steven-nemes
Puritan Board Sophomore
What exactly would constitute as damnable belief?
Paul teaches that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. What sorts of beliefs would conflict with this? Would Arminianism, which denies that God actively ordains and determines all happenings, be contrary to the idea that Jesus is Lord? On the surface I don't see why.
The argument could be along the lines of "confessing Christ's lordship involves your confessing the Calvinistic understanding of divine sovereignty, etc." I don't see why that should be true. First of all, predestination and election and such are not clearly understood or implied by the text at all. They do fit nicely with the text, but you can't find those doctrines here. Plus, an Arminian can and often does confess that Jesus is Lord, God is in control of the happenings of the universe, and still hold that human beings have free will--although inconsistently and appeals to mystery. I see no reason to think that this inconsistency is enough to damn them, though; surely somewhere, at some point in all our noetic structures, there are beliefs that we hold that are contradictory and inconsistent, but are we to be damned for that? I should think not.
And clearly Arminians believe that God raised Jesus from the dead.
So why should they be damned, as some have said?
And what exactly is the line between damnable heresy and simply differences in theology?
Romans 10
9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.
11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”
12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him.
13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Paul teaches that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. What sorts of beliefs would conflict with this? Would Arminianism, which denies that God actively ordains and determines all happenings, be contrary to the idea that Jesus is Lord? On the surface I don't see why.
The argument could be along the lines of "confessing Christ's lordship involves your confessing the Calvinistic understanding of divine sovereignty, etc." I don't see why that should be true. First of all, predestination and election and such are not clearly understood or implied by the text at all. They do fit nicely with the text, but you can't find those doctrines here. Plus, an Arminian can and often does confess that Jesus is Lord, God is in control of the happenings of the universe, and still hold that human beings have free will--although inconsistently and appeals to mystery. I see no reason to think that this inconsistency is enough to damn them, though; surely somewhere, at some point in all our noetic structures, there are beliefs that we hold that are contradictory and inconsistent, but are we to be damned for that? I should think not.
And clearly Arminians believe that God raised Jesus from the dead.
So why should they be damned, as some have said?
And what exactly is the line between damnable heresy and simply differences in theology?