Augustine (and therefore Calvinism) was influenced by BOTH pagan and Gnostic heretical ideas.

-

There were NO CALVINISTS in the Early Church. No orthodox Christian theologian, apologist and/or leader taught the doctrines today associated with Calvinism. I've cited many of them in this blog and can post quote after quote, passage after passage from Church leaders in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries who TO THE MAN taught against the way Calvinists understand the Scriptures today. 

And WHO was to blame? Where did "Calvinism" come from? It ALL came from/through Augustine in the early 5th Century. Previously, it was believed that Augustine's change/shift came in AD397. More recent scholarship would argue that it wasn't until AD412. 

What is irrefutable is that it was Augustine who "introduced" the novel doctrines that today we call "Calvinism". 

The irony of ironies is that one can find the doctrines of Calvinism in the days of the Early Church. But, they are NOT being taught by the Church; rather, they are being taught by the heretics! This has been demonstrated exhaustively, and irrefutably in the Oxford Ph.D. dissertation, 

Augustine's Conversion from Traditional Free Choice to "Non-free Free Will": A Comprehensive Methodology - Dissertation Link: Ph.D. Dissertation


To quote the author at length as to the summary of his findings about the non-Apostolic, non-Christian influences on the theology of St. Augustine: 






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tertullian or Luther on "The Bondage of the Will"? - I'll go with Tertullian.

-
I find, then, that man was constituted free by God. He was master of his own will and power. ...For a law would not be imposed upon one who did not have it in his power to render that obedience which is due to law. Nor again, would the penalty of death be threatened against sin, if a contempt of the law were impossible to man in the liberty of his will. ...Man is free, with a will either for obedience or resistance.  Tertullian (c. 207, W), 3.300,301.   As to fortune, it is man's freedom of will.  Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.201.   This will be the power of the grace of God—more potent indeed than nature—exercising its sway over the faculty that underlies itself within us: even the freedom of our will. ...We define the soul as having sprung from the breath of God. It is immortal...[and] free in its determinations.  Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.202.
Read more

If Calvinism were true, Jesus would be a liar.

-
I am grateful that almost every Calvinist I know is inconsistent. They don't actually  apply their systematic to the Scriptures. If they did, then they would have to concede that Jesus was a liar. Why? Because on Calvinism, mankind is dead in their trespasses in such a way as they cannot respond to anything, not even the Gospel. They are totally unable to do anything. According to Calvinism, the only way they can be saved is for God to resurrect them (to regenerate them) so that they can believe. Yes, Calvinism teaches that regeneration (being born again) must happen BEFORE a person can believe the Gospel. Why? Because they are dead.  But then according to Calvinists, when God gives His "effectual call" to a person, they are brought to life and made able to respond to, to believe the Gospel. And from beginning to end they are enabled by God to persevere in faith. If they are "effectually called" they will be saved no matter what!  So why is Jesus a liar accordin...
Read more

John 6 - The Apostolic Exegesis

-
I think my new counsel to each and every Augustinian/Calvinist/Monergist is to study Historical Theology because again and again, they demonstrate they are ignorant of the earliest Christian exegesis of John 6 and other passages the Calvinists use to support their particular doctrines. Hearing again about a recent debate between Leighton Flowers (from Soteriology 101) and Gabe Hughes (from WWUTT) on John 6 and Hughs (who argues for the Calvinist interpretation) begins immediately arguing for how the text would have been understood to those that first heard it/received it.  What Hughes obviously doesn't realize is that instead of arguing for the "Apostolic Exegesis" of the text, articulates Augustine's 5th Century understanding which was FIRST FOUND amongst the Gnostic heretics (late 2nd and 3rd centuries) and later the Gnostic Manichaeans (late 3rd and 4th centuries). If only the Calvinist Exegetes (the term I'll use to refer to all of them) would study early Chur...
Read more