| Poster | Thread |
KeithLaMothe
Member
Joined: 2004/3/28
Posts: 354
| | Re: | | I was going to post some thoughts on Calvinism, with some minor corrections to Philologos's comments (they were very close, though), but it seems that the fellow on the soapbox is espousing Universalism rather than Reformed theology.
There's some merit to the idea that Calvinism is a step closer (than Arminianism) to Universalism, but looked at another way it could also be said that Arminianism is closer:
Calvinists affirm the [b]efficacy[/b] of the atonement.
Arminians affirm the [b]universality[/b] of the atonement.
Universalists (or at least some of them) affirm [b]both[/b].
So both of the first two groups believe "parts" of Universalism, I don't know which is closer. This is somewhat neither here nor there, however, as the mere fact that one's theology can be added to in such a way as to produce rank heresy doesn't necessarily say much about one's theology.
|
|
 2004/12/2 11:04 | Profile |
sermonindex
Moderator
Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 37708
"Pilgrim and Sojourner." - 1 Peter 2:11
Online! | | Re: | | Quote:
Calvinists affirm the efficacy of the atonement.
Arminians affirm the universality of the atonement.
Universalists (or at least some of them) affirm both.
Very well put brother! We can put the emphasis were we want to put it. but the hardest thing is to put the emphasis where God puts it in the Scriptures. You cannot get to that point if you skim over your favorite highlighted verses, but it takes a meditation and study of Scriputres as a whole accepting it ALL as His word. believest thou this?
_________________
SI Moderator - Greg Gordon
|
|
| 2004/12/2 11:18 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Thanks Mike
[b]For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you.[/b] (1Co 11:19 NASB)
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2004/12/2 11:19 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Hi Keith
Quote:
Calvinists affirm the [b]efficacy[/b] of the atonement.
Arminians affirm the [b]universality[/b] of the atonement.
Universalists (or at least some of them) affirm [b]both[/b].
Beautifully crafted!
Would it be correct to say that Calvinists affirm the [i]inevitable[/i] efficacy of the atonement?
and that Arminians affirm the universality of the atonement but not its [i]inevitability[/i].
and would it be correct to say that Universalists (some of them) also affirm the [i]inevitable[/i] efficacy of the atonement?
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2004/12/2 11:26 | Profile |
RobertW
Member
Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri
| | Re: | | Universalists affirm the inevitable (and unconditional) universal efficacy of the atonement. That makes them more than the sum of Calvinism and Arminianism; it make them Calvinism+ Arminianism + Inevitability.
God Bless,
-Robert
_________________
Robert Wurtz II
|
|
| 2004/12/2 12:15 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
Universalists affirm the inevitable (and unconditional) universal efficacy of the atonement. That makes them more than the sum of Calvinism and Arminianism; it make them Calvinism+ Arminianism + Inevitability.
But don't FPFs also affirm inevitability in 'irresistable grace'? In your language wouldn't FPCs affirm the inevitable and unconditional efficacy of the atonement for those unconditionally elected?
(If anyone has just happened onto this bit of the website and is a little baffled by these careful words, I assure you it isn't usually like this :-D )
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2004/12/2 15:04 | Profile |
RobertW
Member
Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri
| | Re: | | Quote:
But don't FPFs also affirm inevitability in 'irresistable grace'? In your language wouldn't FPCs affirm the inevitable and unconditional efficacy of the atonement for those unconditionally elected?
Brother I'm getting brain fatigue. I'll have to shut down and restart to answer that. :-?
******************
Quote:
But don't FPFs also affirm inevitability in 'irresistable grace'?
Yes
Quote:
In your language wouldn't FPCs affirm the inevitable and unconditional efficacy of the atonement for those unconditionally elected?
Yes
_________________
Robert Wurtz II
|
|
| 2004/12/2 15:57 | Profile |
dohzman
Member
Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132
| | Re: CONSIDER THIS | | Jn 6:48-58 Jesus here sets forth the possibility that men could reject him and die being eternally lost while the offer was constantly there for them.Look at who he addressed this to and the broad range of people it applies to. It is finished was a saying the High Priest said after the Lamb offered as a sin offering for the nation was accomplished and that saying was yet another fulfillment of prophesy about Jesus and was uttered by the true HIGH PRIEST--- Jesus Christ. But that didn't negate the fact of participation. How many Isrealites would have lived if Blood hadn't been placed over the door posts and lintels at the passover? I've always wondered how many egyptians placed blood of a lamb over thiers just as a precaution and were spared?
_________________
D.Miller
|
|
| 2004/12/2 20:14 | Profile |
dohzman
Member
Joined: 2004/10/13
Posts: 2132
| | Re: Think this | | I agree somewhat that someone has an axe gridding here because anti seems to be shooting accusations instaed of reasoning aguements logically and prayerfully. But to say that he's a wolf or deciever or evil? I would just say he wrestling over matters of the law with which he's not very learned, that's all.
_________________
D.Miller
|
|
| 2004/12/2 20:30 | Profile |
philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
It is finished was a saying the High Priest said after the Lamb offered as a sin offering for the nation was accomplished and that saying was yet another fulfillment of prophesy about Jesus and was uttered by the true HIGH PRIEST--- Jesus Christ.
I've never heard this before. Can you tell me where you got the info?
Quote:
I've always wondered how many egyptians placed blood of a lamb over thiers just as a precaution and were spared?
None, unless
1. they were members of the 'church of Israel' Ex 12:3.
2. were actually eating the lamb on the inside Ex 12:4.7
3. had quaranteened their lamb for the correct period Ex 12:6
4. had synchronised its slaying with all the other lambs Ex 12:6
5. and were circumcised Ex 12:43,44
One aspect of the passover which is often missed is that the blood on the doorposts and lintels was a sign that the family inside were eating the Lamb. It was not just an outward ritual but an inward feast. [b]I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. [/b] (Joh 6:51 KJV)
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
|
| 2004/12/3 3:58 | Profile |
