My issues with Arminianism

[ElectedbyHim]

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.

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.

Sinful human pride.

Pride sums up Arminianism for me.

 

[makesends]

Someday I hope to . I have a lot of questions. I wonder if there will be a limit?


From what others say Eve did exactly as she was created to do.

Which goes back to my Why???

Of course God had whatever control he wanted to have.... but just let her be.

IMO I think either predestined or free will, that Eve would have been intrigued by another voice that seemed to know
about God and she felt safe.... I bet she also had been looking at that fruit and wondering about it... and I don't think she
or Adam either one knew what God meant about eat the fruit and die.

I would be willing to bet the serpent had a piece of fruit and bit into it and when he did not die Eve quickly ate for herself.

When she did not die... Adam was all ready... and he probably did not want her mad at him... so it is now history....
for whatever reason they had to go against God.




Not me... I am a card carrying member of the free will group.

But I run into more predestined, anti free will in Genesis discussions then enough, I guess I just assume at this point.

FWIW: To my thinking, if the ability to make choices is to be called, "free will", it is not mutually exclusive with predestination nor determinism.

 

[Arial]

I guess what I am wanting to know is why , I wonder, would he want his creation to start off with a failure at the hands of Satan.... that serpent?

Consider that the Bible is one continuous story from beginning to end. The story is God's plan of redemption unfolding in history. It was established in the Covenant of Redemption within the Godhead before the creation of our world. The central figure and focus, the protagonist if you will, is Jesus the Son of God who comes to redeem.

Consider that war is declared on the serpent in Gen 3:15 and everything that follows are the result of battles in the spiritual realm.

Now, look at the end of the story.
Is. 11
1 Cor 15
Rev 21-22
Col 1:15-20

All things were created by the Son and For him.

Our Lord and our God.

 

[brightfame52]

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.

Hi Is the invitation to them who dont thirst ? Rev 22:17

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Would athirst come from the natural man dead in sin or from a spiritually new man having a spiritual thirst given by the Spirit of God.

 

[makesends]

Hi Is the invitation to them who dont thirst ? Rev 22:17

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Would athirst come from the natural man dead in sin or from a spiritually new man having a spiritual thirst given by the Spirit of God.

My guess is, you have a point to make. Out with it, then. Let's git 'er done!

 

[makesends]

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.

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 's statement is relative— a question of degrees. It is also made, like yours, under a human (temporal) economy and viewpoint. With God it is not whether it can be done, but a question of what God is doing—even, what God is making. He doesn't look to see if this situation will serve the purpose—He MAKES (creates/causes to be) the situation to serve his purpose. If someone in Heaven is nothing more than a doorman, what is it to us how God establishes the nourishment of spiritual life for that person, during this temporal frame? From what I've seen so far, our duty (God's revealed will) is rarely quite what happens/gets accomplished here. What does happen is God's purposes (God's hidden will).

(This has been to me a huge comfort in my fears concerning the salvation of loved ones and even my own faithfulness (or lack of it). God will accomplish everything he has set out to do, and that is GREAT!)

 

[brightfame52]

My guess is, you have a point to make. Out with it, then. Let's git 'er done!

I stated my point.

 

[makesends]

I stated my point.

Good. Thought you were asking a rhetorical question, leading to some conclusion.

 

[Carbon]

Hi Is the invitation to them who dont thirst ? Rev 22:17

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Would athirst come from the natural man dead in sin or from a spiritually new man having a spiritual thirst given by the Spirit of God.

So the gospel don’t invite everyone indiscriminately to take from the water of life and drink freely? When someone hears the gospel that isn’t an outward and possibly an inward call as well?

I think it is. It also cuts off any excuse for unbelievers

Edit} but to be fair I see your point. Like the seed and the sower. The sower went to sow the seed on the good (prepared) soil, not the wayside, stones and such, some seed just fell there.

So in that sense, all have the general call. So everyone is responsible.

 

[JesusFan]

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

My big issue is that their view would make salvation only a possibility, and not a certain thing, as God the trinity did all that they could do to redeem us, but they are are still looking to see if ANY sinner would "come to their senses" and avail themselves of free offer of salvation

 

[brightfame52]

So the gospel don’t invite everyone indiscriminately to take from the water of life and drink freely?

I believe the condition is stated here Rev 22:17

17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

And in the greek these are imperatives not just a free for all whosoever wants to decide. The word come erchomai each time is an imperative, a command. I believe its to the redeemed regenerated members of the Body of Christ.
Now of course we dont know who that may be so we preach and teach indiscriminately , but its only the God prepared who will obey the command.

When someone hears the gospel that isn’t an outward and possibly an inward call as well?

Yes, but if they hear it without having spiritual ears to hear, its a mere outward sound of words, if heard by the regenerated elect made prepared by the Spirit its inward and a command

I think it is. It also cuts off any excuse for unbelievers

Yes I agree, unbelievers are held accountable for the Gospel account God gives of His Son

but to be fair I see your point. Like the seed and the sower. The sower went to sow the seed on the good (prepared) soil, not the wayside, stones and such, some seed just fell there.

Yep

So in that sense, all have the general call. So everyone is responsible.

Yes, responsible for their attitude they had of Gospel Truth. Many in our day contemptuously flip it off as calvinism.

 

[Arial]

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

Which explains why some may hear the gospel many times, even over years, and not believe it, and then at some point when they hear it, they do believe it.

What else could account for that?

If it is explained by human choice---the individuals decision to believe--- it locates the difference between belief and unbelief in the person rather than God's saving action. Even if grace is affirmed in some general sense, the final decision is reduced to an act of human will.

Reformed theology insists that the inward call of the Holy Spirit is not merely persuasive but efficacious. It always accomplishes what God intends. The sinner believes not because he finally chose rightly but because God graciously acted within him, ensuring that the outward call of the gospel was received with true and saving faith. That salvation is truly all of grace and not grace plus choice, or plus anything else.

 

[makesends]

Why did God make a plan where only some... even if it is the majority is chosen by Him yet there are some who basically are denied?

It seems to me a huge human misconception to put it that they are denied anything. According to the analogy of the "Workers in the Field", the one group got everything they 'put in for'. They were not denied what they earned. But the Owner, out of generosity, gave the late-comers more than they deserved.

"But that's not FAIR!" What's not fair about it? —Does God not have the right to be generous with his mercy to those who not deserve it? If a Pharisee has worked for God all his life, and at the end is only condemned, did he not have every opportunity to be thankful (Romans 1:21)? Did he not willfully act in independence and enmity to his Creator? His condemnation is not because he cannot, (though he cannot), submit and please God. It is because he WILL NOT. (John 3:18)

Those who are not redeemed, those who are not to whom God chose to show mercy, are condemned for many offenses. But they were also given much, for which they are not even thankful (per Romans 1). Instead, they complain, and they get help complaining from the Arminians.

 

[Carbon]

My big issue is that their view would make salvation only a possibility, and not a certain thing, as God the trinity did all that they could do to redeem us, but they are are still looking to see if ANY sinner would "come to their senses" and avail themselves of free offer of salvation

Some good points

 

[makesends]

JesusFan said:
My big issue is that their view would make salvation only a possibility, and not a certain thing, as God the trinity did all that they could do to redeem us, but they are are still looking to see if ANY sinner would "come to their senses" and avail themselves of free offer of salvation

Some good points

Yes, indeed! And that is HUGE. Consider, just for one, the supposed 'implication' drawn, that man is, then, endowed with 'the ability of first causer' to cause uncaused to do so. Or, just as bad, in the logical end of it, the notion that something can actually come to pass by mere chance, and not by God's intention.

 

[Carbon]

I believe the condition is stated here Rev 22:17

17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

And in the greek these are imperatives not just a free for all whosoever wants to decide. The word come erchomai each time is an imperative, a command. I believe its to the redeemed regenerated members of the Body of Christ.
Now of course we dont know who that may be so we preach and teach indiscriminately , but its only the God prepared who will obey the command.


Yes, but if they hear it without having spiritual ears to hear, its a mere outward sound of words, if heard by the regenerated elect made prepared by the Spirit its inward and a command

Yes I agree, unbelievers are held accountable for the Gospel account God gives of His Son


Yep



Yes, responsible for their attitude they had of Gospel Truth. Many in our day contemptuously flip it off as calvinism.

I believe Revelation 22:17 has to do with the church. It is not a gospel call to the lost as many assume. I believe this is another place modern Christianity messes up; they believe where it says, "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come." it is teaching of proclaiming the gospel to the lost, but it is not. It's Jesus calling his bride (the church) to come and commune with Him.

@brightfame52 Said: Would athirst come from the natural man dead in sin or from a spiritually new man having a spiritual thirst given by the Spirit of God.

I say, no, of course not. But this passage isnt even about that.

I think we both agree, the bible (scripture) is written to Christians, not the lost.

 

[brightfame52]

I believe Revelation 22:17 has to do with the church.

Yes the regenerated

it is teaching of proclaiming the gospel to the lost, but it is not.

Right, when God sends the Gospel to the lost, unregenerate non elect its purpose is to be a savor of death unto death 2 Cor 2 15-16

15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved,


16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

I say, no, of course not. But this passage isnt even about that.

Yet its a ratification of the truth. all scripture in any given context is profitable 2 Tim 3:16

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

I think we both agree, the bible (scripture) is written to Christians, not the lost.

Yes i agree

 

[JesusFan]

So the gospel don’t invite everyone indiscriminately to take from the water of life and drink freely? When someone hears the gospel that isn’t an outward and possibly an inward call as well?

I think it is. It also cuts off any excuse for unbelievers

Edit} but to be fair I see your point. Like the seed and the sower. The sower went to sow the seed on the good (prepared) soil, not the wayside, stones and such, some seed just fell there.

So in that sense, all have the general call. So everyone is responsible.

As Spurgeon stated, IF God had given to him eyeglasses to see the yellow stripe of backs of the elect would preach only to them, but since only God knows who they are, he preached to all sinners

 

[JesusFan]

Which explains why some may hear the gospel many times, even over years, and not believe it, and then at some point when they hear it, they do believe it.

What else could account for that?

If it is explained by human choice---the individuals decision to believe--- it locates the difference between belief and unbelief in the person rather than God's saving action. Even if grace is affirmed in some general sense, the final decision is reduced to an act of human will.

Reformed theology insists that the inward call of the Holy Spirit is not merely persuasive but efficacious. It always accomplishes what God intends. The sinner believes not because he finally chose rightly but because God graciously acted within him, ensuring that the outward call of the gospel was received with true and saving faith. That salvation is truly all of grace and not grace plus choice, or plus anything else.

Those who state grace can be resisted do not quite grasp that we hold that the elect cannot always resist it, as that is effectual grace unto salvation, but those still lost in their sins indeed can and do keep resisting it

 

[JesusFan]

JesusFan said:
My big issue is that their view would make salvation only a possibility, and not a certain thing, as God the trinity did all that they could do to redeem us, but they are are still looking to see if ANY sinner would "come to their senses" and avail themselves of free offer of salvation

Yes, indeed! And that is HUGE. Consider, just for one, the supposed 'implication' drawn, that man is, then, endowed with 'the ability of first causer' to cause uncaused to do so. Or, just as bad, in the logical end of it, the notion that something can actually come to pass by mere chance, and not by God's intention.

Think that the logical endpoint of consistent Armianism theology would end up at Open Theism view of God and His operations , just as extreme view on Calvinism lands us into hyper Cal version