Are you Arminian, Calvinist, or other?

[ReverendRV]

My mind even comes across to me as off the wall, sometimes. Just now I looked at the words in the https, "Are you arminian?" and I could hear Jimi Hendrix doing that signature guitar strum and singing, "...are you Arminian?....Well, I aaammmm."

Some of my favorite Posters I've dealt with, are Classical Arminians; IE real Arminius Arminians. They usually are Reasonable and understand why a Calvinist is a Calvinist; even if they prefer Arminius...

 

[makesends]

Some of my favorite Posters I've dealt with, are Classical Arminians; IE real Arminius Arminians. They usually are Reasonable and understand why a Calvinist is a Calvinist; even if they prefer Arminius...

I think I know what you mean. I prefer them in that they don't argue theory the way other arminian-istic believers do, and so don't go off into the weeds, but simply stay with "prevenient grace" as opposed to irresistible grace. It too is logically a losing argument but not so obviously as to claim to be a little first cause, trotting about the planet.

 

[David1701]

That's the aspect of Fullerism that I like. Only the Unconditional Elect are Atoned for, but all can be Atoned for. The Sufficiency and Efficiency of the Cross stuff...

I think at the end of the day, Calvinists agree with Sufficiency and Efficiency; but are afraid the Doctrine of Definite Atonement would get lost in the cracks of Sufficiency...

Not exactly...

When you write "...all can be Atoned for.", what do you mean? The atonement happened at the cross, and it was effectual. Jesus actually propitiated the Father; he did not make it possible for all to be propitiated, contingent upon their faith. Jesus actually redeemed; he did not make it possible for all to be redeemed, contingent upon their faith.

Sufficiency is not the same thing as scope. Being sufficient in value (because the value of Christ's atonement is infinite) is not the same thing as universal scope. The non-elect cannot be atoned for, since Jesus did not bear their sins and punishments on the cross. If he had borne their sins and punishments, then they would be saved in time and would not end up in hell.

 

[ReverendRV]

Not exactly...

When you write "...all can be Atoned for.", what do you mean? The atonement happened at the cross, and it was effectual. Jesus actually propitiated the Father; he did not make it possible for all to be propitiated, contingent upon their faith. Jesus actually redeemed; he did not make it possible for all to be redeemed, contingent upon their faith.

Sufficiency is not the same thing as scope. Being sufficient in value (because the value of Christ's atonement is infinite) is not the same thing as universal scope. The non-elect cannot be atoned for, since Jesus did not bear their sins and punishments on the cross. If he had borne their sins and punishments, then they would be saved in time and would not end up in hell.

I'm about to get busy, but I will say that Christ's Atonement is Limited in the Heavenly Holy of Holies when he sprinkled the Mercy Seat with his Blood only for the Elect; that the Cross was not Limited until after this conclusion of the Atonement took place in Heaven by our High Priest...

Doug at CARM says the sprinkling of the Blood in Heaven is Universal, not Limited. It was Limited to the Confessed Sins of the Elect, right? This limitation, limits the Cross; the Cross's Sufficiency doesn't limit it...

 

[Arial]

I marked Calvinism because I do agree with those things found in TULIP (which is a whole other topic---the entire teaching being reduced to an acronym that is somewhat misleading in order to make it one). But I am Reformed---also known as Covenant theology. Many Calvinist have as their interpretive framework dispensations. Reformed has the framework of covenant. Many Calvinist churches are not confessional and Reformed are. Meaning they do not have the historic creeds and catechisms and Reformed churches do. Otherwise they are pretty much the same.

 

[ChristB4us]

Other; a disciple of Jesus Christ.

We need not be identified by any other man in keeping the faith in Jesus Christ which is the good fight as I am sure scripture can be applied to both sides in reproving certain points in them.

1 Corinthians 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? 4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? 5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? 6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. 7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

I am sure one can be agreeing with Calvin side more so but still one can be ensnared to think they have to defend everything Calvin taught just because they agree with some points of truth as applied from the scripture, but I point out that Calvin at one time had agreed to the execution of a heretic which is not supported by scripture but reproved instead.

John 16:1These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. 2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. 3 And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.

Excommunication of an unrepentant believer after the whole church has confronted him or her is the only worst punishment to be administered.

Matthew 18:11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. 12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? 13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray. 14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

That does not mean that everything Calvin has taught is null and void but it goes to show that we are to prove all things by Him, even what we had accepted at face value by the church or a favorite hymn or a phenomenon without questioning it to see if it is Biblical or not.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it. 25 Brethren, pray for us.

Ephesians 6:11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. 12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. 13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

 

[David1701]

I'm about to get busy, but I will say that Christ's Atonement is Limited in the Heavenly Holy of Holies when he sprinkled the Mercy Seat with his Blood only for the Elect; that the Cross was not Limited until after this conclusion of the Atonement took place in Heaven by our High Priest...

Doug at CARM says the sprinkling of the Blood in Heaven is Universal, not Limited. It was Limited to the Confessed Sins of the Elect, right? This limitation, limits the Cross; the Cross's Sufficiency doesn't limit it...

Where does the Bible say any of this?

 

[ReverendRV]

Where does the Bible say any of this?

Nowhere...

But am I wrong? The Heavenly Atonement is Limited, right?

 

[Arial]

I am sure one can be agreeing with Calvin side more so but still one can be ensnared to think they have to defend everything Calvin taught just because they agree with some points of truth as applied from the scripture, but I point out that Calvin at one time had agreed to the execution of a heretic which is not supported by scripture but reproved instead

Misguided and in error though he was in this matter one must take a couple of things into consideration.

Given the witness in the OT as to how God instructed Israel to deal with their enemies in giving them the land, and the penal code against violating certain covenant law, Calvin might well have at least wrestled with the idea that the sentence of execution was valid according to scripture.

And it was at the time the common method the Roman church dealt with what they deemed heresy when it opposed their authority.

In any case, no one has everything right all the time or ever, and it would be foolishness to discount everything anyone says because of one giant misstep.

One has only to look at the dark ages and its causes and the things that were going on then, the light of truth nearly snuffed out; one has only look at the fight for that light, and the shoving out of the darkness, of the reformers to recognize that was a powerful divine intervention of equipping by God through His Spirit. It looked for centuries as though the gates of hell had prevailed against Christ's church---but they will NEVER.

We see it again today imo though in a much different way. What I call the walls of the church broken down and our gates burned with fire. Theology and sound doctrine left the building in large part decades ago, the shepherds feed themselves and the sheep are scattered. But even in the midst of all that, if one has a theology that the reformers established, that of a return to the apostolic doctrinal foundation, we know that Jesus will not lose one of His lambs. He relentlessly, steadily, patientiently, calls them and they hear His voice and follow Him. He knows who they are. The ones God has given Him.

 

[Eleanor]

I may have a mental/psychological block to understanding how the temporal can understand something figuratively to the eternal/spiritual. To me, that is backwards, as the spiritual is the 'more' real. (I know I didn't say that well, but at the moment I can't think how else to put that.) Even the places where Scripture says outright that something is figurative, I think it means it backwards from how we think. For example, when it says that the gate to the city is a pearl, I think "what do we know about 'pearl'? —maybe it is the real pearl, not these passing representations we draw out of oysters."

It is reasonable, however, to suppose a thing as figurative, in that we are unable to understand the 'flavor' of the thing being spoken of without the temporal reference.

But maybe I need another cup of coffee to help me wake up.

Figurative as in "pattern for," as in the OT sacrifices were figurative of Christ's sacrifice.
They were penal, substitutionary, sin-covering (while Christ's was sin-remitting) for those
who had faith in the promise (Ge 15:5, seed; Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16).

 

[Arial]

That does not mean that everything Calvin has taught is null and void but it goes to show that we are to prove all things by Him, even what we had accepted at face value by the church or a favorite hymn or a phenomenon without questioning it to see if it is Biblical or not.

Absolutely.

 

[Eleanor]

I'm about to get busy, but I will say that Christ's Atonement is Limited in the Heavenly Holy of Holies when he sprinkled the Mercy Seat with his Blood only for the Elect; that the Cross was not Limited until after this conclusion of the Atonement took place in Heaven by our High Priest...

Doug at CARM says the sprinkling of the Blood in Heaven is Universal, not Limited. It was Limited to the Confessed Sins of the Elect, right? This limitation, limits the Cross; the Cross's Sufficiency doesn't limit it...

The purpose of the Day of Atonement was for the cleansing of the holy things by blood (tabernacle, Lev 16:16) which had become defiled by being in the midst of a sinful people.

The sprinkling of the bull's blood with the High Priest's finger on the front of, and then seven times before the atonement cover (Mercy Seat) was to cleanse the Most Holy Place of the defilement caused by the sins of the High Priest and the sins of his household (Lev 16:14).

The sprinkling of the goat's blood in the same way was for cleansing the Most Holy Place of the defilement caused by the sins of the people (Lev 16:15).

Then the scapegoat was sent into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people to remove their sin from the tabernacle (Lev 16:22).

So the atonement within the Holy of Holies was not for forgiveness of sin, it was to cleanse the Most Holy Place of defilement.

Atonement for (forgiveness of) sin was made by the High Priest in sacrificing, outside the Tabernacle, the bull for the sins of himself and his household (Lev 16:11), and the goat for the sins of the people (Lev 16:15).

Noting that the atoning sacrifices were offered for God's people, not for all mankind.

 

[Deleted member 5]

The purpose of the Day of Atonement was for the cleansing of the holy things by blood (tabernacle, Lev 16:16) which had become defiled by being in the midst of a sinful people.

The sprinkling of the bull's blood with the High Priest's finger on the front of, and then seven times before the atonement cover (Mercy Seat) was to cleanse the Most Holy Place of the defilement caused by the sins of the High Priest and the sins of his household (Lev 16:14).

The sprinkling of the goat's blood was then done in the same way for cleansing the Most Holy Place of the defilement caused by the sins of the people (Lev 16:15).

The scapegoat was sent into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people to remove their sin from the tabernacle (Lev 16:22).

So the atonement within the Holy of Holies was not for forgiveness of sin, it was to cleanse the Most Holy Place of defilement.

Atonement for (forgiveness of) sin was made by the High Priest in sacrificing, outside of the Holy of Holies, the bull for the sins of himself and his household (Lev 16:11), and of the goat for the sins of the people (Lev 16:15).
Noting that the atoning sacrifices were offered for God's people, not for all mankind.

Have you read any of Gordon Wenhams works on Leviticus?

 

[ChristB4us]

Misguided and in error though he was in this matter one must take a couple of things into consideration.

Given the witness in the OT as to how God instructed Israel to deal with their enemies in giving them the land, and the penal code against violating certain covenant law, Calvin might well have at least wrestled with the idea that the sentence of execution was valid according to scripture.

And it was at the time the common method the Roman church dealt with what they deemed heresy when it opposed their authority.

In any case, no one has everything right all the time or ever, and it would be foolishness to discount everything anyone says because of one giant misstep.

One has only to look at the dark ages and its causes and the things that were going on then, the light of truth nearly snuffed out; one has only look at the fight for that light, and the shoving out of the darkness, of the reformers to recognize that was a powerful divine intervention of equipping by God through His Spirit. It looked for centuries as though the gates of hell had prevailed against Christ's church---but they will NEVER.

We see it again today imo though in a much different way. What I call the walls of the church broken down and our gates burned with fire. Theology and sound doctrine left the building in large part decades ago, the shepherds feed themselves and the sheep are scattered. But even in the midst of all that, if one has a theology that the reformers established, that of a return to the apostolic doctrinal foundation, we know that Jesus will not lose one of His lambs. He relentlessly, steadily, patientiently, calls them and they hear His voice and follow Him. He knows who they are. The ones God has given Him.

I believe He will not recover every lost lamb by the time He comes as the Bridegroom for why only a few will be found abiding in Him, which is why those denied by Him for being workers of iniquity as that iniquity by its work denies Him, He still abides even in those left behind as He will finish His work even in those unrepentant saints left behind.

 

[Eleanor]

Have you read any of Gordon Wenhams works on Leviticus?

No, nor am I familiar with the name.

 

[David1701]

Nowhere...

But am I wrong? The Heavenly Atonement is Limited, right?

It's the other part that's the problem.

 

[Deleted member 5]

No, nor am I familiar with the name.

He is an OT scholar and has a wonderful commentary on Leviticus.

 

[ChristB4us]

I'm about to get busy, but I will say that Christ's Atonement is Limited in the Heavenly Holy of Holies when he sprinkled the Mercy Seat with his Blood only for the Elect; that the Cross was not Limited until after this conclusion of the Atonement took place in Heaven by our High Priest...

Doug at CARM says the sprinkling of the Blood in Heaven is Universal, not Limited. It was Limited to the Confessed Sins of the Elect, right? This limitation, limits the Cross; the Cross's Sufficiency doesn't limit it...

And...

Where does the Bible say any of this?

1 Timothy 4:9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. 11 These things command and teach.

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Romans 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. 10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. 11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

By combining the truth from those 3 scriptures, Christ's atonement is received when we believe and not before. His blood can save all but only applied and received when one believes in Jesus Christ & that God has raised Him from the dead.

 

[Deleted member 5]

I believe He will not recover every lost lamb by the time He comes as the Bridegroom

Welcome @ChristB4us!

The above is interesting. What do you mean by "every lost lamb?" Who are they exactly?

for why only a few will be found abiding in Him, which is why those denied by Him for being workers of iniquity as that iniquity by its work denies Him,

Do you believe they were saved, then lost salvation?

He still abides even in those left behind

At what point specifically are these left behind?

as He will finish His work even in those unrepentant saints left behind.

Hmmm. OK.

 

[ReverendRV]

It's the other part that's the problem.

Another thing I'm right about, is that Jesus said if the Seed hadn't been carried away; the Trodden Soil could turn and be healed, just as the Good Soil is healed. This speaks of Sufficiency...

The question is; why is Sufficiency true of the Cross though? The reason is due to the Sacrifice of the Cross, not due the Atonement of the Cross...