A sister in the LORD spurred these thoughts this afternoon. Our Calvinist friends are quick to tout their embrace of the five SOLAs of the Reformation. I don’t blame them at all, for we Arminians…
Calvinism
Jerry Walls, “WHAT IS WRONG WITH CALVINISM?”
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.
Francis Hodgson, The Calvinistic Doctrine of Predestination Examined and Refuted
The expositional sermons of a Methodist preacher on the topic of predestination published in 1855 at the request of his friends. (link)
Arminians are Christians, Barely
In the introduction to his book, Willing to Believe: The Controversy over Free Will, R. C. Sproul, Sr., when asked if he thinks Arminians are Christians, answers, “‘Yes, barely.’ They are Christians by what we call a felicitous inconsistency.”1 He agrees with J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston, who insist that Arminians, because they reject the (unproven and eminently philosophical) theory that regeneration must precede faith, they “thereby deny man’s utter helplessness in sin, and affirm that a form of semi-Pelagianism is true after all.”2 This is the reason, so the authors are convinced, that “Reformed theology condemned Arminianism as being in principal a return to Rome (because in effect it turned faith into a meritorious work) and a betrayal of the Reformation (because it denied the sovereignty of God in saving sinners . . .).3
The Problem with Calvinism is . . .
by Roger E. Olson
People often ask me what is my single most serious problem with Calvinism. Why am I not a Calvinist? First, I like to point out that nobody is obligated to be one. Some evangelicals are under the mistaken impression that Calvinism is the norm for all evangelicalism and that if you’re not a Calvinist you’re somehow defectively evangelical. It is wrongly believed to be the default theology of authentic evangelicalism.
I grew up in the thick of evangelicalism — spiritually nurtured by mentors and peers in Youth for Christ where I rubbed shoulders with evangelicals of many different denominations. We used to debate Calvinism versus Arminianism all the time and we generally agreed to disagree and nevertheless worship and witness together. I don’t remember anyone then telling me I had to be a Calvinist to be a faithful Christian or an evangelical.
The Enemy of my Enemy
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…
Arminius’ Impact on Calvinism
[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…
James Nichols, *Calvinism and Arminianism Compared in Their Principles and Tendency*
James Nichols did a great amout of work getting Arminian books published, but he also wrote a bit himself. Here’s his work Calvinism and Arminianism Compared in Their Principles and Tendency. (link)
Answers to Common Calvinist Questions
Some answers to common Calvinist questions: Q: Why does one person believe in Jesus and not another? Q: Man is dead. How can a dead person believe or do anything? Q: If man is dead…
Arminian Minute: Eye of the Tiger & Romans 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21g_zKK_FTk
Arminius’ Nine Questions For the Synod of Dort
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).
Arminian Minute: Is Unconditional Election Good News for the Despairing Soul?
Does Calvinism (with its upholding of unconditional election) really have good news for the despairing sinner? At most, a Calvinist can tell a disturbed soul that they could be among God’s elect. But, is such…
Arminius vs. Calvin on Assurance of Salvation and Perseverance
Some have argued that Arminianism offers little assurance that one will finally be saved due to the notion, which many Arminians hold, that a believer can lose his or her salvation. What may astound you…
Arminius vs. Calvin on Total Depravity
Total Depravity teaches that every single human being has been affected by the fall. Every part of a person has been affected; hence, total depravity. This has never meant that people are as bad as…
Arminius vs. Calvin on Unconditional Election
That the doctrine of election (or, as some would have it, predestination) is taught in Scripture is rarely denied. There are those who teach that election or predestination is only related to salvation via means…
Arminius vs. Calvin on Limited Atonement
Theologians are divided as to whether Calvin held to an Unlimited or Limited view of the Atonement. And while most Christians, whether Arminian, non-Calvinist, Amyraldian, or four-point compatibilist Calvinist, would agree that Christ’s atoning sacrifice…
Arminius vs. Calvin on Irresistible Grace
Irresistible Grace, also known as Effectual Calling, is, according to Calvinist Wayne Grudem, “an act of God the Father, speaking through the human proclamation of the gospel, in which he summons people to himself in…
John Piper on the Relationship between God’s Sovereignty and Tragedy
John Piper was asked by Cathy Grossman, from USA Today, what he would tell the children who lost their parents on 9/11. She understood Piper to be suggesting that a victim should concentrate on the…
James White says He could have Chosen Otherwise
I had previously listened to James White’s refutation of Molinism on the dividing line, but I just had a chance to listen to the full presentation on youtube. For the most part, it’s the same…
Bavinck on supra/infra-lapsarian predestination
I recently read Herman Bavinck on supralapsarian and infralapsarian predestination (link). Bavinck’s approach is intriguing. He argues that both the supralapsarian and infralapsarian systems have their strengths and weaknesses, so he cherry-picks the strengths and…
Recent Posts
Roy Ingle, “Calvinism and the Atonement”
Why Does God Deny the Opportunity of Choice for or Against Him to Young Children Who Die and the Mentally Impaired?
Mark K. Olson, “Wesley’s ‘Warmed Heart’ at Aldersgate – What Really Happened?”
Adam Roe, “The Crucial Thread of Prevenient Grace: A Wesleyan Perspective on Divine Drawing”
