does He call everyone with a general call, but only effectually calls some? I've got to do another post, so I'll mull this over later and get back.

JOHN 3:18

 

[prism]

One could also assert...

Matthew 11:27 KJV
All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

..unless one claims that the Son has revealed the Father to all mankind.