Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

THE ARMINIANIZING OF AMERICAN THEOLOGY: (Triumph of Arminianism 2)
Wesley Theological Journal ^ | James E. Hamilton

Posted on 06/06/2002 5:45:14 AM PDT by xzins

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last
The free choice position has been in ascendency for some time and is the impetus for the great numbers of conversions that have taken place in American religious renewals.
1 posted on 06/06/2002 5:45:14 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands; fortheDeclaration; winstonchurchill; ShadowAce; P-Marlowe; Revelation 911...
bump for a good, informative read.
2 posted on 06/06/2002 5:46:12 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins; fortheDeclaration; winstonchurchill; Revelation 911; zshhh; ShadowAce; P-Marlowe...
Bump for an excellent James Hamilton article. xzins, you're not going to win any friends with this one.

I know James Hamilton. He and his family were in a serious car accient in 2000 and he almost died. His recovery was nothing but miraculous and a testimony to the power of prayer. I saw him last fall and he is back to teaching on a limited schedule.

3 posted on 06/06/2002 6:27:00 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins;corin stormhands
Lets see,Evangelical Arminianism evolved at the same time as Secular Humanism.

Interesting correlation don't you think?

My Conclusion:
Evangelical Arminianism is just Secular Humanism with a god.

4 posted on 06/06/2002 8:14:39 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty; xzins
My Conclusion: Evangelical Arminianism is just Secular Humanism with a god.

My conclusion, everybody realized Calvinism was wrong.

5 posted on 06/06/2002 8:19:00 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
Now, come come Corin. I proposed a premise and that was the best you could do? You seem like a bright enough guy. Your statement, besides the exaggeration of the term "everybody", does not disprove my premise. The correlation between the rise in Secular Humanism with it's Diestic philosophy and the rise in Evangelical Arminianism gives proof that Evangelical Arminianism is just an offshoot of Secular Humanism. Secular Humanism teaches that man with his reason is god. Evangelical Arminianism teaches that man with his reason can reach God. Man, as naturally prideful in himself, will naturally endorse a theology that credits himself with the "reason" to reach God. So your statement, besides the exaggeration, is true. The question is why? And now you know the why.
6 posted on 06/06/2002 8:51:30 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty; xzins
The correlation between the rise in Secular Humanism with it's Diestic philosophy and the rise in Evangelical Arminianism gives proof that Evangelical Arminianism is just an offshoot of Secular Humanism.

No, I think what I said was valid. Read the article again. Hamilton says: The basically deterministic formulations of Jonathan Edwards and his followers were increasingly looked upon as both theologically indefensible and morally repugnant. Calvinism was being rejected.

The fact that gnosticism was contemporaneous with the legitimate rise of Christianity doesn't invalidate both. Does it?

7 posted on 06/06/2002 9:07:32 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
My take on all this is "free will" folks will never convince Calvinists and vice versa.This debate has overwhelmed a hundred thousand posts on hundreds of FR threads.One suspects few if any have thereby changed their opinions but keep it up because it's basically entertaining and fun.

Imvho many Calvinist posts come across as self righteous and lacking in humility.They seem preoccupied with somehow articulating a view that encompasses God's unknowable essence with human notions of his foreknowledge.Face it guys--we are only creatures--this is a mystery.

But Calvinists--- like all the rest of humanity--- will sooner or later be judged on the basis of how they've run this race of life.While there is time we all need to repent and to ask for His mercy. With but few exceptions such has been the teaching of Historical Christianity in both East and West for nearly two millenia.

8 posted on 06/06/2002 9:57:07 AM PDT by IGNATIUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: IGNATIUS
While there is time we all need to repent and to ask for His mercy.

I think we can all say Amen to that (or we should).

9 posted on 06/06/2002 10:01:13 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xzins
The problem with the article is that it portrays Arminianism as opposing Calvinism with Philosophy and not scripture.

Thus, you are opposing philosophical speculation (Calvinism) with more philosophical speculation.

The only important thing for the Christian is What saith the Scriptures

10 posted on 06/06/2002 2:13:17 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration; xzins
The only important thing for the Christian is What saith the Scriptures

Trust me ftd. I know the author personally. He's got a strong grasp on the scriptures.

11 posted on 06/06/2002 3:01:55 PM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins
***In time Mahan came to understand Christian perfection as logically implied by his view of freedom. The very suggestion that a state of moral and spiritual perfection might be open to a man was staggering to the imagination of a Calvinist. But Mahan, along with Finney, argued that Jesus Christ enjoins men to be perfect, and nothing in the Bible would be enjoined if it were impossible. If you ought to do something, then you can do it; and if you do not do it, you should not look for excuses elsewhere.****

===

How's the perfection coming, Xzins?

12 posted on 06/06/2002 5:37:50 PM PDT by drstevej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
Reid was not unaware of the subjectivity of his methodology

Instead of starting out with hypotheses and analogies drawn from the physical world, the mental philosopher should begin with the data of introspection, the dictates of common sense.

Corin, this article is filled with contradictions. The above quotes show that subjectivity about internal feelings is what Arminian philosophers based thier conclusion on. In my estimation, the whole of Wesleyian theology seems to be based on feelings. The author thinks this is scientific methodolgy:

Their influence was keenly felt in academia also. D. H. Meyer points out that the American system of higher education in the nineteenth century has been aptly described as "Protestant Scholasticism" because of its ambitious effort "to organize all knowledge, including knowledge of the cosmos, of men, and of society, into a consistent and intelligible whole," establishing a correspondence between secular knowledge and basic Christian principles.

Corin, read up on current epistemology. Internalist epistemology is almost rejected out of hand today.

It is important to notice that Scottish realism was useful in various camps. It was just as useful to the Unitarian in his opposition to Calvinism as it was to the Evangelical.

Slam dunk! How much more proof do you need? This is exactly why most main line denominations are nothing more than humanist societies. I'm no historian or theologian but I would be interested to see if your friend received any peer review on this article. With my limited knowledge it appears to be full of holes.

The fact that gnosticism was contemporaneous with the legitimate rise of Christianity doesn't invalidate both. Does it?

I'm not sure what your driving at with this statement? We believe only true Christianity is correct and Gnosticism incorrect. Likewise, I would say that Calvinism is more correct and Arminianism less so. I'm afraid your friends article fully supports my contention.

13 posted on 06/06/2002 9:36:49 PM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
Trust me ftd. I know the author personally. He's got a strong grasp on the scriptures.

I believe you, but I did not see any in that article.

I was rejecting the approach not the author.

14 posted on 06/07/2002 1:27:04 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
The only important thing for a Christian is what saith the Scriptures.

For the first few hundred years after Christ's Resurrection the books to be included in the NT canon were not even decided yet.Most people couldn't read.There were no printing presses.If a local congregation had one copy of(say) a letter from St.Paul---it was not circulated but hidden to avoid persecution and probable confiscation.If a copy of a future canonical book were available in one of the churches it probably wasn't in one's native tongue.

Yet many early Christians suffered for their Lord achieving the crown of martyrdom via fire,beheading,crucifiction,poison,drowning,wild animals,etc.Some would not even place a pinch of incense upon Caesar's altar in order to save their lives--judging such a arguably perfunctory act to be treason to their Savior and Lord!

Since these folks couldn't go to a corner bible bookstore and purchase "the Scriptures" for their own private interpretation---um,er--how were they converted?

15 posted on 06/07/2002 5:54:21 AM PDT by IGNATIUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
I'm no historian or theologian but I would be interested to see if your friend received any peer review on this article.

I'm certain that for publication in the journal that he did. I traced it back and was interested to find that Hamilton wrote this in 1974. I believe he would've been on the campus during the Asbury Revival of 1970. One that spread around the world.

I'm no scholar or theologian either, but I'm working on it. What I do know is that James Hamilton, and countless other scholars like him, would come to much the same conclusions.

I've been sharply criticized for saying this before. But my walk with God is much more experiential than it is academic. I know James Hamilton, I know his life. I know his colleagues, I know their lives. All of that speaks louder to me than articles and statements and philosophies.

I'm learning a lot on these threads and in private study. So far, what I've read continues to reinforce my beliefs. Hamilton's life speaks to me louder than his writings. Especially something written almost 30 years ago.

16 posted on 06/07/2002 6:06:37 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
. So far, what I've read continues to reinforce my beliefs. Hamilton's life speaks to me louder than his writings.

Good post

Your first sentence is indicative of what winston is always saying. We naturally filter our understanding of material through our experience and belief structures. You read this piece as a victory over determinism and I read this piece as evidence of the church falling prey to humanism. I think what is important is that we try to understand the oppositions viewpoint in an unemotional state. For example, my recent studies have been to try and understand the Arminian concept of God's foreknowledge being compatible with a libertarian free will. I haven't gotten my arms around it yet but I'm trying.

But my walk with God is much more experiential than it is academic.

I asked drstevej about this on one of carton's threads. I think he gave sound advice to strive for both faith and knowledge with equal zeal.

17 posted on 06/07/2002 6:57:29 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty; drstevej
We naturally filter our understanding of material through our experience and belief structures.

Exactly. I'm more than willing to learn. And I've admitted before that I may be wrong.

But when I first entered these threads (as Ward Smythe), I made the same assertions and was told quite bluntly that I had to deny my heritage and deny these "false teachers."

One, I'm just too old to do that. But it was lunacy to suggest that I would deny the fact that my great grandfather was a Wesley circuit rider, that I was raised in and have lived in the Wesleyan tradition for forty-plus years, that I went to a Wesleyan-Holiness school, married my Wesleyan-Holiness bride, and continue to worship in a Wesleyan church. Not to mention the hundreds of Wesleyan scholars I've met along the way who have given their very lives for the cause of Christ.

I was asked to give that up based on a "conversation" on FreeRepublic.

That's just goofiness.

18 posted on 06/07/2002 7:40:33 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: IGNATIUS, winstonchurchill, xzins, corin stormhands, revelation 9:11,
The only important thing for a Christian is what saith the Scriptures. For the first few hundred years after Christ's Resurrection the books to be included in the NT canon were not even decided yet.

The NT Canon was completed by 100 AD. The church (those who make up the body of Christ having accepted Christ through faith in His shed blood), were already using the scriptures that God wanted them to use)

Most people couldn't read.

Most Jews could read. Where people couldn't read, they were taught. Scripture is the greatest motivator there is for literacy.

That is why Roman Catholic countries have such a high illiteracy rate. They do not care if the people read the Bible.

There were no printing presses.

So what! They had scribes translating the works. Europe had not yet fallen into the Dark Ages, since the Roman Catholic Church would not take over for another 200-300 years.

That is when the lights went out!

If a local congregation had one copy of(say) a letter from St.Paul---it was not circulated but hidden to avoid persecution and probable confiscation.

It wasn't? Paul tells the Colossians to circulate the letter And when this epistle is read among you ,cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodicans, and that ye likewish read the epistle from Laodicea (Col.4:16)

If a copy of a future canonical book were available in one of the churches it probably wasn't in one's native tongue.

One, most people read or spoke both Latin and Greek since those were the languages of commerce. Two, the RCC attempted to keep the Bibles out of the hands of the common people in their own language since they had a priesthood to protect.

Yet many early Christians suffered for their Lord achieving the crown of martyrdom via fire,beheading,crucifiction,poison,drowning,wild animals,etc.Some would not even place a pinch of incense upon Caesar's altar in order to save their lives--judging such a arguably perfunctory act to be treason to their Savior and Lord!

Yes, that is true and those persecutions came later after the Books had circulated and Christianity had gained a foothold in the Empire.

Yet, the Roman Empire persecution pales beside the persecution of the RCC against those whose only crime was the desire to have a bible in their own (gasp!) language.

Unable to kill everyone that so desired the words of God,(although they certainly made a valiant effort!) the Roman Catholic church changed tactics and decided to compete with the correct Bibles (Tyndale, Geneva, Coverdale) with their own English translation the Douey-Rheims. Using a different text, that is the basis of most modern versions (NIV, NAS,)

Since these folks couldn't go to a corner bible bookstore and purchase "the Scriptures" for their own private interpretation---um,er--how were they converted?

They were converted by those who could read and preached the Gospel to them. Then they taught them to read so they could read the words of God themselves.

Christians have been doing that in every Roman Catholic country, since keeping the people in ignorance of the word is part of Rome's modus operandi

19 posted on 06/07/2002 1:52:09 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
Evangelical Arminianism is just Secular Humanism with a god.

Well, stop hemming and hawing around and tell us how you really feel.

20 posted on 06/07/2002 2:49:30 PM PDT by winstonchurchill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson