Please click on the attachment to view Laurence M. Vance, “A CRITIQUE OF THE POTTER’S FREEDOM BY JAMES WHITE” (published in the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society [Spring 2003]).
General
Why I’m Not A Calvinist
In this post I give my autobiographical and intellectual reasons for rejecting Calvinism
This is a post I have been thinking about and working on for quite some time. It is not meant to be an exhaustive critique of Calvinism or an argument for the purity of non-Calvinist theology. It is a response to the genuine inquiries of those who ask why I no longer hold to the Calvinistic “doctrines of grace” and “sovereignty of God.” Confessional intellectual autobiography and polemical discourse are the genres in which I write, and hopefully it will be apparent at which places I vacillate between the two. I have made a concerted effort to downplay the use of technical jargon, though some will be necessary. When words idiosyncratic to the issues emerge I will do my best to explain them, but I plead for grace in advance for any presumed vocabulary that may be foreign to the gentle reader.
What Is Reformation Arminianism?
INTRODUCTION
For those well acquainted with the Calvinist-Arminian debate, Reformation Arminianism (or Classic Arminianism) is a theological system which emphasizes universal atonement within a framework of Calvinistic total depravity and the penal satisfaction view of the atonement (explained in the paragraphs below).
For those less acquainted with such matters, Reformation Arminianism is first of all a way of understanding how salvation is accomplished within the main lines of Protestantism, which tends to emphasize God’s free offer of salvation to all of humanity rather than a deterministic/predestinarian approach which makes salvation an impossibility for the great majority of humanity.
Olson’s Ten Myths about Arminian Theology
by James M. Leonard
Arminian Baptist
Roger Olson has written a helpful volume entitled, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities. Basically, he sets the record straight on a number of issues where Calvinist polemic has falsely depicted Arminian theology. He does this in a consistent and systematic way, first by detailing the false and extreme allegations made by mainstream Calvinists, and then refuting them by examining the theological trajectory on the given topic beginning with Arminius and passing through his earliest followers, then Wesley, and then the 19th century Wesleyan theologians, and then concluding with contemporary Arminian theologians.*
Richard Watson, “Calvinism Defined”
This article was taken from http://www.imarc.cc/apolg/history7.html
CALVISM DEFINED
By
Richard Watson
——————————————————————————–
