JOHN WESLEY AND JONATHAN EDWARDS ON RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE:
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
Robert Doyle Smith
Introduction
The tone of the eighteenth-century debate between Arminians and Calvinists finds apt description in John Wesley’s observation that to say, “This man is an Arminian,” was, to some, much the same thing as saying, “This man is a mad dog.”1
JOHN WESLEY: PRACTICAL THEOLOGIAN? From the Wesleyan Theological Journal Randy L. Maddox FOR: Dr. J. Kenneth Grider 1 When one reads secondary treatments of Wesley one repeatedly comes across disclaimers of his being a “systematic”…
JOHN FLETCHER’S METHODOLOGY IN THE ANTINOMIAN CONTROVERSY OF 1770-76 From the Wesleyan Theological Journal ROBERT A. MATTKE, B.D., M.A. (Head of Religion Department, Miltonvale College) For over two centuries, the name of John Wesley has…
JOHN FLETCHER’S INFLUENCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF WESLEYAN THEOLOGY IN AMERICA
From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
By John A. Knight
Introduction
Not until recent years has the significance of John Fletcher’s theology been assessed by interpreters of the history of Christian doctrine. For almost two hundred years his work was eclipsed by the Wesleys and by some in the Calvinistic wing of the 18th century Evangelical Revival in England, except for occasional references by historians and biographers of his contemporaries.
David C. Shipley’s perceptive study, “Methodist Arminianism in the Theology of John Fletcher,” unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Yale, 1942, was a pioneer work in this country. Particularly in the last two decades others have begun to recognize the importance of Fletcher to the development of Wesleyan theology.1
CHARACTERISTICS OF WESLEY’S ARMINIANISM
From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
Luke L. Keefer, Jr.
In spite of J. I. Packer’s allegation that John Wesley was a Calvinist,1 albeit an inconsistent one, Packer himself dodges inconsistency by appealing to antinomy regarding the relationship between God’s sovereignty and humanity’s free will.…
Taken from http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Atonement.html
This article is not written by an Arminian, but from a “moderate Calvinist” perspective. We include it because it argues for unlimited atonement, a doctrine that is so obviously biblical that many who consider themselves Calvinists embrace it.
The Extent of the Atonement: Limited Atonement Versus Unlimited Atonement
by Ron Rhodes
Preface It is dangerous for God to give high truth to highly educated people. There is a danger that in the furtherance of that truth it becomes mixed with an alloy of human wisdom. It…
The following article was taken from http://revivaltheology.gharvest.com/1_cal_arm/fletcher/index.html REPLY TO THE PRINCIPAL ARGUMENTS BY WHICH THE CALVINISTS AND THE FATALISTS SUPPORT THE DOCTRINE OF ABSOLUTE NECESSITY: BEING REMARKS ON THE REV. MR. TOPLADY’S “SCHEME OF CHRISTIAN…
The following article was taken from http://revivaltheology.gharvest.com/1_cal_arm/fisk08.html Moral Agency and Accountability by The Rev. Wilbur Fisk, D. D. (This essay comes from Chapter 9 of Fisk’s book “Calvinistic Controversy: Embracing a Sermon on Predestination and…
The following commentary by Adam Clarke was taken from http://revivaltheology.gharvest.com/1_cal_arm/romans9.html Adam Clarke’s Commentary Paul’s Letter to the Romans Chapter 9 ——————————————————————————– Paul expresses his great sorrow for the unbelief and obstinacy of the Jews, 1-3.…
The following essay first appeared in Clark H. Pinnock (ed.), The Grace of God and the Will of Man (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1989) pp. 15-29. This version does not include the endnotes from the original.…
It has been contested that John 3.16 fits well within a Calvinistic framework. After all, as Calvinist R. C. Sproul has noted, whosoever will may come to Jesus. But, he continued, no one will ever…
From a casual reading through Ephesians, the student of Scripture can easily summize that whether or not one finds himself as one of the “elect” depends solely on his union with Christ Jesus. The phrases…
The following post was first published at http://www.indeathorlife.org/. I decided to re-post it as it relates to the previous post regarding God’s Sovereignty and Man’s Free Will. A few minor revisions have been made.
Arminians have long pointed to Matthew 23:37 to respond to the Calvinist doctrines of determinism, limited atonement, and irresistible grace.
Calvinism teaches that Christ died only for the elect (particular atonement), that he has decreed whatsoever shall come to pass in human history (determinism- no human free will as pertains to true contingencies), and that man has nothing to do with his own salvation (monergism), which necessitates their doctrine of irresistible grace.
My wife and I have a daily reading of Scripture where we read through large sections of the Bible at once, to get the bigger pictures in Scripture, and cover the full ground of Scripture…
“Because the members of the regular provincial Synods could not be long absent from their respective congregations, such galloping commissions as these, endowed with ample powers, were appointed to traverse every province in which Arminianism…
It was the “ardent wish of the Calvinists only to have the company of those choice spirits of other countries that would readily coalesce with themselves in devising measures to crush Arminianism. To obtain the…
Arminius, at times, equated election with predestination, as many Calvinists do as well. For these people, the matter of one’s eternal destination is wrapped up in the word, “predestination.” Today, however, theologians have properly distinguished…
While readying myself this morning I was browsing through a couple of blogs and a discussion board and came across an inquiry of sorts that seems to beg an entire issue rather than just a…
