Arminianism

A Very Brief Explanation of Jacobus Arminius’ Doctrine of the Twofold Will of God

, , No Comment

Calvinism posits that in God there exists a distinction of wills; the will of revelation and the will of sovereignty (i.e. the revealed will and the secret or sovereign will). However, Arminians posit that the problem with this theory of two wills is that when one is put into effect then the other is put to naught. Let me make an example of this.

It is often said by Calvinists in Genesis 50:20 that God has commanded that it is unlawful to do ill to one’s family (in this instance, kidnapping). This is said to be the revealed will of God. And yet, allegedly in this Gen. 50:20 circumstance, Calvinists believe that you can also discern the operation of the sovereign or secret will of God working through the sin of Joseph’s brothers to a good and godly end.

Read Post →

Seedbed - sow extravagently

Check out Seedbed – A New Arminian Resource

, , No Comment

Asbury Theological Seminary has started a new theological resource site called Seedbed [asburyseedbed.com]. They have an RSS feed, and regularly post free content from an Arminian and Wesleyan Perspective. You can sign up to be on their email list, and on a monthly basis they will send you a free resource (such as an e-book). They also have an online store with reasonably priced resources.

Be sure to check them out!

Read Post →

Dr. Phil Fernandes on Calvinism and Arminianism

, , Comment Closed

A video of Dr. Phil Fernandes on Calvinism and Arminianism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AESUv09eXFQ

Dr. Fernandes, a 4 point Arminian and member of SEA, is President of the Institute of Biblical Defense (http://instituteofbiblicaldefense.com/). He is a Christian Apologist, Author and Pastor of Trinity Bible Fellowship. Dr. Fernandes holds the following degrees: Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion degree from Greenwich University, Master of Arts in Religion degree from Liberty University, Bachelor of Theology Degree from Columbia Evangelical Seminary.

He has authored 6 books: Contend Earnestly for the Faith, God, Government, and the Road to Tyranny, The God Who Sits Enthroned: Evidence for Gods Existence, No Other Gods: A Defense of Biblical Christianity, Theism Vs. Atheism: The Internet Debate, The Decay of a Nation

Read Post →

Thomas Osmond Summers’ Systematic Theology

, , No Comment

Thomas Osmond Summers’ Systematic Theology a complete body of Wesleyan Arminian divinity, consisting of lectures on the twenty-five articles of religion–arranged and revised, with introduction, copious notes–and a theological glossary, Volume 2 – Pub. House of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, 1888 (link)

Read Post →

CALVINIST RHETORIC: The Stronghold

, , No Comment

Or “A Mighty Fortress Is Our Theology”

What I Mean by the Stronghold

This is probably going to be the hardest rhetorical analysis that I currently have planned to explain what I mean. It is important for this post that I mention that this is neither a critique on Calvinist theology, nor is this particular anomaly a universal characteristic of Calvinist rhetoric. Instead, this is something that I have noticed experientially as I have talked to Calvinists.

Read Post →

Michael Brown: Calvinism Or Arminianism?

, , Comment Closed

Dr. Michael Brown, a former Calvinists turned Arminian and member of SEA, presents both sides of the debate between Arminianism and Calvinism in 4 sessions. The goal is for his church to better understand the leading points and opposing points of view to prepare them for conversations concerning this issue. It has a tendency to be a divisive topic. But Dr. Brown presents both in such as way as to equally impress and convince.

Dr. Brown’s presentation may be accessed in 4 You Tube videos (though there is no live video) or 4 audio files.

An outline of the sessions may be found below with the appropriate link for each session provided with its description.

Read Post →

My Cat Illustrates the Difference Between Arminianism and Calvinism

, , No Comment

[Humor]

A picture is worth a thousand words, or so they say. Instead of writing a 2,000 word post on the difference between Arminianism and Calvinism, I have posted two pictures of my cat.

The difference between Arminianism and Calvinism is this: Arminians believe that grace is resistible. Calvinists believe that grace is irresistible.

First, let’s look at the Calvinistic concept of irresistible grace. Those to whom God gives grace will certainly receive it. God’s grace is provided in a way that it is not coercive, because God works in the hearts and minds of the elect in such a way that they freely want to receive what He provides. Below my cat illustrates what this looks like:


Read Post →

J.I. Packer and Arminianism

, , Comment Closed

by Roger Olson

Today I received an e-mail from a reader who asked why I didn’t mention J. I. Packer in either Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities or Against Calvinism. That’s a good question. I didn’t, so now I will.

To the best of my knowledge, the only lengthy, detailed treatment of Arminianism in print by Packer was his Introduction to John Owen’s The Death of Death in the Death of Christ in A Quest for Godliness. It may be found at this web address. There Packer, a Calvinist, completely misrepresents Arminianism. It’s truly shocking how distorted his understanding of Arminianism was then. I don’t know if it’s improved since then or not.

For example, there he wrote that:

Read Post →

SEA Member Nelson Banuchi Responds To Michael C. Patton On Dr. Olson

, , Comment Closed

Calvinist Michael Patton recently wrote an article in reaction to some of Roger Olson’s rhetoric against Calvinism. Olson has stated: “The God of Calvinism scares me; I’m not sure how to distinguish him from the devil.” Despite the fact the Olson specifically states else where that he believes that Calvinism is Christian, and despite the subjective caveats that Olson places even within that sentence, Patton and others have reacted very strongly what they believe is an Arminian claiming that Calvinists worship another god. Instead of submitting to my impulse to say, “welcome to our world”, I instead wish to highlight a comment that one of our members, Nelson Banuchi, posted on Patton’s blog:

“I can understand Patton’s concern, however, I think he is blowing it up a bit.

Read Post →