Five Articles of the Remonstrance of Jacobus Arminius of 1610

Heres also a video, that explains John 3:16
I hope it would open eyes and hearts of Brothers and Sisters in Christ who are Arminian, to embrace unconditional election (calvinism aka biblical doctrine)

Indeed Arminianism is only a half-faith and a perversion of God's grace, since it denies God's Sovereign free choice of grace.

When you carefully examine the Five Articles of the Remonstrants about half their doctrine is Calvinism. I have examined each article in this thread.

So that cannot be either a perversion of God's grace or of the Gospel. Some of their ideas are completely biblical, and even their concept of the eternal security of the believer is not a total adherence to the opposite of eternal security.

Calvinists judge the Remonstrants far more harshly than justifiable. But neither Calvinism nor Arminianism is actual Bible truth -- the true Gospel.

"SOVEREIGN GRACE" -- You will not find this term in the Bible -- where those two words appear together. So this is a strictly Calvinistic or Reformed term, which seeks to limit salvation to only some people, while excluding many others.

However here is what the Bible has to say about the grace of God (as opposed to the Calvinistic misconception):

1. The grace of God (which brings salvation) is infinite and is offered to all men (Titus 2:11).

2. The grace of God is offered to sinners strictly on the basis of the finished work of Christ. Christ died for our sins and rose again for our justification.

3. Christ died for the sins of the whole world, which means that He took away the sin of the world. He tasted death for every man.

4. God offers salvation to whosever will take of the water of life freely -- anyone and everyone without exception, and without regard to caste, color, language, race, social standing or nationality.

5. The condition of salvation is obedience to the Gospel -- repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

Calvinists aren’t all that bad. A Calvinist produced the beauty that is “Pilgrim’s Progress”.

I am not a Calvinist, but count them as beloved brethren.

Both sides often judge each other, largely based on misunderstanding

Wesley and Whitefield got along quite well, despite their differences

Just because Reformed holds a position does not make it wrong...

Reformed also believe in...(which I hold to be essential doctrine)

A. Trinity

B. Second Coming of Jesus

C. Substitutionary Atonement

D. Justification by faith

E. Resurrection of Jesus

F. Virgin birth
etc

That's right, Arminians and Calvinists hold to essential doctrines which makes them a Christian, so amen to that , there is obviously saved and unsaved people on both sides, only God knows, so we seek each others good and be faithful

Yes, but what the heck is an incarnation?

Sorry Whispered, I didn't read triune, trinity, god-man, three-in-one, God the Son, 2-in-1 natures, incarnation, one-essence, or anything 'God made flesh' in all of the passages that you quoted? Did you digress?

You see, the mystery of Christ is in his chronology, not his ontology. He was the first-born of all creation, but God chose to reveal him at the appointed time so that man may appreciate his own sin, and consequently, Christ's perfection. God wanted a son, and for his son, he gave him a family that he may be the head, but he played this out in history in reverse order. i.e. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God... This is clearly a literary convention called antanaclasis, but is speaking of a very profound revelation, ...God saved the best for last.

By calling Jesus God, you have denied the principle of the Son, and destroyed the pure love that was manifested between them. God does not love himself, nor redeem himself from himself, obviously!

DB7
Sorry to reign you in, but please be careful. If you are saying there is no Trinity then you
are on dangerous ground as to the rules and can be disciplined if reported. The Trinity
is expressly taught in this forum and any opposition of the teaching is pounced on by
the administrators, and quite rightly.

There is a 2nd person in the Trinity, He existed in the beginning with the Father, there is no chronology
in that statement. That means Whenever and wherever the Father is (existed) there too is the 2nd person,
Logos - Son - Word, Speaking, - Voice. He is there in Genesis 1 - Let there be Light - not the Father speaking ,
but the Logos. But the Father is there and so is the Holy Spirit they all agree. They are not desperate yet they
are distinct. John reaffirms this in John 1 - In the beginning was the Word (logos) and the Word was with God
and the Word was God.

Gen1:1 - In the beginning God (Triune God including the Father) created the heavens and the earth.

2 - Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep,
and the Spirit of God (3rd Person of the Trinity) was hovering over the waters.

3 - And God (Logos - Word - preincarnate Christ) said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

So there in the first 3 verses of the Bible the three are presented.

Further the Bible shows how this came about with the Triune God conversing amongst themselves
speaking the plurality of the Godhead yet not defining exactly the Trinity with other verses we can
find who 'our' and 'let us' means.

Gen 1:26 26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness . . .

John reaffirms this in John 1:
John 1:1 King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

This statement is puzzling: DB7 said: "By calling Jesus God, you have denied the principle of the Son,"

I quote here an extract from the Athanasian Creed c. 5th Century based on the work of Augustin the Church Father:

The theology of the creed is firmly rooted in the Augustinian tradition,
using exact terminology of Augustine's On the Trinity (published 415 AD

"Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood. Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ;"

The Athanasian Creed (although not from Athanasius) is based on the 10 volumes of Augustine on the Trinity
and exhaustive work which all main denominations adhere to along with the Nicene Creed 381 A.D.:

"And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons),
Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; "

So I hope DB7 you do not repeat that Jesus is not God.

Jesus is very God of very God

DB7 asks "What is incarnation."

I think probably with tongue in cheek as I suspect he knows exactly what is meant by the word
'incarnation' but possibly he prefers not to acknowledge it.

Isaiah 7:14
"Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child
and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.

Isaiah saw it why not you DB7?

Butterflyyy said:
"Ugh...here we go...seems like another tiresome Calvinist on here"

You don't have to read this thread if you don't want to Butteflyyy
you don't even have to be here, you are free to visit any thread you
like without our permission.

Butterflyy said:

"Sorry Bill but I have found it to be tiresome and difficult to speak with Calvinists over the years."

****
I can't ban Calvinists from this thread Butterflyy, I can't even control who visits here
but as the thread is about the Remonstrance and the Canons of Dordt why would you
wish to be here? you are free to go elsewhere should you wish to.

I bless you too, you seem a troubled girl.

[B]Nehemiah6[/B]
Posted much about the word "Whosoever"

This is very useful, although it is important to state that the Canons of Dordt
and the Remonstrance state that 'whosesoever believes will be saved'.
Jesus died on the cross to call all men, He died for all men, yet only some
are saved. The reformers could not say that His atonement failed for those
lost, so they said his atonement was efficatious only for His sheep, which
it is. They also said His death was for all men i.e. to call all men to repentance.

As to double predestination, its not a bad word. God knew who would come
because he knew He would impart the new heart. He also knew the rest would
refuse to come unless He changed them, so ina way God predestined them
to destruction, although that is not part of Calvinist theology.

Romans 9 says he choose some vessels for glory and some for destruction,
yet it is the sinner's rejection of Christ that sends him/her to hell.

DB7 said in post 213
"Christ did not sin because he loved God with all his heart, mind and soul, and for no other reason, that is how he was able to redeem us.
Do you love your mother or father, your siblings or spouse (rhetorical), of course, even the heathens do, therefore, don't tell me that you're fallen . . . "

Excuse me DB&, but I think you need a comma in that sentence. Surely you meant to say:

Christ did not sin, because he loved God with all his heart, mind and soul, and for no other reason;
that is how he was able to redeem us. :0)

DB7 said in post 214:

"You sound like an anti-christ, what . . . is a god-man?!"

Jesus is forever our Lord he is forever God - Man.

If you don't understand that, what are you doing in here?

DBZ is a heretic, its that simple, hes of the devil, you will know them be their fruit indeed.

Butterflyyy said in post 208

If you walk like an universalist,
waddle like an universalist
and even quack like an universalist
people might think you are an universalist.

Just a friendly notice.

Flint 231

As much as you are welcomed in here brother, I would urge you to edit your post #237
as it breaches the rules of the forum and I know you could be banned for using such
language in here, no matter if true or not. Before someone reports you.

It's up to you, but be it on your own head to ignore this warning.

Adding to the Word of God.... that's what this is....a terrifying prospect.