Search Result

X-Calvinist Corner Files: Testimony # 4

, posted by SEA

The X-Calvinist Corner is a page on this website that shares the stories of people who were once Calvinist but have left Calvinism for a more Arminian theology.  This series (The X-Calvinist Corner Files) highlights one of…

Read Post →

X-Calvinist Corner

, posted by SEA

This page shares testimonies of people who have left Calvinism for a more Arminian theology (these can be seen below).  If you were once a Calvinist and have left Calvinism, please share your story with…

Read Post →

Friday Files, 14 December 2018

, posted by K.W. Leslie

It’s the St. Spyridon’s Day edition of the Friday Files, SEA’s weekly reexamination of our archive. The views expressed in the articles are those of their authors, and frequently SEA. Our members’ names are highlighted…

Read Post →

Arminius – Nine Theological Questions

, posted by drwayman

THE NINE QUESTIONS: NINE OPPOSITE QUESTIONS 1. Which is first, Election, or Faith Truly Foreseen, so that God elected his people according to faith foreseen? 1. Is the decree “for bestowing Faith on any one,”…

Read Post →

Friday Files, 11 May 2018

, posted by K.W. Leslie

It’s the Sts. Cyril and Methodius Day edition of the Friday Files, your weekly rundown of old SEA posts which still have a little life in ’em. The views expressed in them (and K.W. Leslie’s…

Read Post →

Roy Ingle, “Who Chose Whom?”

, posted by SEA

Recently I was listening to a sermon on the doctrine of election from a prominent evangelical Bible teacher. I actually thought he did a good job of presenting arguments in favour of the Calvinist understanding…

Read Post →

The Motive for Arminius’ Theology

, posted by

What we must first understand about Arminius’ theological thought process is his positional biblicistic framework. Calvinist theologian Richard A. Muller confesses as much: “Had Arminius been a biblicistic pietist,” i.e., a devotional writer, “promulgating a…

Read Post →

Gomarus Learns from Arminius in Debate

, posted by

By far Arminius’ fiercest opponent was Francis Gomarus (1563-1641), a supralapsarian Calvinist whose intent at Leiden was to undermine and challenge Arminius’ broadly Reformed scholastic orthodoxy. Arminius was drawn into debate with Gomarus by obligation,…

Read Post →

Susanna Wesley on Predestination

, posted by SEA

The following is from a letter written by Susanna Wesley to her son John. This quotation has been taken from John Kirk, The Mother of the Wesleys: A Biography (London: Henry James Tresidder, 1864), 284-86. Explanatory…

Read Post →

An Arminian Ordo Salutis (Order of Salvation)

, posted by drwayman

written by Roger E Olson, PhD I was recently asked here to provide an Arminian order of salvation (ordo salutis). First, what is an order of salvation? In theology the technical term is “ordo salutis.”…

Read Post →

95 Theses

, posted by SEA

In light of the anniversary of Luther’s posting of his 95 theses on the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany (October 31, 1517), Rebekah Reinagel, one of our members, offers 95 theses regarding…

Read Post →

Karl Barth the Arminian?

, posted by SEA

Karl Barth the Arminian?

this post was written by Roger E Olson, PhD

Okay, that would be a stretch! I’m not claiming that Barth was an Arminian in any classical or historical sense of Arminianism. He was a member, minister and theologian of the Swiss Reformed Church. Much of his theology resonates well with classical Reformed theology. However, in places, he broke decisively with especially “high federal Calvinism” (especially Beza and those who followed him).

Read Post →

Arminius’ Nine Questions For the Synod of Dort

, posted by royingle

Arminius died in 1609, which was nine years before the Synod of Dort convened in 1618-1619. Yet it was his original ideas, teachings, and requests that led to the infamous Synod. From the writings of Arminius, it appears that he had hopes that the national synod would be a place for him to 1) defend himself against all charges of heresy, and 2) to defend his views regarding changes he saw needed in the Calvinistic confessions of faith. Arminius felt that the Scriptures were the highest authority to appeal to, and he felt that the Confessions of faith and Catechisms needed to be changed in light of clear teaching in Scripture. The Calvinists of his day disagreed and argued that the Confessions and Catechisms were the judges of what true believers should confess and believe (and it appears to me to be regardless of what Scripture said).

Read Post →

The A Priori of Particular Grace

, posted by

If it were not for a priori, the Calvinist would be an Arminian. If that statement brought a smile to your face, then you are most likely in the Arminian camp (or at least label yourself a “non-Calvinist,” not that “non-Calvinist” is a legitimate title, mind you). If, however, you felt your blood pressure rise, then you are most definitely a Calvinist.

Read Post →

A Fatal Flaw in Calvinism

, posted by JC_Thibodaux

“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” (Deuteronomy 29:29)…

Read Post →