The Arminian View

[BrianJK]

The end result I meant

So what about the meme I posted was misleading, ignorant or failing?

 

[DingDing]

Plenty of dicussion on elects on TOL. We read much of them.

What is TOL?

 

[DingDing]

And is it accurate to say that, from a Calvinist point of view at least, those not elected are both commanded to repent and prevented from repenting?

I think they would say, "commanded, but not enabled".

 

[BrianJK]

I think they would say, "commanded, but not enabled".

So the meme I posted was wholly accurate concerning their beliefs then?

 

[DingDing]

So the meme I posted was wholly accurate concerning their beliefs then?

Well, you would have to remember that calvinists make a big distinction between not being enabled and being prevented. In their theology, God prevents nothing, but must enable anything.

 

[BrianJK]

Well, you would have to remember that calvinists make a big distinction between not being enabled and being prevented. In their theology, God prevents nothing, but must enable anything.

TomAto, Tomato...

Interesting, considering so many Calivinist theologians of today and yesterday teach that God determines everything, even causing sin. If this is the case, God both causes everything that happens and prevents everything that doesn't.

In any case, the meme says simply that the sinners are commanded to repent and that they cannot repent. It does not distinguish between refusal to enable and prevention.

 

[DingDing]

TomAto, Tomato...

Interesting, considering so many Calivinist theologians of today and yesterday teach that God determines everything, even causing sin. If this is the case, God both causes everything that happens and prevents everything that doesn't.

In any case, the meme says simply that the sinners are commanded to repent and that they cannot repent. It does not distinguish between refusal to enable and prevention.

Remember, this is not my theology. I'm just a messenger.

 

[BrianJK]

Remember, this is not my theology. I'm just a messenger.

understood

 

[OzSpen]

Another straw man fallacy!

 

[OzSpen]

I'm aware of Arminian theology and it's influence on Wesleyan theology but more attention is paid to entire sanctification then anything else. The Nazarene churches are the only ones left who still hold to the doctrine as John Wesley taught it. It really seems like another form and fashion of Calvinism with a shifting of emphasis and some semantical three card monte going on.

Wesley's doctrine of entire sanctification, in my understanding, is one of the weakest points in his theology. I cannot find adequate biblical support for this doctrine, but that nuance is for another thread.

Oz

 

[mark kennedy]

Wesley's doctrine of entire sanctification, in my understanding, is one of the weakest points in his theology. I cannot find adequate biblical support for this doctrine, but that nuance is for another thread.

Oz

Its also the essence of Weslyan and Pentecostal doctrine. Weslyan theology strongly emphasis the gifts and fruit of the Spirit and are rife with lay ministry and revivalistic evangelism. Except for entire sanctification I would say there isn't a dimes worth of difference between Arminion theology and Calvanism.

 

[OzSpen]

Its also the essence of Weslyan and Pentecostal doctrine. Weslyan theology strongly emphasis the gifts and fruit of the Spirit and are rife with lay ministry and revivalistic evangelism. Except for entire sanctification I would say there isn't a dimes worth of difference between Arminion theology and Calvanism.

I was an Assemblies of God pastor and Bible teacher for 10 years. I think I know that Pentecostal denominations' theology. Wesleyan entire sanctification was not taught in that denomination.

You mean to say that you don't know the difference in soteriology (doctrine of salvation) between TULIP Calvinism and the Arminian Remonstrants' views. If that is the case, you don't know Classical Reformed Arminianism very well.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Its also the essence of Weslyan and Pentecostal doctrine. Weslyan theology strongly emphasis the gifts and fruit of the Spirit and are rife with lay ministry and revivalistic evangelism. Except for entire sanctification I would say there isn't a dimes worth of difference between Arminion theology and Calvanism.

If you can't see the difference between TULIP Calvinism views of salvation and the Arminian position, you don't know Classical Reformed Arminianism very well.

R C Sproul, a hot Calvinist, condemns Arminians by saying they are 'barely' saved. I've attempted to refute his views in, Sproul damns Arminianism by association with semi-Pelagianism

Please learn to spell Arminian and Calvinism.
Oz

 

[DingDing]

Its also the essence of Weslyan and Pentecostal doctrine. Weslyan theology strongly emphasis the gifts and fruit of the Spirit and are rife with lay ministry and revivalistic evangelism. Except for entire sanctification I would say there isn't a dimes worth of difference between Arminion theology and Calvanism.

Hello,

I attended a Nazarene church for a year, and was a member of the Free Methodist church for a number of years. (So I am or was kind of familiar with some of these things.) The "entire sanctification" thing came up in discussion in both churches. I voiced my disagreement in both churches, and in both churches I was told by both pastors that though this doctrine was still "on the books", that it was not really held to by the majority of the church. This is a "remnant", if you will, of "backwoods" theology, as one of them put it. As he said, once enough of the "old wood" in the denomination dies off, this teaching will probably be removed from the books. All that having been said, "entire sanctification" is not a major teaching in either church, in fact, for the most part, it is an embarrassment from days gone by.

But as far as there not being "a dimes worth of difference between Arminion theology and Calvanism", I would say there is at least one big difference - the "once-saved-always-saved" question.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Speaking of jokes, I remember old Christian songs rewritten for Calvinists. Things like:

Jesus loves some of the children
Some of the children of the world
John Calvin says it's true
Christ may not have died for you
Jesus loves some of the children of the world

That is a good one. Lol

 

[ToBeLoved]

Matt 23:37 (ESV) adds a parallel dimension where Jesus addresses the people of Jerusalem: 'O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!'

He wanted to gather these people but they, in their freedom, had the God-given ability to say, 'No'. Jesus wanted to gather these children but 'you would not'.

Oz

That's a good point.

 

[tulipbee]

So what about the meme I posted was misleading, ignorant or failing?

What did I say about your meme?

 

[tulipbee]

What is TOL?

I'm using tapatalk app and this app merges all my forums together. They all look alike. I thought I was responding to a TOL forum. Sorry

 

[BrianJK]

Both are very misleading. Calvinists do repent and can. You have no clue what inspired or inspiration means or you wouldn't be saying that. Epic failure, AGAIN ! This many agains gets old.

What did I say about your meme?

 

[watchman 2]

I'm using tapatalk app and this app merges all my forums together. They all look alike. I thought I was responding to a TOL forum. Sorry

What is TOL?

Theology online. Unless your able to match name calling with name calling, and can easily misrepresent people , i would stay clear of TOL. I was there for a couple of months, i was called every name in the book, and it went completely unpunished. So when they can't answer your understanding with a better one, they resort to viscous name calling and misrepresentations. I couldn't do that so i left.

I appreciate the standard here in this forum.