Arminians That I Admire

Yes Rip, let's "set things straight" -- I assumed you'd repented of your hateful statements, so I was willing to offer you the "right hand of fellowship" and consider your past false accusations and rude comments to be hyperbole posted in the heat of the moment.

Seeing that you actually started this thread 3 years ago (I missed this yesterday), and your Why Do Arminians Say Such Things comments were just a few days ago, I suppose I must conclude that I erred when I thought you'd amended your views. Certainly your restatement of some of your charges ("among other lies," "deliberately lying," "your falsehoods")is unfortunate.

I see no reason to hold grudges -- I think that's counterproductive to serving the Lord. I am sorry that my comments were so indelibly burned into your memory. I can only say that I hope you are willing to forgive me for the things I said. As my previous post in the other thread indicated, I didn't hold your charges that I was "deliberately lying" against you. For what it's worth, that was forgiven and forgotten.

And I do appreciate your having started this thread, even if it was 3 years ago. It gives me hope that the hostility on both sides of this divide can be overcome -- if we want it to be.

JDale

 

How about this phrasing instead? I do not believe my statements to be hateful. The validity of both of our posts should stand on our words compared to the truth.

How about this? I am not in the habit of making false accusations. Whatever I said was exactly how I feel about the situation deep inside.

Here ya go. My views stay the same.

Actually, that one sounds pretty good.

 

Now Mr Rippon, you have not learned a thing. You need to say 50 hail Marys and write 1000 times on notebook paper, "I will not be rude to the bretheren."

 

On a serious note, I do not think, as has been said in other posts, that you hate Arminians, in fact, have listed several you admired. On this board, I think Allen and Webdog do a good job of articulating whichever degree they are between the two. As I told you before, I think to characterize Calvinistic beliefs as God sitting up in heaven zapping people at random with a regeneration magic wand is way off base. God knows everything He is doing whether we understand or not.

To mention one, we did a study on Wesley, and I admire him.

Not to get off the subject of the op, but what do you think of Knox?

 

I think Betty Elliot is a typical American Calvinist, as was Jim before her.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Rip:

My attempt was a simple one. I was trying to thank you for starting this thread (how long ago was not germaine to me when I first posted here). I actually still do appreciate that some here who are Calvinist can tip their hats and even admire some Arminians. My only goal was to acknowledge that -- and I do.

Rip, that you continue to doggedly pursue our earlier disagreement on this thread is not in keeping (as I understand it) with the OP -- even if it WAS you who started it! Therefore, I am left to conclude that because of your personal animosity toward me, nothing I say will further contribute to this topic. I am very sorry -- and I thank those of you who have posted on this thread -- sincerely.

I hold no grudge, Rip. I hope you feel the same. Blessings in your work on behalf of His Kingdom...

JDale

 

Charles Wesley is credited for founding the Methodist faith along with his brother and others, but what I think I admire about him is his emphasis on holy living and sanctification. I think many times a church today puts all its emphasis on salvation and very little on sanctification. There are lots of people who attend church who never moved out of the pew on Sunday morning. There has to be a connection between Bible study, prayer, and daily living guided by the Lord. My opinion is that the church has as much responsibility to nurture and mature its members as it does in spreading the Gospel.

 

Frankly, I think, for the most part, we use the labels, Calvinist and Arminian far too loosely. One is a five-pointer, another is a 4-pointer and variations in between, yet all labelled as Calvinists. How so? Then we want to label all non-Calvinists as Arminian.

As Baptists, there are a lot of Calvinistic doctrines we blatenly deny, but we still call ourselves Calvinists. A good many Baptists in Canada, believe predestination and election are based in God's foreknowledge, which is not Calvinistic, and yet they label themselves as Calvinists. They are certainly not Arminian.

I see a number of men in here labelled as Arminian, yet they firmly taught the eternal security of the believer and absolute sovereignty of God. Then, even Arminius believed in the absolute sovereignty of God, but denied it in his view of soteriology. Confusion does reign supreme in many circles, especially when attributing the common labels.

Cheers,

Jim

 

You could be correct, but I've never heard of Warren Wiersbe calling himself as Calvinists or Arminian. I've never call him either. Does he claim to be Arminian or is that you calling him Arminian ?

 

I find it interesting how many Non-5 Point Calvinists still want to be called Calvinists and refuse to admit they are Arminians in any way. The issues between Calvin and Arminius were unconditional election and irresistible grace, not eternal security.

I have a friend who graduated from Moody as a 5 Point Calvinist. Over the years, he has changed his beliefs to only believe in the 5th point. However, he insists he is still a 5 Point Calvinist; but he changed the definitions of the first four points. Apparently among the Calvinists world, the name Arminian has been talked against so much that the One Point Calvinists don't want to admit they are Arminians in any way.