Five Articles of the Remonstrance of Jacobus Arminius of 1610

[Discern]

well that's a good thing

of course the Holy Spirit will draw people to Christ, but choose

we are not forced by 'irresistible grace and regeneration before salvation' as per Calvinists

Calvinists do not teach “forced”. They teach nature/heart change, that results in being made willing in the day of salvation.

I believe the same, but not that it is irresistible. And I also believe Christ died for all and God is not willing that any should perish. How these all work together, I do not fully understand. But they are not contradictory, I think they are paradoxical but all true

 

[Discern]

Calvinists do not teach “forced”. They teach nature/heart change, that results in being made willing in the day of salvation.

I believe the same, but not that it is irresistible. And I also believe Christ died for all and God is not willing that any should perish. How these all work together, I do not fully understand. But they are not contradictory, I think they are paradoxical but all true

I meant to say “seem to be paradoxical” above.

 

[Discern]

well that's a good thing

of course the Holy Spirit will draw people to Christ, but choose

we are not forced by 'irresistible grace and regeneration before salvation' as per Calvinists

Would you say you agree with article four of the Remonstarants in the OP?

If not, what part do you disagree with?

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Would you say you agree with article four of the Remonstarants in the OP?

If not, what part do you disagree with?

honestly?

I smell a good dose of what non-Calvinists do not see in scripture

in other words, no choice

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Calvinists do not teach “forced”. They teach nature/heart change, that results in being made willing in the day of salvation.

I believe the same, but not that it is irresistible. And I also believe Christ died for all and God is not willing that any should perish. How these all work together, I do not fully understand. But they are not contradictory, I think they are paradoxical but all true

you and I have not made acquaintance with the same Calvinists

and to be sure, there are many flavors

 

[Discern]

honestly?

I smell a good dose of what non-Calvinists do not see in scripture

in other words, no choice

I don’t see that there at all.

What I see is “ I am weak, but He is Strong”!

 

[7seasrekeyed]

I don’t see that there at all.

well of course not

you would not have asked what I thought of it if you had

enough for tonight

I don't want nightmares about Calvin torching folks at the stake (kidding. kinda )

 

[Discern]

well of course not

you would not have asked what I thought of it if you had

enough for tonight

I don't want nightmares about Calvin torching folks at the stake (kidding. kinda )

In that article 4, what I see is “God works in you both to will and to do”. Phil. 2:13

This is not Calvin, it is Bible

 

[Discern]

In that article 4, what I see is “God works in you both to will and to do”. Phil. 2:13

This is not Calvin, it is Bible

I also see “every good gift comes down from the Father of Lights” in that article.

In other words, as Spurgeon says «All of Grace”

Goodnight friend

 

[Whispered]

The Book of Acts chapter 10:34-35: "... Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him."

 

[Discern]

The Book of Acts chapter 10:34-35: "... Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him."

No conflict between the verse you are quoting and what has said.

The fear of the Lord is wisdom, and wisdom comes from the Lord

Grace...

 

[Whispered]

No conflict between the verse you are quoting and what has been said

It silences all of the TULIP points.
(More verses that refute TULIP) 1 Timothy 2:4: "Who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the Truth."

 

[Discern]

It silences all of the TULIP points.
(More verses that refute TULIP) 1 Timothy 2:4: "Who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the Truth."

The OP was not about TULIP or Calvinism. I don’t know how we got so far off topic

You do realize that the Remonstrants /Arminians did/do not hold to TULIP?

 

[Discern]

It silences all of the TULIP points.
(More verses that refute TULIP) 1 Timothy 2:4: "Who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the Truth."

For the record, I have NO PROBLEM with 1 Tim. 2:4, nor do I have a problem with your interpretation of it. I agree with you on that issue

 

[Discern]

For the record, I have NO PROBLEM with 1 Tim. 2:4, nor do I have a problem with your interpretation of it. I agree with you on that issue

...and I like your avatar.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The OP was not about TULIP or Calvinism. I don’t know how we got so far off topic. You do realize that the Remonstrants /Arminians did/do not hold to TULIP?

And that was precisely why they published their Five Articles. So the OP is about opposition to Calvinism and that is right on topic.

Unfortunately the Remonstrants continued to corporate some of the teachings of Reformed Theology, so it was not an all-out rejection of TULIP. I have already covered all this in earlier posts. The problem is that neither group wants to go back to the actual biblical Gospel (which you would think is the desire of every Christian).

 

[Whispered]

...and I like your avatar.

Thank you. This is the actual full picture:

 

[Discern]

And that was precisely why they published their Five Articles. So the OP is about opposition to Calvinism and that is right on topic.

Unfortunately the Remonstrants continued to corporate some of the teachings of Reformed Theology, so it was not an all-out rejection of TULIP. I have already covered all this in earlier posts. The problem is that neither group wants to go back to the actual biblical Gospel (which you would think is the desire of every Christian).

I don’t know which teachings you object to, do not much I can say. I do not agree with everything in the five articles, but I am more midway between Calvinism and Arminianism. I can’t think of anything where I would say I reject both sides on any issue, but rather either both get it right or else one side or the other gets it right.

It seems to me that usually to disagree with both on issues regarding salvation amounts to a departure from orthodoxy. For example if one denies the fallenness of man, or reject saved by grace through faith alone, or believe in universalism, all I would view as departing from biblical orthodoxy.

But I don’t know what your objections are, so I don’t know.

 

[Whispered]

The OP was not about TULIP or Calvinism. I don’t know how we got so far off topic

You do realize that the Remonstrants /Arminians did/do not hold to TULIP?

I do indeed, thank you.



THE FIVE ARTICLES OF REMONSTRANCE


In 1609, Jacob Arminius died. His chief students and followers condensed his teaching into Five Articles. There were two main individuals who put the Five Points of Arminianism together: Jan Uytenbogaert assisted by Simon Episcopius. They were his closest associates and most devoted students. [1] So, in 1610, they summarized Arminius' teaching which was against Martin Luther, a principal Theologian of the Protestant Reformation. Now John Calvin, who was alive at the time of Martin Luther, set about to more fully explain the teachings of Martin Luther and the True Protestants in more precise detail in order to present them all to Francis I, King of France. As we will recall, Luther, who was still alive when Calvin composed his Institutes, read Calvins' works and agreed with them all 100% as being an accurate presentation of his (Luthers') teaching and his sermons, and fit to be presented to Francis I, King of France for his edification.
Now Jacob Arminius, basically, had believed himself to be more of a Bible scholar than Martin Luther and he (Arminius) began teaching what disagreed with Luther. Arminius began to draw some students, and also some Roman Catholic prelates who were very interested indeed in Arminius' presentation that seemed to overthrow Luther. Later, the Remonstrants that disagreed with the core teachings of the Reformation summarized their disagreement with Martin Luther into five basic points and called these five Points "The Articles of the Remonstrants" ("they" being the "remonstrants" or objectors to Luthers' teaching, and their objection to the core Doctrines upon which the True Protestant Reformation was based). They had learned these things from Jacob Arminius.

SINCE ARMINIUS' CORE TEACHING WAS IN THESE FIVE POINTS THEY SOON BECAME KNOWN AS THE FIVE POINTS OF ARMINIANISM

The Five Points of Arminianism were the main reason The Synod of Dort was Convened[2] in 1618. This Synod of Dort (as an answer to the Five Points of Arminianism), produced what became known as "The Five Points of Calvinism" as a result. T.U.L.I.P. was simply the Biblical refutation and rebuke to the Five Points (or Articles) of Arminianism which appeared before what are called "The Five Points of Calvinism" (Calvin had long since passed on to his Heavenly Reward). The True Protestants Called this Council (Synod) to clearly set down what they believed so that later, there would be no doubt in anyones' mind concerning the teachings of Martin Luther as compared to Arminius or the Roman Catholic Church (the Roman Catholic Church later did approve Arminianism, and still does).

ARMINIANISM IS RULED HERESY AND A PERVERSION OF THE TEACHINGS OF MARTIN LUTHER

Arminianism was Unanimously Ruled a Heresy at the Synod of Dort by all the Delegates representing the True Protestant Churches. [3]
Here are the original Five Points of Arminiansim. Later, Semi-Arminianism added to and altered these Five Original Points. This will be discussed later.

THE FIVE POINTS OF ARMINIANISM.....Article continues

 

[Nehemiah6]

But I don’t know what your objections are, so I don’t know.

Please see posts #32, 51,52, 74, and 77.