My issues with Arminianism

[Carbon]

Here are 6 of my issues with Arminianism.

1) God's decrees are limited by man's choices/decisions.

The main thing is, God's eternal purpose is established "for his own glory".
Psalm 33:11 states:
The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations.

These include the happenings of life, the affairs of nations, and the actions of both good and evil.
And, they were made before the world began and are immutable.

2) The belief that believers can "fall away" and lose their salvation

Now I do know that not all Arminians believe that a believer can lose their salvation; they are not all in agreement. But many insist on it even though scripture teaches perseverance of the saints.

According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: Eph 3:11.
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. Romans 8:1.

And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Eph 4:30.

3) Arminianism can lead to a works-based righteousness, where individuals constantly strive for a perfection they can never achieve, leading to guilt and a lack of assurance of salvation.
I believe it's just another road to Rome.

4) The view that Christ's death was sufficient for all but not effective for everyone until a person chooses, which undercuts the efficacy of the atonement itself.
This makes Christ's atonement a probable atonement. Which teaches, it's possible to get saved.

5) Arminianism has a weak view of original sin, which in turn impacts the understanding of the need for the work of Christ and the nature of conversion.
Arminians claim they agree with Original sin, but I believe they do not rightly understand it.

6) Arminianism detracts from God's glory. They emphasize human ability to choose. This proves their lack of true understanding of original sin. Some may not realize it, but they are taking a little of the glory of salvation for themselves.

 

[Carbon]

5) Arminianism has a weak view of original sin, which in turn impacts the understanding of the need for the work of Christ and the nature of conversion.
Arminians claim they agree with Original sin, but I believe they do not rightly understand it.

The gospel invitation extends a call to salvation to every single person who hears its message. It invites all men, without distinction, to drink freely of the water of life and live. It promises salvation to all who repent and believe. But this outward general call, extended to the elect and the non-elect alike, will not bring sinners to Christ.
Why? Because men are by nature dead in sin and are under its power. They are of themselves unable and unwilling to forsake their evil ways and to turn to Christ for mercy. Consequently, the unregenerate will not respond to the gospel call to repentance and faith. No amount of external threatinings or promises will cause blind, deaf, dead, rebellious sinners to bow before Christ as Lord and to look to Him alone for salvation. Such an act of faith and submission is contrary to the lost man's nature.

Receiving and believing the gospel is not a result of preaching the word. But it is the Holy Spirit extending to the elect a special inward call in addition to the outward call contained in the gospel message. Through this special call, the Holy Spirit performs a work of grace within the sinner, which inevitably brings him to faith in Christ. This inner call by the Holy Spirit is always efficacious; it always results in salvation

 

[Carbon]

6) Arminianism detracts from God's glory. They emphasize human ability to choose. This proves their lack of true understanding of original sin. Some may not realize it, but they are taking a little of the glory of salvation for themselves.

There is absolutely nothing we can do to get an unregenerate person to have faith and believe the gospel unto salvation. No, regeneration is not the result of the persuasive influence of the truth.

Look at it this way, being born again (regeneration) is a "recreation" of the soul, it is a creative operation of the Holy Spirit "below consciousness."
And without the presence of the knowledge of Christ in a man's mind, the new life infused into the soul cannot function.
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3.
God, the Holy Spirit really does a great work!

The exercise of faith in Christ would be an utter impossibility where all knowledge of Christ is absent. Consider, in the case of natural birth, God sees to it that children are born into a world wherein the necessities of life, such as light, air, and nourishment, are provided for. Why would we believe spiritual life would be different?
God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished and where spiritual life can function properly. And for this, the word of God is a condition that is essential.

So, we find that when Reformed Theology places the external call before regeneration, this does not mean that it considers the external call as the efficient cause of regeneration nor as a means the Holy Spirit uses in the regeneration of the soul. But Reformed theology does in the case of adults, the external call is a prerequisite to regeneration.

 

[Rella]

God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished and where spiritual life can function properly. And for this, the word of God is a condition that is essential.

I see this as a reasonable conclusion.

But if he sees it cannot be nourished... how do you account for the fact that there are many... and by todays standards possibly most that
might be the case.... then what?

 

[Carbon]

I see this as a reasonable conclusion.

But if he sees it cannot be nourished... how do you account for the fact that there are many... and by todays standards possibly most that
might be the case.... then what?

I'm afraid I do not quite understand your question.

It seems you're asking what if God sees where the new spiritual life cannot be nourished?

 

[Rella]

I'm afraid I do not quite understand your question.

It seems you're asking what if God sees where the new spiritual life cannot be nourished?

Let me try differently...

You had said "
Carbon said:

God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished and where spiritual life can function properly. And for this, the word of God is a condition that is essential.

God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished and where spiritual life can function properly. This makes perfect sense for the predestined person, and also in my view of free will people... which someday, not now, Ill get into.'
I have no disagreement with this as stated.
My problem come with those people with whom spiritual life cannot be nourished.
In the case of predestination Calvin simply chalked these people off to the reprobates with no hope....
So these people that God created and made are simply lost... and I suggested that is the majority of folks today
who would never consider repentance.
That of course is the Calvin Double Predestination view..... And is also the Westminster Confession of Faith view that
was based on Calvin....
So we have a lot of folks with no hope, ever.... And it does bother me....
So yes... my question is on your view, if God sees where the new spiritual life cannot be nourished, what then?

I still remember Karla Faye Tucker who killed those people, sentenced to death for killing two people with a pickaxe during a burglary, in Texas in the 1990s and had a jailhouse conversion before she was put to death.
Remember her...?

 

[makesends]

Consequently, the unregenerate will not respond to the gospel call to repentance and faith. No amount of external threatinings or promises will cause blind, deaf, dead, rebellious sinners to bow before Christ as Lord and to look to Him alone for salvation. Such an act of faith and submission is contrary to the lost man's nature.

Well, yes and no. They may very well "respond" according to the flesh, even to the point of believing that they have faith, and their guilt expunged, specially by the relief of "giving up their own will to God" and "accepting Him into their life". They are still what I call self-determinists.

But if he sees it cannot be nourished... how do you account for the fact that there are many... and by todays standards possibly most that
might be the case.... then what?

"But if he sees..."? Are you saying his choice of to whom to show mercy comes from what he sees in a person?
"But if he sees it cannot be nourished..." Are you limiting his ability to "nourish"?

 

[Rella]

Well, yes and no. They may very well "respond" according to the flesh, even to the point of believing that they have faith, and their guilt expunged, specially by the relief of "giving up their own will to God" and "accepting Him into their life". They are still what I call self-determinists.
I
"But if he sees..."? Are you saying his choice of to whom to show mercy comes from what he sees in a person?
"But if he sees it cannot be nourished..." Are you limiting his ability to "nourish"?

If you are addressing part of your reply to me....

@Carbon said

God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished and where spiritual life can function properly. And for this, the word of God is a condition that is essential.
You said...
Are you limiting his ability to "nourish"? I am not limiting God to anything. He has no limits. He can do anything He chooses and wants to. Including saving ever person who ever lived from Adam onward.
I do not agree with what Carbon stated "God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished "

With God's foreknowledge, he knows from before time where that spiritual life will take place and be properly nourished.... And he does so... and that is where the predestination of the free will come in... because God knows where to nourish and where not to.

 

[makesends]

If you are addressing part of your reply to me....

@Carbon said

God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished and where spiritual life can function properly. And for this, the word of God is a condition that is essential.
You said...
Are you limiting his ability to "nourish"? I am not limiting God to anything. He has no limits. He can do anything He chooses and wants to. Including saving ever person who ever lived from Adam onward.
I do not agree with what Carbon stated "God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished "

With God's foreknowledge, he knows from before time where that spiritual life will take place and be properly nourished.... And he does so... and that is where the predestination of the free will come in... because God knows where to nourish and where not to.

Carbon said,
"The exercise of faith in Christ would be an utter impossibility where all knowledge of Christ is absent. Consider, in the case of natural birth, God sees to it that children are born into a world wherein the necessities of life, such as light, air, and nourishment, are provided for. Why would we believe spiritual life would be different?
God sees to it that spiritual life takes place only where spiritual life can be nourished and where spiritual life can function properly. And for this, the word of God is a condition that is essential."

So, you see, for your question, you quoted Carbon out of context. I'll speak for Carbon here, though I'm sure he could do a better job of it than I can. Carbon was referencing the way the facts fall out concerning sanctification. It is not a question of what persons are or are not possessing of the ability to be nourished, but that with his election and salvation of them God provided all they need for nourishment.

You look at it backwards. God does not need to look into the future to see what can and cannot be done, nor to see what we are going to do. He CAUSES the future. It does not [somehow] happen to him.