Calvinists? Arminians?

[asajoseph]

Just out of interest, I was wondering what sort of spread here? Self description is the only requirement...

[Clement of Rome]

Wow... I didn't realize how long it's been sense someone posted on this subject.

[Icarus]

Clement,
Your formula needs more.

Faith Responce---> Regeneration--->Changed Nature--->Holy Spirit

You need to explain what Faith is Responding to.

[Clement of Rome]

It's not really my formula and it wasn't intended to be exhaustive. The faith response is to the gospel message.

[Icarus]

Parroting isn't of much use in a debate forum.

What I was looking for was "God invites". But I'd also rearrange two things. Changed Nature and Holy Spirit.

God Invites--->Faith Response--->Holy Spirit--->Regeneration--->Changed Nature


Note: God is not sequential in thinking like we are. After our faith response you could probably rearrange Holy Spirit, Regeneration, Changed Nature till the cows come home.

[Clement of Rome]

I appritiate your concern for particulars but I wasn't concerned with being specific. It seems we really don't have a disagreement unless you placed regeneration before faith responce.

[Icarus]

Clement,
No, we don't on that set of issues. But I do have concerns on the term "regeneration". My understanding of its use would be to assume that something is dead and brought back to life. Implying of course our spirit. But, then again, is our spirit in fact dead?

One could say yes, and quote scriptures from Paul. But if Paul were speaking literally as us being dead in our transgressions. Then how is it that we reason without a live spirit? Flesh is flesh. It does what it is told or acustom to do. Flesh does not think, it reacts. We (even sinners) are spirit, we are not our bodies. Loose a non vital body part and you are still you. There is only a missing flesh. Not a missing part of the spirit.

Man is made in God's image. And God is not Flesh.

All that to say, I would use the term "turning" or "change of mind" to replace "regeneration".

Thoughts?

[Burbot]

I am not really sure where I'd fit. I definetly reject he idea of God's selected before birth for salvation, as well as "once saved, always saved" and such, but I also reject the Arminian view that works do nothing for salvation.

some events have definetly been predestined though, for example, the persecution of Christ.

I think the biggest thing that keeps me from Calvinism is predestination and Free Will and how they can be coexistant as in (the onyl church I know of) the Anglican tradition.

[McCulloch]

I am not really sure where I'd fit. I definetly reject he idea of God's selected before birth for salvation, as well as "once saved, always saved" and such, but I also reject the Arminian view that works do nothing for salvation.

some events have definetly been predestined though, for example, the persecution of Christ.

I think the biggest thing that keeps me from Calvinism is predestination and Free Will and how they can be coexistant as in (the onyl church I know of) the Anglican tradition.

I really don't see how you can have it both ways. Either salvation is entirely the work of God as the Calvinists teach or something action on the part of someone other than God is involved as the Arminians teach. Is belief a free decision of a human or is belief a gift from God given to depraved humanity?

[Burbot]

Ok, let me re-phrase that. I believe that men choose to beleive on God (Arminian) however another Arminian principle (I've read) is that good works do not help to receive God's grace, so I would not be Arminian. I didn't mean to say I had it both ways.

[McCulloch]

Ok, let me re-phrase that. I believe that men choose to beleive on God (Arminian) however another Arminian principle (I've read) is that good works do not help to receive God's grace, so I would not be Arminian. I didn't mean to say I had it both ways.

I think that you have been mislead regarding Arminian theology. Grace, to them, is a free and undeserved gift from God received by faith.