Calvin vs. Arminius

[larryt]

As I have already stated I am not looking to resolve this or compromise with those that do not believe the scriptures. And it is you who need to take heed to Pr. 3:7. It is not me that is meandering.

This discussion has little to do with scriptures and much to do with your personal ideology. Little to do with destiny and much to do with liberty. Liberty. Ever heard that word before? I'm sure you have, but perhaps you've forgotten what it means. Christ is about liberty, not fatalistic assumptions and ideological restrictions. Salvation is about glad tidings, not dark rumors or ethereal chains.

When you write "those that do not believe scriptures" you're really saying 'those that don't agree with my personal interpretation'. What you do not seem to realize is that your position is untenable. You cannot prove that your dogma is the ultimate truth and neither can those who entrench themselves on the other side of the interstate of eternal destiny. The argument has been going on for centuries without any resolution. Doesn't that tell you something?

Man has drawn a line that God did not intend.

Your own logic has painted you into a corner. According to your scheme it doesn't make any difference what you believe, sir.

Calvin once wrote, "There is no such thing as an accident." He leaves no room for the whims of man. No room at all for liberty. If we follow that logic, your own opinion means nothing. God's will be done and that's that. It's a kind of fatalistic approach similar to Islam. I grant the point that Calvin has a truth here, but only in part.

According to Animists, man has a modicum of responsibility in the matter. God grants man an elevation to the position of liberty so as to participate in his own destiny at some level. Animists believe this decision is strictly between the man and God. It's a very personal, spiritually sensual matter, which is inappropriate for you or any man to deny. I grant the point that Animists have a truth here, but only in part.

Either way your one-sided opinion is purely academic. It is irrelevant to any real solution to the logical dilemma. It dictates restriction. It does not provide man with liberty and it does not provide a suitable answer. Calvinism and Animism as separate components do not provide a logical structure. There are inconsistancies in each separate argument which opponents of Christianity rightly point out. Considered together, however, they give light and freedom to an otherwise insoluable puzzle. They provide satisfying answers. Marry the two points of view and you get a confidence in the deliverance and salvation of God that cannot be appreciated separately.

* * *

In the midst of this discussion let us all remember and give thanks to God that apart from the blood of Christ shed upon the cross for us there is no salvation at all. Without it there can be no appreciation of His gift to us and no means to share it with others. Jesus has given us a beautiful gift horse and we stand here looking it in the mouth.

* * *

"And it is you who need to take heed to Pr. 3:7. It is not me that is meandering. I have been very consistant in my replies."

Consistant? Yes you are - stubborn and hard headed too. I don't believe I ever perceived your mind as being anything other than completely concrete.

A meanderer? No you aren't. You have been narrow minded every step of the way.

I am not vacillating either, sir. My position as always has been that both A + C ideologies are found lacking. In as much as they attempt to formulate a singular intepretation of divine redemption they fail. Both of them. That is why the argument slogs on. My point of view is that one ought to consider a marriage of the two dogmas instead of a divorce. God never drew a line of separation. Why is it so difficult to consider that BOTH may be correct?

"You get confronted with the need to prove your position and you change the subject."

I haven't changed the subject once. I've written an anecdote or two to illustrate a point, but that can hardly be construed as changing. My entire effort is aimed at the considered approach to marrying the two arguments into one consistent logical and harmonious system. It is obvious that you favor divorce, fantasy and constant bickering. I applaud your effort if not your position. You're entitled to your opinion even if it is a bit stodgy and obsolete.

"I am not interested in your philosophical arguments."

Oh my dear sir, how wrong you are - again. You continue to invest in considerable effort to disprove my assertions. If you can't succeed by means of logic you resort to the loser's tactic of attacking the opponent's character and liberty to write. This proves to the casual reader that you ARE interested. Why else would you persist if you weren't interested? I love you too!

What else is animism and calvinism if not a philosophical system to explain disparate snippets of scripture?

"And your hollerin is nothing more that pride."

It's considerably more than that my friend. It's an expression of my liberty to write an opinion and my inalienable right to declare the nature of God so far as it has been my priviledge to discover. I stand and holler because I can, despite the wishes of those with totalitarian desires to repress it. Somebody please tell me what's wrong with having pride in the liberty to holler?

but that's just me again, hollering from the choir loft...

Again all talk and no substance. You have your opinion. But that is all it is is an opinion. I am not here to debate philosophical opinions.

And what you describe is the paradox that God is absolutely sovereign and yet man is absolutely responsible.

[His_disciple3]

well this debate is been going on since the 1500's and it ain't been proved either way from scriptures, there are scriptures that support election and there are scriptures that support choice, But i can't see God, the God of Love that we serve, having to force someone to love Him and designing it to be that He would have to force people to Love Him, it is not mercy that forces someone to do something it is mercy that allows someone to do something,. forcing someone to do something is oppression, which The Bible clearly speaks that to oppress someone into serving you is wrong. I have committed a crime, I stand before the Judge and He pours out mercy and says you are free to go your crime has been forgiven, now if he has to force me to go, then I am not free but still being oppressed by him to do what he wants me to do, I also on the other hand can feel guilty of my crime and refuse his mercy, Judge I am guilty and fell that I should be punished for what I did. so I am refusing your mercy, he has to make me serve my time for the crime I commited, so if you can see If He forces me to stay or forces me to go, he is still the oppressor and this is not the God that holy Scriptures portrays, unless you take four of five verses out of contents, and make them say what you want them to say. as calvinist do.

[larryt]

well this debate is been going on since the 1500's and it ain't been proved either way from scriptures, there are scriptures that support election and there are scriptures that support choice, But i can't see God, the God of Love that we serve, having to force someone to love Him and designing it to be that He would have to force people to Love Him, it is not mercy that forces someone to do something it is mercy that allows someone to do something,. forcing someone to do something is oppression, which The Bible clearly speaks that to oppress someone into serving you is wrong. I have committed a crime, I stand before the Judge and He pours out mercy and says you are free to go your crime has been forgiven, now if he has to force me to go, then I am not free but still being oppressed by him to do what he wants me to do, I also on the other hand can feel guilty of my crime and refuse his mercy, Judge I am guilty and fell that I should be punished for what I did. so I am refusing your mercy, he has to make me serve my time for the crime I commited, so if you can see If He forces me to stay or forces me to go, he is still the oppressor and this is not the God that holy Scriptures portrays, unless you take four of five verses out of contents, and make them say what you want them to say. as calvinist do.

Did Lazarrus have a choice when he was raised from the dead? Your carnal reasoning will never undersand the grace of God, nor how He can elect someone to be given grace and that person's will being set free fully chooses to serve the Lord.

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

[His_disciple3]

well this debate is been going on since the 1500's and it ain't been proved either way from scriptures, there are scriptures that support election and there are scriptures that support choice, But i can't see God, the God of Love that we serve, having to force someone to love Him and designing it to be that He would have to force people to Love Him, it is not mercy that forces someone to do something it is mercy that allows someone to do something,. forcing someone to do something is oppression, which The Bible clearly speaks that to oppress someone into serving you is wrong. I have committed a crime, I stand before the Judge and He pours out mercy and says you are free to go your crime has been forgiven, now if he has to force me to go, then I am not free but still being oppressed by him to do what he wants me to do, I also on the other hand can feel guilty of my crime and refuse his mercy, Judge I am guilty and fell that I should be punished for what I did. so I am refusing your mercy, he has to make me serve my time for the crime I commited, so if you can see If He forces me to stay or forces me to go, he is still the oppressor and this is not the God that holy Scriptures portrays, unless you take four of five verses out of contents, and make them say what you want them to say. as calvinist do.

Did Lazarrus have a choice when he was raised from the dead? Your carnal reasoning will never undersand the grace of God, nor how He can elect someone to be given grace and that person's will being set free fully chooses to serve the Lord.

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Lazarus being raised from the dead had nothing to do with His love toward God or God's love toward Him, or even his salvation, all will be raised one day, some for heaven some for hell, Jesus said that He was the Way. you are saying there is another way it's called election, Jesus Didn't say all that the Father forces to love me will be my sheep. But rather IF you love me, keep my commandments. why would Jesus say such a thing that would tear down the doctrine of grace according to Tulip? If you love me keep my commandments, shouldn't according to tulip that read, If my Father has forced you to love me, You will keep my commandments, call it carnal or what ever, is it carnal to think That God is a rewarder of those that deligently seek Him, or is it carnal to take a verse that says no one seeks Him, to mean that no one does and no one ever will, so then with your interpretation, God is not a rewarder for no one ever seeks Him. so you cut out, that You must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those that dilegently seek him, Not you are forced to believe but rather Ye must believe, you say that my carnal understanding will never understand grace, and you couldn't be more right, I will never understand grace the way your carnal mind see's it, A God who allows all to be borned with a sin nature, a God without respect of persons, taking a world of sinners, and saving some and not giving the others any hope whatso ever! you are correct about that, i will never see God throw a human being into hell without giving them an escape. the door, the Way Jesus Christ our Lord God.

[larryt]

well this debate is been going on since the 1500's and it ain't been proved either way from scriptures, there are scriptures that support election and there are scriptures that support choice, But i can't see God, the God of Love that we serve, having to force someone to love Him and designing it to be that He would have to force people to Love Him, it is not mercy that forces someone to do something it is mercy that allows someone to do something,. forcing someone to do something is oppression, which The Bible clearly speaks that to oppress someone into serving you is wrong. I have committed a crime, I stand before the Judge and He pours out mercy and says you are free to go your crime has been forgiven, now if he has to force me to go, then I am not free but still being oppressed by him to do what he wants me to do, I also on the other hand can feel guilty of my crime and refuse his mercy, Judge I am guilty and fell that I should be punished for what I did. so I am refusing your mercy, he has to make me serve my time for the crime I commited, so if you can see If He forces me to stay or forces me to go, he is still the oppressor and this is not the God that holy Scriptures portrays, unless you take four of five verses out of contents, and make them say what you want them to say. as calvinist do.

Did Lazarrus have a choice when he was raised from the dead? Your carnal reasoning will never undersand the grace of God, nor how He can elect someone to be given grace and that person's will being set free fully chooses to serve the Lord.

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Lazarus being raised from the dead had nothing to do with His love toward God or God's love toward Him, or even his salvation,

This is what is called a TYPE of the new birth, an example to show what the new birth is all about.

A God who allows all to be borned with a sin nature, a God without respect of persons, taking a world of sinners, and saving some and not giving the others any hope whatso ever!

1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

1Th 4:13 ¶ But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

you are correct about that, i will never see God throw a human being into hell without giving them an escape. the door, the Way Jesus Christ our Lord God.

The escape door is right there. It is not God's fault that they will not see, will not come, will not thirst. All that are thirsty will come to the Water of Life. All that are blind and wish to have sight will be given sight. This is the free gift of God even the faith to believe that they can come to Him. If God does nothing to entervien in the individual's life he will never seek God and God is perfectly just in letting the wicked go to everlasting judgement.

Ro 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

Ro 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?

You keep implying that God forces people to love Him. This is another straw man that you have set up to knock down. I do not believe that God forces anyone do do anything.

The blind man CANNOT see.

The dead man CANNOT live.

The lame man CANNOT walk.

The natural man CANNOT choose to follow God.

When the blind man receives sight he WANTS to see.

When the dead man receives life he WANTS to live.

When the lame man receives strength he leaps for joy.

When Christ is revealed in the elect the love because He FIRST loved them.

[His_disciple3]

well this debate is been going on since the 1500's and it ain't been proved either way from scriptures, there are scriptures that support election and there are scriptures that support choice, But i can't see God, the God of Love that we serve, having to force someone to love Him and designing it to be that He would have to force people to Love Him, it is not mercy that forces someone to do something it is mercy that allows someone to do something,. forcing someone to do something is oppression, which The Bible clearly speaks that to oppress someone into serving you is wrong. I have committed a crime, I stand before the Judge and He pours out mercy and says you are free to go your crime has been forgiven, now if he has to force me to go, then I am not free but still being oppressed by him to do what he wants me to do, I also on the other hand can feel guilty of my crime and refuse his mercy, Judge I am guilty and fell that I should be punished for what I did. so I am refusing your mercy, he has to make me serve my time for the crime I commited, so if you can see If He forces me to stay or forces me to go, he is still the oppressor and this is not the God that holy Scriptures portrays, unless you take four of five verses out of contents, and make them say what you want them to say. as calvinist do.

Did Lazarrus have a choice when he was raised from the dead? Your carnal reasoning will never undersand the grace of God, nor how He can elect someone to be given grace and that person's will being set free fully chooses to serve the Lord.

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Lazarus being raised from the dead had nothing to do with His love toward God or God's love toward Him, or even his salvation,

This is what is called a TYPE of the new birth, an example to show what the new birth is all about.

A God who allows all to be borned with a sin nature, a God without respect of persons, taking a world of sinners, and saving some and not giving the others any hope whatso ever!

1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

1Th 4:13 ¶ But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

you are correct about that, i will never see God throw a human being into hell without giving them an escape. the door, the Way Jesus Christ our Lord God.

The escape door is right there. It is not God's fault that they will not see, will not come, will not thirst. All that are thirsty will come to the Water of Life. All that are blind and wish to have sight will be given sight. This is the free gift of God even the faith to believe that they can come to Him. If God does nothing to entervien in the individual's life he will never seek God and God is perfectly just in letting the wicked go to everlasting judgement.

Ro 9:22 [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

Ro 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?

You keep implying that God forces people to love Him. This is another straw man that you have set up to knock down. I do not believe that God forces anyone do do anything.

The blind man CANNOT see.

The dead man CANNOT live.

The lame man CANNOT walk.

The natural man CANNOT choose to follow God.

When the blind man receives sight he WANTS to see.

When the dead man receives life he WANTS to live.

When the lame man receives strength he leaps for joy.

When Christ is revealed in the elect the love because He FIRST loved them.

I think you got a couple of these wrong, when a blind man receives sight, he doesn't want to see he does see. when a dead man receives life, the Bible teaches that he must die to self that Jesus may live through him. when a lame man receives strength He leaps for the Lord, see when I got saved( when God said choose life over death and live) I thanked God for my salvation , when you get saved no biggie, He had to cause you were elected (that is according to your calvinism)

[wingnut-]

If salvation were assigned by God, and man has no say regarding it, then why bother with life as we know it? Pre-destination makes absolutely no sense to me, if God wanted robots then He would have just made it so. I am not good with chapter and verse recollection, but doesn't it say somewhere in Joshua "Choose you this day whom ye will serve, as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."? Doesn't sound to me like Joshua believed in pre-destination.

You make two contrdictory assumptions. Because God chooses whom He will save and whom He leaves alone does not mean that man has no say in the matter. I understand that you do not understand predestination. Is predestination referred to in the bible? It is in 4 verses so you need to study and see what the bible says about it and why it is there. Because we choose does not preclude predestination.

Thanks, but I have read it, many times, and I simply disagree with your position. I am curious as to which 4 verses you are referring to, and logically speaking, when one has options and makes a choice, it doesn't add up to predestination by my definition. Perhaps your definition differs from my own.

If you tell me what specifically you disagree with then I might be able to give you an answer.

Actually the greek word is used 6 times.

Ro 8:29 ¶ For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate [to be] conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Ro 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

The same word is translated differently here.

Ac 4:28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

1Co 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, [even] the hidden [wisdom], which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

And in Rom. 8:29 What does the word "foreknow" mean? If it only means congition then how is it that Jesus "never knew" those in Matt.7:23.

I disagree with predestination is what i disagree with, and the reason for this is because it eliminates grace. It also undermines God's love in my opinion, because if it were true, then it would basically be saying, most of you I am creating to destroy and send to eternal damnation, but a few of you I will reward with eternal life. Thank you for posting the verses you were referring to, but I require no further assistance, and have no interest in debating this topic because we will simply never agree. I see no point in countering with scripture that refutes your claim, because following this thread I have seen that many already have, and there is nothing new to really add. God bless you, and again, thanks for the reply.

[OneLight]

Larry, in Romans 8:29, it is written that God first foreknew before He predestined. Why do you think that is and how is it that God foreknew?

My take is that God knew exactly who would accept His Son, and those are they whom He predestined.

For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

[His_disciple3]

well this debate is been going on since the 1500's and it ain't been proved either way from scriptures, there are scriptures that support election and there are scriptures that support choice, But i can't see God, the God of Love that we serve, having to force someone to love Him and designing it to be that He would have to force people to Love Him, it is not mercy that forces someone to do something it is mercy that allows someone to do something,. forcing someone to do something is oppression, which The Bible clearly speaks that to oppress someone into serving you is wrong. I have committed a crime, I stand before the Judge and He pours out mercy and says you are free to go your crime has been forgiven, now if he has to force me to go, then I am not free but still being oppressed by him to do what he wants me to do, I also on the other hand can feel guilty of my crime and refuse his mercy, Judge I am guilty and fell that I should be punished for what I did. so I am refusing your mercy, he has to make me serve my time for the crime I commited, so if you can see If He forces me to stay or forces me to go, he is still the oppressor and this is not the God that holy Scriptures portrays, unless you take four of five verses out of contents, and make them say what you want them to say. as calvinist do.

Did Lazarrus have a choice when he was raised from the dead? Your carnal reasoning will never undersand the grace of God, nor how He can elect someone to be given grace and that person's will being set free fully chooses to serve the Lord.

Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Lazarus being raised from the dead had nothing to do with His love toward God or God's love toward Him, or even his salvation,

This is what is called a TYPE of the new birth, an example to show what the new birth is all about.

I couldn't disagree with you more, had nothing to do with the new birth it was show the disciples and others that the living God could raise the dead. as Jesus prayed He didn't say Father they need to see the new birth, He said if thy believest, you will see the glory of God. then He said He did this that they may Know that He was of God, and seeing that we are trying to show You that God has let man have a hand in salvation, Lazarus, when lazarus did come forth God could have loosed Him as He raised Him, But Who loosed him from the grave clothes, MAN !!

Edited August 3, 2012 by His_disciple3

[larryt]

Larry, in Romans 8:29, it is written that God first foreknew before He predestined. Why do you think that is and how is it that God foreknew?

My take is that God knew exactly who would accept His Son, and those are they whom He predestined.

For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

I hinges on the meaning of FOREKNEW.

If God is basing salvation on what man will do and knowing who it is that will choose Him then God is a respecter of persons becasue He respects those that are going to choose and rejects those that won't. It is not according to His good pleasure and His choice but on man's choice.

And when Jesus said to the hipocrites, I never knew you, Did He mean He had no recollection of them? I don't think so, God knows everythng. When God says He knows someone it is much deeper than just cognition.

Jer 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, [and] I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.