Monthly Archives For November 2012

Do Arminians Believe in the Sovereignty of God?

, posted by Matthew Murphy

Do Arminians believe in the sovereignty of God? If one has only ever read Calvinistic books, the answer would seem to be a no-brainer, for according to most Calvinists, an Arminian is by definition someone who denies God’s sovereignty. For example, notable Calvinist exponent Edwin H. Palmer (1922 – 1980) explicitly declared that “the Arminian denies the sovereignty of God”.1

Funny though it may seem, there are even those who reject the tenets of Calvinism, yet try and take a middle road between Calvinism and Arminianism. These so-called ‘non-Calvinists’ are usually known by the maxim, “I am neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian, but simply a Bible-believer.” I should know; I used to be one.

Read Post →

Adam Clarke on Ephesians 2:8-9

, posted by drwayman

Adam Clarke on Ephesians 2:8-9

provided by SEA member, Roy Ingle

I am studying to teach this weekend from Ephesians 2:1-10 and I was reading from Adam Clarke’s commentary on the passage and I loved his words on verses 8-9:

Read Post →

8 Things Wesleyans Need to Learn from Neo-Calvinism

, posted by drwayman

8 Things Wesleyans Need to Learn from Neo-Calvinism

Although not a SEA member, Caleb Friedman makes some great observations for Arminians and Wesleyan-Arminians in particular.

I’m a Wesleyan. Always have been, always will be. However, as I look across the landscape of American evangelicalism, it’s hard to escape the fact that something new and exciting is happening in the Calvinist movement. In March 2009, Time magazine included ‘The New Calvinism’ in its article “10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now.” The fact that any evangelical group would receive such attention from a periodical like Time speaks volumes about the fruit that this movement has been producing for the kingdom in recent years.

Read Post →

What Fell in

, posted by drwayman

What Fell in “the Fall”?

written by SEA member, Roy Ingle

F. Lagard Smith in his book Troubling Questions for Calvinists (and all the rest of us) asks 15 questions about the Fall in Genesis 3:1-7.

I post his questions here without comment.

[Editor's note: Smith is not an Arminian, but a Semi-Pelagian. Yet these questions can still be helpful in thinking about the issue of human depravity.]

1. What do you think? Were Adam and Eve free moral beings, fully able to decide between obeying and disobeying God without any predetermined secret eternal will of God preempting their freedom to choose right from wrong?

a) If not, is there any way that God Himself is not responsible for their sin and “the Fall”?
b) If so, were they simply exceptions to an otherwise universal rule of predestination and sovereign causation?

2. Were Adam and Eve either totally or partially depraved before “the Fall”?

3. What about immediately after “the Fall”?

Read Post →

Adam Heard the Voice of God

, posted by drwayman

Adam Heard the Voice of God

written by SEA member, Roy Ingle

Some Calvinists such as R.C. Sproul asserts that one must be regenerated before faith because of the nature of total depravity. Since mankind is dead in their sins (Ephesians 2:1) and unable to please God in such a state (Romans 8:7-8) then God must regenerate people in order for them to come to faith and be saved from sin (John 3:3; 1 John 5:1). A dead person is simply dead and can do nothing unless God first breathes life into them by His Spirit (Titus 3:5-7) and then they can come to faith and be justified before God (Romans 5:1). It is reasoned that those elected by God will be regenerated to believe.

Read Post →

Arminius on The Effects of the Sin of Our First Parents

, posted by drwayman

Arminius on The Effects of the Sin of Our First Parents

provided by SEA member Roy Ingle

DISPUTATION XXXI

ON THE EFFECTS OF THE SIN OF OUR FIRST PARENTS

I. The first and immediate effect of the sin which Adam and Eve committed in eating of the forbidden fruit, was the offending of the Deity, and guilt — Offense, which arose from the prohibition imposed — Guilt, from the sanction added to it, through the denunciation of punishment, if they neglected the prohibition.

II. From the offending of the Deity, arose his wrath on account of the violated commandment. In this violation, occur three causes of just anger:

(1.) The disparagement of his power or right.

(2.) A denial of that towards which God had an inclination.

(3.) A contempt of the divine will intimated by the command.

Read Post →

Jesus Says the Dead Will Hear Unto Spiritual Life

, posted by Ben Henshaw

I want to recommend Chris Chapman’s article available at SEA called, The Extent of Spiritual Death. Chapman’s article does an excellent job of demonstrating from Scripture that the spiritual death described in the Bible does…

Read Post →

Arminius on What the First Sin Produced

, posted by drwayman

Arminius on What the First Sin Produced

written by SEA member, Roy Ingle

What were the results of Adam’s transgression against God?

Arminius answers thus:

The proper and immediate effect of this sin was the offending of the Deity. For since the form of sin is “the transgression of the law,” (1 John iii, 4,) it primarily and immediately strikes against the legislator himself, (Gen. iii, 11,) and this with the offending of one whose express will it was that his law should not be offended. From this violation of his law, God conceives just displeasure, which is the second effect of sin. (iii, 16-19, 23, 24.) But to anger succeeds infliction of punishment, which was in this instance two-fold.

(1.) A liability to two deaths. (ii, 17; Rom. vi, 23.)

Read Post →