Are Free Grace Christians Same Theology as Classic Arms?

I mean, this debate can go on and on..., around different titles.

 

As one who would agree with their view, I would say it is different, mainly in the original sin dept.

 

You'd first need to define what you mean by "Free Grace Christians". (Incidentally, are the upper case F, G and C there simply because the words are the title of a thread?)

 

Seriously Jesusfan.. you need to grasp the groups and what they believed.

Classical or Reformed Arminians, while being akin to Wesleyan Arminians and Modern day Arminians .. They are distinctly different.

Classical Arminians are closer to reformed beliefs than the others.

Free Grace view is closer to the modern day Arminianists which go even further than the Wesleyan Arminians in their views.

I'm not speak of them either positivity OR negatively, just in relation to their views and to whom they are more a kin

 

I feel that JF is just curious as I am to the differences...thats why I presume he is asking. Look at it as an opportunity to present your viewpoints. Of course if you have something you dont want to disclose.....:smilewinkgrin:

 

I wasn't meaning my statement as a negative or demeaning.. but most (especially on here) use the phrase "Classical Arminians" to refer to current or modern day Arminians, when in fact 'Classical Arminianism' is a minority view among Arminians today.

 

The above is specifically a Classical Arminian position.. other Arminians hold to with variations on depravity.

There is a group within the modern day Arminians, more associated with the charismatic "Name it and Claim it" and "Word of Faith" which are moving very close if not full vested into the Semi-Pel and/or Pelegainism views.This of course is an off shoot version and does not speak for the mainline view and no where near the Classical view.

All Classical and Mainline Arminians hold that God must move upon man in order to hear and respond to the gospel.

To be honest, I have never met or read on this view till I got on the BB.

 

LOL, Oh I agree.....Kinda mind blowing isnt it?

 

DUPLICATE

LOL, Oh I agree.....Kinda mind blowing isn't it?

 

If you wish to get the answer from them, there is book out by Charles C. Bing, " Simply by Grace" An introduction to God's life changing gift.
And here is another, "Setting The Stage For Eternity", buHarlan D. Betz. If interested there are many book out there on the subject.

Also you might find some thing here, http://www.faithalone.org/resources/index.html

 

Not at all taken into consideration Acts 17:26-27. Everything leading up to the Gospel presentation and acceptance is attributed to God.

 

Who is denying God's grace? Not me. I have always said that unless God revealed Jesus to us through his word, it would be impossible for any man to believe on Jesus.

And it is not simply revelation, the scriptures say God's word is quick and powerful, and able to pierce to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. All things are laid open and bare before God.

Men are always affected deeply by God's word, in Acts 2:37 it says those who heard God's word were "pricked in their heart". These men repented and believed. In Acts 7:54 we see the opposite, it says those who heard Stephen were "cut to the heart". These men reacted to the Holy Spirit's conviction in anger and rebellion and stoned Stephen. But they were not unaffected by God's word, it had a profound effect upon them.

That said, once men have been convicted by God's word, all men have the ability to accept truth and receive Jesus, or they can turn away in rebellion and unbelief.

But no one is saying the gospel is "mere words".

 

Can you find in ANY of my statements, 'me' saying these people 'deny God's grace'? I said it was a view I had not come across till I got on the BB.

 

Just note, hopefully to avoid misunderstandings.

It seems that the term "Free Grace" must mean totally different things to different people.

Allan wrote:

Free Grace view is closer to the modern day Arminianists which go even further than the Wesleyan Arminians in their views.
​

But if you follow any of the following links to church websites, all for churches which have the phrase "Free Grace" in their name, you will see that those churches are certainly not Arminian, and certainly do not "go even further than the Wesleyan Arminians in their views.":

Free Grace Baptist Church Belvedere, Kenk, UK

Free Grace Baptist Church Chilliwack, Canada

Free Grace Baptist Church Boksburg, South Africa

Free Grace Baptist Church Sidcup, Kent, UK

Free Grace Baptist Church San Antonio, Texas, USA
​

....and so the list could go on.

I even tried searching for "Free Grace Christians" (with the speech marks) on Google, and one of the first sites I came to was a Canadian one about "Free Grace Christians". The section "About Us" includes a paragraph which begins:

V. God’s Purpose of Grace
Election is the gracious purpose of God, according to which He regenerates, justifies, sanctifies, and glorifies sinners. It is the glorious display of God’s sovereign goodness, and is infinitely wise, holy, and unchangeable. It excludes boasting and promotes humility.
​

I must add that I'm not criticising Allan, or anyone else, come to that; just pointing out the obvious need for us to define our terms.

 

I've never seen this view on the BB...do you know who holds to it offhand?

 

Confusing....doesnt he mean "Free Will" as apposed to "Free Grace"?

 

No, Free Grace is a soteriological position. Most "non-cal's" fall into this camp, IMO
www.faithalone.org.