Just what are you?

[quantumfaith]

The Oxford English Dictionary has this to say about Arminian and Arminian-related entries.

Arminian

A. adj. Of, belonging to, or following the doctrine of, James Arminius or Harmensen, a Dutch Protestant theologian, who put forth views opposed to those of Calvin, especially on Predestination. Arminius died in 1609; in 1618-19 his doctrines were condemned by the Synod of Dort; but they spread rapidly, and were embraced, in whole or part, by large sections of the Reformed Churches.

1618 tr. Barnevelds Apol. H, The point in question is not concerning the Arminian Religion, but Romish Poperie. 1674 HICKMAN Hist. Quinquart. 133 Before Bishop Laud ruled . . those who embraced the Opinions since called Arminian, were indeed out of the way to preferment. 1853 MARSDEN Early Puritans 99 The Calvinistic and Arminian controversy.​

B. sb. An adherent of the doctrine of Arminius.

1618 tr. Barnevelds Apol. D, Winbergen is principall of the Perfectists, and you of the Arminians. 1673 MILTON True Relig. 7 The Arminian . . is condemn'd for setting up free will against free grace. c 1760 WESLEY Wks. 1872 X. 360 The Arminians believe, it [predestination] is conditional; the Calvinists, that it is absolute. 1834 Penny Cycl. II. 365 The Wesleyan Methodists call themselves Arminians, and their Magazine appeared formerly under the title of the Arminian Magazine.​

† Arminianish, a. Obs. rare. = ARMINIAN.

1700 in Somers Tracts V. 17 They have . . suffered to be printed all Arminianish, popish, vain books.​

Arminianism

Arminian doctrines. or adherence to them.

1618 tr. Barnevelds Apol. Ded. A iij, Already wholy bent to Arminianisme. 1627 Let. fr. Jesuit in Rushw. Hist. Coll. (1659) I. 475 That Soveraign Drug Arminianism, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their Heresie. 1674 HICKMAN Hist. Quinquart. 227 He .. confirmed himself in his debauchedness, by his Arminianism. 1822 SYD. SMITH Wks. 1867 II. 5 The Articles of Religion are older than Arminianism, eo nomine.​

Arminianize

a. trans. To make Arminian. b. intr. To teach Arminianism. Arminianized, -izing, Arminianizer, one who teaches or promotes Arminianism.

1637 GILLESPIE Eng. Pop. Cerem. Ep. A iij b, Many . . who are either Popish and Arminianized . . or silly ignorants. 1674 HICKMAN Hist. Quinquart. Some of our Arminianizing English Writers. 1692 Christ Exalted § 106 Antisozzo leans on the contrary side, and Arminianizeth. 1698 Ibid. Ded A iij, This will not go down with Arminianizers. 1698 CLARK Script. Justif. Introd. B, I have no Arminianizing Principles or Design.​

I wisheth not to arminianeth anyone.

 

[HankD]

Here IMO is the essence of the problem of this on going debate C vs. A.

Our God who is eternal and without beginning or end has entered into the time continuum which He created with both a beginning and an end.

NKJV Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.​

Psalm 46:10 Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.​

HankD​

 

[Winman]

A sad demonstration of profound ignorance.

The Archangel

Well, Loraine Boettner disagreed with you.

It was Calvin who wrought out this system of theological thought with such logical clearness and emphasis that it has ever since borne his name.

But inasmuch as it was Calvin who first formulated these principles into a more or less complete system, that system, or creed, if you will, and likewise those principles which are embodied in it, came to bear his name."2

Source

http://www.bloomingtonrpchurch.org/refdocpre/

So who is ignorant, me or you?

 

[glfredrick]

Well, Loraine Boettner disagreed with you.





Source

http://www.bloomingtonrpchurch.org/refdocpre/

So who is ignorant, me or you?

From the very document you cite:

Among the past and present advocates of this doctrine are to be found some of the world's greatest and wisest men. It was taught not only by Calvin, but by Luther, Zwingli, Melanchthon (although Melanchthon later retreated toward the Semi-Pelagian position), by Bullinger, Bucer, and all of the outstanding leaders in the Reformation. While differing on some other points they agreed on this doctrine of Predestination and taught it with emphasis. Luther's chief work, "The Bondage of the Will," shows that he went into the doctrine as heartily as did Calvin himself. He even asserted it with more warmth and proceeded to much harsher lengths in defending it than Calvin ever did. And the Lutheran Church today as judged by the Formula of Concord holds the doctrine of Predestination in a modified form. The Puritans in England and those who early settled in America, as well as the Covenanters in Scotland and the Huguenots in France, were thorough-going Calvinists; and it is little credit to historians in general that this fact has been so largely passed over in silence. This faith was for a time held by the Roman Catholic Church, and at no time has that church ever openly repudiated it. Augustine's doctrine of Predestination set against him all the half-hearted elements in the Church and arrayed him against every man who belittled the sovereignty of God. He overcame them, and the doctrine of Predestination entered the belief of the universal Church. The great majority of the creeds of historic Christendom have set forth the doctrines of Election, Predestination, and final Perseverance, as will readily be seen by any one who will make even a cursory study of the subject.

Saying that the Reformed doctrines are only Calvin's (or even were formulated by Calvin) is to misrepresent history.

 

[Winman]

From the very document you cite:



Saying that the Reformed doctrines are only Calvin's (or even were formulated by Calvin) is to misrepresent history.

I never said that, I said Calvin had influences, especially Augustine.

It was Boettner who said Calvin was the one who truly put this system together.

It was one of you Cals that said Calvin has nothing to do with Calvinism. That is ridiculous, why would they name the doctrine after him?

 

[Robert Snow]

Hyper-Calvinism
God decrees some to salvation and some to reprobation
God elects the ones decreed to salvation and damns all others
Permits Fall
Create

I don't agree with this.

Supralapsarianism (Calvinism to Hyper-Calvinism)
Elect some, reprobate rest
Create
Permit Fall
Provide salvation for elect
Call elect to salvation

I don't agree with this.

Infralapsarianism (Historical Calvinism)
Create
Permit Fall
Elect some, pass over the rest
Provide salvation for elect
Call elect to salvation

Getting closer.

Amyraldism
Create
Permit Fall
Provide salvation sufficient for all
Elect some, pass over rest
Call elect to salvation

Getting even closer.

Arminianism
Create
Permit Fall
Provide salvation for all
Call all to salvation
Elect those who believe (and not those who will fall away)

This I agree with, with one exception. Those who are saved cannot be lost, they are kept by the Holy Spirit.

Semi-Pelagianism
Create
Permit Fall
Provide atonement for those who respond
God elects those who respond and who do not fall away

I don't agree.

Pelagianism
Create
Fall was the choice of man
Man decides his own fate
Christ is a good example
Man can chose Christ as an example and work toward pleasing God
God chooses those most pleasing who do not fall away

I don't agree.

 

[Jarthur001]

Arminianism
Create
Permit Fall
Provide salvation for all
Call all to salvation
Elect those who believe (and not those who will fall away)

This I agree with, with one exception. Those who are saved cannot be lost, they are kept by the Holy Spirit.

What happened to human will?

 

[Robert Snow]

What happened to human will?

I'ts like the bond-slave during the time of Moses who chose to stay with their master, the Lord Jesus Christ. Once saved, we have had our ears pierced with a sharp awl.

Exo 21:6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

 

[Amy.G]

What happened to human will?

We gave it to God when we received Jesus as our Lord and Savior.


That's what a bond slave does.

 

[Jarthur001]

I'ts like the bond-slave during the time of Moses who chose to stay with their master, the Lord Jesus Christ. Once saved, we have had our ears pierced with a sharp awl.

Exo 21:6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Hello Robert,

Thanks for your reply. I can't give you Eph 1, because of many reasons. However, You do give a good answer over all. You also give a supporting verse.

Let me ask you this. How does this relate to Gomer? Gomer is clearly the picture of salvation. She is also a slave.

What do you think?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Here IMO is the essence of the problem of this on going debate C vs. A.

Our God who is eternal and without beginning or end has entered into the time continuum which He created with both a beginning and an end.

NKJV Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.​

Psalm 46:10 Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth.​

HankD​

Or as Tom Vols earlier pointed out in 2 Timothy 2:23-24 (New International Version)

23 Don’t have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 24 And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.

 

[HankD]

Or as Tom Vols earlier pointed out in 2 Timothy 2:23-24 (New International Version)

23 Don’t have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 24 And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.

Not only that, but when you try to break up a fight you might end up with a blackeye yourself.

HankD

 

[Mexdeaf]

Be all that as it may I see C-A being a worthwhile discussion. I was very anti-Cal (with no real reason to be except that was what was drilled into me previously) and unfocused as far as my theology was concerned before I began to study the issues for myself after being challenged on this very board.

The problem starts when we begin to question the salvation of others and call them heretics- no need for that, in most cases. Occasionally a real heretic does show up but they don't last long in these parts.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Not only that, but when you try to break up a fight you might end up with a blackeye yourself.

HankD

So after observing this contentious argument & realizing that it doesn't resolve anything, I'm content NOT to participate....black eyes hurt too much. As Shakespeare I believe once quoted, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Our danger then is to become so involved in proving one side or the other that we forget that the opponent is a Christian brother.

"Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right" Genesis 18:25 :godisgood:

Blessings
Steve

 

[Crabtownboy]

We spend a lt of time telling others what we do not believe. That we should not be labled names other people give us in theology. I taught it would be good to allow people to place their own labels on what they believe. Now many do not like labels. I can understand this. But this maybe helpful for every one, to let others know just where you stand. Below you will find a list of theology groups.

1) Hyper-Calvinist

2) Calvinist

3) Arminian

4) semi-Pelagian/hyper-Arminian

5) Pelagian

Where would the poster place their theology?

I understand that some will not take on a label here. For those I would sak you to say something like this...

I was predestined to believe in free-will.

 

[webdog]

What happened to human will?

Where is human will in trying to undo a murder done of one's free will?

 

[HankD]

So after observing this contentious argument & realizing that it doesn't resolve anything, I'm content NOT to participate....black eyes hurt too much. As Shakespeare I believe once quoted, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Our danger then is to become so involved in proving one side or the other that we forget that the opponent is a Christian brother.

"Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right" Genesis 18:25 :godisgood:

Blessings
Steve

Right, and for that reason, I don't particpate that often, only occassionally to give the MugWump point(s) of view.

HankD

 

[Jarthur001]

Where is human will in trying to undo a murder done of one's free will?

ok....i have no idea what you just said, but i'll answer 7.

 

[webdog]

ok....i have no idea what you just said, but i'll answer 7.

According to your logic, if you can choose to do something you can equally choose to undo it or no longer do it.

 

[Jarthur001]

According to your logic, if you can choose to do something you can equally choose to undo it or no longer do it.

Not really. Like in the fall of man, man does not have a will to right himself. So I know what happened to the will, it is bound.

I asked a free-will believer, ...you know......one that believes man's will is still intact, .......I asked that guy what happened to mans will, after they had said that "man cannot just leave God because I believe they said..."because the believer is sealed"".

Now I agree that God seals, because I believe God is in control of salvation from start to the end, and it is him that makes the choice before and after. So I know what happens to the will.

The free-will has man with free-will intact....what happens to the will? How does it go from free to..sealed without God doing something that compromise mans will, if he should will to leave?

Now a Bond Slave WANTS to be a slave. and there is more to it than just this, which we will get to later. But I'm asking if a slave WANTS to leave...that is his desire....Will God compromise mans will?

If yes...than God does indeed do this.

If no...than how does it work?

Is it that God only has the right to do such things after man says it is ok?