Historic VS Contemporary Arminianism

[Yeshua1]

MB,

Do not fall into the trap of using the patristic age to defend doctrine. The post-Apostolic age was rife with error. They tolerated baptismal regeneration, the pre-existence of the soul, and modalism. The early church fathers were not a monolithic group.

I can appreciate your not wanting to be called by the name of a man. The great thing is that you do not have to accept it. I use those terms for categorical reasons. My use of them is not personal, but it also is not dependent on whether you accept them or not.

yes, for when catholic church and other seek to get their doctrines approved by referencing the early Church fathers, have to realise that they were NOT Apostles of Christ, and that early on after John passed there started to be a distortion of the Apostolic doctrines of the Chrsitian faith!


Which was to be expected for peter/paul/Jude etc ALL saw that even in their day a deviation from the truth was trying to sneak into early church, and they wrote to combat that an make sound doctrines were being heeded!

And when someone claims to NOT be following a mans teaching, but that of the bible only, doesn't that soundsimiliar to those who said 'we were of peter, another we of paul, another we follow christ?"

 

[MB]

MB,

Do not fall into the trap of using the patristic age to defend doctrine. The post-Apostolic age was rife with error. They tolerated baptismal regeneration, the pre-existence of the soul, and modalism. The early church fathers were not a monolithic group.

Freewill is taught in the Bible unlike the Calvinist belief of regeneration before faith. Freewill is seen in the first two people on earth. We are created in the Image of God and to say He doesn't have freewill is ridiculous. We have the exact same freewill that God has. He gave it to us when He created the first man and gave him a choice to eat of the fruit and die or not eat and live for ever. No where is regeneration before faith supported from scripture. I've been a student of the Bible most all of my life. Even before I was saved. I know what is supported and what isn't and If I run into something I don't understand, prayer to the Father for wisdom has worked so far. You are right they may have made some mistakes but not nearly as many as modern intellectuals make today
Barnabas wrote; Epistle of Barnabas 100 A.D. 1:139 (losing salvation) "Take heed, lest resting at our ease, as those who are the called [of God], we should fall asleep in our sins, and the wicked prince, acquiring power over us, should thrust us away from the kingdom of the Lord." 1:139 (chap. 4) "This means that the man perishes justly, who, having a knowledge of the way of righteousness, rushes off into the way of darkness. (chap. 5) (Presumably the way of righteousness is open to him).

I posted this to show you are right. The early Church fathers did make mistakes. I'm not ignorant of those mistakes.

I can appreciate your not wanting to be called by the name of a man. The great thing is that you do not have to accept it. I use those terms for categorical reasons. My use of them is not personal, but it also is not dependent on whether you accept them or not.

Never the less they are not even close to being accurate. I'm also called an Arminian yet what I believe does not agree with any of their doctrines.
MB

 

[12strings]

Comparing David with Calvin is ridiculous. Calvin followed Augustine, David followed God. Huge difference. David suffered for his sin Calvin went on like nothing ever happened. God corrected David proof He believed in God. Calvin as far as I know was never corrected. No where have I read so far where Calvin ever repented or suffered for the murder of several citizens of Geneva for non belief. He was a monster no better than any murder on Death Rowe. It's not just the murder he committed but the reason that literally made me sick. He judged the Catholic Church for there murders and turned right around and did the same things for the same reasons. There was nothing good about John Calvin. He was a religious dictator and a murderer just like the Pope who hunted him.
MB

Well, Thanks for the replies anyway. A less willing debater might have stopped answering me pages ago. Just be careful you don't judge all who agree with Calvin on the predestination issue to be just like him in every other way. That's all.

-Andy

 

[12strings]

I'm also called an Arminian yet what I believe does not agree with any of their doctrines.
MB

This may be beyond the scope of this thread, but can you please state how you disagree with all 5 of the the original Arminian Points?

(You just said you believe in free-will, so that' one you agree with right there...)

And I'm editing to say, Even Calvinists and everything in between agrees with SOME of arminian doctrines...so you really need to not make such broud statements.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Most Baptists would be Arminian;

Please clarify that statement..... Im not Arminian however I consider myself Baptist.

Or should I just say Credo Christian?

 

[Yeshua1]

Freewill is taught in the Bible unlike the Calvinist belief of regeneration before faith. Freewill is seen in the first two people on earth. We are created in the Image of God and to say He doesn't have freewill is ridiculous. We have the exact same freewill that God has. He gave it to us when He created the first man and gave him a choice to eat of the fruit and die or not eat and live for ever. No where is regeneration before faith supported from scripture. I've been a student of the Bible most all of my life. Even before I was saved. I know what is supported and what isn't and If I run into something I don't understand, prayer to the Father for wisdom has worked so far. You are right they may have made some mistakes but not nearly as many as modern intellectuals make today
Barnabas wrote; Epistle of Barnabas 100 A.D. 1:139 (losing salvation) "Take heed, lest resting at our ease, as those who are the called [of God], we should fall asleep in our sins, and the wicked prince, acquiring power over us, should thrust us away from the kingdom of the Lord." 1:139 (chap. 4) "This means that the man perishes justly, who, having a knowledge of the way of righteousness, rushes off into the way of darkness. (chap. 5) (Presumably the way of righteousness is open to him).

I posted this to show you are right. The early Church fathers did make mistakes. I'm not ignorant of those mistakes.

Never the less they are not even close to being accurate. I'm also called an Arminian yet what I believe does not agree with any of their doctrines.
MB

We do NOT the same free Will Adam had, for He was created without a sin nature, while ALL have us are born with one since the fall!

IF that were not true, then Jesus could have been born as a "normal" person, but he needed to not assume the fallen sin nature, so had to come Virgin Born conceived by Holy Ghost!

 

[MB]

We do NOT the same free Will Adam had, for He was created without a sin nature, while ALL have us are born with one since the fall!

How do you know Adam had no sin nature? Does the Bible say so or did you just imagine it.

IF that were not true, then Jesus could have been born as a "normal" person, but he needed to not assume the fallen sin nature, so had to come Virgin Born conceived by Holy Ghost!

No offense but you really need to proof read your post. This last half I can't even give a good guess of what you trying to say or, ask.
MB

 

[Herald]

No where is regeneration before faith supported from scripture.

You keeping making that accusation. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[Rippon]

With concern I tell people the truth about Calvin and his doctrines. I have studied the man and the doctrines he promoted.

You have certainly not studied the man and his doctrines. i doubt you have read much from his own writings. You depend on anti-Calvinistic websites and books.

He was a dictator of his religion he forced every one in Switzerland to either be Calvinist or be thrown in prison or worse,

He lived in Geneva. He had no authority outside of that city. Of couse his doctrinal writings were very influential.

You are so confused. The term "Calvinist" was not used in John Calvin's lifetime. Most folks in Geneva were of a Reformed stance,aside from the Libertines. Nobody was jailed or worse because they did not believe in what later were calledf the five points.

they know what I'm writing is true.

Since a large part of what you have stated is untrue...

I'll tell you why because it cannot be shown from scripture with out taken separate scriptures out of text and the lies Calvinist tell to go along with it.

You really ned to get a grip.

He burned people at the stake for non belief.

He burned nobody. He had no political authority in the city until 5 years or so before his death. Yet you want to go one-up and even use the plural form and say people.

 

[Herald]

Freewill is taught in the Bible unlike the Calvinist belief of regeneration before faith. Freewill is seen in the first two people on earth. We are created in the Image of God and to say He doesn't have freewill is ridiculous. We have the exact same freewill that God has. He gave it to us when He created the first man and gave him a choice to eat of the fruit and die or not eat and live for ever. No where is regeneration before faith supported from scripture. I've been a student of the Bible most all of my life. Even before I was saved. I know what is supported and what isn't and If I run into something I don't understand, prayer to the Father for wisdom has worked so far. You are right they may have made some mistakes but not nearly as many as modern intellectuals make today
Barnabas wrote; Epistle of Barnabas 100 A.D. 1:139 (losing salvation) "Take heed, lest resting at our ease, as those who are the called [of God], we should fall asleep in our sins, and the wicked prince, acquiring power over us, should thrust us away from the kingdom of the Lord." 1:139 (chap. 4) "This means that the man perishes justly, who, having a knowledge of the way of righteousness, rushes off into the way of darkness. (chap. 5) (Presumably the way of righteousness is open to him).

I posted this to show you are right. The early Church fathers did make mistakes. I'm not ignorant of those mistakes.

Never the less they are not even close to being accurate. I'm also called an Arminian yet what I believe does not agree with any of their doctrines.
MB

I suggest you study the Apostolic and early church fathers in detail. They may be excused from many of their errors because post-apostolic doctrine was, to put it simply, a mess.

You need to stop this, "nowhere found in the Bible" nonsense. You may disagree with the Reformed hermeneutic, but it does find basis for its belief about the human will in the Bible.

You are Arminian to the extent that you believe man chooses God pre-regeneration. That does not mean you embrace all Arminian teaching. I am called a Calvinist even though I disagree with paedobaptism and Presbyterian ecclesiology; key teachings of John Calvin. I accept the term because it accurately describes my view of salvation.

 

[Rippon]

Presbyterians still call there [sic]ministers Vicar.

No.as a matter of fact Presbyterians do not call their ministers "vicar." You are entirely mistaken and confused.

Really you do need to do some reading.

Yes,you do. But start with first sources.

 

[Herald]

Please clarify that statement..... Im not Arminian however I consider myself Baptist.

Or should I just say Credo Christian?

The majority of Baptists are synergists. Within synergism most Baptists are Arminian in their soteriology. Monergists are a small, but growing, minority.

 

[Rippon]

Comparing David with Calvin is ridiculous. Calvin followed Augustine, David followed God. Huge difference.

Calvin followed the Bible. Among non-inspired literature he profited from Augustine's works. But he plainly disagreed with him at various points,which would be evident to anybody who actually reads primary material.

the murder of several citizens of Geneva for non belief.

Would you be so kind to name these "several people."?

He judged the Catholic Church for there[sic] murders and turned right around and did the same things for the same reasons.

I thought you claimed earlier that Calvin was a Roman Catholic.

There was nothing good about John Calvin.

Calvin was an immense treasure to the Universal Church up till the present times.

...just like the Pope who hunted him.
MB

What Pope "hunted him"?

 

[Rippon]

Comparing David with Calvin is ridiculous. Calvin followed Augustine, David followed God. Huge difference.

To state that Calvin did not follow the Lord is so absurd. You are going to have to admit that you have not actually read any of Calvin's works for yourself. You are heavily indebted to anti-Calvinistic websites and literature. You don't go to the primary sources.

 

[Iconoclast]

Herald,!2strings,and Rippon,

Good posts throughout as you are keeping this discussion on track by making responsible posts in contrast to the emotionally based error.A few years ago Don Kistler did a fine series of sermons on the Puritans that I was able to attend the meetings.
he pointed out that most opposition to the Puritans was based on completely second hand sources and was in fact (9th commandment violations} that is talebearing,and false witness.
Asking for direct sources or specifics helps to calm down the emotional musings that have no basis in truth.Thanks for the solid posts.

 

[Rippon]

We have the exact same freewill that God has.

Humans are steeped in sin from the womb. God has no sin whatsoever. The will of people is under the influence of sin to say the least. To say that with respect to the will people and God Himself share the same chaacteristics is absolutely false.

I'm also called an Arminian yet what I believe does not agree with any of their doctrines.
MB

You leave yourself so open MB. You are funny LOL!

 

[Yeshua1]

I suggest you study the Apostolic and early church fathers in detail. They may be excused from many of their errors because post-apostolic doctrine was, to put it simply, a mess.

You need to stop this, "nowhere found in the Bible" nonsense. You may disagree with the Reformed hermeneutic, but it does find basis for its belief about the human will in the Bible.

You are Arminian to the extent that you believe man chooses God pre-regeneration. That does not mean you embrace all Arminian teaching. I am called a Calvinist even though I disagree with paedobaptism and Presbyterian ecclesiology; key teachings of John Calvin. I accept the term because it accurately describes my view of salvation.

think what most here call Calvinism would be more accurate to call as being "Reformed!"

and notice how hard they are to accept ANY label for theology, evev though they have been officially recognised as acceptable for centuries!

 

[Iconoclast]

free will is a false philosophical idea.We have a will-self will, that is bound by our nature.
In heaven our will.....will not be FREE....to sin. We are free to worship and serve,never FREE to sin. We in this dying outward man are able to sin, but never free to.

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.

20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.

21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.

22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[Yeshua1]

free will is a false philosophical idea.We have a will-self will, that is bound by our nature.
In heaven our will.....will not be FREE....to sin. We are free to worship and serve,never FREE to sin. We in this dying outward man are able to sin, but never free to.

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.

20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.

21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.

22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

We are free to do what we will, but the big problem is that out will is as you stated confined by sin nature! So will keep doing 'freely' the things of the flesh, as that is all that we have to 'work with!"

One of the very best books I read concerning the "free will" of man was by Luther, the Bondage of the Human Will!

 

[Rippon]

One of the very best books I read concerning the "free will" of man was by Luther, the Bondage of the Human Will!

In that book it is said that Luther was more Calvinistic than John Calvin himself! It is very,very good.