Arminians

<crickets chirping>

 

I haven't met any here. That's why I call 'em "free-willers".

 

Allan and JDale have referred to their theology as Arminian - I think the latter refers to himself as a Reformed Arminian. Correct me if I'm wrong, guys.

I think the problem with labels like Arminian and Calvinist is that people have so many different ideas and connotations with those labels. Some people only equate "Arminian" with being able to lose your salvation, while others might equate it with conditional election or universal atonement. Frankly, I am learning to avoid these labels, unless I know the other person knows what I am referring to.

 

I used to avoid the term "calvinist". It got cumbersome to avoid it, though, so I gave up. I figure it's easy enough to say "calvinism" and then explain the parts where I disagree.

I think enough people have a rough idea of what calvinism means that the term usually works - mostly among calvinists, though. I don't think enough people have an understanding of what arminianism really means.

 

What about "stump jumper" for Calvinism???? :laugh: not!

 

...and followers of both schools think differently from their founders.

For instance, I heard that Arminus thought that it was technically possible for one to lose salvation, but didn't know how it could practically happen.

I mean, just because someone is a Freudian psychologist doesn't mean that he thinks the same as Freud.

 

1. I know of one church which rejects Calvin and his teachings and don't care to be called Calvinists but espouses the doctrines of grace as they see them in Scripture.

2. Reason: Calvin was inconsistent at times and taught things they couldn't agree with.

 

HEY! That may be where I am! Do they have a "label" for what they believe yet? Or do they just say, we believe the Bible?

 

This is what I lifted off of the internet.

Arminianism holds to the following tenets:

* Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation
* Salvation is possible by grace alone
* Works of human effort cannot cause or contribute to salvation
* God's election is conditional on faith in Jesus
* Jesus' atonement was for all people that will receive it
* God allows his grace to be resisted by those unwilling to believe
* Salvation can be lost, as continued salvation is conditional upon continued faith

I unashamedly agree with all of these except the last one. I am OSAS. :wavey:

 

Oh My!

I have to agree with Cutter! (I don't think that's happened before)

Although, I'd probably have to change the statement "Jesus' attonement was for all people" to "Jesus' blood is sufficient for all, but is only applied to those who believe".

 

Welcome to the fold!

 

1. They do believe in the doctrines of grace, but which not to be called Calvinists or be associated with Calvin.

2. Not sure what they want to be called.

 

Who gets the glory in this scenario?

 

I agree with all but the loss of salvation. OSAS.

Does that make us Aminians?

I don't even know who Arminius is.

 

True

False. Salvation is guaranteed by grace through faith alone, nothing "possible" whatsoever.

True

Since I do not agree with how "election" is being used here...false. Salvation is conditioned on faith in Christ, though.

False. Jesus' atonement was for all, but is applicable to those who receive it.

True

False with a capital F.

I'm clearly not an arminian.

 

Just Christian is fine with me.

1Cr 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
1Cr 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them [which are of the house] of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
1Cr 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1Cr 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

 

Correction coming Andy.

Yes, JDale consigns his theology to the label 'Reformed Arminianism', and if I remember correctly a College/University Professor to boot
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1008226&postcount=12

I however, have NEVER called myself nor have I refered to my theological views as 'Arminian'. I detest the label 'free-willer' even more.

 

Sorry about that. I just see in many of your posts that you lean towards classical Arminianism, but I don't think I've seen you discuss eternal security, which if you believe in that, then you couldn't technically be called Arminian in your theology. Also, I respect (your) classical Arminian position much more than semi-Pelagianism, which sometimes creeps into the non-cal argumentation on this board.

Peace.

 

Any godly person in Armenia might be surprised if they discovered that the title given to their nationality was an "ungodly nickname".

But even if we write "Arminian", as in the thread title, it might be a nickname, but is it an ungodly one? It is surely no different to the term "Calvinist", which seems to get thrown around even more on this board. (I tried to do a search, so that I could compare numbers, but both yielded precisely 500, so I imagine that searches are limited to that number of results).

To me, "Arminian" refers to anyone who follows the teachings championed by Jacobus Arminius. My (secular) encyclopaedia says that Arminianism is a doctrine in Christianity, formulated in the 17th century, declaring that human free will can exist without limiting God's sovereignty or contradicting the Scripture, and is named after a dutchman, Jacobus Arminius. I can see that people who believe similar doctrines to those of Arminius (such as prevenient grace, conditional election, resistible grace, etc.) might feel offended by the term, just as some who do not believe those doctrines are not overjoyed at a nickname which seems to suggest that they derive their doctrine from a mere man (and is regularly used thus on this board). There are plenty of people who write on this board who say they do believe in such things as conditional election, resistible grace, and so on.