Recent Posts

Who was Episcopius?

, , No Comment

Simon Bisscop (better known by his Latinized last name, Episcopius) was James Arminius’ student and close friend. He attended the University of Leiden when the hot debates between Arminius and Gomarus were going on. He…

Read Post →

The Nature of Saving Faith

, , No Comment

The subject of this post is to define faith from an Arminian perspective and demonstrate that the Calvinist charge that faith within the Arminian system would promote boasting, is inaccurate. Saving faith, when Biblically understood,…

Read Post →

Challies: Defending Arminians Unfair to Their Accusers

, , No Comment

The content of this post was authored by J.C. Thibodaux and is posted on his behalf.

Recently, Tim Challies did a review of Roger E. Olson’s Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities,

He cites a paragraph from the book:

“When conservative theologians declare that synergism is a heresy, they are usually referring to these two Pelagian forms of synergism. Classical Arminians agree. This is a major theme of this book. Contrary to confused critics, classical Arminianism is neither Pelagian nor semi-Pelagian! But it is synergistic. Arminianism is evangelical synergism as opposed to heretical, humanistic synergism.”

Read Post →

Why I’m Not A Calvinist

, , No Comment

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.

Read Post →

Weekend Devotionals

, , No Comment

Each weekend SEA will publish a devotional, typically on Saturday but sometimes on Sunday. The purpose of the devotional is to show how an Arminian understanding of the text enriches one not just theologically, but practically as well. The first series of devotionals will be coming from 1 John, either from the ESV or, more often, the author’s own translation.

Read Post →

Do you really need a user account? And joining SEA

, , Comment Closed

This is just a note to clear up something that could be confusing about the site at the moment:

Only SEA members who will be contributing to the content of this site need to create an account. And only members of SEA are allowed to contribute to the site. If you are interested in joining SEA, please see our “About Us” page and our statement of faith. Then, if you would like to join, please contact us with at least your first and last names and request to join the society. You may contact us through our contact page or at societyofevangelicalarminians @ gmail dot com.

On another note, regular blog posts should begin sometime this week.

Praise be to God!

Read Post →

What Is Reformation Arminianism?

, , No Comment

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.

Read Post →

Churches: Beware of Calvinism on the Sly

, , No Comment

Calvinist churches are but a small minority; most evangelical churches are Arminian or semi-Arminian. However, the Calvinist resurgence is producing full Five Point Calvinist pastors looking for work. The resurgence is also prompting Arminian and semi-Arminian pastors to embrace Calvinism. This dynamic is the source of considerable tension in the life of the local church, not to mention in the heart of such pastors as they hold to a view which is often at odds with their churches.

Of course, this is not a problem for those Calvinistic pastors who minister within the confines denominations which are pre-committed to Calvinism. However, this is a huge problem for Calvinistic pastors who minister in theologically mixed denominations. Such denominations would include Southern Baptist Convention, General Baptist Conference, Evangelical Free Church, American Baptist Churches and others, not to mention the many independent churches.

Read Post →

Olson’s Ten Myths about Arminian Theology

, , No Comment

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.*

Read Post →

Why Divine Foreknowledge Does Not Determine the Future

, , No Comment

Robert E. Picirilli, in his excellent work Grace, Faith, and Free Will, broaches the subject of Divine Foreknowledge of future events.

He’s very clear on the subject, and convincing. He draws from Arminius himself and from Richard Watson, although he admits that the 19th century theologian’s style is belabored. I’m not sure what is original either to Dr. Picirilli or to his sources.

In particular, Dr. Picirilli cites the simple illustration that we ourselves know with certainty specific events which occurred yesterday, but that none of us would claim that our present knowledge of yesterday’s events caused those things to happen or that such knowledge limited our choices when we were faced with them. In the same way, God’s knowledge of the future doesn’t cause events to happen or limit the human’s freedom to choose to do one thing or another.

Read Post →