What is Hyper-Arminianism?

[preacher4truth]

I always consider "Hyper-Arminian" (a term I don't recall ever even seeing or using) as more openly semi-pelagian or pelagian, taking the Arminian man-centric false salvation to its logical conclusion. "If it's going to be, it's up to me."

The term "Hyper-Calvinist" is a coined term "boogey-man" that I have never seen in action (and believe me, I hang around with every type of calvinist imagineable). Read a booklet by an avowed Arminian Sword of the Lord type decrying "Hyper Calvinism" and he was so in the dark theologically that he described a simple five-point biblicist as this so-called "boogey-man" to avoid!! Sad commentary that he taught such nonsense.

Still see on the BB some trying to slur other believers by calling them "Hyper-Calvinists" and never saw anyone CLOSE to that position here in our BB family. [Words have meaning: Hyper-Calvinism is a defineable word and you can match post/theology to it . . and never find one here] Have seen many who would tend toward the hyper in the Arminian/semi-pelagian camp.

This is why I call it (hyper-cal) "phantom" and it is a slur as you say.

I would attribute Copeland and friends as hyper-arminians. I also, as you've stated, see many who would lend themselves this way in their theology (toward hyper-arminian).

 

[Don]

I believe the example of "hyper calvinism" would be John Ryland (not John Ryland, Jr., friend of William Carey; but his father, John Ryland, Sr.) who told Carey "sit down; if God pleases to convert the heathen, He will do it without your aid or mine."

Existing sects today that exemplify this type of hyper calvinism...well, that's hard to find.

On the other hand, one could just about use the Methodists and a whole slew of others as examples of hyper-Arminianism. Much easier to find people who believe they have to play some part in their salvation, than to find people who believe it's okay to simply sit on the couch because no one has any part whatsoever in salvation.

 

[quantumfaith]

I always consider "Hyper-Arminian" (a term I don't recall ever even seeing or using) as more openly semi-pelagian or pelagian, taking the Arminian man-centric false salvation to its logical conclusion. "If it's going to be, it's up to me."

The term "Hyper-Calvinist" is a coined term "boogey-man" that I have never seen in action (and believe me, I hang around with every type of calvinist imagineable). Read a booklet by an avowed Arminian Sword of the Lord type decrying "Hyper Calvinism" and he was so in the dark theologically that he described a simple five-point biblicist as this so-called "boogey-man" to avoid!! Sad commentary that he taught such nonsense.

Still see on the BB some trying to slur other believers by calling them "Hyper-Calvinists" and never saw anyone CLOSE to that position here in our BB family. [Words have meaning: Hyper-Calvinism is a defineable word and you can match post/theology to it . . and never find one here] Have seen many who would tend toward the hyper in the Arminian/semi-pelagian camp.

Don't you think, human nature being what it is, we much easier see that which we are looking for?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I am not a church historian, so I couldn't name "sects" that have originated from Calvinism, but I have seen a few varieties of Calvinism here. An example would be Pinoybaptist who claims to be DoG, but frankly I've never been able to make heads or tails of what he believes. I do know it is very different from what most Cals believe here. I would consider him to be a "sect". So, there is a wide variety of Cals/DoGs that could be considered sects, though I am not knowledgeable of their differences. Perhaps someone like Allan could provide this information as I believe church history is his specialty.

What do you need Allan for, you appear very good at Google so look up Primitive Baptists & read it for yourself.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I always consider "Hyper-Arminian" (a term I don't recall ever even seeing or using) as more openly semi-pelagian or pelagian, taking the Arminian man-centric false salvation to its logical conclusion. "If it's going to be, it's up to me."

The term "Hyper-Calvinist" is a coined term "boogey-man" that I have never seen in action (and believe me, I hang around with every type of calvinist imagineable). Read a booklet by an avowed Arminian Sword of the Lord type decrying "Hyper Calvinism" and he was so in the dark theologically that he described a simple five-point biblicist as this so-called "boogey-man" to avoid!! Sad commentary that he taught such nonsense.

Still see on the BB some trying to slur other believers by calling them "Hyper-Calvinists" and never saw anyone CLOSE to that position here in our BB family. [Words have meaning: Hyper-Calvinism is a defineable word and you can match post/theology to it . . and never find one here] Have seen many who would tend toward the hyper in the Arminian/semi-pelagian camp.

AMEN Brother:thumbs:

 

[kyredneck]

....An example would be Pinoybaptist who claims to be DoG, but frankly I've never been able to make heads or tails of what he believes. I do know it is very different from what most Cals believe here. I would consider him to be a "sect".....

Google 'immediate regeneration'. Therein lies the difference.

 

[preacher4truth]

I believe the example of "hyper calvinism" would be John Ryland (not John Ryland, Jr., friend of William Carey; but his father, John Ryland, Sr.) who told Carey "sit down; if God pleases to convert the heathen, He will do it without your aid or mine."

Existing sects today that exemplify this type of hyper calvinism...well, that's hard to find.

On the other hand, one could just about use the Methodists and a whole slew of others as examples of hyper-Arminianism. Much easier to find people who believe they have to play some part in their salvation, than to find people who believe it's okay to simply sit on the couch because no one has any part whatsoever in salvation.

Don, that is an excellent post. I contend that much more needs to be said, written, about hyper-arminianism since it is a tangible reality. It has been too easy to go around with "hyper-cal" label, pointing fingers at folks who simply believe the DoG's, and call them this, and most don't even know what a hyper-calvinist is.

It certainly may have caused persons to act passively, but I don't see it leading to cultic nonsense seen that hyper-arms have caused, and as you've also mentioned.

Hey, if hyper-cals ultimate end means it is ALL GOD, then call me that. I'd rather be accused of that than to be a hyper-arminian, and tied to these merchandisers in word-faith and heretics like Copeland, both being living examples of its end, MAN IN CONTROL OF GOD.

 

[JesusFan]

What sect has hyper-calvinism led to?

Let's say hyper-calvinism = God does all, to Him all Glory. How can this be wrong?

Let's say hyper-arminianism = God plus the effort of man = a share of His glory.

These are accurate descriptions of both, though brief.

I see only one leading to the ultimately wrong path and conclusion.

So, again, what specific sect has hyper-calvinism led to? I'm interested to know.

Hyper Calvinism can lead one to spiritual pride, and also to deny sending forth the Gospel in order to have the elected out ones to become saved, as they say "God will save his own, period!"

 

[JesusFan]

This is why I call it (hyper-cal) "phantom" and it is a slur as you say.

I would attribute Copeland and friends as hyper-arminians. I also, as you've stated, see many who would lend themselves this way in their theology (toward hyper-arminian).

they are hyper Charasmatics who are heretics teaching a false sdoctrines from a false god..

they calim to be speaking for the Lord, but by dening the Cross, jesus died and had to get reborn again, their teachings equal to new revelation from God etc!

Don't know IF they are Hyper Arms, as they would by definition be classied as heretics!

 

[webdog]

AMEN Brother:thumbs:

Are you also "amening" the fact arminianism is "false salvation"...what Dr. Bob stated?

 

[Allan]

This is why I call it (hyper-cal) "phantom" and it is a slur as you say.

And yet that 'phantom' is readily identified by other reformed believers as not only being true in our day and time but a growing concern.

Monergism, Spurgeon.com, and other reformed websites have not only attested to this false view but that it is a growing problem. There is hyper'ism AND a full blown Hyper-Cal. Many are leaning toward Hyper-ism that will by default and inevitably lead to full blown Hyper-Calvinism. (I have a thread on here about this)

So the 'phantom' isn't some ambiguous specter made up by opponents but real and here and now, attested to by the reformed groups themselvs

 

[quantumfaith]

I have a friend who prefers the distinction "Historical Baptist". I am quite confident that he is not "hyper-calvinistic". However, I must admit I don't understand the distinctions between i.e. Calvinism, Reformed Theology, Historical Baptists, DoG. I am sure that there are, I am simply unaware of such.

 

[Allan]

I have a friend who prefers the distinction "Historical Baptist". I am quite confident that he is not "hyper-calvinistic". However, I must admit I don't understand the distinctions between i.e. Calvinism, Reformed Theology, Historical Baptists, DoG. I am sure that there are, I am simply unaware of such.

Here are 5 points that speak to Hyper-Calvinistic beliefs found at Spurgeon.com epitomized with this quote from Phil Johnson at Spurgeon.org called "A Primer on Hyper-Calvinism:

I wrote and posted this article because I am concerned about some subtle trends that seem to signal a rising tide of hyper-Calvinism, especially within the ranks of young Calvinists and the newly Reformed. I have seen these trends in numerous Reformed theological forums on the Internet, including mailing lists, Web sites, and Usenet forums.

Lest anyone wonder where my own convictions lie, I am a Calvinist. I am a five-point Calvinist, affirming without reservation the Canons of the Synod of Dordt. And when I speak of hyper-Calvinism, I am not using the term as a careless pejorative. I'm not an Arminian who labels all Calvinism "hyper." When I employ the term, I am using it in its historical sense.

History teaches us that hyper-Calvinism is as much a threat to true Calvinism as Arminianism is. Virtually every revival of true Calvinism since the Puritan era has been hijacked, crippled, or ultimately killed by hyper-Calvinist influences. Modern Calvinists would do well to be on guard against the influence of these deadly trends.

In this he states:.
A hyper-Calvinist is someone who either:
1. Denies that the gospel call applies to all who hear, OR
2. Denies that faith is the duty of every sinner, OR
3. Denies that the gospel makes any "offer" of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal), OR
4. Denies that there is such a thing as "common grace," OR
5. Denies that God has any sort of love for the non-elect.

Monergism.com (found here) also has a list that is 'seemingly' a bit more exhaustive however they state that Phil Johnson short list is simply a condensed version for their own and BOTH agree with each others listing. This statement is noted in my thread on Hyper-Calvinism and is defined by Calvinists

 

[DHK]

I always consider "Hyper-Arminian" (a term I don't recall ever even seeing or using) as more openly semi-pelagian or pelagian, taking the Arminian man-centric false salvation to its logical conclusion. "If it's going to be, it's up to me."

Just a question Bob.

A while back someone posted a thread with a poll. Some of the different positions were identified as the ones above: pelagian, semi-pelagian, (I think it had 3, 4 or all 5 point Calvinist), and a couple of other choices), defined each one and asked which one best fits your theology. A number of the posters (non-Cals) on the board chose "semi-pelagianism" to best represent their position. That being the case, according to your post above, are you suggesting that these folk have a "man-centric false salvation"?

I am not accusing you, just asking. It seems to have offended some in the sense that you have called their salvation into question.

 

[Allan]

Just a question Bob.

A while back someone posted a thread with a poll. Some of the different positions were identified as the ones above: pelagian, semi-pelagian, (I think it had 3, 4 or all 5 point Calvinist), and a couple of other choices), defined each one and asked which one best fits your theology. A number of the posters (non-Cals) on the board chose "semi-pelagianism" to best represent their position. That being the case, according to your post above, are you suggesting that these folk have a "man-centric false salvation"?

I am not accusing you, just asking. It seems to have offended some in the sense that you have called their salvation into question.

The offense (even for those of us who don't hold to it), is that he calls NOT hyper-Arminian a false salvation (which I would concur since it goes beyond the Arminian position and goes into an actual Pel and semi-Pel view) ... but that Arminianism itself is false gospel... ERGO.. if you aren't Calvinist you aren't saved as anything else is a 'false' gospel.

If he misworded it that would be one thing.. however if not.. well.. we will see what he says.

 

[Dr. Bob]

"False salvation" was poorly worded by me - and changed. Thanks for pointing out my word choice. Some arminians may truly be born again by God's grace alone, even if they mistakenly think they had something to do with it!!

False perception of salvation would better describe most Arminians here.

 

[preacher4truth]

And yet that 'phantom' is readily identified by other reformed believers as not only being true in our day and time but a growing concern.

Monergism, Spurgeon.com, and other reformed websites have not only attested to this false view but that it is a growing problem. There is hyper'ism AND a full blown Hyper-Cal. Many are leaning toward Hyper-ism that will by default and inevitably lead to full blown Hyper-Calvinism. (I have a thread on here about this)

So the 'phantom' isn't some ambiguous specter made up by opponents but real and here and now, attested to by the reformed groups themselvs

I see brother. But it that has been identified is a "growing concern" yet not named and personified in actuality, such as hyper-armianism is linked to Jerry Savelle, Benny Hinn, Joyce Meyer, Kenneth Copeland and others. I think I could also put Joel Osteen in this same category. This is not nearly as ambiguous as "hyper-calvinism" is and I have not met a hyper calvinist personally.

However, let's pretend that whatever point they (hyper-cals) believe in be true, what is its ultimate and logical end? I contend that it would be that it is All God. And at the end of the day, if their tenets were absolutely true, would we still, Glorify God, and still, ultimately trust in Him, and believe that all of His Sovereign control and purposes are Just and Holy (as HE can be none other)?

What if this (hyper-cal) became readily indentifiable in a real local church, yet they preached the Gospel, baptized regularly, attributed all of it (and we know they would say all of it!!) was due to God, and all glory to Him? I can't sit here and say I would have a problem with that whatsoever.

Now, I do have a serious issue with hyper-arminianism. That is for certain.

I appreciate the links, and have been there often looking at what is said. Thank you.

 

[JesusFan]

Just a question Bob.

A while back someone posted a thread with a poll. Some of the different positions were identified as the ones above: pelagian, semi-pelagian, (I think it had 3, 4 or all 5 point Calvinist), and a couple of other choices), defined each one and asked which one best fits your theology. A number of the posters (non-Cals) on the board chose "semi-pelagianism" to best represent their position. That being the case, according to your post above, are you suggesting that these folk have a "man-centric false salvation"?

I am not accusing you, just asking. It seems to have offended some in the sense that you have called their salvation into question.

just a question...
being one on the Arminianist camp so to apeak here on BB...

Do you see all cals as being essentially the same in their positions/view points?
Do you see a difference between moderate/high camp cals?

Are do you see doctrinal the resident Armaldist on BB. myself?

thanks!

 

[Allan]

"False salvation" was poorly worded by me - and changed. Thanks for pointing out my word choice. Some arminians may truly be born again by God's grace alone, even if they mistakenly think they had something to do with it!!

False perception of salvation would better describe most Arminians here.

Ok.. on that I can live with.. thank you for the clarification

 

[DHK]

just a question...
being one on the Arminianist camp so to apeak here on BB...

Do you see all cals as being essentially the same in their positions/view points?
Do you see a difference between moderate/high camp cals?

Not all Calvinists are the same.
I answered that to some degree here:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1698636&postcount=61

Are do you see doctrinal the resident Armaldist on BB. myself?

thanks!

As for you, I am not sure what your are.