[RnMomof7]

An interesting side note here for the various Wesleyans (Methodists, Nazarenes, etc.) is that despite his rather vehement rejection of Calvinist teaching, Wesley upheld the central tenet of the Reformation: justification by faith. In this sense, orthodox Wesleyans are not Arminian, a distinctive that should be noted. In this sense and on this central issue, Wesley did stand firmly with the great Reformers. I never realized some of these more subtle doctrinal distinctives until some vicious arguments passionate theological discussion threads here at FR.

After all these centuries, it is interesting to see how Calvinism and justification by faith alone is still the central theological dispute among Christian churches.

You are soooooooo sutble LOL...indeed Wesley did agree with Calvin on may points..justification by faith..total depravity,what he called the "quicking" ( in reformend circles regeneration).he taught Salvation was fully of God,and the infallibility of Scripture..mostly that Salvation was fully of God

I recently quoted Wesley to make a very Calvinist point on a Wesleyan form and I was quickly told that Weslsy was often "Calvinist",and thus I was dismissecd and the thread was pulled LOL

After much study I have come to think the difference between Wesley and Whitefield was not all that great..Wesley with his measure of grace..and quicking.....and Whitefield with election and regeneration.....it was the method of Gods action that differed..

[George W. Bush]

I recently quoted Wesley to make a very Calvinist point on a Wesleyan form and I was quickly told that Weslsy was often "Calvinist",and thus I was dismissecd and the thread was pulled LOL

Making friends everywhere you go! Sometimes, you just can't win.

It is droll to hear of Wesley being branded Calvinistic by modern "Wesleyans". I find that a little humorous. But then, we have modern "Calvinists" (Dallas Theological Seminary and their ilk) who contend that Calvin did not believe in Limited Atonement (the L of the Dordtian TULIP).

I still say that Whitefield was sounder than Wesley theologically. But perhaps not the better pastor or preacher, something we can't know with certainty in modern times. Whitefield is a lot sounder and more thorough on paper with well-developed and scriptural arguments but Wesley may have had some very winning ways as a speaker and a pastor. We can see in modern times that a lot of very unscriptural TV preachers are the best-known and most popular of Christian leaders so we shouldn't be too surprised.

I see in both Wesley and Whitefield a real passion for personal holiness and righteous living. Wesley's error was in trying to develop a sort of systematic theology around it, an endeavor that led him to introduce some unscriptural notions. But in demanding personal holiness from their foloowers, the two men were very similar and were both sincere reformers of the straying church of their time.

[CCWoody]

Wesley did agree with Calvin on may points..justification by faith..total depravity,what he called the "quicking" ( in reformend circles regeneration).he taught Salvation was fully of God,and the infallibility of Scripture..mostly that Salvation was fully of God

Hmmm! From the little I've read of both Calvin and Wesley, I'd say that Wesley denied Total Depravity (or man's total want to not repent), Regeneration as an act prior to man's confession of Christ with His lips, and that Salvation was fully (I'd say solely) of God.

I'd be happy to pull one, say Regeneration, and use a Spurgeon sermon I've read in the last month to start a thread. You can then try to find Wesley material to support their agreement. I'd say it would be a good exercise.