tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-172417803867627775.post4728165946013915476..comments2023-05-18T03:50:23.681-07:00Comments on The Center for Theological Studies: The Noble ArminianByronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11537490279115937176noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-172417803867627775.post-42005699858458601632010-04-03T19:54:18.155-07:002010-04-03T19:54:18.155-07:00Kaitiaki,
Regarding Calvinism and Arminianism, I...Kaitiaki,<br /><br /> Regarding Calvinism and Arminianism, I think you may be right. In my discussions with Calvinists, I have found that advocates of both theologies use terms differently at times. For instance, let's look at the word "unconditional." Calvinists use this to say that God "picks" certain people to be saved. The Classical Arminian, however, defines "unconditional" as God not being bound by anyone or anything outside of Himself to do anything. He is not forced or obligated to anyone to do anything. So, in a sense, Classical Arminians argue unconditional election in the sense that God elects based on His own decisions. Classical Arminians (CA) argue God's free decision to select the process of salvation based on Romans 9. In this sense, we agree with the Calvinist...however, CAs disagree with Calvinists when it comes to Romans 10. For the Arminian, Romans 10 confirms the process of salvation: by faith (Romans 10:9). The Calvinist incorporates Romans 10 as an afterthought. For him, the Calvinist believes God picks and chooses people; but when it gets to Romans 10, the Calvinist says that God regenerates the person, and then they practice faith in God. <br /><br /> You stated that the Arminian and Calvinist have different emphases: I agree that it could be very possible. But I think that Classical Arminianism explains both emphases: it emphasizes both prevenient grace (and faith as gifts-- divine sovereignty), as well as the responsibility of man to believe on His name.Deidre Richardson, B.A., M.Div.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04415891901162852180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-172417803867627775.post-10241942056008303752010-03-28T23:56:17.600-07:002010-03-28T23:56:17.600-07:00I'm not sure if this is an appropriate respons...I'm not sure if this is an appropriate response but let's try it here anyway. <br /><br />Paul and James seem to be in disagreement with each other. Paul says (Romans 3:28) we are saved "by faith apart from works" and James says (James 2:24) "man is justified by works and not by faith alone." And they both cite Genesis 15:6. <i>"And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."</i> <br /><br />Paul says (Romans 4:2): "If Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about; but not before God." While James says James 2:21): "Was not Abraham, our father, justified by works when he offered up Isaac, his son, on the altar?" I believe a resolution is possible but it does take careful evaluation.<br /><br />Could it be that the Arminian and the Calvinist are a little like James and Paul - using their terms differently because their concerns are different?Kaitiakihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04091541905130901357noreply@blogger.com