Arminianism: Who is the Sovereign and Who is the Servant?

[Arial]

"Again it is certain that man never achieves a clear knowledge of himself unless he has first looked upon God's face, and then descends from contemplating to scrutinize himself....So it happens in estimating our spiritual goods. As long as we do not look beyond the earth, being quite content with our own righteousness, wisdom and virtue, we flatter ourselves most sweetly and fancy ourselves all but demigods. Suppose that once we begin to raise our thoughts to God. and to ponder his nature, and how perfect are his righteousness, wisdom, and power---the straightedge to which we must be shaped, Then what earlier was masquerading as righteousness was pleasing to us will soon grow filthy in its consummate wickedness. What wonderfully impressed under the name of wisdom will stink in its very foolishness. What wore the face of power will prove itself most miserable weakness. That is, what in us seems perfection itself corresponds ill to the purity of God.~~~~Calvin, Institutes~~~~

The position of Reformed theology is that God is free, He is sovereign over all His creation and that man as a creation of God is subject to him. Therefore not free.

What I have noticed in these debates, and what is concerning to me, is that, the man is free position, of Arminianism sets it focus on man's freedom as more important than God's freedom. In fact in order to preserve this freedom of man, their defense of that position arrives at a God who is not sovereign (though most claim to believe this in spite of the arguments that they use) but a creature who is sovereign over God. A God who is passive in election and man who is active in election. A God who is passive in the salvation of any, and the creature who is active in their own salvation. A God who is utterly dependant upon the creature for the effectiveness of the Son suffering and dying on the cross to save.

What concerns me about this is that all beliefs and doctrines of salvation and grace that come out of this position do not take God and who He reveals Himself to be, into consideration at all. Instead they start with man's freedom and then try and mold God around those teachings. The result is an inability or even desire to discover who God really is. What happens is using the scriptures to access the benefits of having been placed in Christ, the benefits of this world, and the benefit of escaping hell, without ever actually seeking God for the sake of seeking Him. The trust in God is placed first in the decision made in their freedom, and second in Christ and His person and work.

I believe a person can be saved even if they think this way, by the patience, mercy, longsuffering of God as long as a person actually knows what Jesus did, who He is, and believe it in their heart. Because God is sovereign and He does, according to scripture and HIs very nature that is revealed there, elect and predestine who He wills to salvation, He does His work in them of regeneration, regardless of what the person is being taught concerning the process. Some would disagree with me, and I can only say for sure that I am not certain. It is my hope because I have family that will not even listen to anything opposed to free will.

But there is so much that is not gained that God has given to us, so many scriptures and definitions of words that must be altered to fit the presupposition of man's freedom, while trying to align them with the self revealed God is not even attempted. God is not looked at to determine what something means. Because of this, the depth of God and the entire redemption is missed. The unfathomable magnitude of the rescue by Jesus is missed. Even the breathtaking power and perfection of God though declared by the mouth lacks depth in the heart for it has no depth in the mind. His omniscience in free will becomes passive knowledge of all that will happen and then determining that it will come to pass that way. That He knows all the contingencies and which contingency will actually occur according to what man does, and then agrees to it. Everything about God is in relation to and a response to the actions of humanity. Gone is the omniscience that tells us He has full knowledge of everything because He "built" it and all that is in His creation also contains everything in it that causes it to function, and breathe, and move, and be, from a worm to the stones in a mountain, from the movement of planets, to the sun and earth and rain providing exactly what the tree or the blade of grass needs. And with humanity at the helm, we are prone to miss the perfect harmony and symmetry and interwoven tapestry of redemption, and of the mind and being of God that begins in Gen 1:1, and flows steadily forward throughout His word. Without faltering or turning or backward step, every single thing connected to the next showing us who He is. The Almighty. Lord of Hosts. Ancient of Days. The Alpha and Omega. Sovereign over all He made. The One who owns all knowledge, and wisdom, and power, and grace, and good. The only One who can give it.

Seek God. Know God.
Ps 65

Praise is awaiting You, O God, in Zion;
And to You the [a]vow shall be performed.
2 O You who hear prayer,
To You all flesh will come.
3 Iniquities prevail against me;
As for our transgressions,
You will provide atonement for them.
4 Blessed is the man You choose,
And cause to approach You,
That he may dwell in Your courts.
We shall be satisfied with the goodness of Your house,
Of Your holy temple.
5 By awesome deeds in righteousness You will answer us,
O God of our salvation,
You who are the confidence of all the ends of the earth,
And of the far-off seas;
6 Who established the mountains by His strength,
Being clothed with power;
7 You who still the noise of the seas,
The noise of their waves,
And the tumult of the peoples.
8 They also who dwell in the farthest parts are afraid of Your signs;
You make the outgoings of the morning and evening [b]rejoice.
9 You [c]visit the earth and water it,
You greatly enrich it;
The river of God is full of water;
You provide their grain,
For so You have prepared it.
10 You water its ridges abundantly,
You settle its furrows;
You make it soft with showers,
You bless its growth.
11 You crown the year with Your goodness,
And Your paths drip with abundance.
12 They drop on the pastures of the wilderness,
And the little hills rejoice on every side.
13 The pastures are clothed with flocks;
The valleys also are covered with grain;
They shout for joy, they also sing.

 

[Josheb]

"Again it is certain that man never achieves a clear knowledge of himself unless he has first looked upon God's face, and then descends from contemplating to scrutinize himself....So it happens in estimating our spiritual goods. As long as we do not look beyond the earth, being quite content with our own righteousness, wisdom and virtue, we flatter ourselves most sweetly and fancy ourselves all but demigods. Suppose that once we begin to raise our thoughts to God. and to ponder his nature, and how perfect are his righteousness, wisdom, and power---the straightedge to which we must be shaped, Then what earlier was masquerading as righteousness was pleasing to us will soon grow filthy in its consummate wickedness. What wonderfully impressed under the name of wisdom will stink in its very foolishness. What wore the face of power will prove itself most miserable weakness. That is, what in us seems perfection itself corresponds ill to the purity of God.~~~~Calvin, Institutes~~~~

The position of Reformed theology is that God is free, He is sovereign over all His creation and that man as a creation of God is subject to him. Therefore not free.

What I have noticed in these debates, and what is concerning to me, is that, the man is free position, of Arminianism sets it focus on man's freedom as more important than God's freedom. In fact in order to preserve this freedom of man, their defense of that position arrives at a God who is not sovereign (though most claim to believe this in spite of the arguments that they use) but a creature who is sovereign over God. A God who is passive in election and man who is active in election. A God who is passive in the salvation of any, and the creature who is active in their own salvation. A God who is utterly dependant upon the creature for the effectiveness of the Son suffering and dying on the cross to save..............

Amen

 

[His clay]

"Again it is certain that man never achieves a clear knowledge of himself unless he has first looked upon God's face, and then descends from contemplating to scrutinize himself....So it happens in estimating our spiritual goods. As long as we do not look beyond the earth, being quite content with our own righteousness, wisdom and virtue, we flatter ourselves most sweetly and fancy ourselves all but demigods. Suppose that once we begin to raise our thoughts to God. and to ponder his nature, and how perfect are his righteousness, wisdom, and power---the straightedge to which we must be shaped, Then what earlier was masquerading as righteousness was pleasing to us will soon grow filthy in its consummate wickedness. What wonderfully impressed under the name of wisdom will stink in its very foolishness. What wore the face of power will prove itself most miserable weakness. That is, what in us seems perfection itself corresponds ill to the purity of God.~~~~Calvin, Institutes~~~~

The position of Reformed theology is that God is free, He is sovereign over all His creation and that man as a creation of God is subject to him. Therefore not free.

What I have noticed in these debates, and what is concerning to me, is that, the man is free position, of Arminianism sets it focus on man's freedom as more important than God's freedom. In fact in order to preserve this freedom of man, their defense of that position arrives at a God who is not sovereign (though most claim to believe this in spite of the arguments that they use) but a creature who is sovereign over God. A God who is passive in election and man who is active in election. A God who is passive in the salvation of any, and the creature who is active in their own salvation. A God who is utterly dependant upon the creature for the effectiveness of the Son suffering and dying on the cross to save.

What concerns me about this is that all beliefs and doctrines of salvation and grace that come out of this position do not take God and who He reveals Himself to be, into consideration at all. Instead they start with man's freedom and then try and mold God around those teachings. The result is an inability or even desire to discover who God really is. What happens is using the scriptures to access the benefits of having been placed in Christ, the benefits of this world, and the benefit of escaping hell, without ever actually seeking God for the sake of seeking Him. The trust in God is placed first in the decision made in their freedom, and second in Christ and His person and work.

I believe a person can be saved even if they think this way, by the patience, mercy, longsuffering of God as long as a person actually knows what Jesus did, who He is, and believe it in their heart. Because God is sovereign and He does, according to scripture and HIs very nature that is revealed there, elect and predestine who He wills to salvation, He does His work in them of regeneration, regardless of what the person is being taught concerning the process. Some would disagree with me, and I can only say for sure that I am not certain. It is my hope because I have family that will not even listen to anything opposed to free will.

But there is so much that is not gained that God has given to us, so many scriptures and definitions of words that must be altered to fit the presupposition of man's freedom, while trying to align them with the self revealed God is not even attempted. God is not looked at to determine what something means. Because of this, the depth of God and the entire redemption is missed. The unfathomable magnitude of the rescue by Jesus is missed. Even the breathtaking power and perfection of God though declared by the mouth lacks depth in the heart for it has no depth in the mind. His omniscience in free will becomes passive knowledge of all that will happen and then determining that it will come to pass that way. That He knows all the contingencies and which contingency will actually occur according to what man does, and then agrees to it. Everything about God is in relation to and a response to the actions of humanity. Gone is the omniscience that tells us He has full knowledge of everything because He "built" it and all that is in His creation also contains everything in it that causes it to function, and breathe, and move, and be, from a worm to the stones in a mountain, from the movement of planets, to the sun and earth and rain providing exactly what the tree or the blade of grass needs. And with humanity at the helm, we are prone to miss the perfect harmony and symmetry and interwoven tapestry of redemption, and of the mind and being of God that begins in Gen 1:1, and flows steadily forward throughout His word. Without faltering or turning or backward step, every single thing connected to the next showing us who He is. The Almighty. Lord of Hosts. Ancient of Days. The Alpha and Omega. Sovereign over all He made. The One who owns all knowledge, and wisdom, and power, and grace, and good. The only One who can give it.

Seek God. Know God.
Ps 65

Praise is awaiting You, O God, in Zion;
And to You the [a]vow shall be performed.
2 O You who hear prayer,
To You all flesh will come.
3 Iniquities prevail against me;
As for our transgressions,
You will provide atonement for them.
4 Blessed is the man You choose,
And cause to approach You,
That he may dwell in Your courts.
We shall be satisfied with the goodness of Your house,
Of Your holy temple.
5 By awesome deeds in righteousness You will answer us,
O God of our salvation,
You who are the confidence of all the ends of the earth,
And of the far-off seas;
6 Who established the mountains by His strength,
Being clothed with power;
7 You who still the noise of the seas,
The noise of their waves,
And the tumult of the peoples.
8 They also who dwell in the farthest parts are afraid of Your signs;
You make the outgoings of the morning and evening [b]rejoice.
9 You [c]visit the earth and water it,
You greatly enrich it;
The river of God is full of water;
You provide their grain,
For so You have prepared it.
10 You water its ridges abundantly,
You settle its furrows;
You make it soft with showers,
You bless its growth.
11 You crown the year with Your goodness,
And Your paths drip with abundance.
12 They drop on the pastures of the wilderness,
And the little hills rejoice on every side.
13 The pastures are clothed with flocks;
The valleys also are covered with grain;
They shout for joy, they also sing.

Praise the Lord! Thanks for posting.

 

[Arial]

Here is what the late Norman Geisler had to say about Calvinism in his 1999 book "Chosen But Free." A book I feel was specifically written to muddy the waters as Reformed theology was on the rise. There is nothing Reformed about his teaching in this book and yet he self identifies as a moderate Calvinist calling the Reformed five point theology extreme Calvinism. There is no validity to such a claim historically or otherwise.

He says, "Belief affects behavior, and so ideas have consequences.---Likewise false doctrine will lead to false deeds." If he had stopped there we might all nod in agreement. But he goes on to proclaim that Reformed theology "can have a devastating effect on one's salvation. To say nothing of one's enthusiasm to reach others for Christ." That it lays the groundwork for universalism, undermines trust in the love of God, and in doing this has been "the occasion for disbelief and even atheism for many." He declares that the God presented by those who adhere to Reformed theology "is not worthy of worship" and "does not represent God at all." This viewpoint he says, is so "unfortunate" that it removes the motivation for intercessory prayer. He turns effectual saving grace into "force", brought into the covenant of grace as being dragged in kicking and screaming.

I feel quite sure that Geisler knows full well that he is misrepresenting Reformed theology. But he does so anyway, and how often do we see these same arguments parroted in what is loosely termed debate on the forum. I say loosely because the free will camp, regardless of what form it takes, does no better a job of supporting its position than Geisler did in CBF. No exegesis of scripture. No examination of the exegesis or assertions of the opposition. The truth is they don't because they can't. The Bible won't support their position.

But why do this? What is at the root of this debate. Pretty much the same thing the RCC fought tooth and nail against in the Reformation. With them it was to maintain the supremacy of the Catholic church in dispensing grace. In the Protestant position it is to defend the freedom of man to choose for himself in all things and in all ways. In essence to not be dependant upon God for anything other than the provision of a way of salvation.

One of the great dangers of the Reformation according to Ignatius of Loyola (founder of the Jesuits) to his followers, was that they would so stress the power of God that the freedom of man was eclipsed. His follower Luis de Molina came up with his theory of "middle knowledge." This says that God knows what free agents will do in circumstances that exist but their actions are still free. This was done to get around the teachings of the Reformation on the sovereignty of God and the freedom of God as the ultimate in all things. Surprisingly the A'ist position on free will, however defined, pertains to God's knowledge. Geisler redefines the biblical definition of foreknowledge as God knowing what will happen and then determining that it will happen.

Enter Geisler and it's echo among those who deny the sovereignty of God in election.

"---- God will save the greatest number of people that is actually achievable without violating their free choice." "God will not save people at all cost---not if it is at the cost of their freedom or dignity---for that would mean at the cost of their humanity. God will not dehumanise in order to save."

Does that sound like the God we read of anywhere in the Bible? Does that sound like an upside down theology? And par for the course, Geisler does not bother to present anything as support. or anything carefully run through proper exegesis. No one does, and no one can. The Bible absolutely will not support it.

 

[makesends]

But there is so much that is not gained that God has given to us, so many scriptures and definitions of words that must be altered to fit the presupposition of man's freedom, while trying to align them with the self revealed God is not even attempted. God is not looked at to determine what something means. Because of this, the depth of God and the entire redemption is missed. The unfathomable magnitude of the rescue by Jesus is missed. Even the breathtaking power and perfection of God though declared by the mouth lacks depth in the heart for it has no depth in the mind. His omniscience in free will becomes passive knowledge of all that will happen and then determining that it will come to pass that way. That He knows all the contingencies and which contingency will actually occur according to what man does, and then agrees to it. Everything about God is in relation to and a response to the actions of humanity.

Just a question here, in the structure of what you wrote: I highlight, "That He knows all the contingencies and which contingency will actually occur according to what man does, and then agrees to it." in its context, because when I read it the first time it jumped out at me as a false statement. I'm just hoping you mean that sentence (because even though structurally it is a phrase, you punctuate it as a sentence, which is how I read it the first time. Now, looking again, I'm thinking you mean it as a continuation of the things the self-determinist ('Arminian', you said) assumes. I hope that is so.

It is, rather surprisingly, if you mean it how I hope you do, a statement both @Josheb and I agree with. Because the self-determinist notion of 'contingency' is not the same as his, though their descriptions sometimes sound the same. Their notion depends on mere chance, while, I think Josh places it in God's hands, perhaps vaguely, yet he begins his description of it with God having created that contingency, while they think, as you have said, that it depends on them. (Josh, please correct me or elucidate, if I've misrepresented what you believe.)