Featured Is Arminianism heresy?

Don't brag --it was an honorary one --not earned.

You have shown no knowledge of Historical Theology whatsoever. Your posts can hardly be distinguished from a rebellious and hateful teen --one who smears graffiti all over the place.

 

Wait.....he has an honorary doctorate?

 

Why <Wait>?

What difference does a 'doctorate' make to either truth or lie?

 

The irrefutable problem for Calvinism.

In addition to the irrefutable problem for Calvinism as stated previously we have this...

 

Hiding under a rock Rebel? Care to explain your contradiction?

 

It is interesting to note that Rebel's former identity of Michael Wrenn on the BB had a total of 4,319 posts.

Aside from Augustine, where he had many posts making remarks (potshots) of the Bishop of Hippo --he made a grand total of Zero posts regarding the remaining dozen men. That is a strong indication that he hasn't an inkling about them despite his protestations of familiarity.

Yes.

 

Perhaps those goads will bear fruit as they did with the Apostle Paul!

I would add that I don't believe Arminianism, at least as I understand it, is heretical. I just think it is an grievous error!

 

Calvinist posts - high on name-calling and low on real Bible answers to the irrefutable texts given #104

Is not the compelling all-consuming solution -- that Calvinists often "imagine" that tactic to be. So then - sticking with my signature line on this one.

 

Do you? The only one on this board that I know of that claims to be Arminian is Bob Ryan, and he is SDA. The rest of us may be non-cal, but that doesn't make us Arminian. I question your understanding of Arminianism.

 

DHK

Th OP was straight forward and historical record. There was no inference at all .You are trying to cyber bully him/

trying to look for and hide behind loop holes and redefining terms is what is dishonest. To say there are no, Pelegians, semi Peligians , or Arminians here is bogus.

.

perhaps you should answer the OP and not set up an a personal attack as you are like to do.:thumbsup:

 

Why are you making false accusations and continuing on in an unnecessary diatribe.
First, notice that his point, as you stated, was not a point of theology at all. It was stated (just as you did), as an accusation.
My reply was to differentiate between grace and justice. I fully understand the difference (that is the reply you need--kind of childish for me to have to say that for you), and proceeded to show him the difference.
Concerning this post of yours, the Bible's best advice:

Rom 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

Luke, who posted here so often as Calvinism's representative, believed that God is the author of sin. Any thinking Calvinist will admit that their belief system logically leads to that conclusion. After all, isn't that what you keep quoting--God "appointed (created or fitted) vessels of wrath fitted for destruction." He created people for evil means according to your own theology.

Nice quote, from Calvin I presume. He is your idol?
But that is not what the Bible teaches. Does the Bible ever say, even one time? "Christ died for the elect," or does it say that he died "for the world,"
that he was "the just for the unjust"? Or, are all the elect the unjust"? What does that make the non-elect, if the elect are the "unjust"? (1Pet.3:18)

1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

Another one of your diatribes by taking the conversation out of context.
As I replied, Those who have accepted God's gift of salvation, the debt of payment that Christ made don't deserve eternal condemnation, do they?

Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,

They are the chosen recipients of God's grace--but based on what?
That decision is not random. It is based on his omniscient knowledge of who will freely choose him and who will freely reject him. God has given man within the confines of his sovereignty a measure of free will so that he can receive or reject Christ as Savior. That is the basis of being "a recipient of God's grace."
I already explained those verses in my post.

I gave you examples of those that freely came to Jesus;
of those that freely rejected Jesus;
of those that freely followed Jesus.

Yet, inexplicably you still maintain that we all are simply puppets in the hand of the Great Puppeteer, automatons without any will, pre-programmed robots.
What a shame! What a lifeless religion a Calvinist has devoid of any ability to praise and worship the true and living God--without the "free will" to even praise Him.

 

Again, no mainstream Calvinist, i.e. 99.9% of them, would ever say that God is the Author of evil. No, no "thinking Calvinist" would so conclude as you have wickedly put forth.

But then you quote Scripture and seem to oppose it. Don't you believe that objects of wrath have been fitted for destruction? Romans 9:22 is part of Holy Writ. Whether you like it or not it is the truthful testimony of God. That passage in no no way, shape or form attributes anything evil to God.

How can you preach to people when you pervert the Word of God? All people deserve the wrath of God. Some are recipients of his mercy and others are the recipients of His wrath as Ro.9:22 says. You need to accept the Scripture. Do not oppose it.

No, it came entirely from me. You insert the name of Calvin so often (always in a deameaning manner) that anyone can get the idea that you are mentally unbalanced in your obsession.

Amen.

Not only did Jesus die for those among the Jews, but those from among the Gentiles as well. The children of God scattered around the world is who He laid down His life for --from every tribe, language, people and nation. Jesus was slain. With His blood He purchased them. See Rev. 5:9,Heb.2:17, Acts 20:28,Eph.5:25,Jn. 10:11,15,Jn.11:51,52 for confirmation.

Of course they deserve eternal condemnation --everyone does. But out of His pure mercy He chose a remnant --the "objects of His mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory, even us, whom he also called, not only from among the Jews but also from among the Gentiles." (Ro.9:23b,24)

Amen. A very comforthing portion from God's Word.

"Calvinism does not teach anything arbitrary or capricious about God's election, no matter what some loud mouths might continually repeat." (Pastor Larry)

The above is a bunch of bunk. That is the philosophy taught in your non-biblical tradition --not the Word of God.

You always stoop to that low level and dredge up that junk. It hasn't worked for you in the past, doesn't work for you now, and won't work for you in the future. It is just an advertisement of your desperation.

More of the same bunkum above.

You need to note what is below.

Who who has ever given given to God, that God should repay them?
For from him and through him and for him are all things.
To him be the glory for ever! Amen. (Romans 11:35,36 NIV)

 

"I'm an Arminian, but I don't care two hoots what Arminius thought about this or that. The label is descriptive, not prescriptive." (Pipedude 8/29/2009)

Yeah, it pretty much puts the bulk of you in the category of Arminian to Semi-Pelagian.

 

I believe I said according to "my understanding of Arminianism." My understanding may not jive with your understanding but I haven't accused you of anything other than being a pre-trib-dispensationalist. But of course I hope you come into the knowledge of the truth both in your soteriology and your eschatology.

I could make a study once again of what constitutes Arminianism but I don't see the value in it, certainly not if there is only one Arminian on the board. But of course I thought that Roman Catholics were essentially Arminian in their soteriology, but maybe it is just papist!

 

Your post just demonstrated that the term "Arminian" is a derogatory term used by Calvinists to label anyone that is not a Calvinist.

It's quite alright. I am used to the mindless thinking (or non-thinking).
Being a missionary and working among another religion like either Muslims or Hindus, they consider anyone outside of their own religion as "Christian."
It doesn't matter if one is RCC, J.W. Mormon, or one that is actually born again. They don't know the difference. Of course "Christian" to many of them can be a derogatory term as well.

 

An Arminian believes that they can lost their salvation.
They also believe that they reach entire sanctification (sinlessness).
--The latter point the RCC doesn't believe and I don't know of anyone else on the board that believes it either.

 

No, you have just demonstrated your need of ESL.

I respect Pipedude. He acknowledges that he is an Arminian. It is not merely a derogatory term used by Calvinists. Arminians describe themselves as Arminian.

Roger Olson, a well-known theologian is a self-professed Arminian. Here is something noteworthy he has said:

I have agreed with my Calvinist friends (such as Mike Horton) that American Christianity is by-and-large Semi-Pelagian.

 

No, most do not believe that.

No, most do not believe that.

You really need to get more familiar with your group.

 

There is Classical Arminianism and Wesleyan Arminianism.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/arminianism.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminianism

I know what Arminianism teaches. I know what Wesley believes. But the ignorant seems to have been you.

 

You are ill-informed. You had said that Arminians believe they can lose their salvation and that they think they can achieve sinless perfection. I told you that most Arminians do not believe those things.

Wesleyans are but a subset of the larger movement. Many Baptists who are not Calvinistic lie in the realm of the Arminian and Semi-Pelagian turf. These Baptists outnumber Wesleyans by a considerable margin.