Non-Calvinist theologians?

Lutheran scholar R.C.H. Lenski wrote a series of New Testament commentaries that are still in circulation today. His strongly anti-Reformed stance comes through clearly in his writings.

Also, if you consider C.S Lewis a theologian, he was anti-Reformed.

 

Norman Geisler is an example of a modern theologian who is non-Calvinistic. He's not one of my personal favorites, but he has done some good work in the field of apologetics.

 

Lutheran sotierology is not quite arminian or calvinist. They believe in predestination but also that one can lose their salvation- once... at least the Mo Synod Lutherans around here seem to believe this. I think that is fairly close to Luther's own stance.

 

The Position of Fundamental Baptist World -Wide Mission
http://www.biblebelievers.net/Calvinism/kjcalvn1.htm
Which states, in part:
As for John Calvin, he was not a Baptist. He was a Reformer. He was not Christian in his attitude and behavior. He was a tyrant who cast those who disagreed with him into prison.

...1. The Sovereignty of God. We believe in the sovereignty of God, but we believe that in the matter of salvation God leaves the final decision to man. God has elected a plan of salvation. He has given man the free will to accept or reject that plan.

We believe that without question God knew, before the foundations of the world, who would choose to accept Christ and who would choose to reject Christ. I Peter 1:2 says, "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father...." We do not believe that God decided, determined, elected, or selected who would and who would not receive Christ.

...Fundamental Baptist World-Wide Mission rejects all five points of the doctrine called Calvinism which was founded in Hell; surfaced by the teaching of Augustine, a Catholic saint in the Fourth Century; and has been made famous and caused much confusion by John Calvin of the Reformed Church in the Fifteenth Century.

...While on II Peter 2:1, concerning "Damnable Heresies." Pastor Charles Britt said, "There is one way to spot a heretic" (or those who teach false doctrine)- He said, "Ask them 'What must a person do to be saved?" If the question is directed to a person who believes and preaches the doctrine of John Calvin and he answers, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved," then that involves man's will and his answer is contradicting his doctrine. He should answer, "In order for you to be saved, you must be one of the elect and then you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved. If you are not one of the elect, then there is nothing that you can possibly do to be saved."

He might also answer, "You must wait until there is a 'drawing' which you cannot resist; then you will be saved because you will automatically be saved if you are one of the elect."

I have never read material written by a Calvinist or a so called Calvinist, when his statements did not continually contradict his doctrine.

The teaching of the doctrine of John Calvin, the Reformer, causes confusion everywhere it is discussed, leaves unanswerable questions, and creates strife and division. We have seen works and entire mission fields divided and destroyed by the doctrine of John Calvin. God keep us from this heresy.

...We believe in the free will and the responsibility of man. We believe in the sovereignty of God. We believe that God, in His sovereignty, limited that sovereignty and gave man a free will and made him responsible. We believe that God foreknows every detail of all that has happened and will happen on the earth.



Dave Hunt IMMEDIATELY comes to mind!
http://www.thebereancall.org/Search_Search.aspx?SectionID=1359&search=calvin -- that is some of his material in his monthly newsletters.

This site
http://www.geocities.com/calvinismheresy/calvinismmain.html
is Arminian, and I am most assuredly NOT, but it has some very interesting articles about Calvinism and even some very interesting quotes FROM Calvinists, including Calvin himself.

Calvinism appeals to those who think that it is the only answer to Arminianism. There are very many Christians that are soulwinners, love God, seek the salvation of the lost and yet ARE NEITHER Calvinists nor Arminian.
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Doctrines/heresies_of_calvinism.htm -- which also presents some interesting points.

http://www.biblelife.org/calvinism.htm


Are these writers 'theologians'? That depends on how you want to define the word. They all wrote about theology and all presented biblical referencing.

 

I would consider Dave Hunt a very poor example of a theologian... and some of your sources are a little surprising Helen. Not that a source automatically discounts the comment... but at least two of those sites are very heavily KJVO.

Ryrie, Rice, Wesley, WE Vine, Geisler, and RA Torrey come to mind as non-calvinists who I personally find thoughtful, sound theologians who happen to disagree with me on this very fine issue of theology.

Hunt, Finney, Hyles, and Billy Graham would number in the non(anti)-calvinists that I personally have less respect for.

 

Dave Hunt is not a theologian.

I think of Torrey, Geisler, Ryrie and Wesly, all of which have great things to say. Albert Barnes was more Calvinistic but he did believe in general attonment.

 

This is simply a false statement.

I am a calvinist because after reading scripture it appears to be the best system for accounting for the whole of scripture... not because it answers Arminianism per se. Though I will acknowledge that it was gaping holes in the de facto Arminianism I had been taught as a child that left me both dissatisfied and plagued by doubt.

As far as people who are neither, there are people who have not studied the issue enough to align themselves with one or the other but most non-calvinist Baptists and Protestants are in fact Arminian in their beliefs.

 

Helen, thats an interesting site. I see they have a fellow off Ruckmans staff by the name of Lawrence Vance refuting calvinism. Now thats a laugh. You want some heresey, check out that crowd.

 

Gill is another calvinist theologian of great stature.

Does anyone know about Matthew Henry or Robertson? Some of Robertson's commentaries seem to conflict on the subject.

Adam Clarke's commentaries are widely distributed and he is decidedly arminian.

Vincent I think was non-calvinist.

 

John Wesley would probably be one of the best known Arminian theologians right?

 

Probably. Though very few practice his whole position today.

 

Matthew Henry I believe was a 5 point Calvinist.

Luther was calvistic but probably not a 5 point Calvinist and is a good one to read. Adam Clarke is my favorite classical Arminian as well as John Wesley. Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown's Commentary on the Whole Bible is moderately calvinistic and seem to be respected by both Calvinists and Arminians.

John Gill, in my opinion the greatest Baptist theologian and a Calvinist is my favorite to read.

 

I'm reasonably sure that Matthew Henry was a 5 pointer.

This is an interesting thread. As I look at a lot of the theologians that I have books by, they are all Calvinistic. Yet when I bought most of them, I wouldn't have considered myself Calvinistic. Yet, I recognized good treatment of scripture that these books had.

A couple questions 1) Was D.L. Moody a "theologian" 2) Was he Calvinistic? I'm fairly sure the answer to #2 is no, because I thought he said you could lose your salvation.

 

I think you're right, although I'm not certain whether the caricaturing is done out of ignorance or deliberately. I hope it's the former, since I would hate to think that anyone here would intentionally distort someone else's views.

 

Arminianism: The road to Rome!
http://www.swrb.ab.ca/newslett/actualNLs/RHNarmin.htm

 

I'm not Arminian. Are you saying the Fundamental Baptist World -Wide Mission is?