Who Would be Seen As the Arminian Theologian To Calvin?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by JesusFan, May 25, 2011.

  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    IF John Calvin is held up as being Mr Calvinsit, one MUST read to appreciate the theological views of Calvinism...

    WHAT Theologian(s) from the Arminian camp would the personthat one MUST read?

    Who would be seen as Mr Arminianist?

    just asking what would be a good systematic theology for the Arminian viewpoint?
     
  2. jbh28

    jbh28
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who Would be Seen As the Arminian Theologian To Calvin?

    I don't know...maybe Jacobus Arminius?;)
     
  3. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    13,377
    Likes Received:
    728
    :1_grouphug:....does such a thing exist?....that might be an oxymoron:laugh:

    You could read some of Wesleys writings, or Finneys...or Pelagius.:eek:

    Oh wait......Arminians say they only read the bible, so no need for the books of men!:rolleyes:
     
  4. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wesley never penned a systematic theology. Finney did.

    Roger Olson has tried. However, remember that there are more than two options here. You have the more and less Calvinistic. So therefore, Thiessen would be seen as less Calvinistic than Grudem or Erickson or Reymond but more than Olson or pehaps Oden. So it's not really an either/or proposition entirely.
     
  5. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0

    Where would you rate out those you listed in in regards to "where they stood" on basis of Calvinism? From strict cal to moderate to close to Arminian ?
     
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    I looked thru the theology books that line my shelf and sorry I could not come up with any suggestions.

    Not a joke: I have always considered "arminian/pelagian" and "theology" as mutually exclusive terms.
     
  7. Earth Wind and Fire

    Earth Wind and Fire
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    18,912
    Likes Received:
    94
    Shhhh, Bob dont let Skan hear that or you will get a warning :rolleyes:
     
  8. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...that's what happens when you believe arm / pel are the same thing, you become confused
     
  9. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Olson is squarely Arminian. Oden is a Wesleyan/Methodist.
     
  10. dwmoeller1

    dwmoeller1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,155
    Likes Received:
    0
    Arminians aren't Pelagians or semiPelagians (eg Finney). It's an unfair characterization of their position. Now yes there are some who call themselves Arminian when in reality they are semi-Pelagian, but lumping them together with those who really are Arminian is no more fair than lumping Cists and the hyper variety all together.
     
    #10 dwmoeller1, May 27, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2011
  11. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    hear hear...:smilewinkgrin:
     
  12. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hope that you have enough education to know what Pelagains and Semi- Pels actually believe and that it CAN NOT be equated to Classical or Reformed Arminianism in any shape or fashion nor toward Historical Weslyanism ... I will give you that many of modern day Wesleyan's are closer to the semi-pel view (and a fewer number toward full Pelagainism) than ever before.

    If that was your equation above, it would be about that same as saying that since your view has some similarities to Augustine, you're a Roman Catholic and must by virtue of said declaration be lumped into the same theology.
     
  13. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    No it wouldn't.

    It wouldn't be anything like that.

    Augustine is a respected theologian across the board. Nobody agrees with any theologian completely about every conclusion they come to but real modern theologians, just as those throughout church history respect his ideas- by NO MEANS WHATSOEVER- just Roman Catholics.

    In fact, learned people understand that it was the theology of Augustine that Luther and Calvin used to give the Roman Catholic Church fits.

    So, no. Your analogy doesn't pan out.
     
  14. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    For some reason most Calvinist's education does not seem to extend that far.
    It seems to be easier for some to willfully mislead, slander, and toss out maligning caricature against the other persons views that you disagree with, then to actually and correctly describe the other persons views.

    Any first year college student who took even a little time to see what Pelagians and Arminians believed, would walk away laughing at Dr. Bob's conclusion on the issue.
     
  15. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    First, I never said JUST Roman Catholics, nor did I state one must agree totally with any theologian, and as usual missed my point entirely.
    Also, it was not Augustines theology, but 'some' of it, yet the rest fits squarely and comfortably in the RCC

    Additionally I would suggest you expand your education to learn more about the views and beliefs of Augustine. :) Enjoy
     
    #15 Allan, May 27, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2011
  16. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    What kind of education do you have? I'm just curious. You sound like you are overcompensating for a lack of one. You have use the word "education" twice on this page alone speaking to two different people.

    No. You linked Augustine to Roman Catholicism as if us saying you guys are semi-pelagian is like you saying we are Roman Catholic.

    The analogy is ridiculous because the Roman Catholics have little to do with Augustine's theology today.

    You are more Augustinian than Roman Catholics!

    So the analogy is fallacious.

    Can we call you a Calvinist since you believe eternal security and believe many things that Augustine taught?

    Or since you believe many things that Augustine taught should we call YOU a Roman Catholic??

    On the other hand you do believe very similarly to the semi-pelagians- I didn't say identically. A difference you nameless guys claim is that you believe in prevenient grace to help the sinner choose God.

    But you certainly do believe this:
    And it is always hard to nail you guys down because you have no real specific statement of faith but it seems you believe this too:
    So no, comparing you to semi-pelagians is not the same as you comparing us to Roman Catholics just because we ascribe to much of the theology of Augustine.
     
  17. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    See.. Now you're getting it. It is a.. what did you say.. ah yes, a "fallacious" statement. Indeed, to try to say either system is akin to Pel or Cath is fallacious.

    Once again it appears you know little of the subject.
    Pelagianisms core view.. that which all the rest of the view stands upon:
    That man has the capacity to seek God in and of himself apart from any movement of God or Divine aid, and therefore that salvation is effected by man's efforts. (a reward for his efforts)

    From Theopedia on Semi-Pelagianism:
    Semi-Pelagianism, a moderated form of Pelagianism, taught that man has retained the ability to seek God in and of himself apart from any movement of God's grace.

    From Monergism.com (from source: Differences between Semi-Pelagianism and Arminian Beliefs)
    [Semi-Pelagianism]
    While not denying the necessity of Grace for salvation, Semi-Pelagianism maintains that the first steps towards the Christian life are ordinarily taken by the human will and that Grace supervened only later

    Carm on Semi-Pel
    The semi-Pelagian teaches that man can make the first move toward God by seeking God out of his own free will and that man can cooperate with God's grace even to the keeping of his faith through human effort. This would mean that God responds to the initial effort of person and that God's grace is not absolutely necessary to maintain faith.

    and others as well I can call up.. not to mention of course Wiki, but do I really need to bring that link up

    All of these convey the same point. In short, man can seek after God apart from any divine influence or aid, but man needs grace in order to be saved, which God grants after man has initially come.

    It is important ti understand the above this is what is meant by the commonly used statement - injured will, in that the will that is injured does cause him to stumble but he does not need God to aid him in his initial coming.. but since he is 'injured' he must be helped the rest of the way.

    Thus the cooperation referred to here is man finishing his work to be saved. He needs God only to help him over the finish line -so-to-speak... but nothing more.

    It is of note that Calvinism or Reformed theology is 'exactly' the same as Arminianism and Non-Cal views regarding mans salvation. In that God not only will not but can not save any man, until that man chooses to allow God to. No matter how one wishes to cut this piece of pie, God saves man upon mans consent and never apart from it. The use of the term 'cooperation' is what muddies the waters there as it does not properly convey what Semi-Pel believes the cooperation entailed and what Cals and Arm believe it entails.

    To compare this view to Arminianism or Non-Cal theology.. is silly at best and willful slander at worst.

    Again, you make yourself sound foolish and quite ignorant with such statements. First try asking me what I believe in stead of telling me what I believe and then you find out your wrong. No I do not hold to your statements. Secondly, find out what is meant by 'injured' will and the meaning of what cooperation entails

    You do realize that there are more variations of Calvinism than Baptist denominations.. it is hard to nail you all down to a particular statement of faith There are various ones for various versions and various interpretations of various views.

    *sigh.. yes, it is.
     
    #17 Allan, May 27, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2011
  18. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    You're not reading Allan.

    I said this in the very post to which you are responding:
    Try to pay attention, OK?

    Yea, like I said- Try to pay attention.

    Yep, try to pay attention there, Allan. It would have saved you a lot of pointless typing and copying and pasting.

    And yet more illustration of your need to read posts thoroughly before responding.

    Nor should you have wasted our time bringing up what you DID bring up.

    And that is the ONLY point at which you and the semi-pelagians disagree.

    So you are for all practical purposes a semi-pelagian. That is what best describes you.

    The only difference you ave cited is the one I had already cited for you- you adhere to prevenient grace.

    So, the best thing we who actually HAVE a theology can call you people is "slightly modified semi-pelagians".

    No. This is pretty darn near close to what you people keep saying here on bb.

    You do not believe that man is so totally depraved that God has to do ALL the work.

    You believe that he is damaged greatly by the fall and needs God's help.

    That is semi-pelagianism and that is what you believe.

    Just embrace it Allan. It's BASICALLY what you are.

    The only difference is that you think he needs a little MORE help from God than the classical semi-pelagian believes he needs from God.

    Nope. You made that up. But nice try.

    Boy- you missed that one!

    Look up the terms synergism and monergism. There could not hardly be more opposing soteriologies.


    Well that's, not surprisingly, EXACTLY how the semi-pelagian cuts this "slice of pie".

    Yes it does. And it conveys EXACTLY what you believe. So embrace it.

    Not according to the research that you just did.
    People who know better than you- people who are professional theologians say what I am saying.

    Then there's what you are saying which basically NOBODY says.



    Bull. Prove this.

    There are extraordinarily SLIGHT variations between true Calvinists.

    Stuff as minor as lapsarian view points divide true Calvinists.

    True Calvinists can ascribe to 90 percent or better of the Westminster Confession or the 1689 Baptist Confession.

    What on EARTH do you people ascribe to???
     
  19. Old Union Brother

    Old Union Brother
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    740
    Likes Received:
    0
    you all sure are off topic from the OP. Just sayin.
     
  20. Luke2427

    Luke2427
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    8
    Yea, but somebody made the point that semi-pelagians have never put out any real theologians because theology and semi-pelagianism are antithetical to one another.

    Allan retorted that his crowd which has no nameable theology are NOT semi-pelagians and then questioned the education of the gentleman who made that statement. He said that would be like calling us Calvinists Roman Catholics because we have so much in common with Augustine.

    So I pointed out that he has a whole lot more in common with the semi-pelagians than Augustine had with the Roman Catholics thus proving his analogy to be silly.

    That's the sum of our deviation.
     

Share This Page

Loading...