Arminianism

Arminius on Romans 7:14

, , Comment Closed

Arminius on Romans 7:14

provided by SEA member, Roy Ingle

Here are the thoughts of Arminius on Romans 7:14. As I noted before, Adam Clarke felt that the whole of the passage is speaking of an unregenerate man. Arminius agreed. It was here, in his preaching through Romans, that Arminius ignited the controversy with the theologians of his day when he begin to teach that the man of Romans 7 was unregenerate. Calvin had taught that Romans 7 represented the struggle of all Christians including Paul the Apostle.

And now Arminius on Romans 7:14:

Read Post →

Quick Overview of Lapsarianism

, , Comment Closed

Quick Overview of Lapsarianism

written by SEA member Roy Ingle

In Calvinism, there are three major views regarding the divine viewpoint of the atonement of Christ and the purpose of the atonement. They describe this viewpoint by ordering a series of decrees that God supposedly made at the beginning of creation. I will present all three views below.

Read Post →

Seedbed’s Theological Perspective and Worldview

, , Comment Closed

This is a reprint of a post written by Seedbed.com’s staff. Seedbed is a website of Asbury Seminary whose mission is similar to our own: providing on-line theological resources for the growing of the church. Finding this post encouaraging, we wished to share it with you in support of Seedbed’s mission:

God desires everyone to live forever in his Kingdom. The possibility is open to anyone, anywhere at any time.

Read Post →

An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 5: Taking The Mystery Out of Mr. Patton’s Strange Arguments

, , Comment Closed

Part 5: Taking the Mystery Out of Mr. Patton’s Strange Arguments

Patton: These two issues, human freedom and sovereign election, are not contradictory when put together, but they are a mystery.

This is the same claim Mr. Patton made in his first post called “Why Calvinism is the Least Rational Option.” We have already begun to highlight the problems with this claim.

Read Post →

An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 3: False Assumptions and Question Begging

, , No Comment

Part 3: False Assumptions and Question Begging

Patton: Therefore, [according to Arminianism] God’s predestination of people is “fair” and makes sense. After all, there are too many questions left unanswered when one says that God chooses who will be saved and who will not. Why did he choose some and not others? Did God make people to go to hell? Is God fair? “Why does he still find fault, for who resists his will?”

The Arminian chooses this position because, for them, it is the only way to reconcile human freedom and God’s election.

Here is where Mr. Patton really missteps.

Read Post →

An Arminian Response to C. Michael Patton’s “The Irrationality of Calvinism” Part 2: Theological Imprecision and Misrepresentations

, , No Comment

Part 2: Theological Imprecision and Misrepresentations

Patton: However, I think we need take a step back and see that while the shoe fits when it comes to some particular issues in Calvinism these accusations are far from forming the bedrock of the primary issues in Calvinism. You see, one of the many reasons I am a Calvinist has to do with the tension that is allowed within the Calvinistic system that is not allowed in other systems.

The central core of Calvinism primarily centers on one doctrine: predestination. While the sovereignty of God has its place, it does not ultimately determine where one lands.

This is highly debatable among Calvinists. This may be Mr. Patton’s opinion, but I think that he is probably in the minority.

Read Post →

Another Calvinist Misrepresentation of Arminianism

, , Comment Closed

Another Calvinist Misrepresentation of Arminianism written by Roger E Olson, PhD As anyone knows who comes here regularly, I am a self-appointed defender of the truth about classical Arminianism. That often brings me into conflict…

Read Post →