Author Thread: A Puritans Mind ???
Admin


A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 19 Apr, 2011 04:34 PM

James Arminius (1560-1609)

The life of the arch-heretic of the Christian church responsible for reviving the heresy of Semi-Pelagianism.

Introduction to Arminius

by Dr. C. Matthew McMahon



After much thought, I have decided to add this section of the website into A Puritan�s Mind specifically for the benefit of the Calvinist. The Calvinist needs to have a thorough understanding of the Arminian tradition and their arguments. Deviant and mixed up forms of Arminianism are seen across the evangelical board of the contemporary church. If the Calvinist desires to deal faithfully with the Bible in opposition to the teachings of Arminianism, he must know what Arminianism teaches, even in it�s watered down and deviant forms today. Arminianism is not something hidden under a stone, but lives in full view, and in direct opposition, to the Gospel. It is a deceiving doctrine of demons wrought up from the pit of hell, where, in the consummation of the age, it will be cast for all eternity with the devil that spawned it and the false teachers who propagated it. My position on this doctrine is clear. I am opposed to the system of doctrine known as Arminianism. It is important to note at the outset that I have a very rigid opinion of Arminius and his writings. It is my opinion that James Arminius (James Harmensen) was an arch-heretic (a heresiarc) of the Christian faith. He was a deceived man who deceived others; those ultimately known as the Remonstrants, and today he still has some followers. Good intentions do not count for truth. He was a false teacher of the faith even if he believed he had the smallest amount of �good intention.� Now, this portion of the website is not to be taken as �Arminian bashing.� That is not my intent at all, and I will not tolerate the accusation that I am bashing Arminians on this portion of my site. Nor am I calling Arminius �names�. My intent, as I said, was for the benefit of the Calvinist, first and foremost. Though I have made myself known as to my opinion of Arminius in this first paragraph, and as to my outlook on the teachings of the system he produced and that the Remonstrants taught, I am still intending this portion of the site to edify the Calvinist by systematically refuting each of the major anti-biblical tenants of the Arminian system of thought and placing the Bible in the forefront. In the end, we should have a clear understanding of what classical Arminianism taught, and what the Bible says.

Whenever the Calvinist sets forth the ideas contained in the doctrines of grace, and fervently sets his pen (or keyboard) against the writings and thoughts of the Arminians, he is usually arguing against secondary ideas based upon his knowledge of the subject. What do I mean by this? I mean to say that instead of hearing the doctrine of repentance from Arminius himself, or from the Remonstrants (his followers), the Calvinist will refute the Arminian doctrine of repentance based on preconceived notions, assumptions, other books written about other authors who say they are Arminian, and the like. They are arguing against secondary ideas - on second hand information. Now it may be that the learned Calvinist �gets lucky� and, at times, hits the proverbial nail on the head. (We will not even mention the ignorant Calvinist who cannot even get the historical facts correct much less Arminius� doctrines.) He may certainly set forth, say, the doctrines of grace, in a manner which is consistent with orthodoxy, and at the same time he may adequately refute false ideas which rise against those doctrines even unknowingly. By doing all this that does not mean that he has a handle on the manner in which Arminius himself stated the doctrine or perceived the idea. In his ignorance of Arminius� ideas that does not make the Calvinist wrong in his approach to correctly handling the Word of Truth, but it does make him wrong in the manner of understanding the position of others before he critiques it. Ignorance in this manner is not to be tolerated. I am saddened by the lack of Calvinist prowess here in today�s Reformed Church. Books are being written, arguments stated, money is being made, and the �truth� is being proclaimed. Revision of these abound � do they not? In all honesty, I am not interested in them. Let us all stop arguing about these secondary issues and first have a real handle on what the Arminian actually believes and teaches. But we are only able to do this if we understand the intricate root system of classical �Arminianism.� Those who claim to be Arminian today and write books against their preconceived ideas of Calvinism (Geisler, Hunt, et al.) would be scolded and rebuked by Arminius himself for misunderstanding even what Arminius taught. The Remonstrants would have nothing to do with them. Today�s �Arminians� are as much classical Arminians as a 2003 Lamborghini Diablo is a replica of the first Ford motorcar. We are dealing with apples and oranges. (Note: Do not assume that I accuse James White of being wrong in refuting those men (Geisler, Hunt, et al); but do understand that those men know little, or nothing, about what James Arminius actually taught. Their own mixed up brand of �theology� is aberrant to say the least.)

There are certain kinds of Calvinists I am trying to help. On the one hand, there is the sympathetic Calvinist. He believes Arminians are as much a true Christian as any other Christians. Yes, they may be in serious error, but still, in all they hold to in error, they still preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and so, they are saved. He is wrong. Then there is the other side of the spectrum, the hardened Calvinist, who asserts that all Arminians are doomed and damned, and the only Gospel is to be found in the doctrines of TULIP. Only those who adhere to TULIP are saved. He is wrong as well. In knowing that both extremes exist in today�s culture, the Calvinist needs to develop a pastoral heart, while at the same time he must stand unswervingly to the truth of the Bible in a manner in which does not comprise the faith, once for all delivered unto the saints (Jude 3).

Lastly, on a personal note, I want to position myself fairly here. Though I believe that the system of doctrine known as Arminianism is heretical, that does not mean I am one of the hardened Calvinists who has little or no compassion on the �Arminians� of today. I am not in the first camp, nor am I in the second camp. To say �Arminians� are deceived brethren is an oxy-moron. It�s simply a matter of really understanding the Gospel. Yet, to throw a theological blanket over the entirety of Arminianism today and to say they are all lost is to act irresponsibly. Saying that is unfair, and Calvinists are not showing forth a prudent biblical mind when they say it. I would suggest that the Calvinist first read Dr. Nicole�s very good article �How to deal with those who differ from us.� After that, after meditating on that, then come and read through the posts here as they arrive.

I do hope that this portion of the site becomes a help to those who need it.

The quotations taken from Arminius� writings will be from the following source:

Arminius, James. The Works of Arminius, Translated by William Nichols, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI: 1991. Volumes 1-3.



This edition is a copy from what was known as the �London Edition� written in Latin.



The format for citations will be as follows (3:125).

This would mean volume 3, page 125 of Arminius' writings.

C. Matthew McMahon

October 31, 2002



Sourced from www.apuritansmind.com *** More of man�s Spew for the Pew�

Its no wonder why Calvinists & Arminians Battle�

I�m so very Glad that Ima �Judeao~Christian��Lord have Mercy ***�xo

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 20 Apr, 2011 08:31 PM

Oh well this is a great point. I heard of God saving people from other sources yes. I believed it when I read it in scripture. Same as you heard God doesn't save from other sources. We are twins, almost

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 20 Apr, 2011 08:42 PM

Actually, ummm, No.

I was raised in the Catholic Church, Catholic School, Altar Boy etc....At age 27 I decided to quit the Catholic Church because they said Church tradition takes precedence over Scripture. I sat down at my kitchen table almost every night with the Bible, a Bible Dictionary and a Strongs Concordance. Never did I come to the doctrines of grace, however I did come to Jesus!

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 20 Apr, 2011 08:51 PM

And never once heard a pastor that preach anything other than Catholicism! Well I'm proud of you. However that still makes us no different :)

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 20 Apr, 2011 09:22 PM

Yes, I believe we are both Christians.

However the way I came to my beliefs was no different than back in the time of Luther and Calvin; I got my hands on a Bible! The way I came to my beliefs was to take the Bible as God's word, and then to take God at His word, which said If I asked, He would give me the Holy Spirit to guide me into all truth, and I believe He has and got me out of the Catholic Church. What I have been given is a gift directly from God as He promises in His word to those who ask.

With that said, perhaps you can understand why I am adamant about things being spelled out in Scripture and not a big fan of systematic theology or Church tradition.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 20 Apr, 2011 09:29 PM

Yes and I am adamant about what scripture teaches as well.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 20 Apr, 2011 10:38 PM

Lsu there is one you unique problem that you and James have you do not believe the bible.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 21 Apr, 2011 08:23 AM

James Stated ~ When you open the bible, the Holy Spirit does NOT give you the correct interpretation of the Bible.

*** When a Child of God is Reading & Studying the Word of God and the Holy Spirit by Revelation Reveals Truth to the Child of GOD...It IS Correct Interpretation...To say Otherwise is Blasphemy...In so doing the Person has Equated Them Self as Supreme Above that which God has Deemed Holy Righteous...I pray the LORD Jesus will Forgive such Accusations Against His Perfect Holy Spirit...It is Written 3 times for Emphasis�

Mat 12:31~ �Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32~ And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.�

Mark 3:29~ �But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.�

Luke 12:10~ �And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.�

In Christ Jesus* Grace�xo

Post Reply



View Profile
History
A Puritans Mind ???
Posted : 21 Apr, 2011 04:20 PM

PJ - Lsu there is one you unique problem that you and James have you do not believe the bible.

Ryan - Coming from someone who doesn't know it, I tend not to put much stock in this.

Post Reply

Page : 1 2 3 4