Who can "live up to" Arminianism?

ReverendRV

Well-known member
Tu quoque is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy. This specious reasoning is a special type of ad hominem attack
I haven't noticed anyone doing this; I reckon that's why it seems misapplied...
 

christ_undivided

Well-known member
Tu quoque is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy. This specious reasoning is a special type of ad hominem attack

If you claim to be empowered by God to live without sin, and you sin, then you're a hypocrite.

It doesn't matter what Wikipedia tells you.

Arminians can't live up to their own standards.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
I haven't noticed anyone doing this; I reckon that's why it seems misapplied...

It's simply one of many "labels" to avoid responding to criticisms:
"tu quoque!"
"fallacious!"
"red herring!"
"straw-man!"
"out of context!"
It's nothing but bankrupt mud-slinging.

It's just like when politicians don't like someone, they simply label them:
"homophobe!"
"transphobe!"
"Islamophobe!"
"xenophobe!"
"misogynist!"
"anti-Semite!"
"fascist!"
"Nazi!"
"Deplorable!"

Hecklers don't discuss. They just mud-sling the other side.
 

christ_undivided

Well-known member
Another fallacy , quote anyone claiming sinlessness or sinless perfection . I’ve know two posters who claim that , one female and another named gary on the apologetics forum . Those are the only two posters I’ve ever heard make those false claims . No one on this forum believes such nonsense.

Read what I wrote again. I didn't say anything about sinless perfection.

If you claim to be empowered by God to live without sin,

That is what Arminians claim. This isn't a claim that comes from Calvinism. It comes from Arminians.

The primary issue you have is not acknowledging your lack of repentance when you sin.
 

Synergy

Well-known member
That's the irony they are not getting. Allowing a Unitarian onto Team Truth because they scratch your ears, but not allowing a Calvinist who is within the Pale of Orthodoxy onto Team Truth...
How ironic that Calvinists were unceremoniously ostracized by Eastern Orthodoxy and here is a petition to allow a Calvinist into Team Truth based on his "Orthodoxy". I know that Eastern Orthodoxy does not equate to Orthodoxy in Protestant circles but nevertheless there is solid truth behind my statement.
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
How ironic that Calvinists were unceremoniously ostracized by Eastern Orthodoxy and here is a petition to allow a Calvinist into Team Truth based on his "Orthodoxy". I know that Eastern Orthodoxy does not equate to Orthodoxy in Protestant circles but nevertheless there is solid truth behind my statement.
You disagree that I belong on Team Truth? Then take it up with Civic. Me? I can say Jesus is LORD...
 

Synergy

Well-known member
You disagree that I belong on Team Truth? Then take it up with Civic. Me? I can say Jesus is LORD...
I was focusing on the "irony" part, not you. Chalcedon is the team leader so I'll defer to his judgment. One thing that a team member must adhere to is your commitment to the team. No dual-team members as the Arminianism Calvinistic divide does not allow for it. I'm not sure if you've already committed exclusively to our team yet?
 

Slyzr

Well-known member
Arminianism isn't taught in the Bible. Your demand is senseless. Arminianism is taught by a man. You are his follower. You refuse to deal with the question because it will reveal you're a hypocrite.

Chains.... ?

Oopsy ....

'And it by chains you have been set free'. :cool: :cool: :cool: :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:

ReverendRV

Well-known member
I was focusing on the "irony" part, not you. Chalcedon is the team leader so I'll defer to his judgment. One thing that a team member must adhere to is your commitment to the team. No dual-team members as the Arminianism Calvinistic divide does not allow for it. I'm not sure if you've already committed exclusively to our team yet?
Fair enough...

I'll just say one more thing. Dizerner is on Team Truth despite his belief that God poured his Wrath out on Jesus. Perhaps the Unitarian would agree since he thinks Jesus is not God...

Me? I do not plan on quitting Team Truth. If you want me ousted, wait for Civic to return...
 

Slyzr

Well-known member
Fair enough...

I'll just say one more thing. Dizerner is on Team Truth despite his belief that God poured his Wrath out on Jesus. Perhaps the Unitarian would agree since he thinks Jesus is not God...

Me? I do not plan on quitting Team Truth. If you want me ousted, wait for Civic to return...

nt ....

a bit much for me.
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
I knew what you believed. Remember, we talked about this. Your claims are false. Either way, given your claim, you can't "live up to" your own claims.
If I continue to sin, deliberately (which means you know that it is sin), and die in that state, Hebrews says that I will fall into the hands of an angry God.

If I am doing this, but stop, repenting of my lifestyle and turning toward God in faith, then I am forgiven.

What am I to live up to in this?


Wow. I don't see how you can make such a statement. You're ignoring the obvious. People died (judged as sinners) without the law. Thusly, the penalty of death was legal applied to those regardless of their understanding of the law.
Did I not say that death reigned, even if no one sinned as Adam had? Physical death is the consequence of Adam's sin. Spiritual death, eternal separation from God, is what is based on guilt from sinning. It is the second death! That is Paul's message in Rom 5:13-14.




Why did people die at all?
As the result of Adam, our forefather's sin! Not because of their sin!


You claim you're not sinful because you don't understand your sin. That is "back peddling" from claiming to live a righteous life according to what you claim to be God's demand.
I have made no such claim! I have not claimed to be without sin. I have not claimed that actions done of which I am ignorant of their sinfulness are not sin, or that things that I know are sins, but an unaware that I have committed them, are not sins. They are indeed sin, but they are not held against us by God until we are made aware of it. This is precisely what Paul preached in Athens, saying, "In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent." (Acts17:30)

I am sinful because I commit sin. I am guilty of sins I knowingly commit. I am condemned for not repenting of those sins which I knew were wrong, but continued to commit them unceasingly.




With all due respect, sin doesn't require your acknowledgement to be sin. I heard you the first time you gave this type of example. It is a bogus example.

I have never said it wasn't sin, as explained above!
Adam spent his entire life learning the consequence of his sin. God didn't change. He knew it all along. Knowledge varies with man but not with God.
God is not being judged, man is! Adam knew the eating of the tree was sinful, wrong, prohibited, and did it anyway! Learning the consequence of your sin is not the issue! God knowing it is sin is not the issue! The issue is a) whether God counts men's sins of ignorance against them, or if men are graciously abstained from guilt for sinful acts of which they are ignorant in one way or another. Scripture states the latter!


All the world is guilty. They just refuse to acknowledge it. Which is what Paul is dealing with in Romans 3.

Pay attention to the words ... "and all the world may become guilty before God. "

Condemnation is clear.....

Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Notice the words... CONDEMNED ALREADY.

Your belief an acceptance of your own guilty doesn't establish guilt toward God. You're already guilty.
Yes we are, because nobody is completely ignorant! We all know from an early age the difference between right and wrong.


Grasshopper, you'll leave this world in weakness crying for mercy for your failures. Don't "kid yourself". No one is going to face God cheering.....

"Thank you Jesus for making me live so righteous"........

You do realize that grasshopper is the hero of the story, don't you....just sayin'!

Jude 1:24To him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— 25to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

And,

2 Tim 4:8Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.

These sure sound like a "Thank you Jesus for making me live so righteous"........" kind of statement.

Yes, it is only by his grace that we achieve these rewards, and it is only through his Spirit working in us that we are made righteous! Of this we will be fully aware and will confess clearly! But we can die with full confidence that we are receiving life eternal and rejoice at the thought of standing before God.
I say BP of 70's over 40's this past week while the emergency room nurses thought I was leaving this world. The Lord heard and answered my prayer for mercy. My cry for help. I couldn't help myself.
None of us can! Thank the Lord for his mercy and grace! He alone has the power of life and death! I'm glad you are better!

How in the world can I claim anything other than Grace?
I have never claimed anything contrary to this!


Doug
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
Silly boy! The damned are damned because they have been charged and found guilty, so their awareness is self evident! Again, "sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law."







Doug
The above statement in the bold blue is totally false, for what you are confused with here, is what Paul means when he says "for sin is not imputed when their is no law".

For he is not saying by this that they are not guilty of sin but only that the guilt of their sin has not been fully perceived by them being they have no commandment against their sin through which to convict them of it.


Read Romans 5:14, for Paul very clearly says that death (punishment for sin) reigned from Adam to Moses even over them who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam who had been given an actual commandment from God to impute sin within his conscience.
 

christ_undivided

Well-known member
The above statement in the bold blue is totally false, for what you are confused with here, is what Paul means when he says "for sin is not imputed when their is no law".

For he is not saying by this that they are not guilty of sin but only that the guilt of their sin has not been fully perceived by them being they have no commandment against their sin through which to convict them of it.


Read Romans 5:14, for Paul very clearly says that death (punishment for sin) reigned from Adam to Moses even over them who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam who had been given an actual commandment from God to impute sin within his conscience.

Neverless..... death reigned. Sin was imputed in death without the law of Moses. The law of sin and death has existed since the fall of humanity.
 

christ_undivided

Well-known member
I have made no such claim! I have not claimed to be without sin. I have not claimed that actions done of which I am ignorant of their sinfulness are not sin, or that things that I know are sins, but an unaware that I have committed them, are not sins. They are indeed sin, but they are not held against us by God until we are made aware of it. This is precisely what Paul preached in Athens, saying, "In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent." (Acts17:30)

I am sinful because I commit sin. I am guilty of sins I knowingly commit. I am condemned for not repenting of those sins which I knew were wrong, but continued to commit them unceasingly.

Acts 17 is an appeal to how the Gentile world was overlooked by God. They still died. They still received the judgement of their sin.

Eph 2:12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Eph 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
If I continue to sin, deliberately (which means you know that it is sin), and die in that state, Hebrews says that I will fall into the hands of an angry God.

Actually your above is twisted also, for the writer of Hebrews is not speaking of sin in general here but rather of the specific sin of totally turning away from God through rejecting Christ Jesus and going back to the OT law after having been exposed completely to the truth of God that is in Christ.

This is what the whole book is about, for he is speaking to a mixed Hebrew crowd, some who had only tasted of Christ and were about to turn away and then also to those who had fully consumed the truth in Christ within their hearts and you should see this in Hebrews six also.
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
The above statement in the bold blue is totally false, for what you are confused with here, is what Paul means when he says "for sin is not imputed when their is no law".

For he is not saying by this that they are not guilty of sin but only that the guilt of their sin has not been fully perceived by them being they have no commandment against their sin through which to convict them of it.


Read Romans 5:14, for Paul very clearly says that death (punishment for sin) reigned from Adam to Moses even over them who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam who had been given an actual commandment from God to impute sin within his conscience.

The penalty for the guilt of personal sin is the second death; physical death is the inheritance passed on from the results of Adam's sin. I am not burdened with the guilt of my forefather's sinful acts, but the effects of those acts are endured by all who have followed after. Paul's covetous acts, prior to understanding the commandment, " You shall not covet!", were indeed sinful, but Paul is not held as guilty until he has become cognitively conscious of what coveting is and the prohibition of it!


Doug
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
Acts 17 is an appeal to how the Gentile world was overlooked by God. They still died. They still received the judgement of their sin.

I disagree! The ignorance overlooked is, in context, the ignorance about who the unknown God was and what his nature is. But now that Paul has declared the truth about this "Unknown God", ignorance is no longer a defense! Thus, they must now repent of following any other gods.

Yes, they still died physically because of Adam's sin, and they are the bearers of spiritual condemnation to spiritual death because we have all knowingly done what we knew to be wrong when we committed them!

Doug
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
Actually your above is twisted also, for the writer of Hebrews is not speaking of sin in general here but rather of the specific sin of totally turning away from God through rejecting Christ Jesus and going back to the OT law after having been exposed completely to the truth of God that is in Christ.

This is what the whole book is about, for he is speaking to a mixed Hebrew crowd, some who had only tasted of Christ and were about to turn away and then also to those who had fully consumed the truth in Christ within their hearts and you should see this in Hebrews six also.
No, he is not!


Doug
 

Yahweh will increase

Well-known member
No, he is not!


Doug
Yes he is, and what proves it are the words "there remains no sacrifice for sins" for their rejecting Christ and going back to the OT, would leave the without a sacrifice for their sin because the OT sacrifices never took away sin anyhow.

Very clearly, the writer is speaking of sinning willfully against the knowledge of the truth in Christ and walking away from it and going back to the Old Mosaic covenant, that is the willful sin he is speaking of here and not sin in general.
 
Top