• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Non-Debate thread on Reformation History

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Origins of Calvinism and Arminianism may be discussed -- but no debating about "which is right".

Discuss history concerning Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Melancthon, Beza, Arminius, General vs Particular Baptists and any related stuff.

Anyone who DEBATES -- may their house become an dunghill -- and a shaft as thick as a weaver's beam be driven through their entrails.
 

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
22,786
19,790
Flyoverland
✟1,365,927.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Origins of Calvinism and Arminianism may be discussed -- but no debating about "which is right".

Discuss history concerning Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Melancthon, Beza, Arminius, General vs Particular Baptists and any related stuff.

Anyone who DEBATES -- may their house become an dunghill -- and a shaft as thick as a weaver's beam be driven through their entrails.
I am outside of the whole Calvinism vs Arminianism controversy, so I will not be debating it at all. But I would be interested in reading a historical explanation of how it developed. The professor who taught my Reformation History class was too enamored of Luther and everything else got packed into the last three weeks of the class. Learned a lot of Luther but not too much else. Arminius was basically skipped.
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
20-gallon Baptists and 40-gallon Baptists...

At one time in American history, Baptist churches (who normally paid pastors in chickens, produce, etc.) set MONTHLY LIMITS on how much WHISKY per month could be part of the pastor's salary.

Some were 20-gallon Baptists -- some were 40-gallon Baptists.

There is a rock group today named the 40-gallon Baptists.
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Dearest Chevyontheriver and whosoever else --

As a starting point in the historical development of Calvinism vs Arminianism, I would turn the clock back a thousand years from that controversy to the controversy between Pelagius and Augustine, for their controversy involves some similar ideas as Calvinism vs Arminianism.

Pelagius was a monk who was overboard on WORKS for salvation; Augustine was one of the Top Dogs in the ancient church and usually his ideas won the day, but not in this matter. Augustine had the theory of "Double Predestination" - that God decided from eternity past those who would be saved and those who would be damned, with no consideration whatsoever for a person's actions or beliefs. Pelagius' views were condemned, but Augustine's theories didn't 'WIN' either, and the church adopted what is sometimes called a "semi-Pelagian" view of salvation, though that term can be misleading.

This is all 4th-5th century stuff. As the Reformation began in early 1500's -- it centered around Luther in Germany -- but there were other "Reformers" who jumped on the bandwagon at the same time. Zwingli and John Calvin were operating in parts of Switzerland -- they differed on things, Zwingli was militant, I think he died on a battlefield, sword in hand.

Calvin in a way revised the issue of Augustine's Double Predestination; and heavily emphasized God's Sovereignty.

A contemporary of Calvin's who greatly outlived him was Beza. Jacob Arminius was a Calvinist in Holland, professor at University of Leyden, at one time he was tasked by Beza's bunch to refute some writings of a guy named Koornherdt who advocated free will. In studying/preparing to dispute these ideas, Arminius found himself agreeing with them.

Arminius said that rather than this Double Predestination with no regard for what a person thought; that Predestination was by God's foreknowledge of which people would believe and persist in believing.

The Beza bunch was none too happy that Arminius 'switched sides' and was proclaiming Free Will. But Arminius passed away before a Synod could be held about the matter. That Synod was called the Synod of Dort -- Arminius' followers were known as Remonstrants and led by one Episcopius. They lost, and were driven out of Holland.

England's situation, of course, was rather unique -- instead of a 'Reformer' leading them on theological grounds -- we have King Henry the Eighth upset cuz Pope wouldn't give him another annullment, so Henry declared his own church, Church of England, Anglican - from which our Episcopalians come from.

Eventually, century or so after Arminius, John Wesley started Methodism as a movement within the Anglican Church - Wesley revived the ideas of Arminius - at one time Wesley had a publication called The Arminian Magazine.

This is all quick and dirty - I couldn't sleep - it seemed someone was prowling around outside my window, I went out there but just a neighbor walking back and forth talking on his cellphone, but I gave up on laying back down and typed this out.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Sam91
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Armenians are from Armenia, an ethnic group.
Arminians are those who hold to the THEOLOGY of Arminius.

My friend Gary was an Armenian Arminian.

The Armenian Church, I think, is one of the "non-Chalcedonian" churches, would that be Oriental Orthodox rather than Eastern Orthodox, Fender? I do not understand the "non-Chalcedonian" churches
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I guess I give up on finding any historical references to 20-gallon and 40-gallon Baptists.

Doing a search only comes up with the ROCK BAND - the 40-gallon Baptists.

But I first heard of the real Baptists in a course on Baptist History at Baylor University.

There are, of course, no staggering theological implications of Baptist pastors having amounts of whisky in their 'salaries' being limited to 20 or 40 gallons per month -- but it is a piece of history.
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
A Baptist preacher with 40 gallons of whisky per month might produce some pretty FIERY SERMONS!!

As far as the Reformation itself, its various venues of Germany, England and Switzerland had proponents who did not always see eye to eye on Free Will, and the Lord's Supper (real presence or symbolic).

In addition, there were those of the Radical Reformation -- who thought Luther, Zwingli and Calvin DID NOT GO FAR ENOUGH!

So you had Anabaptists, Lollards, Cathars and other radical traditions that were not satisfied with the limits of main Reformation...

Luther wrote early on on BONDAGE OF THE WILL, not affirming a free will, I think he initially pled for a REAL PRESENCE in eucharist; I dunno if he changed his mind slightly over time on both these subjects.

You also had a CounterReformation by RCC - some say both Futurism and Preterism in eschatology came from CounterReformation authors, I think that is hard to support for Futurism, for Historic Premillennialism (Chiliasm) was present in first few centuries of the Church, though it was not "Pre-TRIB".

I get older by the day and memory gets worse by the day, so anybody feel free to disagree with my history
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,117
34,056
Texas
✟199,236.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Pelagius was a monk who was overboard on WORKS for salvation; Augustine was one of the Top Dogs in the ancient church and usually his ideas won the day, but not in this matter. Augustine had the theory of "Double Predestination" - that God decided from eternity past those who would be saved and those who would be damned, with no consideration whatsoever for a person's actions or beliefs. Pelagius' views were condemned, but Augustine's theories didn't 'WIN' either, and the church adopted what is sometimes called a "semi-Pelagian" view of salvation, though that term can be misleading.
The full Pelagian beliefs were condemned at Council of Carthage in 418 A.D. These condemnations were summarily ratified at the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431).

The Council of Ephesus: Excursus on Pelagianism

https://www.theopedia.com/pelagianism

Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Council of Orange 529 called by Pope Felix IV. The Council approved the Augustinian doctrine of sin and grace over against what would be called Semi-Pelagianism, but without Augustine's absolute predestination. The Canons of the Council of Orange constitute the judgement of the Council.

https://www.theopedia.com/Council_of_Orange

Canons of Orange:
Historic Church Documents at Reformed.org

So they did not concur with Augustine's double predestination but did confirm his views of Faith and Free Will.

Augustine's Grace and Free Will:

CHURCH FATHERS: On Grace and Free Will (St. Augustine)


Luther and other Reformers pointed not only to Augustine but the Council of Orange.

Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Between Orange and Trent
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
“Semi-Pelagianism condemned at Orange in 529 AD, but reaffirmed at Trent” (1545-1563) (Basically, the essence of statements by Bavinck, Berkouwer, and Sproul; see below)

?

re-affirmed at Trent??

that was from your last link, redleghunter

I started reading Augustine's CONFESSIONS - find it sort of bizarre
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,117
34,056
Texas
✟199,236.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,117
34,056
Texas
✟199,236.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
re-affirmed at Trent??
I think the take away is Trent is in tension with Orange. The opinion of the site owner used "semi Pelagianism was reaffirmed at Trent." That's the tension.

It's why the Reformers put a lot of freight behind Augustine and Orange.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,117
34,056
Texas
✟199,236.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Dearest Chevyontheriver and whosoever else --

As a starting point in the historical development of Calvinism vs Arminianism, I would turn the clock back a thousand years from that controversy to the controversy between Pelagius and Augustine, for their controversy involves some similar ideas as Calvinism vs Arminianism.

Pelagius was a monk who was overboard on WORKS for salvation; Augustine was one of the Top Dogs in the ancient church and usually his ideas won the day, but not in this matter. Augustine had the theory of "Double Predestination" - that God decided from eternity past those who would be saved and those who would be damned, with no consideration whatsoever for a person's actions or beliefs. Pelagius' views were condemned, but Augustine's theories didn't 'WIN' either, and the church adopted what is sometimes called a "semi-Pelagian" view of salvation, though that term can be misleading.

This is all 4th-5th century stuff. As the Reformation began in early 1500's -- it centered around Luther in Germany -- but there were other "Reformers" who jumped on the bandwagon at the same time. Zwingli and John Calvin were operating in parts of Switzerland -- they differed on things, Zwingli was militant, I think he died on a battlefield, sword in hand.

Calvin in a way revised the issue of Augustine's Double Predestination; and heavily emphasized God's Sovereignty.

A contemporary of Calvin's who greatly outlived him was Beza. Jacob Arminius was a Calvinist in Holland, professor at University of Leyden, at one time he was tasked by Beza's bunch to refute some writings of a guy named Koornherdt who advocated free will. In studying/preparing to dispute these ideas, Arminius found himself agreeing with them.

Arminius said that rather than this Double Predestination with no regard for what a person thought; that Predestination was by God's foreknowledge of which people would believe and persist in believing.

The Beza bunch was none too happy that Arminius 'switched sides' and was proclaiming Free Will. But Arminius passed away before a Synod could be held about the matter. That Synod was called the Synod of Dort -- Arminius' followers were known as Remonstrants and led by one Episcopius. They lost, and were driven out of Holland.

England's situation, of course, was rather unique -- instead of a 'Reformer' leading them on theological grounds -- we have King Henry the Eighth upset cuz Pope wouldn't give him another annullment, so Henry declared his own church, Church of England, Anglican - from which our Episcopalians come from.

Eventually, century or so after Arminius, John Wesley started Methodism as a movement within the Anglican Church - Wesley revived the ideas of Arminius - at one time Wesley had a publication called The Arminian Magazine.

This is all quick and dirty - I couldn't sleep - it seemed someone was prowling around outside my window, I went out there but just a neighbor walking back and forth talking on his cellphone, but I gave up on laying back down and typed this out.
I like your starting point. I think it is important to acknowledge the early church debated the very same issues we do today. It was not a 16th century invention but two traditions from antiquity at tension coming to a head at the time of the Reformation.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Anto9us
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,105
2,041
Texas
✟95,775.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
As far as COUNCILS -- it is obvious that some have contradicted others.

It was a main point for Luther that both COUNCILS as well as POPES had contradicted each other.

I am wary of COUNCILS -- especially those that came after the Great Schism -- when there was no longer a unified church.

But even in the very first council in Acts 15 - I am wary of CONDITIONS imposed on Gentiles like "no eating meat sacrificed to idols".

Paul later wrote "eat whatever is sold in the Shambles" - the only proviso was "don't do it right in the face of another who thinks it's wrong" or words to that effect.

Councils up through Chalcedon that dealt with the nature, person, deity and pre-existence of Christ seem important.

Florence and Trent are surely just "Roman Catholic Councils", cannot even claim to speak for Protestants or Orthodox.

Calvinists are going to accuse me of Pelagianism regardless of what any Councils say -- they obviously don't know their own butts from hot rocks if they do -- knowing nothing of history, Arminianism, Pelagians or Semi-Pelagians.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,491
10,859
New Jersey
✟1,342,894.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
One problem with the debate context is that it tends to emphasize differences. Arminius was an admirer of Calvin’s theology, who considered himself Reformed. He agreed, contra Pelagius, that we are hopeless without grace. However he thought God graciously enables everyone's will, but it’s possible to reject this.

I looked at Pelagius a couple of years ago. He certainly thought the will is free, but in a different sense from Arminius. He didn’t believe, as Arminius did, that our will is bound until God graciously regenerates us. He saw Christianity as a moral struggle.
 
Upvote 0