Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arminianism -- False Doctrines of the "Pope" of Modern Pelagianism
Response to: Calvinism- False Doctrines of the "Pope" of Geneva ^ | August 13, 2003 | OP

Posted on 08/13/2003 6:04:31 PM PDT by OrthodoxPresbyterian

Arminianism -- False Doctrines of the "Pope" of Modern Pelagianism

Introduction: the Anti-Predestinarian Syllogism

In debates between Reformation Protestants and Arminian neo-Protestants, it is common for Arminians to invoke a peculiar and logically-fallacious syllogism in an effort to deflect attention from the evidentiary insurmountability of the Biblical Case for Reformation Protestantism. This syllogism is constructed in the form of a classic ad hominem Guilt-by-Association argument, according to the following general Form:

Needless to say, it makes little impression upon the Arminian neo-Protestant that the Doctrines of Absolute Predestination were believed by Godly Christians for centuries before Calvin (i.e., 10th-15th Century Waldensian CredoBaptists, the 6th-9th Century Presbyters of Iona, the 4th-10th Century Ambrosian Catholics, Saint Augustine, the Apostles, Jesus Christ Himself, etc). What matters is the argumentative usefulness of being able to lay this charge to the particular account of John Calvin, and thus evade the theological defeat of the UnBiblical Arminian systematic heresy by re-framing the debate as a mud-throwing competition directed against one particular Reformer.

Now, before we proceed, we should observe: the Arminian neo-Protestant assertions against Calvin are not borne out by the Facts of History in the first place.

Uncomfortable Facts about Michael Servetus

Michael Servetus was:

In point of History, Michael Servetus was executed as a matter of State Punishment, as sentenced by the Civil Council of Geneva – which itself was controlled at the time by Calvin’s political enemies, the Libertines. In fact, as the Libertine Party itself rejected Calvin’s doctrine of Predestination, it is more historically accurate to say that Servetus was killed by the Anti-Predestinarian “protestants”, than to attribute the deed to Calvin (who at any rate pleaded for a more merciful execution “by the Sword”, rather than the slow burning-to-death on which the vicious Anti-Predestinarians insisted).

Be that as it may, however, it needs be asked – if it is appropriate for Arminian neo-Protestants to employ such a Syllogism against the Reformer John Calvin, is it not equally appropriate to measure by the same standard the heretical Schismatic who, perhaps more than any other single man, was fundamentally responsible for sundering the Godly unity of Reformation Protestantism into a thousand confused and competing sects – James Arminius? To that Question we now turn:

Arminius – his teachings on Politics, Religion, and the Sword of the State

Phew.... Thank God that America was founded primarily by convinced Calvinists, and not Arminians. Moving along, though, let us now apply the Arminian's Favorite Syllogism -- to Arminius himself.

Arminius at the Bar of the Arminian Syllogism:

Hmmmm. Howzabout that.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Ecumenism; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant; Theology
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 981-984 next last
To: Cvengr
No humility at all, I see. I will pray for you, that God would enlighten you to the Truth, and remove the scales from your eyes. You have injured me, but I do not hold it against you. You simply do not know any better.
681 posted on 08/19/2003 9:56:25 PM PDT by nobdysfool (All men are born Arminians...the Christian ones that grow up become Calvinists...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 680 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool
#669 is an example of the aischrologia which I never intended towards others in posts to you. Those posts which I mentioned salvation and returning to Him, I will provide to any fellow Christian wherein I observe a fallen nature. I sense you are between thumos and kakia, which was never my intent when I mentioned salvation or encouragement to repentence.
682 posted on 08/19/2003 10:10:56 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: Jean Chauvin
Thanks for the links. I agree with most of the Belgic,..at least as far as I have read. It is better wordsmithed than many of the positions advocating Calvinism in these threads which have sparked some of my stipulative objections. Thanks again.
683 posted on 08/19/2003 10:14:07 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 617 | View Replies]

To: Jean Chauvin

684 posted on 08/19/2003 10:19:09 PM PDT by Jean Chauvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 679 | View Replies]

To: Jean Chauvin; Wrigley
Holland's TULIP days? :-)
685 posted on 08/19/2003 10:20:56 PM PDT by CARepubGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 684 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
Your welcome.

btw, the Belgic Confession is one of the earliest Calvinist documents (1561).

It is modled after, but not plagaraized from Calvin's French Confession from a few years earlier.

You will also notice a difference in the Belgic and Heidelberg compared to the later Canons of Dordt as well as the Westminster Confession and Catechisms -the idea of "regeneration" during the reformation was defined as the movement of the entire lifetime of the believer towards God.

Thus, the Belgic and the Heidelberg both use the concept with that understanding. The Canons and Westminster documents both speak of "regeneration" as the act which preceeds faith and initiates conversion.

This does not mean that these documents conflict, but it should be taken into consideration when reading them.

The Belgic is a wonderful confession -take a read on the biography of Guido deBres who wrote the confession. It's quite moving.

Also spend time in the Heidelberg Catechism -the preferred confession of we "Dutch" Reformed.

You will instantly notice the emphasis of the HC towards the comfort of belonging to Christ as the HC opens, whereas the Westminster Confession of Faith tends towards a more formal doctrinal beginning. Not wrong either way, but as a matter of emphasis and comfort, I prefer the HC.

The HC, btw, was intended to be an ecumenical document. The authors were Caspar Olevianus and Zacharius Ursinus. Olevianus was a student and protege of Calvin. Ursinus is credited by most historians as the one who did most of the writing. He was a protege and personal friend of Philip Melanchthon -Luther's close friend and associate. It is perfectly understandable, then, that Philip Schaff describes the Heidelberg Catechism as being entirely "Melachthonian".

Jean

686 posted on 08/19/2003 10:31:54 PM PDT by Jean Chauvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 683 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
Whenever I find myself facing an apparant dilemma in Scripture of God's attributes, I've found I'm either focusing on the wrong lesson or have not taken all factors into consideration either sequentially or simultaneously.

In the problematic verses where many are tempted to adopt a truism that God uses sin to accomplish His Plan or implement His Will,..I instinctively wince. Sin is simply disobedience to His Will. So if he uses sin to advance His Plan, then he uses something which is against His Will in order to advance His Will. This would entail God as inconsistent. But we know He is immutable and Perfect Righteousness. Therein lies the apparant conflict.

I then look more closely at the predicaments and passages surrounding the cases where He is atributed as using sin to advance His Plan, and discover that there may be other lessons to be learned by those agents surrounding the sins being 'used'. e.g. the 1stKings22 passage regarding King Asa and the lying spirit.

One case of sin involves actions which are 'good for nothingness'. It might be the case, that if He is faced with a situation consequent of His creature's volition, that they have been so rebellious or sinful, that their souls are so scarred that they will not accept truth.

In these situations, in order to not violate the volition which He created as good, He needn't force the volition of His creature, but instead, might have the bounds eradicated by the creature's scarred state to where it doesn't matter what is communicated to the creature, a lie or truth, because the information is good for nothingness anyways.

The use of the lying spirit might be better phrased as allowing the lying spirit his will, thereby allowing the volition of both King Asa, his prophets, the lying spirit, and God's Prophet to be cast into play. The result still displays His Soveriegnty without marring His righteousness or His Holiness.

Whenever I observe sin associated with His Plan, I tend to believe His real justification is of more significance and the will associated with sin is immaterial to His decision.
687 posted on 08/19/2003 10:32:21 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 646 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool
"...The truth is, man needs major heart surgery, performed soley by the Holy Spirit, for without that surgery, man will die."

Good point, but even further, without that regenration man is already dead.

688 posted on 08/19/2003 10:34:56 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 650 | View Replies]

To: CARepubGal
Yup. Prettier Dancers!

(I guess that's what you get for being on the sandy shores of Lake Michigan!)

Jean
689 posted on 08/19/2003 10:35:06 PM PDT by Jean Chauvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies]

To: Jean Chauvin
LOL! I bet those dancers are Calvinist! Oh NO! (sarcasm off)
690 posted on 08/19/2003 10:38:50 PM PDT by CARepubGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 689 | View Replies]

To: CARepubGal
What evidence of faith do you find shallow for me to develop through faith in Him?
691 posted on 08/19/2003 10:42:52 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 661 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Good questions.

1) Where did sin originate? A: When Lucifer became Satan upon his declaration of the 5 "I wills".

2) Can sin occur without the permission of God? A: The phrasing of the question is a bit awkward. Considering God is Sovereign over all things, then the answer is no. Since God is Soveriegn over all things, His Sovereignty is also in the environment of all situations, so its a rather moot question. His permissiveness might be merely lack of action against it. His Soverignty still isn't threatened by that as He still is in control and nothing will remove His Soveriegnty. From our perspective, we wouldn't know one way or the other, because He is still in control even if we are not in the picture.

3) Is sin like all things used for the Glory of God? Segue from answer to #2. Technically yes.

This can be misleading because to the uninformed, ...a deceptive argument might ensue that sin is justifiable because all things are used to God's glory, so let's glorify Him by sinning. I stipulate this as an exaple where such a theological question in and of itself can be used to promote degeneration rather than encourage regeneration.

This is where I have the most heartburn with 'quasi-Calvinist' statements. Those which are pregnant with deceptive leads promoting degeneracy rather than encouraging fellowship with God through Christ.
692 posted on 08/19/2003 10:57:28 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 567 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
Related Thread:

The Church's Witness to the World

This is an exposition of the Belgic Confession by Peter Y. DeJong.

This specific article is dealing with Article 13 of the Belgic Confession.

Jean

693 posted on 08/19/2003 11:09:11 PM PDT by Jean Chauvin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 683 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr; lockeliberty; CCWoody; Dr. Eckleburg; drstevej; Wrigley; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; CARepubGal; ..
#669 is an example of the aischrologia which I never intended towards others in posts to you. Those posts which I mentioned salvation and returning to Him, I will provide to any fellow Christian wherein I observe a fallen nature. I sense you are between thumos and kakia, which was never my intent when I mentioned salvation or encouragement to repentence.

Quit strutting around like a pompous peacock and make your statement in plain English! I asked for an apology and you give me this drivel. It sure doesn't look like an apology to me. I see it as another not-so-subtle attempt to belittle and marginalize me. I'm not asking for much, just that you acknowledge that you wrongly questioned my relationship with the Lord, and did so publicly to build yourself up at my expense.

I made an orthodox confession of faith and have defended that confession. You questioned my salvation, called me "soulish", speculated that I might in fact not be saved, impuned my posts, and even now are hinting that you believe I have a fallen nature, which is tantamount to saying that I am not a Christian. How dare you make such accusations, such slander, and such false statements?! Who gave you the right?

You have quite graphically displayed for all to see here, that you have not exhibited a Christian attitude, but a Gnostic and pompously proud attitude, not only toward me but toward others here. Your attitude disgusts and offends me.

694 posted on 08/19/2003 11:11:22 PM PDT by nobdysfool (All men are born Arminians...the Christian ones that grow up become Calvinists...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
In these situations, in order to not violate the volition which He created as good, He needn't force the volition of His creature, but instead, might have the bounds eradicated by the creature's scarred state to where it doesn't matter what is communicated to the creature, a lie or truth, because the information is good for nothingness anyways.

Hey Boy... you're twisting yourself into knots trying to save God. He don't need your help.

695 posted on 08/19/2003 11:14:46 PM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 687 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
I still tend to believe the Lord acted passively upon the lying spirit's active will considering the Calvinist appeal to James 1:13-15. Do you see it otherwise?
696 posted on 08/19/2003 11:23:31 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 564 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool
Funny you should ask that. In reality, I have no absolute control over my life, because God is sovereign over all.

Funny that you answered a question I did not ask. The question was concerning total control, not absolute control. Answer the question asked; not the one you want to answer.

697 posted on 08/19/2003 11:25:06 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 664 | View Replies]

To: lockeliberty
No, I'm working through these Scriptures in order to understand how they fit together without inconsistency, implied or contrived by some extremists who seek to neither be patient, loving or perseverent.
698 posted on 08/19/2003 11:26:01 PM PDT by Cvengr (0:^))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 695 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
You see, for ctd to insist that in order for God's love to be true love there must be the possibility that the Father might reject the Son.

I never said nor implied that. You are a liar. Point to the post where I made such a claim. The only thing you have managed to do is to intentionally misconstrue pretty much everything I have posted because you are unable to intelligently address issues I have raised.

699 posted on 08/19/2003 11:31:12 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 665 | View Replies]

To: drstevej
CCwoody is lying about what I have posted. i dare you to locate a post where I said or implied what he claims. Woody is intellectuaqlly dishonest, and I would think that an honorable person such as yourself would tolerate such lies.
700 posted on 08/19/2003 11:34:29 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 654 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 981-984 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