the gentleman writes
1 Total Inability .... The teaching of Five-Point Calvinism is that man is totally unable to do anything to obtain salvation. They state very emphatically that he cannot repent or believe the Gospel.Their teaching is that man cannot believe until he is born again. This new birth is brought about by God who chooses certain individuals and regenerates them. Those whom He regenerates are then capable of believing by virtue of their new birth. Man does not have a free will by which he is able to come to Christ for salvation.
This is an interesting start as it reveals that he has not even understood the doctrine correctly; the basis of this teaching as i prefer it to be known as :
Radical Corruption..... meaning that ... "due to the fall of Adam and evil the sin of disobedience entered into humanity and radically altered mans whole existence rather than being good and moral creatures .. we seek to do selfish evil deeds and because of this state man has been raised in there is no hope for him to ever please God in his own merits, this corruption is not a surface level issue it has permeated the whole man to his core... he is outside of Christ an enemy of God .....and the fact is that man can not please God ... but he does respond to the gospel in the negative"
Now lets see the scriptural arguments against this truth if there are any .. the first one offered is as follows
Concerning the statement that man cannot repent we find the Word of God stating the exact opposite. In Acts 17:30 we find that God commands all men everywhere to repent, and thathaving so commanded, He expects they can and will. In 2 Peter 3:9 we find that God is notwilling that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. If they should come, thenthey can come. God does not mock men by asking them to do what they cannot do. In Acts 11:18 we are told that God hath granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life. Notice that the repentance comes first and it results in life.
The basis of this argument is that "if God demands a people to repent.... then they will repent" .. what this misses is that God has two will a declarative will and a submissive will ... or simply put God ordains means and the ends
so just because God declare man should repent .. it does not follow that man has the ability to do so .. it is beyond man to submit to anything other then his own selfish desires and he does so consistently
now if God tell people to repent we shall use the terminology found in this objection "he expects they can and will" ... and yet not every one does, what does this tells us man has a bigger will than God ... God is not able to achieve his desires
two of these passages are just declarative command ... which in and of themselves do prove that such would be the case
The other passage happens to be taken out of context by arminians and like true cultish behaviour is given a false application
A brief over overview:
"For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,
and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.
But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgement and destruction of the ungodly." (vs 5-7)
here is the previous section of the passage and note the lasts words which speak of the judgement and destruction of the ungodly .... and important point if every single person will be saved, how could it says that people will be condemned and set for destruction
For a more detailed understanding from the context I refer to my exegesis on 2 peter 3
The gentleman then states :
Concerning the statement that man cannot believe the gospel, and that man cannot believe until his is born again, let the following Scriptures be studied— John 1:12; 3:15,16,36; 5:24; 6:40; 7:39; 12:36 and 20:31. These Scriptures all show that spiritual life follows upon the sinner's believing in Jesus Christ. The Apostle John gave as his reason for writing his gospel, "that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name." It is very clear that believing comes first and the new birth follows. The verses I have cited from the Gospel of John by no means exhausts the Scriptures which prove life through believing. If you will take Strong's Concordance and study the words believe, believed, and believeth, you will find much more. A notable example is Acts 16:31 where Paul said, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." The Calvinist would twist it to read, "when thou art saved by the Lord Jesus Christ, thou shalt believe." What utter disregard for the plain teaching of the Word of God!
The first mistake is to think reformed theology teaches this concept "Concerning the statement that man cannot believe the gospel, and that man cannot believe until his is born again" the correct understanding is this:the reformed position is this .... the unregenerate man is able to understand the facts of the gospel but until the person is first regenerated he can not respond in a fashion that pleases God ... the unregenerate can n only respond in a universally negative fashion.. through their rebellious nature.
All these selected scriptures do not refuted the position all it reveals is that you can not accurately handle the classic text that are seen as supporting the doctrine like Romans 1 -3 and Romans 8 :1-8
The second disrespectful tag line is the following statement "What utter disregard for the plain teaching of the Word of God" this is a complete cop out what it is saying is that there is no need for going deep into scriptures because we can get a basic understanding from simply reading the texts in surface level manner; this is what all cults do they show a disrespect for the truth by neglecting the clear references on studying to show yourself approved and the kind
we also note the verses given show a complete failure to understand them. Clearly when one examines john 1 :12 -13
Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
The verses tell us that mans attempts in trying to make this a human choice are in complete error since it clearly says our adoption as sons is based on the divine will as seen in these words "but born of God" ... and john 3 :3-8 and 6 :44 both eliminates how this is the case .. the father draws a person through the work of the spirit of God in regeneration (being born again) then this action leads to the father imparting true saving faith in the son of God
We further note the use of john 6 :40
All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
To disconnect a single verse in the fashion, this arminian has shows a blatant disrespect for the Lords words as we know this is Jesus explaining to the Jews why they don't believe "because they have not been given by the father" their disbelief is their own but it is seen as divine judgement that some will not be able to exercise true faith
the reason these people that are said to believe on the son in vs 40 is because they are they're the same ones given by the father in vs 37
Now for a more thorough examination on this text I refer you to my exegesis on on it
the gentleman continues :
Concerning the statement that man does not have a free will by which he is able to come to Christ, please note what Jesus said in John 7:17: "If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine." Here He said that a man may will to do God's will. Again in John 5:40 Jesus rebuked the Jews when He said, "ye will not come to me, that ye might have life." It was not that they could not come, but that they would not come. In Rev. 22:17, the Word of God declares "whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." Here God makes a real offer of the water of life to "WHOSOEVER WILL."
The only thing to note is that Calvinists who say there is no "free" will are correct since the will has been radically altered and contaminated by the fall of Adam. While Adam may have been created with a "free" will to worship God; it does not follow that man who clearly is a slave of sin as Jesus states in john 8 : 31-38 are found in the same manner of having a free will. Take note of the words:
Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. I know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you. I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.”
These words are very precise on the subject; those who live a life in sin are themselves a slave to that nature ... this truth is seen in Romans chapters 1 -3 and 8 :1-8. It is almost interesting to not the repeadity of the same scripture such as john 5 :40 as if there is some purpose of free will in the text .. when there is none, john 7 : 17 like john 5 :40 is about the teachings of Christ being truthful , not about free will
But the arminian needs to provide an exegetical based response to the following passages:
Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practises sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you. I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.”
What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”“Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips.” “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known.” “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
The above passages all declare the depravity / inability of man: the fact that no man can of their own accord come to God ... and it is very clear one side in the debate is able to stay focus on the specific text that speak of the subject "the Calvinist" and the other side "the arminian" can not as they continually run to this text or that text as to try and refute our position but fail to do so.
As we have seen the responses given can not withstand scrutiny, and the issue gets worse as we move to the next doctrine unconditional election
The gentleman writes :
2 The teaching of Five-Point Calvinism is that God has determined and decreed that some are to be saved without any conditions to be met on their part. This is called Unconditional Election and is the choosing of some to salvation in Christ, while at the same time, leaving the rest in their lost condition by not choosing them. This election is not based on God's foreknowing that certain would believe, but is based on His sovereign will to elect certain ones. Those who are not chosen to be part of the Elect of God can in no way enter into that company. In line with this teaching, the statement is made that God does not love all men, but only those whom he has chosen to be saved.
This has pretty much made the correct statement on the doctrine ... the only point i need to add is the following one
Now lets see the scriptural arguments against this truth if there are any ... the first one offered is as follows:
Let not the language of this, fool no one when he states "its clear God has his elect ones" this is nothing more than buzz word for everyone who has faith in Christ, as in self exercised faith and not divine borne faith, let us now move to the claims here.
This idea of being conformed to the image of Christ through faith in Christ is not biblically founded .. it is an assumption, we are adopted to son ship, not predestined to it. However, we are predestined to salvation this is clear from scripture
here is the whole essence of the argument ... "since God knows the end from the beginning, he foreknows those who will believe in Christ" ... so basically Gods choosing is not based on his own will and choice but is coerced to be done by the acts of man ... this is nothing new as it is what the catholic faith dreamt up in the 16th century to combat the reformation ... and is known as molinism
for a protestant to take this position is sheer folly as the bible condemns it and any other variant of it
it is important for us note that the passages utilised Ephesians 1 and 2 in totality refuted this position be espoused by this gentleman .. note the last word of Ephesian 2
"for by grace you have been saved, and that is not your own doing, it is a gift of God" such a text if it was the case of us being in control of Gods grace or being the determinative factor .. would turn the text on its head.
leaving us with much doubt in Paul's meaning but it is clear it is Gods doing that is not based on what he had seen
It is almost unbelievable that one would use 2 peter 1 :2 to disqualify the elect when the text actually affirms it .. in specific the Jewish elect
Here are the words,
Then the gentleman writes:
Note the use of the term, "whosoever will" this is a key to understand how this faulty logic is the course of turning a Greek word that denotes the believing ones in a non specific group of people.
To say that the English term, "whosoever" means every single person misses the clear teachings of people that are to be condemned for sin like in 2 peter 3 :6-7 ... the term as specific meaning "the believing ones"
now he tells us there is a condition to be met ... another typical anti gospel tactic of taking the clear passages as i have mention that there is no conditions on the human
The clearest example of a false belief being read back into the text of Scripture come in upon john 8 : 24 .. let us consider the context
There is no condition being spoken of; he is speaking to the Jews unbelief in him, which by the way obviously is a choice but it is also Gods decree that they would not believe, so must ask what Jesus trying to communicate here.
Simple there disbelief is the direct result of the father not giving them to him, and the final point will be that they would come to judgement. Remember Assyria ... God used them to punish Israel then punished them for their ego trip in Isaiah 10, and the same will be for these Jews .. their disbelief is the result of God not giving them to the son
then the gentleman states:
The horrific use of john 3 :16 without going to the original Greek to understand the whole thing is seen and noted, let us then make a point of stating that in john 3 .. we first have Jesus announcing the work of the Spirit in regeneration in vs 3-8. Then he comes to his own work .. the continuity is seen in that for man to believe in Christ he first has to be regenerated, which leads to true saving faith in Christ
But beyond this, the term "world" has to be seen in the context and have an assumed meaning placed on it even the context only allows it be seen as the believing one, and then distinguishes them from the already condemned
Eternal Choice ... meaning that every happen in time is down to the fact that God is one who determine the whole set of events, an this is the same with mankind he has chosen a way for man to be saved, and who it is that will be savedthe only disagreement i have is with the last statement "in line with this teaching, the statement is made that God doesn't love all men" the fact is he does love all men .. he just loves them in different measures .. while he has general love for all, he has a redemptive love for only the electand still he has the freedom in whom he loves and whom does not
Now lets see the scriptural arguments against this truth if there are any ... the first one offered is as follows:
The Scriptures are very plain that God has His Elect ones who by faith in Jesus Christ are predestinated "to be conformed to the image of His Son" (Rom. 8:29). They are adopted by God and Chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4,5). This election is plainly declared to be based on the foreknowledge of God (1 Peter 1:2; Rom. 8:29). Since God knows the end from the beginning, He foreknows those who will believe in Christ. He has purposed that they will be to the praise of His glory throughout the ages and through them He will "show the exceeding riches of His grace" (Eph. 2:7).
Let not the language of this, fool no one when he states "its clear God has his elect ones" this is nothing more than buzz word for everyone who has faith in Christ, as in self exercised faith and not divine borne faith, let us now move to the claims here.
This idea of being conformed to the image of Christ through faith in Christ is not biblically founded .. it is an assumption, we are adopted to son ship, not predestined to it. However, we are predestined to salvation this is clear from scripture
here is the whole essence of the argument ... "since God knows the end from the beginning, he foreknows those who will believe in Christ" ... so basically Gods choosing is not based on his own will and choice but is coerced to be done by the acts of man ... this is nothing new as it is what the catholic faith dreamt up in the 16th century to combat the reformation ... and is known as molinism
for a protestant to take this position is sheer folly as the bible condemns it and any other variant of it
it is important for us note that the passages utilised Ephesians 1 and 2 in totality refuted this position be espoused by this gentleman .. note the last word of Ephesian 2
"for by grace you have been saved, and that is not your own doing, it is a gift of God" such a text if it was the case of us being in control of Gods grace or being the determinative factor .. would turn the text on its head.
leaving us with much doubt in Paul's meaning but it is clear it is Gods doing that is not based on what he had seen
It is almost unbelievable that one would use 2 peter 1 :2 to disqualify the elect when the text actually affirms it .. in specific the Jewish elect
Here are the words,
To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood:
Then the gentleman writes:
The Scriptures are also very plain in stating that "whosoever will" may come to Christ. Please read the following Scriptures— John 3:15,16; 4:14; 12:46; Acts 2:21, 10:43; Rom. 10:13; Rev. 22:17. The word whosoever means "all, any, every, the whole." Since we believe in the verbal, plenary inspiration of the Word of God we are forced to believe that when God moves the Scripture writers to say "whosoever," then that is exactly what He means. That there is a condition to be met in order for one to be saved is proved by our Lord's words in John 8:24, "for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." Other Scriptures have already been quoted under Total Inability to bear out the conditional requirement of believing in order to have salvation.
Note the use of the term, "whosoever will" this is a key to understand how this faulty logic is the course of turning a Greek word that denotes the believing ones in a non specific group of people.
To say that the English term, "whosoever" means every single person misses the clear teachings of people that are to be condemned for sin like in 2 peter 3 :6-7 ... the term as specific meaning "the believing ones"
now he tells us there is a condition to be met ... another typical anti gospel tactic of taking the clear passages as i have mention that there is no conditions on the human
The clearest example of a false belief being read back into the text of Scripture come in upon john 8 : 24 .. let us consider the context
So he said to them again, “I am going away, and you will seek me, and you will die in your sin. Where I am going, you cannot come.” So the Jews said, “Will he kill himself, since he says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?” He said to them, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sin
There is no condition being spoken of; he is speaking to the Jews unbelief in him, which by the way obviously is a choice but it is also Gods decree that they would not believe, so must ask what Jesus trying to communicate here.
Simple there disbelief is the direct result of the father not giving them to him, and the final point will be that they would come to judgement. Remember Assyria ... God used them to punish Israel then punished them for their ego trip in Isaiah 10, and the same will be for these Jews .. their disbelief is the result of God not giving them to the son
then the gentleman states:
That God loves all men in this world and sent His Son to die for them is abundantly clear from John 3:16. The Five-Point Calvinist changes the meaning of the word "world" here and adds to the Word of God by placing immediately behind it two words, "the elect." The verse then appears this way, "For God so loved the world (the elect) that He gave His only begotten Son, etc." I have seen this verse written in this way in gospel tracts. The word world is used 77 times in the Gospel of John. I would encourage you to take Strong's Concordance and look up each occurrence, then insert the words "the elect" behind each usage of it. You do not have to go far before you see how ridiculous it is.
The horrific use of john 3 :16 without going to the original Greek to understand the whole thing is seen and noted, let us then make a point of stating that in john 3 .. we first have Jesus announcing the work of the Spirit in regeneration in vs 3-8. Then he comes to his own work .. the continuity is seen in that for man to believe in Christ he first has to be regenerated, which leads to true saving faith in Christ
But beyond this, the term "world" has to be seen in the context and have an assumed meaning placed on it even the context only allows it be seen as the believing one, and then distinguishes them from the already condemned
Then I would also like some consistency .. if this here means every single person .. then what about the term world being used in john 15 :18 -19, 1 john 2 :15-17
should we take this in a universalist sense showing no one will be saved, or should we allow context to define the use it holds?
what this gentlemen is arguing for is a inconsistent world view being forced into johns gospel .. and it has to be seen as very deceptive thing to do
But the arminian needs to provide an exegetical based response to the following passages:
even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.
But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.
The above passages show us this truth that God chose a people in Christ, and saves them based on the work of Christ alone .. thee is no conditions the bible shows us no place for this .. only twist a few scriptures can one arrive at a view that in of itself proves the person is not saved
as we have seen the response given cannot withstand scrutiny ..... and the issue get worse as we move onto the next doctrine limited atonement.
The gentleman states :
3 The Five-Point Calvinist states that Christ died on the cross for the sins of the Elect. To say that He died for the sins of the Non-Elect is not reasonable. Since, according to their system, God has chosen some to be saved and chosen the rest to be lost, He cannot require the death of Christ for those He does not plan to save anyhow. Therefore, the atonement of Christ is limited to the Elect only.
here is the understanding that we are provided by this gentleman and it is incomplete as to what the doctrine is all about.
The basis of this doctrine i prefer it to be called:
Definite Atonement .... this teaches that the atonement provided in Christ was and is fully sufficient in doing its sole aim which is to redeem those whom are given to the son .. the teaching does not so much deal with the elect or whom it saves, rather the sole attention is to the fact that it truly saves ... the depth of this truth lies in the work of the son as the letter to Hebrews makes it clear that the difference between the ones of old and the one in Christ .. in him we find our true forgiveness and so it has to be a reality
Now lets see the scriptural arguments against this truth if there are any ... the first one offered is as follows:
The basis of this argument is to be seen in the fact he has misrepresented the position which i laid out above, note his words "if you have accepted the first doctrines it is necessary to limit the atonement ... the problem is that the bible states that it was for every man and is effective upon believe"
Now why do say this is not the real picture .. it assumes 2 things 1 ... that limited atonement actually limits who it saves, rather than proving it is for all mankind, and 2 it misunderstand how the work of Christ is actually in operation based on the select verses he chooses
It is very disappointing to see a christian utilizing the scriptures in the same way cult do when they are trying to prove Jesus is not God ... we need to have a higher standard of love for Gods word
the many verse that quoted, are done so in ignorance of the doctrine, and done so on selective use
The two examples I want to touch on here are the Hebrews 2 and the 1 timothy 2,
If you have accepted Total Inability and Unconditional Election it is necessary to limit the scope of Christ's death on Calvary. The only problem is that the Scriptures directly state that the death of Christ was for every man and is effective for the sinner the moment he believes. In 1 John 2:2 it is said that His death was a propitiation (satisfaction) not only for our sins, but for the sins of "the whole world." In Hebrews 2:9, it says that Christ tasted death for "every man." 1 Tim. 2:6 says that He gave Himself a ransom for "all." John the Baptist declared in John 1:29 that Jesus was the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the "world." In Isaiah 53:6, the Word of God states that "all" have gone astray (I would assume that refers to all men in the world) and that the Lord laid on Jesus the iniquity of us "all." Since the gospel is for "whosoever will" and it consists of the good news that Christ died for sinners, I must believe that the atonement of Christ is not limited.
The basis of this argument is to be seen in the fact he has misrepresented the position which i laid out above, note his words "if you have accepted the first doctrines it is necessary to limit the atonement ... the problem is that the bible states that it was for every man and is effective upon believe"
Now why do say this is not the real picture .. it assumes 2 things 1 ... that limited atonement actually limits who it saves, rather than proving it is for all mankind, and 2 it misunderstand how the work of Christ is actually in operation based on the select verses he chooses
It is very disappointing to see a christian utilizing the scriptures in the same way cult do when they are trying to prove Jesus is not God ... we need to have a higher standard of love for Gods word
the many verse that quoted, are done so in ignorance of the doctrine, and done so on selective use
The two examples I want to touch on here are the Hebrews 2 and the 1 timothy 2,
Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him. But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and Honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. For he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one source.That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers
Note that the gentlemen has taken one verse in exclusion of the whole passage, where it goes on to say "many sons to glory" showing that Christs death brings the elect to glory, even though he tasted death for everyone in the sense he went through the same temptations and so forth man goes through , a point that the write of this letter makes in chapter 4 vs 14-16
but this in no way disproves the teaching that is founded upon a bed rock of passages that is exegeted and shown to be in harmony
For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time. For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.
Here it is the term "all" that is made reference to .. but against we ask for consistency .... as always Paul has not left us with out a way of understanding whom he is referring too
Paul has made this clear that Christ truly died for his people in other place that actually deal with the atonement such as Romans 5 :18 -20, and 8 :31-34 and Ephesians 1 :4-5,11
in these passages we are given the direct evidence of whom is saved in Christ, the above 1 timothy passage is speaking to the work he does
the gentleman then states :
Not only is the atonement of Christ unlimited and offered to all men, but the Holy Spirit is presently working to convict the world (all men) of one sin. That sin is that Christ paid the penalty for their sins, but they do not believe on Him (John 16:8,9). God is "not willing that any should perish" (2 Peter 3:9) and it is said that He will "have all men to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4). In Scripture we find the Father giving the Son to the world, the Son tasting death for every man, and the Holy Spirit convicting the world. Since God's work must be our work, we should part company with Five-Point Calvinism right here. The Bible knows nothing of a limited atonement that comes from the vain intellectual reasoning of men.
Note that this statement refuses to deal with the real issues such as what the doctrine teaches which i laid out above .. in these words "the atonement of Christ is unlimited" are we to believe this man has really understood the teaching
If you do not limit the atonement in who it save then you have to limit it to how it saves .. this is why it seen as a potential saving work in Arminian camp
The use of 2 peter 3 :9 is disingenuous in the fact that the passage makes a distinction of people those who will be condemned for their sins, and those who are redeemed (verses 5 -7, and 8- 9)
For more on this passage i refer you to my exegesis on the passage itself to get more understanding
Then we have 1 timothy 2 :4 this is yet another misunderstood text in light of context it should be seen that "all people" refers to distinct people of power as seen in the context vs 1-2
The claim that "the bible knows nothing of a limited atonement" is sheer folly .... since it is clear in scripture that the atonement is for a specific people
john 6 , 8 and 10 all confirm this fact when they all undoubtedly who Jesus is given people, and tells the Jews you are not of God
Take note of Jesus words in john 10 ....
"Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me,is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one”Jesus clearly make it so that Jesus has his sheep and many are not them .. an important element in the gospel ... Christ knows his own
But the Arminian needs to provide an exegetical based response to the following passages:
conclusion
we have gone through the 4 doctrines which this gentleman has problems with, not neccasarily the actual doctrines of grace but the straw-man versions he has set off and then tried to knocked down
the fifth one he has no problem with, except its association with the other doctrines.. what I find fascinating this is the usual type of attack based on ignorance, there is no discussion of all the passages that we have done much exegesis upon in the past
and we have discussion of John 6 :35 -45, Romans chapters 8 -11, and Ephesians 1 :3-11 which is not surprising but nevertheless it is a deep problem that we have christian act from dishonesty .. something a christian should never do
Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ
But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.
Here are a few representative passage which speak to the truth of this doctrine that being : the work of Christ in make redemption fully achievable for whom he dies for; and not how many he dies for.
For any attack on this it would have to be the heart of the issue : the reality of his work in redemption.
As we have seen the response given cannot withstand scrutiny ..... and the issue get worse as we move onto the next doctrine Irresistible grace.
The gentleman states:
Here we have the fourth doctrine to which must turn too.. in order for us to see how this has understood the doctrine
the basis of the doctrine I prefer to call it :
the gentleman states :
Let us go through this above comment to see what the basis of such a claim is ....is that the idea of "irresistible" being something which is false since man can resist the holy spirit, the first major mistake is to assume the title of the doctrine is really the meaning, we dont doubt people can resist the spirit of God
What we are saying is that those who are chosen in Christ first have to be made a new creature, by the sovereign work of the spirit of God .. it is an act of imputation and apart of justification
The use of Matthew 23 :37 is a dishonest and disrespectful use of scripture based on the fact that the text is about the coming judgement upon isreal, and Christ could be relating to the ordinary act of saving someone since he makes a distinction in who he wants to save "your children" and not the "leaders of Jerusalem"
Here is the text "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing!"
The Hebrews texts are warning text about specific types of acts and can not be used to disprove the act of regeneration as we have discussed in the introduction, as these passages are centered on "what if" situations... to state "Here it is plain that the blood of Christ was available to them for salvation, but was refused" is to miss the basic point of the Hebrews warning passages ...
If such a person was to do this it would be a Jew who went back to old way .. this would mean they are saying that Christs blood is not powerful to save and that the blood was in effect not true blood of the covenant this is what the text means vs 39 ... is to be seen in light of vs 38 which is speaking of times in the old days ... when God had made a command on the righteous one, who would live by faith... but "IF" he shrinks back .... not talking of a real even but if it was to happen, then Gods soul wont find no pleasure in him ..... the text then goes on to contrast thsi to the fact that the christian had a surer faith through the spirit "but we are not of those who shrink back" . showing that this is a real situation but a what if situation
But the Arminian needs to provide an exegetical based response to the following passages:
the above passage all show that the act of regeneration must in fact be the first step of salvation, which then is what course the gift of faith to work in a person .. a person who is dead in sin can not show this kind of faith as it is of God
As we have seen the response given cannot withstand scrutiny ..... and the issue get worse as we move onto the next doctrine Irresistible grace.
The gentleman states:
4. Calvinists teach that all those whom God has chosen to be saved will be unable to resist the call of God. Since He has predetermined them to be saved, He effectually calls and regenerates them without any condition to be met on their part.
Here we have the fourth doctrine to which must turn too.. in order for us to see how this has understood the doctrine
the basis of the doctrine I prefer to call it :
Eternal regeneration the teaching states that in oder for a man to be saved God must absolute have control over the acts involved salvation from the first part to the last point .... and here we have a foundation that is the unregenerate must be sovereignly changed from a sinner to a saint .. or Godhater to Godlover, before God can work true saving faith in a person which has been placed in Christ.
the gentleman states :
The Word of God teaches that "the grace of God that bringeth salvation has appeared to all men" (Titus 2:11). Since God has provided salvation for all men and yet all do not come, that is proof enough that men do resist the grace of God. The Bible gives clear instances of men resisting the grace of God. Jesus stood over Jerusalem and said that He wanted to gather them unto Himself, but they "would not" (Matt. 23:37). When Stephen preached to the Jews, he said that regarding their attitude toward God's Word, they were stiff-necked and that they were resisting the Holy Spirit Who was calling them (Acts 7:51). The writer of Hebrews, when describing those "who draw back unto perdition" (Heb. 10:39), said that though they were sanctified by the blood of Christ, yet they had "done despite unto the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10:29). Here it is plain that the blood of Christ was available to them for salvation, but was refused. That the Spirit of God strives with sinners to bring them to repentance and faith is stated in Gen. 6:3. This verse also states that God will one day give man up when His grace is continually resisted.
Let us go through this above comment to see what the basis of such a claim is ....is that the idea of "irresistible" being something which is false since man can resist the holy spirit, the first major mistake is to assume the title of the doctrine is really the meaning, we dont doubt people can resist the spirit of God
What we are saying is that those who are chosen in Christ first have to be made a new creature, by the sovereign work of the spirit of God .. it is an act of imputation and apart of justification
The use of Matthew 23 :37 is a dishonest and disrespectful use of scripture based on the fact that the text is about the coming judgement upon isreal, and Christ could be relating to the ordinary act of saving someone since he makes a distinction in who he wants to save "your children" and not the "leaders of Jerusalem"
Here is the text "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing!"
The Hebrews texts are warning text about specific types of acts and can not be used to disprove the act of regeneration as we have discussed in the introduction, as these passages are centered on "what if" situations... to state "Here it is plain that the blood of Christ was available to them for salvation, but was refused" is to miss the basic point of the Hebrews warning passages ...
If such a person was to do this it would be a Jew who went back to old way .. this would mean they are saying that Christs blood is not powerful to save and that the blood was in effect not true blood of the covenant this is what the text means vs 39 ... is to be seen in light of vs 38 which is speaking of times in the old days ... when God had made a command on the righteous one, who would live by faith... but "IF" he shrinks back .... not talking of a real even but if it was to happen, then Gods soul wont find no pleasure in him ..... the text then goes on to contrast thsi to the fact that the christian had a surer faith through the spirit "but we are not of those who shrink back" . showing that this is a real situation but a what if situation
But the Arminian needs to provide an exegetical based response to the following passages:
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God,
For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake
the above passage all show that the act of regeneration must in fact be the first step of salvation, which then is what course the gift of faith to work in a person .. a person who is dead in sin can not show this kind of faith as it is of God
conclusion
we have gone through the 4 doctrines which this gentleman has problems with, not neccasarily the actual doctrines of grace but the straw-man versions he has set off and then tried to knocked down
the fifth one he has no problem with, except its association with the other doctrines.. what I find fascinating this is the usual type of attack based on ignorance, there is no discussion of all the passages that we have done much exegesis upon in the past
and we have discussion of John 6 :35 -45, Romans chapters 8 -11, and Ephesians 1 :3-11 which is not surprising but nevertheless it is a deep problem that we have christian act from dishonesty .. something a christian should never do
