A Fake god who Cannot Save

The Arminian says that Christ did not bear the sins of anybody but sin itself.

The Arminian excuses God by saying that those who are lost are those God couldn’t save.

The reason the Arminian judges God for “with-holding” the grace that could have saved the non-elect is not so much that the Arminian thinks that God “owes” any sinner something. Rather, the reason the Arminian accuses the true God in this way is that the Arminian has a fake god who cannot save anybody. The Arminian has a fake god who cannot cause the unwilling to will anything.

The Arminian says that love is without reason if love is not conditioned on the sinner accepting it.

Most Calvinists agree with Arminians that the important thing about faith is its source and not its object; they disagree about the source—the Arminian crediting man’s faith to receive the faith, the tolerant Calvinist crediting their mutual god as the source of the Arminian’s faith.

Most Calvinists agree that Arminians have a new nature from God: even though the Arminians have a hypothetical view of the atonement, the Calvinists agree that the Arminian’s new nature is not hypothetical.

Most Calvinists agree with Arminians that works are not prescriptive but descriptive of those with a new nature with a resulting changed life: even though they together acknowledge that these works are still sinful, they will not confess themselves as habitual sinners.

Most Calvinists agree with Arminians that faith results in salvation.
Though these Calvinists deny that faith results in the new birth, the same Calvinists agree that faith results in justification and that faith is credited as the righteousness. But any faith which results in justification is not the true faith which is the immediate result of
the justification of the ungodly.

God has a purpose for evil. God has a purpose for evil theology.

The new birth is not to be confused with God’s adoption of children. Galatians 4: 6—“And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying Abba Father.”

The “eternal life” of justification and adoption are not to be confused with the new birth. John 5:24-25 “As many as hear my word and believe in Him who sent me have eternal life. They do not come into judgment, but have passed from death to life.” However, there is no time gap between eternal life and the new birth produced by the hearing of the word of the gospel.

Explore posts in the same categories: arminians, election, faith

Tags: , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

One Comment on “A Fake god who Cannot Save”

  1. markmcculley Says:

    b: Christians are often irrationally inconsistent, and don’t even know it.

    mark: you are inconsistent in saying that there is a gospel which is neither calvinistic nor arminian.

    b: But some systematic theologies are influenced by false (pagan often Greek) presuppositions which distort everything. Like any putative professing Calvinist, a professing Arminian may or may not be regenerate (that’s God’s business, not ours)

    mark: if you are going to baptise a person or welcome them into your congregation, you don’t ask him what gospel she believes? Would you agree that a professing Roman Catholic may be justified? Would you agree that a professing Mormon may be justified? Would you agree that a Muslim may be justified? Do you believe in eternal justification in which knowledge of the gospel may come after one dies?

    b: but we must maintain a continually faithful critique of his false presuppositions, judging them in terms of the true presuppositions we find in the Bible. The idea of a “whole counsel” requires that.

    mark: I always have the same question: what is the gospel? Can you have a promise of grace, without knowing who Christ is and what Christ did? It most certainly not a matter of the “whole counsel” to say that Jesus died for every sinner and that the effectiveness of that death depends on every
    sinner. It is a lie, an untruth, a false gospel.

    b:In the meantime, all mistakes are notheresies, and both the regenerate and the unregenerate are in process.

    mark: So universalism is heresy, but Arminianism is not? Where do you draw the lines? Why do you draw them where you do? Certainly you don’t have to
    draw lines where John Owen and Toplady drew them, but it seems rational for you to know what your gospel is and your boundaries.

    b: There is such a thing, after all, as an Arminian coming to realize that the Calvinists are right after all. I know many such personally. I was one myself.

    mark: This simply begs the question, by assuming not only that you are now a Christian but that you were one then. How important is it to you for you
    to know that you were a Christian then? Have you ever repented of conditioning salvation on the sinner then, or do you still excuse not only
    in yourself then but in others now? Phil 3–a persecutor of the church, as to the law blameless, I was certainly not very well taught, Chafer was my
    rabbit, and I was inconsistent then (as I am still am). But whatever gain I had then, don’t ask me to deny that I had it then, for certainly I don’t
    need to lose what I had then to gain being Reformed now. There’s no need to count everything loss when there’s a crack of inconsistency in everything
    anyway, a touch of gray, so there is no need to suffer the loss of my former profession or to repent of it so that I count my Arminianism as dung
    and rubbish….

    b: However, the notion that Chafer was not even a
    Christian seems to me to be highly implausible.

    mark: what about Mother Teresa? Billy Graham? Joel Osteen? What makes something plausible to you? Numbers? Does your standard for plausibility
    have anything to do with the gospel? What is your Calvinism-free gospel?

    b:I can think of no reason for thinking such a thing, and know of no rational process that would require it as a conclusion. We have no more right to /assume/ an Arminian is /not /a Christian than we have for assuming he /is.

    mark: interesting to see you do a baptism: this doesn’t mean that we assume that she is a Christian but we can’t assume she’s not? You are not being
    honest with yourself here: you DO judge saved and lost. You judge some Arminians to be saved. You are not as agnostic as you pose. To be honest and rational with yourself, you need to ask: by what standard do you judge? Inerrancy? The virgin birth? Not being an universalist?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: