Since I am being pursued, I found this:
"
Question from Visitor:
John, Are Arminian doctrines and Synergist doctrines the same? If not, where do they differ?
All Arminians are synergists, but not all synergists are Arminian. Those who embrace synergism also include Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Methodists, Nazarenes, Molinists, Free Will Baptists, Libertarian Free Will Theists and some Dispensationalist Evangelicals.
We often use the term "synergist" because it is more accurate to describe a wider group. Synergism is related to the
doctrine of regeneration or the
new birth as described in John chapter 3. A Monergist is one who believes that God the Holy Spirit alone does the work of regeneration which opens blind eyes, unplugs deaf ears and turns the heart of stone to a heart of flesh. The synergist. on the other hand, believes that faith is produced by our UNREGENERATED human nature...that a natural man can exercise faith apart from the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (a position that all of the groups listed above share in common). The belief we are promoting here, that we believe is biblical, is that of monergism, that no one can say 'Jesus is Lord' apart from the Holy Spirit' ... that All that the Father gives to Christ will come to Him (John 6:37) and "no one comes to Christ unless the father grants it (John 6:63-65) ... So the Scripture in these passages is plainly saying,
No one can believe the gospel unless God grants it and ALL to whom it is granted will believe -- making God's grace is both invincible and indelible. 2 Tim 2:25 also says it is God who grants repentance. It is not something that the natural man has the desire to do, for John 3:19 says the natural man "loves darkness and hates the light and will not come into the light." But those who come into the light show that it is a work wrought by God. We love God only because he first loved us. It is Paul who plants and Apollos who waters but God causes the growth. When we preach the gospel to people we can preach till we are blue in the face and no one will respond UNTIL Christ sets them free from their bondage to the corruption of nature. Left to themselves men will always reject Christ. It takes a special work of supernatural grace to remove the hostility of man. So we cast forth the seed of the Gospel in preaching but the Holy Spirit germinates the seed, so to speak, if that man would respond.
To further answer your question, it is not appropriate, imho, to label a Roman Catholic an Arminian. Why? Simply because he is not an Arminian and would never own that name. Nor would an Arminian appreciate being called Roman Catholic even though they may share some aspects of their doctrine of salvation in common. Arminians have very specific beliefs called the "Five Points of the Remonstrance" (a protest against Calvinism). This practice of calling anyone we disagree with an "Arminian" is not unlike if there were an Arminian who called
all Calvinists "hypercalvinists". We would be quick to correct him and show the stark differences. If I were to call a Roman Catholic an Arminian it likewise would be inaccurate and both parties would be offended for not attempting to define their position accurately. They may hold synergism in common (a cooperation of man and God in regeneration) but they do not hold many other beliefs in common so the label becomes meaningless when we apply the term Arminian to anyone who does not agree with the five points of Calvinism. Some Calvinists have a tendency to do this but, I believe it is not helpful to any discussion.
If the average evangelical coming out of Dallas Seminary does not believe in monergistic regeneration I do not automatically call him an Arminian, because he would vehemently disagree with most Arminian doctrine. In fact he would be much closer to a Calvinist than an Arminian theologically since he believes in unconditional election and total depravity. He may be inconsistent in his theology and confused, but not Arminian. When we debate with other people it is better, imho,
to describe other people in a way that they can agree with. If you paint them in colors they disagree with then we are creating a straw man. So over the years as I debate and discuss I find being precise is much more likely to persuade than to give a sweep of the hands and just labeling everyone an Arminian. Synergism more accurately describes the main difference we have with many other groups and is
helpful to creating the desire on both sides for further discussion."
Source
But in doing so, I also admit that nearly 100% of all material on Synergism says they agree somewhat with Arminian Theology.
What, if any, is in disagreement with synergism:
"
1. That God, from all eternity, hath decreed to elect to everlasting life, all those who, through His grace, believe in Jesus Christ, and in the same belief, and obedience of faith, persevere to the end. But the unconverted and unbelieving He had resolved to reject to everlasting damnation.
2. That in consequence of this decree, Christ the Saviour of the world, died for all and every man, so that by His death, He hath obtained reconciliation and pardon of sins for all men, nevertheless, in such a manner that none but the faithful really and effectually enjoy the benefits thereof.
3. That man could not [i.e., does not possess the capability to] obtain saving faith of himself, or by the strength of his own free will, but stood in need of God’s grace, through Christ, to be made the subject of its power.
4. Therefore this grace is the cause of the beginning, the progress, and the completion of man’s salvation, in so much that no one could believe, or persevere in faith, without this operating grace, and consequently, that all good works must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. Nevertheless, the manner of the operation of this grace was not irresistible.
5. That true believers had sufficient strength, through divine grace, to resist and overcome Satan, sin, the world, and their own lusts, but whether they might not, through their negligence, apostatize and lose the power of holy saving truth, the testimony of a well-directed conscience, and forfeit that grace, must first be more fully inquired into, under the guidance of the holy scriptures, before they could, with confidence and unhesitating minds, assert and teach it."
5 Points of The Remonstrants, 1610
God Bless
Till all are one.
