James Arminius (The Security of the Believer)_0
Monthly Archives For December 2012
Arminius on the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ submitted by SEA member, Roy Ingle VII. The Son is the second person in the Holy Trinity, the Word of the Father, begotten of the…
By Dr. Dale Wayman
It seems to me that some people have more faith in their relationship with God than I do. I hear people talking about how God does special things for them. For example, I hear people say, “God made this sunny day just for me. I prayed that God would let the weather be nice and sunny and dry so that I would have a good day on my birthday.” I think, “Really? God put in a high pressure system over where you are today just so you could have a good day?” I then imagine a farmer in the same region praying, “Lord, today, could you make it rain really good? My crops aren’t doing well and they could use the moisture.” So, now we have competing prayers. How does God know who to listen to?
Often cited as a proof text for the doctrine of Total Inability is Jeremiah 13:23, which reads,
- Jeremiah 13:23
- “Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil.” (ESV)
The purpose of this post is to explain my reasons for rejecting Jeremiah 13:23 as a good proof-text for the doctrine of Total Inability.
I believe in the depravity of man, don’t get me wrong. But I don’t believe that Jeremiah 13:23 is the best proof-text for such a fundamental truth as this. When considered in context, I believe that this verse is not teaching that it is literally impossible for unsaved man to do any good. Needless to say, I don’t believe this verse is teaching mankind’s ‘Total Inability.’
The Practical Implications of an Unlimited Atonement
written by SEA member, Roy Ingle
On a more personal level, what are the implications of an unlimited atonement when it comes to ministry? I believe there is much value in preaching the truth of unlimited atonement.
1. All People Are Responsible For Their Fate.
Arminius on Our Election Being in Christ
This post is provided by SEA member, Roy Ingle
Arminius wrote the following in a debate over the subject of predestination. He clearly shows that he taught that we are justified by faith and that the basis of our election is not us but Christ and faith in Him, the elected One!
Is Faith a Work?
This post is written by SEA member, Roy Ingle
In Romans 4:4-5 we read the following:
4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.
Calvinism, Arminianism and Omnibenevolence
This post was written by Randal Rauser, PhD
[Please note that Dr. Rauser is not a member of SEA and that SEA does not necessarily endorse all of his theological positions. We include this post on our site because we think it helpful in some respects.]
Arminians like to point out that according to Calvinism God elects some people to damnation. Of course some Calvinists try to soften this teaching by claiming that the election to damnation is a passive divine act according to which God simply “passes over” and thereby opts not to redeem these people.
Unfortunately this shift in nomenclature doesn’t really make the divine act of election to damnation passive in an ethically significant way. Indeed, it calls to mind James Rachels’ famous thought experiment on passive euthanasia so I’m going to borrow from that thought experiment to make my point.
This is the heart of the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and therefore of authentic Christianity: the incarnation of God as “one of us.” Take it away and Christianity is little more than a moralistic, therapeutic deism. The incarnation, as event and doctrine, is the distinctive note of the Christian witness and the basis of Christian hope.
But many Christians believe in the incarnation of God in Jesus, but fail to grasp the fullness of it as good news about God. Karl Barth best expressed this good news about God in a nutshell: the humanity of God—the startling title (given his early emphasis on God’s “wholly otherness”) of one of his last books.
If Barth was right, and I believe he was, God was always inclined toward us, always determined in himself, by his free decision, as “He who loves in freedom,” to be for us in Jesus Christ. Thus, we must think of the Son of God, the second person of the Godhead, the Word, as the “Platzhalter” for Jesus Christ in the Trinity.
Leading Calvinist John MacArthur asserts that,
“The contemporary idea today is that there’s some residual good left in the sinner. As this progression came from Pelagianism to Semi-Pelagianism, and then came down to some contemporary Arminianism, maybe got defined a little more carefully by Wesley, who was a sort of, ah, um, messed up Calvinist, because Wesley wanted to give all the glory to God, but as you well know, but he wanted to find in man some place where man could initiate salvation on his own will… So that the sinner, un-aided by the Holy Spirit, must make the first move. That’s essentially Arminian theology: The sinner, un-aided, must make the first move.”(Bold Emphasis mine)1
Loraine Boettner writes,