Age of accountability, Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Arminianism, Calvinism

I don't think any denomination is totally free of pelagianists even if they have monergist confessions. Some Lutherans have written, "Man is free to reject the gospel but not accept. The Calvinists teach that man is free neither to accept or reject the gospel." I answer, "No, that's what the Lutherans teach! Read the Augsburg Confession, the Smalcald Articles, the Formula of Concord, and Bondage of the Will. But, above all, read the scriptures. And, if you still believe that man has free will to reject the gospel, okay. But don't call yourself a Lutheran."

 

The Holy Spirit makes unwilling men willing but, take comfort, the Pope certainly agrees you.

 

From what I've seen, Erasmus made many good arguments (rather than "dreaming them up), but Luther was simply a more fierce arguer. People too often seem to mistake stating a case and citing prooftexts with fervor (including often putting the other side down) for true biblical substance. If anything, it's probably covering up a lack of it.

 

The last time the Lutherans wrote a confession was 1580. I will do some research and give you an answer that is directly from the Book of Concord.

 

The Evangelical Lutheran Church has not changed its position on perseverance of the saints as recorded in the Book of Concord. The first selection was written in 1537 by Martin Luther. The second selection is from the final Lutheran confession written in 1580.

 

The Formula does reject preservation of the saints in a Calvinist sense; however, some Lutherans go beyond the Formula by expressing a freedom to reject which is contrary to the Formula. The Formula also rejects predestination based on "in view of" forseen faith. The larger context of my quote makes it clear monergism is being upheld.

Here is a link to the section of Formula that has produced so much controversy between Lutherans and Calvinists:Formula of Concord, Election.

 

The Arminian position is that God "Convicts the WORLD of sin" John 16.

The Arminian position is that "God DRAWS ALL mankind unto HIM" John 12:32

And the Arminian position is that THIS is what gives ALL mankind the ability "to choose".

Arminians do not see human choice as "always doing whatever you are made/forced to do". God is operating on a higher level than that.

An Arminian is bascially a two point Calvinist in some ways TP.


In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob, what you just said is what I have understood about the five-point Arminian position. I want to ask you about some more details. It sounds like you are saying that humans always have free will. You identified yourself previously as a four-point Arminian, believing in eternal security. If humans always have free will, does that mean that a Christian is capable of freely choosing to become a non-Christian but will never do so? If the indwelling Holy Spirit prevents or preserves the Christian from making such an unwise freewill choice, then it seems that in reality the Christian does not have true free will. I think the indwelling Holy Spirit allows the Christian to commit unintentional sins of ignorance, but not willful, unpardonable sins.

Do you define free will as the ability to form a bias one way or the other from a position of neutrality (equipoise)? Is total depravity counteracted by common grace from the moment of birth so that a person can make a freewill choice from birth or the age of accountability? Your answers will be helpful to me. In some ways I understand the five-point Calvinist position better than I understand the five-point Arminian position or the four-point Arminian position. I believe in three of the points of Calvinism: total depravity, unconditional election, and perseverance of the saints (TUP). I believe that some people sometimes have true free will (the ability to form a bias from equipoise) when they experience the special conviction of the Holy Spirit.

 

I don't believe in OSAS - it would be inconsistent with the Arminian position to say that apart from God He grants you free will but once in Christ you lose it.

This is the only real valid criticism I have found Calvinists making against Arminians in all the years I have participated in these discussions. I agree with you - Arminians that believe in assurance based on OSAS are doing it "in spite of" the Arminian model and not "because of it".

In the same way that 5 point Calvinists cling to assurance "in spite of" the retro-delete principle of Perseverence in that model of Calvinism "not because of it".

Infants are incapable of abstract concepts of heaven, hell, sin, obedience, love, worship, confession, repentance, hypocracy.

As Christ said in John 3 the Holy Spirit moves upon the soul long before we realize what is going on. That drawing of ALL mankind to Christ is in place as is the sinful nature - at all times.

Even by Calvinist standards that drawing ENABLES the choice that total depravity disables.

Then you are a classic 3-pt Calvinist.

I agree that this is what enables choice. But I think that God places that in the experience of all mankind as He draws all mankind to Himself.

Those that choose to become saints - have even more freedom than that - because they experience the new birth. They can freely choose salvation or death for all eternity.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob, thanks for clarifying those things for me.