The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Arminianism: Dead or Alive?

Whew..... now that's good to hear. I was not a little worried that Roger Nicole had departed the ranks.

Ok guys, I am confused.

R.C. Sproul in his book "Willing to Believe" which traces the history of Pelagianism and Arminianism states that Arminians are saved "but just barely".

But he does not elaborate as to why, although he implies it is because they accept faith alone (justification), even though they do not accept grace alone (monergism).

But in the above article, "The Pelagian Captivity of the Church" he pretty clearly takes the position that today's Arminians aren't saved at all.

Are the Hyper-Calvinists right in at least one aspect that so-called "Arminians" who in reality today are "Semi-Pelagian" aren't saved?

Does the WCF take a clear stand on this, eg. anathemizes Arminianism as the Canons of Dort did?

thanks,
- Kurt

Kurt,

Unfortunately, I too have found a few "inconsistencies" in what R.C. Sproul, Sr. has written over the years on a particular topic. Obviously, I believe what he wrote in the article, "The Pelagian Captivity of the Church" to be the correct view. However, I think it is more than important to say again, that IF <---- a semi-Pelagian/Arminian REALLY believes in his heart what his theology states, then he/she cannot be saved. Why? Because that individual is resting primarily upon his/her "free-will decision for Christ" rather upon grace alone in Christ alone. Those theologies teach synergism: grace + works (free-will choice) = justification. Only by questioning an individual can one make a reasonably sure determination of that person's spiritual condition/state. So again, if a person's heart (deep conviction) is consistent with his/her head knowledge, if semi-Pelagian/Arminian, then they are not saved.

The hyper-Calvinists you refer to err in making a cart blanc prohibition against any and all who profess semi-Pelagianism or Arminianism as to salvation. They leave no room whatsoever for the exception of someone who meets the criteria above, i.e., their hearts rest squarely and only upon grace alone in Christ alone, despite their embracing doctrines that deny such.

The WCF does not make a clear statement on this issue as does the Canons of Dordt mainly because of the intent in writing the document, i.e., it was not polemic in nature as was the Canons of Dordt. If the writers of the WCF were to include a section on this subject, they would have undoubtedly echoed the Canons of Dordt.

In His grace,

Doesn't this require that monergists (in general) need to evangelize synergists, and to treat them as unsaved (allowing for the exception you mention)? Don't all the verses that prohibit fellowship, joint ministry, marriage, church discipline, come into play here?

I don't know of anyone who practices this other than the hypers, am I just uninformed?

Do any reformed denominations practice these things that you know of?

thanks,
- Kurt

Yes and yes, IMHO. Even IF someone wants to include all professing semi-Pelagians and/or Arminians as true believers, joint ministries and marriages are at best problematic. I will assume I don't need to elucidate the various situations where things would be strained at best and near impossible at worst should the two groups be joined. Calvinism is disdained by most and even hated today. That being true, how could a semi-Pelagian group join with a Calvinist group to evangelize together? For a "mixed" marriage, the choices of churches, type of worship, family devotions, books to be read, etc., etc. would all be contentious issues.

In regard to who practices these things I haven't a clue and to be honest it isn't my concern. I can only be true to my own convictions. I can tell you that I could not be a member of a church that professed to adhere to the Reformation Confessions but promoted semi-Pelagian/Arminian doctrines, materials, methodologies, etc. and/or bartered away those great truths for the sake of "unity" with non-Reformed churches/groups. That kind of open and blatant hypocrisy is unacceptable to this old guy. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

Actually although I don't want to judge their hearts, but I would say that do support semi-pelagianism. But they seem to believe that Schuller and Hybels are Reformed.
If you are interested in finding out more I would suggest that you go to the CRC home page and ask them what they think of these ministries.
This is one of the things I did when finding out about the CRC.

Tom

Tom, I will visit their home page. It seems to me that in many cases officially the doctrine may not be semi-pelagian on paper but that in practice it is different.

Johan