Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
John Conger | PentecostalTheology.com
One problem with both arminianism and Calvinism is that one believes a loving God created man knowing most would burn in the lake of fire and the other believes he chooses people to burn eternally on the lake of fire. BUT what if the torment wasn’t eternal? What if the JWs are right on that? What if it is the destruction of the being? I know the bible speaks of the antichrist etc being tormented forever and he’s human but should be we infer that is the fate of all sinners….. Thought this would be interesting conversation this morning ?
John Kissinger [11/28/2015 10:47 AM]
Peter A Vandever undermined sanctification experience and holiness doctrine and you might as well be a baptist #calvinator but I do agree with you that my personal definition on a Pentecostal is strict for the devils also believe in Acts 2 and tremble but it does not make them #Pentecostal
Ricky Grimsley [11/28/2015 1:25 PM]
While i have pondered for sometime what could anyone possibly do to deserve eternal fire, i would start with this verse where jesus is explaining the kingdom of heaven albeit in parables…Matthew 25:41 KJVS
[41] Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
William Lance Huget [11/28/2015 1:33 PM]
It is clear that the unregenerate also end up in hell, then the lake of fire, in torment, not in a medieval torture chamber.
Calvinism/TULIP/double predestination limits the love of God and impugns His character (makes Him arbitrary, etc.).
Arminianism would claim God knows vs causes these things.
Open Theism would actually say that God knew of the possibility versus certainty/actuality of these things. He did not desire, intend, cause, will, etc. some to be saved and some to perish. He was genuinely grieved when it happened. It was not necessary for man to Fall and there was no good reason so many would reject the love and grace of God.
Two destinies are necessary because God does not revoke the life of moral creation in His image and free will is also irrevocable (so there is risk that some will reject His love).
The biblical, historical, orthodox view is conscious, everlasting separation, not universalism, not inclusivism, not pluralism, not annihilationism.
William Lance Huget [11/28/2015 1:35 PM]
http://opentheism.info/open-theism/
John Conger [11/28/2015 1:42 PM]
Yes the fire is eternal but does the person continue to exist in eternal torment or are they burnt up?
John Kissinger [11/28/2015 1:46 PM]
http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/is-open-theism-heretical/
John Conger [11/28/2015 1:51 PM]
I think when the normal explanations can’t fit all the scriptures together neatly them we must look at other options. (in this case arminianism, Calvinism) bit also trinity vs. Oneness etc etc) every follower of a particular theology tends to have “fill in the void” answers. Ignore particular scriptures and explain away others that don’t fit well. “prove all things….”
Ricky Grimsley [11/28/2015 3:01 PM]
Open theism isnt heretical. The problem usually that most people dont understand what it means.
Ricky Grimsley [11/28/2015 3:09 PM]
I think if you are calvanist or Armenian the “eternal punishment” question should give you pause. To think that God would create you, knowing specifically who would go to hell, whether by decree or by exhaustive foreknowledge should at least be discussed. Regardless of what people say there can be no free will if all actions are all ready determined.
John Kissinger [11/28/2015 3:22 PM]
#onlyGODknows http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/why-god-created-us-if-we-were-going-to-hell/
Ricky Grimsley [11/28/2015 3:27 PM]
Thats what people say when when they dont want to examine the scriptures that say things they dont like.
John Kissinger [11/28/2015 3:52 PM]
The Early Church Fathers Declared “Oneness” (Sabellianism) Heresy. The Oneness Doctrine appears to be biblical because only Scripture is used, though wrongfully, to support its tenets, declaring that Jesus is not only the Son but also the Father and the Holy Spirit, that is, he is the only person in the Godhead. But, it is a fairly new movement (1913), built on heresies of the past. https://web.archive.org/web/20100721215945/http://www.velocity.net/~edju/web/Trinity1.htm
Ricky Grimsley [11/28/2015 4:02 PM]
How did we get to oneness?
John Kissinger [11/28/2015 4:03 PM]
John Conger above “bit also trinity vs. Oneness…” https://web.archive.org/web/20100723125223/http://www.velocity.net/~edju/web/Trinity2.htm
John Conger [11/28/2015 4:11 PM]
Lol I’ve studied and debated oneness vs trinity for years. Read novatian’s treatise concerning the trinity. Barnabas etc…both trinity and oneness have problems
William Lance Huget [11/28/2015 4:14 PM]
If you are not trinitarian or Oneness, what are you?! Tell me you are not Arian?!
John Conger [11/28/2015 4:17 PM]
Lol no. Don’t think there’s a name for what I am. Just believe in the God head. Wearemadeinhisimage. Jesus being express image, father is soul, holy spirit being the spirit. Not 3 people working together in unity. But oneness can’t explain the distinction of persons prior to the incarnation. They also struggle with post incarnation of Jesus. I have many friends who are oneness asks debate this often.
William Lance Huget [11/28/2015 4:19 PM]
There are a variety of modalism/Oneness views. It sounds like you have a variety of modalism. Trinitarianism is the biblical, historical, orthodox, defensible view. Godhead is an archaic KJV term that is not helpful and needs defining.
If you affirm that Jesus is Almighty God in the flesh, good. If not, we need to talk.
John Conger [11/28/2015 4:22 PM]
You can classify it however you like. Traditional trinity views cannot get away from three gods that work together in perfect unity. If you can explain how God is “one” is like to hear it
John Conger [11/28/2015 4:23 PM]
And please don’t cut and paste from some article on it. I usually just skip that stuff.
William Lance Huget [11/28/2015 4:24 PM]
God is one in one sense, but plural in a different sense (same sense would be a contradiction). Trinity IS NOT tritheism, but triune/tripersonal/compound vs solitary unity.
God is ONE essence/substance/being/nature. This is not polytheism/tritheism that would be 3 beings/natures/substances.
The personal distinctions within the one essence share the same nature=monotheism.
This is what you need to do to negate the trinity: http://beggarsbread.org/2015/09/05/how-to-defend-an-anti-trinitarian-theology/
John Conger [11/28/2015 4:27 PM]
No doubt there’s no way we can get away from the distinctions of the god head. Blaspheme one with out the other. Praying one to the other etc etc. I know that what we’ve always said as trinitarians . I was a cog minister for 15 years.
William Lance Huget [11/28/2015 4:27 PM]
For those who care, this is the biblical basis for it: http://irr.org/biblical-basis-of-doctrine-of-trinity
William Lance Huget [11/28/2015 4:27 PM]
You will not overturn the best scholarship of all of church history with novel views.
John Conger [11/28/2015 4:28 PM]
Lol no doubt. Just don’t like “fill in the void” answers intended to explain away verses.
Anonymous
Ricky Grimsley proposed this one Terry Wiles Duane L Burgess but he was wrong of course Peter A Peter Vandever undermined sanctification experience and holiness doctrine and you might as well be a baptist #calvinator but I do agree with you that my personal definition on a Pentecostal is strict for the devils also believe in Acts 2 and tremble but it does not make them #Pentecostal
Anonymous
As for sanctification my verse of choice is Jude 1: Sanctified, Kept, and Called
Anonymous
Terry Wiles SANCTIFICATION is always ENTIRE not partial…
Anonymous
Troy Day Of course… God sets us apart through Jesus Christ. Sometimes we do not sanctify the Lord God in our hearts so that we do not sin against Him.
Anonymous
Calvinism affirms the doctrines of grace and God’s sovereignty.
Everyone is either Calvinist: God is sovereign in salvation,
or Arminian: man is sovereign in salvation.
It’s that simple.
Those who get the Gospel right are Calvinists.
Anonymous
of course Arminian does not teach man is sovereign in salvation
Arminian is God’s sovereignty in salvation by giving man a free will
Anonymous
Think I’m with Rick Grimsley on this.
Anonymous
Ricky Grimsley is pre-wrath Michael Chauncey
Anonymous
Troy Day the comments I agree with are not about the rapture but his philosophical view of the future.
Anonymous
Michael Chauncey his philosophical view of the future is pre-wrath
Anonymous
Troy Day that would be an eschatological view. By philosophical I mean open possibilities rather than deterministic, fixed, and inflexible. In other words I also reject the Calvinist philosophy of hard determinism.
Anonymous
Michael Chauncey yet you said his philosophical view of the future.
Anonymous
Bad theology strikes again.
One is either Calvinist: God is sovereign in salvation,
or Arminian: man is sovereign in salvation.
Anonymous
Duane L Burgess lol total misapplication of arminianism. Such total ignorance in that straw man.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse total misapplication of arminianism is true Kyle Williams
Anonymous
In the end neither Calvinism or Armenianism are true. They are poor attempts at deriving a philosophy of agency and determinism.
Anonymous
So here’s the problem: God is Omniscient or all knowing. He cannot be less than this and be God. So he must know who will be saved and who will not be. Romans 8:29, John 6:44, Ephesians 1:4, John 15:16. We also know that God is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Rev 22:13. No one can thwart the will of God because he would be less than God if they could. God is Omnipotent. Paul has out this argument in Romans 9. How can this co-exist with a reality of human choice? Well we also know from the Bible that it does. Firstly, Armenians talks about “free will” but this term doesn’t really bear on the nature of human agency. Human beings have an ability to choose from the options that God allows. It is a granted capacity and more importantly it is a real capacity and the Bible teaches it has consequences. Esther 4:14 bears this theology out. You can make your choice and it will be a real choice, and consequences will flow because of the choice you make. So we see that God who dwells outside time already sees the nature and outworking of events because if he couldn’t he wouldn’t be God. However, we who are proceeding through time and making decisions are outworking a tapestry of causation and agency, therefore for us it is wise to know that God is in control and things will work out in the end according to his will, but for us what is practical is that we are making decisions that will impact how things turn out. Real and important decisions that we have agency over. Calvinism is for us a “theoretical” position as we are not God and we don’t see the end from where we are, and Armenianism is a practical position as we exercise our agency.