Whitefield versus Wesley

www.albatrus.com ^ | Iain Murray

[Alex Murphy]

Iain Murray on Whitefield and Wesley

[excerpted, beginning at fourth paragraph]

When Whitefield returned to England at the end of 1738, after his first visit to America, he found that the awakening in London had been furthered by the conversion and subsequent ministry of the Wesleys. Immediately they began to work together. Under Whitefield's preaching the revival spread to Bristol and the West country in February and March 1739, and when he left that area at the beginning of April 1739, John Wesley was given the oversight of the work.

But before three months had elapsed it began to be evident that there had not been the same doctrinal development in the Wesleys on all points mentioned above. The fact is that while John Wesley had at his conversion in May 1738 accepted evangelical views on sin, faith, and the re-birth, he had at the same time retained his pre-conversion opinions on the doctrines of predestination and the extent of the atonement.

[From the final footnote to the article]

On leaving England in 1739 Whitefield was the leader of the awakening; when he returned in 1741 it was to find himself supplanted and Wesley organizing the movement around himself. He had cause to write at a later date: "I have been supplanted, despised, censured, maligned, judged by and separated from my nearest, dearest friends." (Works of George Whitefield, edited by Gillies, vol. 2, p. 466.) But Whitefield was too great to contend for personal prominence. The legend of "England before and after Wesley " began to originate from this time.

[aruanan]

If the Calvinist position of election is true, preaching the Gospel is unnecessary, but the be must be some reason we a commanded to preach the Gospel to the world that has a real pupose. Whitefield's contention that it enables the elect to understand that he is part of that 'happy number' makes no logical sense.

Of course it makes no logical sense. Will, especially divine will, is beyond logic.

[Alex Murphy]

Os Guiness wrote a great book a few years back...

And before that, he wrote two excellent books titled The Dust of Death and In Two Minds. Os is the son-in-law of Francis Schaeffer IIRC. Glad to hear someone else reads Os!

[stop_killing_unborn_babies]

Another 2 great books.

I discovered Os about 6 years ago and love his work and sharp wit.

He speaks truth with a clarity similar to Shaeffer too.

[stop_killing_unborn_babies]

Another 2 great books.

I discovered Os about 6 years ago and love his work and sharp wit.

He speaks truth with a clarity similar to Shaeffer too.

[P-Marlowe]

One of the charachteristics of the Arminian postmodernist is the rejection of intellectualism in favor of hyper-emotionalism

Which Arminians are you referring to? Which Arminians that post here "reject intellectualism in favor of hyper-emotionalism"? You want to name names? Do I fall into that category? Anyone else here that you can think of?

Quite frankly I find your hyper-stereotyping of Arminians as rejectors of intellectualism to be intellectually bankrupt. Not all Calvinists are intellectual Giants. Nor are all Arminians emotional bobbleheads.

Now would you care to name the posters that you consider to be Arminian postmodernists and show me some evidence that they reject intellectualism in favor of hyper-emotionalism?

And if you can refer to Arminians as hyper-emotionalists, would you mind if we refer to some of you as hyper-Calvinists? Would that upset you?

[stop_killing_unborn_babies]

If the shoe fits, wear it.

Please, refrain from throwing a fit.

[ShadowAce]

God does not "change His mind" ...

Jonah 3:10
Exodus 32:14

These are two examples. It doesn't happen very often, but it has happened.

[Alex Murphy]

Now would you care to name the posters that you consider to be Arminian postmodernists and show me some evidence that they reject intellectualism in favor of hyper-emotionalism?

Now where would the fun be in that? Rev made a near-identical denoument that some of the GRPL Calvinists were "hyper Calvinists" a few threads back, but you never challenged him to back up his statement with facts or names. Rev expanded on his statement when challenged, but never documented it. They were, in his concluding remarks, "my opinion based on my experiences here- Im challenging no one - nor accusing anyone - It my simply impression". I suggest you grant SKIB the same grace you grant Rev911.

In other words, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[P-Marlowe]

If the shoe fits, wear it.

Here, you try these on. They should fit just fine.

Huaraches Sandals
(recycled tire tread soles)
Item #: JU1
Sizes: women's 4 - 11, men's 7 - 13.
Colors: natural, black.
Fabric: 100% hemp
Price: $38.00

[stop_killing_unborn_babies]

those are perfect for you.

[xzins]

Nice shoes, dude.

This article does no justice to the friendship that Whitefield and the Wesleys had for one another. I posted an article about that roughly 2 months ago and it got no play.

It wasn't combative enough, I guess.

[stop_killing_unborn_babies]

Now where would the fun be in that? Rev made a near-identical denoument that some of the GRPL Calvinists were "hyper Calvinists" a few threads back, but you never challenged him to back up his statement with facts or names.

That won't happen. I've come to understand the double standards employed by the Arminians here.

I especially detest the disingenuous misrepresentations made by them, followed by their demands for responses to their queries when they are not reciprocal.

I'll not play their childish games.

[Revelation 911]

Rev made a near-identical denoument that some of the GRPL Calvinists were "hyper Calvinists" a few threads back, but you never challenged him to back up his statement with facts or names. Rev expanded on his statement when challenged, but never documented it. They were, in his concluding remarks, "my opinion based on my experiences here- Im challenging no one - nor accusing anyone - It my simply impression". I suggest you grant SKIB the same grace you grant Rev911.

damn it - this is thread jumping ad nauseum -

and as expected, this whitefield wesley thread - has devolved into a cal / arm ..he said / she said thread yet again

Im sick of it and Im sick of your nonsense and will outright ask for your suspension

......and I dont give a hoot if it lands me in the same hot house because you are plainly argumentative and divisive

[P-Marlowe]

It wasn't combative enough, I guess.

You're just too darned hyper-emotional x.

[xzins]

I was out jumping pews before I came in this evening. Shouted a little, slew a few giants, and sang to the Lord, "Hallelujah!"

[Frumanchu]

Apparently providing evidence of hypocrisy is restricted to the current thread only.

Is that why you never documented your previous claims...because the rules forbidding "thread jumping" did not allow you to cite actual evidence?

Or perhaps this provides us with precisely the evidence requested, and right here in this thread lest threads be jumped...that instead of providing factual, intellectual arguments the retort is fiery indignation and insistence that being argumentative in a debate forum is somehow wrong and deserving of a swift suspension.

[stop_killing_unborn_babies]

damn it - this is thread jumping ad nauseum -

Not so, P-Marlowe was purporting to hold some sort of ethic, so it was challenged to be consistent.

[P-Marlowe]

Seeing as how the KOETT's have apparently been collectively accused of being anti-intellectual hyper-emotional Arminian postmodernists by the newbie with the Huaraches Sandals, do you think you guys might be able to get him to define what he means by that? He doesn't seem to want to respond to me.

[xzins]

By emotional, I think he means that we have hormonal problems that make us weep and wail a lot.

I was thinking of taking ginseng so I could get my unbalanceds back into balance again.

Or maybe granola.

Whaddayathink?

[stop_killing_unborn_babies]

I like yours and xzin's and other Arminian's method...I respond to what I want to.