Search This Blog

The Arminian Fundamentalist

I use the term "Arminian" because it is the closest theological term to the Apostolic soteriology that people understand. Technically, Arminians hold to the Reformed understanding of "Total Depravity" meaning total inability which is NOT what the Apostolic understanding of the Fall was. I use the term "Fundamentalist" because the term 'Evangelical' has tragically all but lost its historic meaning and understanding in today's theological world.

Tertullian was NOT a Calvinist!

Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

- March 07, 2020

Get link
Facebook
X
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps

Comments

David JohnMarch 8, 2020 at 5:38 AM
and Luther got it wrong in "On the Bondage of the Will"
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

If Calvinism were true, Jesus would be a liar.

- November 07, 2022

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...

Why do I fight against Calvinism?

- November 01, 2022

A lot of Christians believe it to be a waste of time and energy to contend for certain Christian doctrines and/or to oppose other Christian doctrines. Shouldn't Christians simply try to unite over and against the non-Christian ideological and non-Christian religious forces of the world? For many doctrines, I would agree wholeheartedly. I don't think Christians should be fighting each other with regard to Baptism, to Eschatology, to Church Government, to Communion, to the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, etc. etc. I'm not saying that there aren't correct views and incorrect ones with regard to all of the aforementioned doctrines, but none of them say anything essential about God's character and/or His essence. In short, there are lots of doctrines we can agree to disagree upon. Especially the doctrines that don't have anything to do with maligning God's character. Take for example the issue of the mode of baptism. Whether we sprinkle someone or immerse them enti...

John 6 - The Apostolic Exegesis

- January 29, 2022

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...