Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How do you respond to these passages? | 1 John 2:2 | Morant61 | 6977 | ||
Greetings Joe! Obviously Calvanists and Arminians approach Scripture with different sets of assumptions. However, Scripture should be the final arbitrator. During the course of this thread, several people have asked me about specific passages of Scripture. I haven't tried to give honest and thorough answers about each passage. However, no one has responded concerning those passages. For instance, you asked me about Rom. 5:17. Then you asked me for Scripture demostrating that salvation is something that can be accepted or rejected. I responded with a fairly detailed examination of 2 Cor. 5:11-20. Before we go on to discuss why some accept and some don't, would you respond to these two passages from your perspective. a) Romans 5:17 uses an active voice for the verb 'receive.' The normal meaning of this would be that the subject does the receiving. How does this square with Calvanism? b) The most important passage is 2 Cor. 5:11-20. Paul describes there his ministry of reconcilation, given to him by God, in which he implores and persuades men to be reconciled to God as though God Himself were making the plea. Paul does so because the love of Christ compels him. His final command is this: Be reconciled to God. This passage seems like it is describing Arminianism perfectly. God reconciled the world to Himself in Christ (unlimited atonement), but those to whom Paul is preaching must "be reconciled (conditonal election)." As a Calvanist, how do you interpret this passage? Thanks! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran p.s. - Let us know how the mission trip goes! |
||||||
2 | How do you respond to these passages? | 1 John 2:2 | Reformer Joe | 6995 | ||
Okay, let's look: a) I admit unfamiliarity with the "middle passive" voice in Greek, so I am unable to comment on the grammatical particularites involved here. In any case, I do not contend that the active reception of a gift or faith runs contrary to the Reformed position in any case. Calvinists contend that we do choose Christ, that we do place our faith in Christ. It is volitional and active on our part, but only because the disposition of our hearts have been changed logically prior to exercising saving faith. This differs from Arminianism in the sense that it is more than a "prevenient grace" that merely makes us ABLE to receive Christ; it makes us WANT to do so. The verse does not imply that there are some to whom it is offered but not received. And, of course, the verse itself does not identify who those people are that will "receive the abundance of grace." However, let's see if we can infer who those individuals may be. We know that they are initially "ungodly" (5:6), which does describe everyone, but doesn't necessarily mean ALL ungodly men. The same verse also identifies the ungodly as "we," so does the "we" mean "we humans" or "we Christians" to whom the letter is addressed? Obviously the latter category is a subset of the former, so we need more to go on. We see that the "us" is continues in verse 8, in that "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Same people being referred to here as in verse 6, unless you can see some reason why the "we" has shifted. Verse 9-10 shows that "we" have been "justifed by His blood" and "shall be saved of the wrath of God through Him" and "shall be saved by His life." Do Arminians hold that all humans fall into this category? Verse 11 shows the pronoun "we" again, in terms of having received reconciliation. Have all human beings been reconciled to God now? It seems that the "we" referred to is limited to Christians. Now it may be that Paul is not emphatically saying in this passage that the unsaved are unatoned for, but the "we" seems to be dealing with those who have been justified, reconciled, saved through Christ from the wrath to come. Therefore, the "ungodly" in verse 6 and the "us" in verse 8 seems very likely to be referring to believers. Now verse 17 is in the middle of a passage where Paul is comparing Christ's atonement to Adam's transgression. He uses the words "the many" to refer to both the condemned and the saved in all the verses except for 18, in which he states that Adam 's sin resulted in condemnation of "all men" and through Christ's death and resurrection "there resulted justification of life to all men." First of all, were ALL human beings condemned until Christ? Secondly, were ALL human beings justified through Christ? Keep in mind that justification means a "declaration of righteousness" and that there is no evidence that Paul is speaking of a "potential justification," just like he wasn't writing of a "potential condemnation." This is why Calvinists hold in many cases that "all men" means "all kinds of men" (which is really not any grammatical stretch) rather than "each and every human being." --Joe! |
||||||
3 | How do you respond to these passages? | 1 John 2:2 | Morant61 | 7008 | ||
Greetings Joe! Thanks for the response! It is much easier to discuss an issue like this when we both deal with a particular Scripture or passage. Let me try to interact with your position. 1) I had to delete this point, my post was too long? :-) 2) Concerning your second, third, and fourth paragraphs: I would agree that the usage of ‘we’ through Rom. 5:1-11 is referring to believers. The context makes it abundantly clear. After all, he is writing to a church. However, that does not necessarily limit Paul’s comments about the actions of Christ only to believers. We have to ask, can Paul’s statements in Romans 5:6-10 also apply to all men? In other words, did Paul believe that Christ atoned for the sins of all men? Consider the following passages: a) 2 Cor. 5:19 - "that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation." Clearly in this passage, Paul felt that Christ’s atoning work applied to the WORLD, not just believers. b) 1 Tim. 2:4-6 - "who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time." Again, the ransom was for ALL men. c) Titus 2:11 - "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men." The reasons I appeal to these verses is simply this: While the specific audience of Romans 5:1-11 may be the church at Rome, what Paul says here applies equally to all men, as he makes clear in other Scriptures. So, one would not be guilty of reading something into the text to say that Christ died for all ungodly. Especially since, Rom. 5:10 uses the same terminology as 2 Cor. 5, where it is said that God reconciled the world to Himself. In answer to your final question of the fourth paragraph: Arminians would say that potentially all men are included in this category! 3) Concerning your fifth paragraph: According to 2 Cor. 5, all human beings have been reconciled to God at the cross. All that remains is for us to "be reconciled" as God Himself appeals to us through Paul. 4) Concerning your last paragraph: Romans 5:12-20 is the crucial passage for our discussion. Here Paul goes into a detailed explanation of what occurred as a result of Adam’s sin, and what occurred as a result of Christ’s death. You asked if all men condemned until Christ. According to v. 18, they were. You also asked if all men were justified through Christ. According to v. 18, they were. You also commented that Paul isn’t talking about "potential justification." However, isn’t that exactly the point of v. 17? Rom. 5:16 sets up a contrast, not a comparison. Continuing the contrast in v. 17, Paul says that death reigned upon all men through Adam’s sin (we know this from v. 12), but life only reigns in those who receive God’s grace. In light of Rom. 5:16-17, Arminians would say that atonement has been made for all men, but it effects only become active individually upon acceptance of the gift. I really appreciate your interaction. You have laid out a logical case. The only major weakness I can see is in your last sentence. And this is one of the major problems I have with Calvinism. Romans 5:12-20 is obviously dealing with the status of all men. Death came upon all because of Adam. Sin reigns in all because of Adam. Even Calvinists appeal to this passage for Original Sin. So, how can you take "all" in this passage to only mean all kinds of men? To me, this is the major weakness of Calvin, He was unwilling for all to mean all because his doctrine said that all could not mean all. You may have been trying to deal with this question in your last paragraph and I just didn't follow it. Can you provide one example where "all" clearly means "all kinds of men?" Frankly, I don’t buy that argument at all (no pun intended!) In English and in Greek, ‘all’ clearly refers to numerical quantity, not types. Where is there any indication in the verses I quoted in points 2a-c, that Paul is only saying that God only came to save certain kinds of people, and not every individual? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||