Monthly Archives For August 2010

Pelagianism: A Monergist Model of Redemption

, posted by Martin Glynn

“Pelagianism? Monergist? Martin, I think you need to recheck your definitions.”

No, it’s true! For those that read mostly internet Calvinist literature, the word “monergism” is understood to be synonymous with determinism. However, the term specifically means that only one party’s actions (energy) matters within the processes of redemption and sanctification. The process involves two parties: God and the human. Therefore, monergism is any belief system that views either party as the only effective actor within the process, whether it be God (Calvinism/Augustinianism) or the human (Pelagianism).

Read Post →

Jerry Walls, “WHAT IS WRONG WITH CALVINISM?”

, posted by SEA

Taken from http://www.catalystresources.org/issues/351Walls.htm

WHAT IS WRONG WITH CALVINISM?

One of the most longstanding debates in the history of theology concerns the relationship between predestination and human freedom. On one side of this dispute, the most famous name is John Calvin, and on the other the most noted name is probably John Wesley. Although Wesley was primarily concerned with evangelism and church renewal, the very nature of his work required him to take positions on certain controversial issues. Perhaps the most significant of these involved his disputes with Calvinism; indeed, his work on these issues represents one of his most important contributions to historical theology.

Read Post →

The Enemy of my Enemy

, posted by Godismyjudge

Calvinist Greg Welty states: Clearly then, the controversy between Calvinists and non-Calvinists over unconditional election is not the Calvinists’ assertion that God elects some for salvation, since non-Calvinists believe this too. Rather, the controversy is over the Calvinists’ negative claim, namely, the denial that divine election unto salvation is on the basis of works or foreseen faith. (link)

Read Post →

Arminius’ Impact on Calvinism

, posted by Godismyjudge

[Editor’s note: It appears that the author uses the term “sublapsarian” as equivalent to the term “infralapsarian.” many use this language in that way. But some use these terms to refer to different positions.] Arminius didn’t…

Read Post →