The Confusion of Arminianism

What if Arminius were here to defend himself in this debate forum?

Arminians:

1. We are all born with the attribute of free will, because the fall of Adam was not so thorough as to have completely removed free will from our nature.

Arminius:

1. "In this state [of the inherited sin natufe from Adam], the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it [free will] is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost."


Arminians:

2. Man is not totally depraved (born unable to do any good, unable to have saving knowledge of God, unable to have saving faith in God, unable to receive or respond to the Gospel).

Arminius:

2. "The mind of man, in this state, is dark, destitute of the saving knowledge of God, and, according to the Apostle, incapable of those things which belong to the Spirit of God. [...] This is true, not only when, from the truth of the law which has in some measure been inscribed on the mind, it is preparing to form conclusions by the understanding; but likewise when, by simple apprehension, it would receive the truth of the gospel externally offered to it. For the human mind judges that to be "foolishness" which is the most excellent "wisdom" of God. (1 Cor. i, 18, 24.)"


Arminians:

3. Man is not spiritually dead in his sin by default.

Arminius:

3. "To these let the consideration of the whole of the life of man who is placed under sin, be added, of which the Scriptures exhibit to us the most luminous descriptions; and it will be evident, that nothing can be spoken more truly concerning man in this state, than that he is altogether dead in sin. (Rom. iii, 10-19.)"


Arminians:

4. Faith is not a gift, except in the sense that it is an innate, God-given ability from creation.

Arminius:

4. "I never said this, I never thought of saying it, and, relying on God’s grace, I never will enunciate my sentiments on matters of this description in a manner thus desperate and confused. I simply affirm, that this enunciation is false, "faith is not the pure gift of God;" that this is likewise false, if taken according to the rigor of the words, "faith depends partly on the grace of God, and partly on the powers of free will..."


Arminians:

5. We have the ability to choose of our own free will to believe or not believe in the Gospel.

Arminius:

5. "...and that this is also false when thus enunciated, "If a man will, he can believe or not believe.""

Just thought it would be interesting to see how arminius would answer modern arminians.

Bro. Dallas

 

yeah, brother Ray,

They will speak of the blood of Christ, but they will require members to rely on works and such things to obtain that blessing. I deny this.

Bro. Dallas

 

http://www.godrules.net/library/arminius/arminius34.htm

http://www.godrules.net/library/arminius/arminius29.htm

http://www.ccel.org/a/arminius/works1/htm/iv.xxiv.htm

Are you reading the links?

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Frogman:
but since many are well grounded in the works based religion, there is no need of reading what a 'theologian' such as Arminius wrote, he spoke of common human nature and tried to reconcile that nature to the Divine nature of God. What is inconsistent is the method he employed was to adhere to the doctrine of total depravity, yet winding up making man's will free. Obviously a man who was confused.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You may see it that way, but just by your statement here I can obviously see that you are the one who is confused about his teachings. You are not accurately following his arguments if you think he was teaching your view of Total Depravity. The freedom of man is most definately fallen in sin. We don't deny that. And IF left to ourselves without God's grace we would remain dead and enslaved. We don't deny that. But God doesn't leave us alone. He sent Christ, the apostles, the Scripture by the Holy Spirit guidance and power. These are sufficient to overcome our depravity. There is not a need to create a secondary working of the Spirit by which he secretly, inwardly and irresistable calls a select few. That makes the other working of God, which is clearly taught in scripture, to seem trivial at best.

Really are you reading the links?

Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

Here is the complete article found at the end of the third link provided in my last post:

 

I am not trying to prove him wrong, just trying to show that he would not stand in fellowship with many of whom call themselves today followers of his teaching, as Scott Emerson has here in this thread and others pointed out.

I do think it is contradictory to say as Arminius does, that man has a totally depraved will, yet possesses a 'free-will'; but this is a representation of those who are seeking only an historical proof of thier views and not a Biblical understanding.

BTW, I can see no distinction between total depravity and 'total inability' perhaps you could enlighten me and others on the major distinctions...if they are to be found.

To use simple language and Biblical language, the first disciples were fisherman. In this capacity they once spent a night fishing with no 'fruit' to show for their labor. But on the next morning, when Christ directed them and empowered their efforts, then there was caught a draught of fish in the net that they were astonished.

It is the same in our own labor. Christ said, ...I must be about my father's business... we attempt to make this our labor. This is not ours, but is God's and was given to the Son while he was in this world. It is our business to proclaim the Gospel and leave to the Spirit to move upon the depraved heart of the hearer(s), thus in this way shall we see the produce of our labor and this by the power of the Spirit of Holiness and not the guise and enticment of men.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas Eaton

{Yes, I have read these links, that is why I posted them}.

 

Originally posted by Bro. Bill:

Hey, here's a method for ya, why not read the Bible and ask the same question?

Bro. Dallas

 

Lets use common definitions. These are from Random House Websters Dictionary
"Depravity" is a condition or state of being.
"Ability" is a skill.
These terms are not interchangeable, they do not have the same meaning and they do not describe a similarity

</font>[/QUOTE]So...would 'total inability' mean the opposite???

If so...then using common definitions you just proved the point, if not, then your confusion is added to that of Arminius himself

Bro. Dallas

 

So, now you wish to deny heaven and hell? Are these two not opposing 'extremes'?

What of the extreme of glorifying man? Is that Biblical?

Bro. dallas