Full Blown Arminianism & and an interesting view...

[cyberjosh]

I don't think I've ever actually read any thing by someone who holds to a pure Arminian view, or atleast not one who has any coherent doctrine in it. I ran across this site today and it seemed extremely well presented as far as comprehensiveness and consistancy of a certain view goes. I do not subscribe to Arminianism however I found one particular gleaning beneficial for illuminating the necessity of experiencing life in Christ by relating to Christ. Read the following:

Christ thus becomes the ultimate statement of humanity's repentance and confession of faith. His atonement is vicarious not simply in that He became a sacrifice so that we would not have to be sacrifices, but it is vicarious in that by His life, death and resurrection He modeled to us how we were to be "living sacrifices" (Romans 12:1â€â€2). It is only as our repentance and obedience are complete so that we are united with Christ in the sacrifice of His total life (Rom. 6:1â€â€10) that sin is expiated and God is propitiated. In the OT, the sacrificial ritual whereby repentance was to be expressed was prescribed by God. In the NT, the proper sacrificial attitude is exemplified by Christ's life and death. Instead of a sacrificial ritual we have a sacrificial example. This example does not simply inspire the sinner to moral renewal, but requires that the sinner also express repentance for sin and personal surrender to God by identifying in faith with the dying and rising experience of Christ (Rom. 6:1â€â€10). Thus, by obedient union by faith in the events of Christ's sacrificial life and death, the believer is enabled to conform to the covenant expectations. This is justification since the believer is now brought into a relationship of righteousness in the covenant union.

Thus, a sacrificial understanding of the atonement in the context of the covenant relationship emphasizes the need for participatory involvement in the "fellowship of his sufferings." Christ's work benefits me only as I experience it in faithâ€â€union with Him. When the objective work of Christ in atonement is divorced from the subjective need for the appropriation of his work by faith, the vicarious implications of Christ's dying "for many" (Mark 10:45) give way to a substitutionary emphasis in which Christ's work becomes an external and transactional satisfaction of penalty which tends to separate the believer from responsibility for moral and spiritual growth.34 This kind of monergism is avoided with the Wesleyanâ€â€Arminian emphasis which stresses both the objective work of Christ before God and the subjective work of Christ in the believer which leads him/her to an appropriate faith response.

I found this a very mind blowing and refreshing view of how vibrant life in Christ is. However I would be sure to emphasize that it is the objective reality of Christ's atonement that affects the results and indeed gives the on-going power by God's grace to participate in the "subjective" (practical) perfect example of Christ. This shows how Christ's life has a two-fold value, that of the objective sacrifice and that of the perfect example against which we need to conform to follow Him in his example.

What do you think about this?


God Bless,

~Josh

 

[Guest]

I will take a TULIP over a DAISY (He loves me, He loves me not, He loves me, He loves me not) anyday.

:-D

 

[Vic C.]

:o


I got the impression from other threads that you didn't adhere to all five points. 8-)

 

[cyberjosh]

I will take a TULIP over a DAISY (He loves me, He loves me not, He loves me, He loves me not) anyday.

:-D

I already said I didn't hold to Arminianism, for the record. The point of the quote given above in my OP can actually be held by either camp, I just found this context particularly illuminating.

My Pastor told me this last wednesday a story about how once a mischevious preacher who was contemporary with Spurgeoun and Wesley's time arranged for them both to preach one night at the same time expecting them to turn the sermon into a debate. Instead what happened is that Wesley said be believed such & such about personal responsibilty, and Spurgeoun said "Well I believe that". And Spurgeon said such & such about election and Gd's work in us and Wesley said "I believe in that too." So they both said, "Okey lets preach." They didn't fight, the ploy back-fired. This shows that regardless of what stance you take on the salvation issue you can operate on the exact same principles that end in the same result: our eternal salvation.

 

[Guest]

:o


I got the impression from other threads that you didn't adhere to all five points. 8-)

I adhere to 5 points - but I guess they are not all in a TULIP.

*smirk* Sorry, I was just trying to make a funny with my post.

I personally believe that most "Calvinists" today - get it wrong - not completely understanding what Calvin wrote.

I believe there is a blend of "election" and personal responsibility. Then again, I see election a little differently. The elect are those who believe, and those who believe are the elect.