Joe wrote:<br>[color:green]In Arminianism, Christ’s death was designed to make salvation a potentially for all people, but it did not actually secure or guarantee the salvation of anyone.</font color=green><br><br>Here is the rub! As I read the commentary on Hebrews 6 that is exactly the conclusion I came to about Calvinism. While it is known that Christ did secure the salvation of some, nobody would be assured of salvation because it would not be known if they were pre-selected or not. If, in the future, they ever backslide, they were never saved. That is Calvinism. What if they die before they come to the point of falling away? They would die thinking they were saved and never having fallen away, are cast into hell anyway. Therefore, all Calvinists live in the uncertainty that Christ did not die for them.<br><br>Joe wrote:<br>[color:green]Fallen man determines by an act of his fallen will whether or not Christ’s work will be effective by his defective faith.</font color=green><br><br>By what ‘will’ did Abraham offer up his son, Isaac? Was his faith defective? Or Noah build the ark; Moses lead the children of Israel, David, Job, on and on. Men have never lost the capacity to respond favorably to the WORD of God in faith. It is man’s nature that is fallen.<br><br>Why would God speak to Cain before he killed Able, if it was not in his power to make the right choice? It is because he had the capacity to make the right choice that he was guilty of murder. The ability to choose is freedom of choice.<br><br><br>Joe referenced this text in his post: 2 Cor 5:18-19;<br>[color:red]2Co 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. <br>2Co 5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; <br>2Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. </font color=red><br><br>Is that what you wanted it to say; He reconciled us and the world? Not imputing their trespasses unto them?<br><br><blockquote>NOTE: The Bible often uses the words WORLD and ALL in a restricted, limited sense: Luke 2:1-2; 1 Cor 6:12, 10:23; John 12:32; 1 Cor 15:22.</blockquote>That disclaimer of yours is rather disturbing to me if you are applying it to the above verse. Naturally the ‘world’ as used in “all the world should be taxed” is a limited sense. He wasn’t taxing Eskimos, if there were any, but you would have to give me a very good textual reason (sans the Calvinistic glasses) why world in 2 Cor. 5:19 is not meant in the broadest sense. (They are not the same Greek word either, btw.)<br><br>In answer to your argument from John Owen, I would ask you the meaning of this verse:<br><br>[color:red]Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth. </font color=red><br><br>The atonement is indeed universal for all but the application of it is conditional on man’s response.<br><br>[color:red]BUT AS MANY AS RECEIVED HIM, TO THEM GAVE HE POWER TO BECOME THE SONS OF GOD, EVEN TO THEM THAT BELIEVE ON HIS NAME.</font color=red><br><br><br>As I said above we're not likely to be able to hash out all the theological differences on a message board. I'm very greatful for the resopnses that were posted and will respond to any further posts, but I don't want to see us going in circles.<br><br>My questions which I think remain unanswered:<br><br>From a Calvinist view, how do I know I am pre-selected?<br>What were the Hebrews in 6:6 in danger of falling away from?<br><ul>Wes said they were falling away from the external church, but that does not answer to the rest of the verse IMO.[/LIST]<br>Is there a human side to the Calvinist view of Salvation?<br><ul>I presume the answer to this is 'no', which leaves an apparent contradiction IMO.[/LIST]<br>
