March 7, 2006
-
ARMINIANS
A consistent Arminian believes every single person will go to heaven since he believes that Christ paid for every sin that has every been committed.
An inconsistent Arminian affirms that some people will end up in hell even though Christ paid for their sins.
Thus, every Arminian is either 1) a Universalist or 2) believes in a “christ” that cannot save.
DOUBTING CALVINISTS
A doubting Calvinist says that Christ died only for His people but also says he is not sure whether or not he is one of God’s people.
Doubting Calvinists say they 1) believe the gospel but 2) are not sure they are saved. Thus, DCs affirm that it is possible for someone to believe the gospel and not be saved. They think, “I believe the gospel, but I may not be saved.”
The Doubting Calvinist thinks that God has lied in his promise to save all believers because the DC thinks it is possible to believe and not be saved.
“HAPPY IS HE THAT CONDEMNS NOT HIMSELF IN THAT WHICH HE ALLOWS”
Comments (9)
Who are you? Where did you hear about my blog?
Everyone who sins is in effect calling God a liar. EVERYONE has sinned, therefore EVERYONE has called God a liar. Yet, many are still saved. So, calling God a liar can be 1) FORGIVEN and 2) it is not a damanble sin (i.e. it does not condemn you to Hell automatically). I do believe that a Doubting Christian is in error for doubting, but telling them that they are not saved is WAY over the top. I would not deal out judgement so rashly and quickly as you do.
“Scripture … teaches that regeneration is ONLY the Holy Spirit giving someone a change of mind about the gospel.”
If I was to say, “Andrew Bain does not believe regeneration is to be given a new nature, he believes it is ‘ONLY the Holy Spirit giving someone a change of mind about the gospel’”
Is that a correct statement?
Or wait… maybe this: “Andrew Bain believes regeneration and the new nature is ‘ONLY the Holy Spirit giving someone a change of mind about the gospel’”
I’m just wondering because you didn’t respond to my response to your response…. yet again, that seems kind of typical though.
I would like to know how and where is my response false? Surely you can find something heretical about it, no?
Andrew or should I call you God ( I sure wont do that even though you may think you are), Who are you to judge the eternity of anyone. Your just flat out wrong and I dont have to prove it, scripture does. To say Owen is an unbeliever, WHAT! You may very well be a goof ball. Matt
Thank You for posting on my site “Extol34″. I am posting you from another blog. I agree with you, Calvinism (or whatever you want ot call it) is entirely biblically and arminianism is not. Though your arguements seem contradictory. I will look over them more but for now it seems that you are saying arminians are unregenerate because they rely on their own merit for salvation. Correct? Then you go on to say that unless one believes in God’s full grace and nothing else he can not be saved. I do believe the latter statement however the very rules you impose contradicts this. Why? You say in order to be saved one must first be a calvinist, then reject those who aren’t and then you will be saved. I believe that kind of logic is just as poor if not worse than the arminians.
Do not take this as an attack. I want to be fair and I will look ove rit again. Thank You for taking the time to read my blog and post me.
-Greg
“What the Arminian wants to do is to arouse man’s activity: what we want to do is to kill it once for all—to show him that he is lost and ruined, and that his activities are not now at all equal to the work of conversion; that he must look upward. They seek to make the man stand up: we seek to bring him down, and make him feel that there he lies in the hand of God, and that his business is to submit himself to God, and cry aloud, ‘Lord, save, or we perish.’ We hold that man is never so near grace as when he begins to feel he can do nothing at all. When he says, ‘I can pray, I can believe, I can do this, and I can do the other,’ marks of self-sufficiency and arrogance are on his brow.” – C. H. Spurgeon
Salvation ultimatly comes down to whether or not God is Sovereign over EVERYTHING, even our WILL.
Jonathon Edwards puts it beautifully when explaining the Sovereignty of God in Salvation:
“The Sovereignty of God is the stumbling block on which thousands fall and perish; and if we go contending with God about His sovereignty it will be our eternal ruin. It is absolutely necessary that we should submit to God as an absolute sovereign, and the sovereign of our souls; as one who may have mercy on whom He will have mercy and harden whom He will”
Jonathan Edwards
Tis all i shall say with this “peaceful” discussion.
Onto another note. I’m quite curious as to how you found my site Mr. Bain. Also, how it is you possibly knew I held the doctrines of grace dear to my heart? If you have any exposition on this matter, do feel free to share by commenting on my xanga site. Have a great day. Dominus Vobiscum my friend.
Coram Deo,
Joshua
P.S. Semper Reformanda!!!!
Didn’t I see John Edwards in Bain’s hall of shame? You know, the place where he calls them all God-Haters and athiests? lol
I don’t think that your logic is accurate. It is a false choice. A dismissal of Limited Atonement does not have to lead to universalism or a belief in an impotent “christ” as you suggested. Rather, I affirm (quite consistently) that God has sent His Son to die as a substitutionary atonement for the sins of the “whole world.” As such, He is able to offer salvation to as many as will receive Him. It is not a sign of impotence to leave a decision to someone else. I am not saying that He cannot do what He wants. To exercise self-restraint is not a sign of weakness (example: Jesus’ emptying of divine priveleges in order to become take on human nature and pay for our sins – not that He could not be omnipotent, but He chose to lay that aside temporarily).
I remember hearing an example once (I cannot remember the source, alas) of a man on death row who, although offered a pardon by the governor of his state, turned it down and was executed. The governor had the power and authority to stay the execution, but did not force it on the man on death row.
DUnno, i never saw that, of course i’ve not had much time to spend in exegesis on what mr. bain has written. If Edwards is in Bain’s hall of shame we’ll have some issues. lol. It appears that the Puritan writers aren’t too high on his list…but I hesitate to articulate for fear that I might deviate from the present course of rectitude in this case. I shall continue to watch…hee hee.
Coram Deo,
Joshua