|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jul 31, 2007 4:52:05 GMT -5
Here are the works of James Arminius: www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?tn=works&sts=t&an=arminius&y=0&x=0Arminius was trainned as a Calvinist, but later modified His Calvinism by affirming that Christ died for all men, and that the will was free, and that election was based upon foreknowledge. Originally, he was a 5 point Calvinist, one of the best actually. But when Theodore Beza, Calvins successor, starting teaching that God was the ultimate cause of sin, a laymen started reproving this error. Arminius was hired by Geneva to refute this laymen. However, once Arminius started studying the arguements of the laymen, and looking at the full councel of God in the Word, he became persuaded that God was not the ultimate cause of sin, Jesus died for all men, men have freewill, and predestination is based upon foreknowledge. Arminius became so thorough at argueing his case, which he considered to be a modified form of Calvinism, that nobody would dare publicly debate him. It was not until after Arminius was dead that the Synod of Dort was arranged, with 133 Calvinists against 8 or so Remonstrants (Arminians). Anyways, I have not yet read the complete works of James Arminius. To be truest to the term, I am not an "Arminian" myself, in respect to all of Arminius' teachings. However, I am sure his writings are brilliant as I have heard so many great things about him.
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Jul 31, 2007 9:36:24 GMT -5
Source, please? I couldn't help but laugh at this outright accusation of cowardice on the Calvinists' part. Did you get this from www.gospeltruth.net or something?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 1, 2007 5:50:35 GMT -5
The source was:
Foundations of Wesleyan-Arminian Theology by Mildred Bangs Wynkoop
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Aug 1, 2007 21:01:04 GMT -5
I must assume you own the book. Would you mind posting an excerpt from the page on which this information is stated? Giving a page number?
|
|
|
Post by evanandliz on Aug 2, 2007 21:24:17 GMT -5
TBXI, I have often wondered at your vehement opposition to anything but five point Calvinism. I have also often wondered how much time you actually spend preaching the gospel, and whether or not your theology is lined up with the reality that is found in reality. Theology can all to often become entirely speculative and ethereal, and the that brings about disillusionment when someone either receives a nice dose of the real, or is opposed by, or hears the stance of someone who has already gained a sense of what actually is. Calvinism is not the gospel, and we need to spend our time defending the teaching of the apostles, prophets, and most of all Christ, before we divide and debate the postulate of a mere uninspired man. If you were to sit down to dine with Jesse (assuming you would) could you refrain yourself from debating opinions and simply unite in the one thing you have in common - the person of Jesus Christ? It is a staggering fact, but Calvinism, Arminianism, Moral Government, Pentecostalism, Charismatics, Wesleyanism, Methodism, are all wong in some point or another. No single denomination, or theological camp is entirely right; this is the manifest and express reason Paul exhorts us away from following the words of mere uninspired man - bu rather build ourselves on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ as the chief corner stone. Jesse, The works of Arminius are good, I have not read them all either, but what I have seen, and heard, is right on. Yours in service to Jesus Christ, Evan Schaible www.FireOnTheAltar.com/7/evanschaible
|
|
|
Post by alan4jc on Aug 2, 2007 23:40:49 GMT -5
Amen Evan. We should hold loosely to our theology and cling to Christ.
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Aug 3, 2007 19:20:33 GMT -5
Evan,
I do not follow the words of a mere uninspired man. I have never read any book that was written by Calvin, aside from looking at his commentaries in a few places (and to say that this makes me his follower would also mean that I am a follower of someone like Matthew Henry or Wayne Grudem - but I am not. I have simply read some of their writings). Virtually all of the points I try to make (all of them, to the best of my memory) are based on Scripture (Christ, the apostles and prophets, etc, as you said - not the writings of an uninspired man) and plain reason/logic, and not Calvin's Institutes or any other human writing. I would argue that what I have spent my time defending here is not merely the writings of Calvin or any other uninspired man, but as you said, the message given to us by Christ and the apostles and prophets. For whose words are being quoted, referenced, and discussed when we talk about these things? Their words, not Calvin's or those of some uninspired man (an exception to this would be, of course, the often-quoted Early Church Fathers, ironically).
I would dine with Jesse. But the discussions that would follow would not be based upon mere "opinions", but Scripture and its right interpretation, if the conversation went in the direction you are speaking of. For me to simply decide to unite with anybody based on their profession of belief in the person of Jesus Christ would compel me to call SDA members and Roman Catholics my brethren as well, the majority of which are not. After all, I have more in common with Roman Catholics over the doctrine of God than I do with open theists - and yet I do not automatically call them brothers just because they confess "Jesus".
I think I understand the sentiment of what Alan is saying when he says, I can agree with this, in a sense. But a good reminder is that without theology, we can't know who Christ is. We can't know if we have the right Christ or not without studying theology. Without studying theology we cannot tell whether the Mormons, the JW's, or the majority of us believe in the true Christ. So to cling to Christ is to cling to theology, i.e., the study of God, i.e. Christ.
I agree with the statement in that we should not cling equally to all points of our theology - but some of them are unnegotiable.
You are correct here. I do not spend enough time doing this, and for this I have no good excuse. Thank you for this (indirect?) exhortation.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Sept 4, 2007 18:40:12 GMT -5
Tyler,
I just wanted to say that I have always been impressed with the way you've handled yourself on the MB. You have displayed a maturity well beyond your years. I really appreciate your ability to sift through the non sense and get to the real issues. Now if you'll only recant you Calvinism I could accept you as a brother in Christ!!!! ;D ;D
Steve
|
|