Aaron Sauer

A varied collection of theology and life observations.

10 MORE Things Arminians DON’T Have a Problem With, BUT SHOULD

The first 10 things can be found here.

For some reason, Arminians have a problem with God ultimately being sovereign over salvation, but they do not have a problem with God…

1. Choosing to not kill Satan the moment he rebelled against Him, but instead allowing him to tempt Adam and Eve.

2. Choosing to not give Adam and Eve the choice concerning whether or not they would be tempted by Satan.

3. Not giving the unsaved or Christians the choice as to whether or not they will be tempted by Satan and/or his demons.

4. Allowing godly Christians to be unable to have children, while giving wicked people the ability to have as many as they want.

5. Allowing Satan to run to and fro on the earth seeking whom he may devour, even allowing him to tempt and try to deceive His people.

6. Creating Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, etc. while foreknowing all the decisions they would make, and still foreordaining the birth places of innocent men, women, and children that would directly be affected by such dictators. 

7. Foreknowing the genocide of Israel’s enemies: men, women, and children; and God still birthing children near this appointed time; instead of not creating them at all or leaving the young “innocent” left alive.

8. Creating Mussolini, Hitler, Hussein, etc. with the natural charismas, intellects, personalities, etc. necessary to lead nations while knowing how they would use His gifts.  He could have easily chosen not to create them or to create them without these necessary natural gifts.  There is not one soul that has ever lived that God was forced to create; nor are there any natural gifts that He has been forced to give.

9. Being sovereign over when lives physically end.  The problem is that everyone dies from something; and if God appoints the time, He also indirectly or directly appoints the method as well.

10. Crucifying Christ before the foundation of the world, choosing His betrayer, appointing the exact time of His Son’s death, and thus indirectly appointing the men who would nail Him to the cross.  Jesus chose Judas knowing fully well that he was an unbeliever from the beginning.  Judas still made his own choice, but Christ chose him first; otherwise, Judas would never have been in a position to betray Christ.

These reasons and the others I have mentioned here are why Arminianism, if consistently carried out, eventually leads to Open-Theism.  Whenever “God must be fair,” is your hermeneutic, and you get to determine the definition of “fair,” you end up creating a god that is not sovereign or all-knowing, just so you can make “sense” of why evil exists in the world.  After all, a loving God would not create men knowing all the harm they would cause to the innocent of the world, would He?

via jaredmoore.exaltchrist.com

10 Things Arminians DON’T Have a Problem With, BUT SHOULD

For some reason, Arminians have a problem with God ultimately being sovereign over salvation, but they do not have a problem with men, women, and children having the inability to choose whether or not…

1. God creates some of them ugly and some of them handsome or pretty.  An attractive person often has an easier life than someone who isn’t attractive.  Just ask teenagers, college students, and adults.

2. God creates some of them prone to obesity and others with high metabolism.  Being fat is the number one reason children are bullied in school.

3. God gives life to humans knowing that they will never trust in Christ and go to heaven; but, will rather choose another gospel and go to hell.  God however still chooses to create them even though He could have freely created only people that would choose Him.

4. God births some of them with natural abilities that translate into eventual riches; while birthing others with natural abilities that translate into borderline poverty.

5. God births some of them into affluent families, while birthing others into homes stricken with poverty, moral degradation, sexual molestation, drunkenness, etc.

6. God births some with natural intelligence that translates into great advances for society, while birthing others with below average intelligence that translates into no advances for society.

7. God births some with perfect health, while birthing others with physical handicaps, birth defects, etc.

8. God gives some life, while allowing others to be miscarried or stillborn.

9. God allows some to hear the gospel thousands of times before they die, while allowing others to hear the gospel only once or not at all.

10. God births some into Christian homes, while birthing others into Islamic, Buddhist, Mormon, etc. homes.

Why can God be absolutely sovereign over temporary life, but not absolutely sovereign over eternal life?  If you are willing to accept God’s sovereign rule over temporary life, then why not His sovereign rule over eternal life?

via jaredmoore.exaltchrist.com

A Humorous Story about George Whitefield and John Wesley Regarding Prayer

From James Montgomery Boice: The Sermon on the Mount: An Expositional Commentary (Matthew 5-7)

At one point in the course of their very influential ministries, George Whitefield, the Calvinistic evangelist, and John Wesley, the Arminian evangelist, were preaching together in the daytime and rooming together in the same boarding house each night. One evening after a particularly strenuous day the two of them returned to the boarding house exhausted and prepared for bed. When they were ready each knelt beside the bed to pray. Whitefield, the Calvinist, prayed like this: “Lord, we thank Thee for all those with whom we spoke today, and we rejoice that their lives and destinies are entirely in Thy hand. Honor our efforts according to Thy perfect will. Amen.” He rose from his knees and got into bed. Wesley, who had hardly gotten past the invocation of his prayer in this length of time, looked up from his side of the bed and said, “Mr. Whitefield, is this where your Calvinism leads you?” Then he put his head down and went on praying. Whitefield stayed in bed and went to sleep. About two hours later Whitefield woke up, and there was Wesley still on his knees beside the bed. So Whitefield got up and went around the bed to where Wesley was kneeling. When he got there he found Wesley asleep. He shook him by the shoulder and said to him, “Mr. Wesley, is this where your Arminianism leads you?"

The story shows that we all have some things to learn about prayer, and it teaches that because no one understands the ways of God as perfectly as we ought to understand them, prayer is, therefore, at least partially confusing to us all.

John Owen on the Arminian View of the Death of Christ

The merit of the death of Christ being to them as an ointment in a box, that hath neither virtue nor power to act or reach out its own application unto particulars, being only set out in the gospel to the view of all, that those who will, by their own strength, lay hold on it and apply it to themselves may be healed.

from The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, John Owen

Chart: Arminianism v. Calvinism

This chart distinguishes between the soteriological systems of Arminianism and Calvinism.
[HT: Gairney Bridge]

(download)

Spurgeon on Particular Redemption

From his sermon Particular Redemption, delivered at the Music Hall, Royal Surrey Gardens, 1858: Spurgeon responds to the Arminian perspective on the extent of the atonement:

"We are often told that we limit the atonement of Christ, because we say that Christ has not made a satisfaction for all men, or all men would be saved. Now, our reply to this is, that, on the other hand, our opponents limit it: we do not. The Arminians say, Christ died for all men. Ask them what they mean by it. Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of all men? They say, “No, certainly not.” We ask them the next question — Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of any man in particular? They answer “No.” They are obliged to admit this if they are consistent. They say “No, Christ has died that any man may be saved if” — and then follow certain conditions of salvation. We say, then, we will just go back to the old statement — Christ did not die so as beyond a doubt to secure the salvation of anybody, did he? You must say “No;” you are obliged to say so, for you believe that even after a man has been pardoned, he may yet fall from grace, and perish. Now, who is it that limits the death of Christ? Why, you. You say that Christ did not die so as to infallibly secure the salvation of anybody. We beg your pardon, when you say we limit Christ’s death; we say, “No, my dear sir, it is you that do it.” We say Christ so died that he infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ’s death not only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved, and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved. You are welcome to your atonement; you may keep it. We will never renounce ours for the sake of it."