The Southern Baptist Convention has been perhaps the greatest means by which the Gospel has been presented to the world, at least during the history of the United States. No other Protestant denomination has achieved as much in their 163 years of existence. Thus, all Disciples of Jesus should consider important the developments that occur within the Convention. If your particular groups or movements aren’t going through what the Convention has, they either already have or likely they will.

That is why a conference held last week was, in my view, important enough to for me to attend. The “John 3:16 Conference” was held Thursday, November 6 and Friday, November 7, 2008, at First Baptist Church, Woodstock, Georgia. The purpose of “John 3:16” was to construct a theological answer to the burgeoning resurgence of Calvinism within the Southern Baptist Convention.

The "invitation" or "altar call" is a common tradition in many "low church" bodies. Invitations to accept Christ are not new, however, the specific form of invitation known as an "altar call" is a relatively new practice. It started with the evangelist Charles Finney, back in the 1830's. Other evangelists who have popularized the practice include D.L Moody, Billy Sunday, Corrie ten Boom, and Billy Graham.

The 400th anniversary of Arminius' "Declaration of Sentiments" occurred last week. We missed the opportunity to mark the anniversary on its exact day here at our site. But it is still worth drawing attention to the anniversary, and more importantly, the declaration it marks. (See below for a link to the document itself.)

Here are some comments from Dr. Keith Stanglin about this important treatise:

"On Oct. 30, 1608, Jacobus Arminius delivered his now famous
Declaration of Sentiments. On Oct. 20, he was summoned to the Hague to present his views to the States of Holland on the controversial doctrines of the day. He spent most of the speech deconstructing the Calvinist view of predestination later known as supralapsarianism. He then presented his positive view of predestination, and briefly addressed other important topics.

Please click on the attachment to view James Arminius, "A Declaration of the Sentiments of Arminius".

This treatise is an accessible introduction to Arminius' thought. It treats predestination, divine providence, the freedom of the will, the grace of God, the divinity of the Son of God, and the justification of man before God. Written less than a year before his death, this work represents Arminius' mature opinions on the topics he treats.

I grew up in a Southern Baptist church that was focused on the gospel. The issues of Calvinism and Arminianism never came up. I had never even heard that there was a debate until 1998 when John MacArthur’s Study Bible came out. That’s when I accepted Calvinism (to the utter disappointment of my parents).

I joined a (PCA) Presbyterian church (Christ’s Community Presbyterian Chuch ~ now Providence Presbyterian Church in Salisbury, MD). I still believed in bapism by immersion (believer’s only, not infants), and the pastor didn’t care one way or the other. I swallowed Calvinism hook, line, and sinker; and I couldn’t believe that everyone wasn’t a Calvinist: it all seemed so clear to me!

by
James M. Leonard
arminianbaptist.blogspot.com

[Editor's note: Please remember that individual posts do not necessarily represent SEA's official position, but represent the views of the individual author of the post. With regard to this excellent and informative post, please note that the author was careful to qualify many of his comments about Welseyanism as applying to "some" Wesleyans (rather than all).]

INTRODUCTION

For those well acquainted with the Calvinist-Arminian debate, Reformation Arminianism (or Classic Arminianism) is a theological system which emphasizes universal atonement within a framework of Calvinistic total depravity and the penal satisfaction view of the atonement (explained in the paragraphs below).

by James M. Leonard
Arminian Baptist

Roger Olson has written a helpful volume entitled, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities. Basically, he sets the record straight on a number of issues where Calvinist polemic has falsely depicted Arminian theology. He does this in a consistent and systematic way, first by detailing the false and extreme allegations made by mainstream Calvinists, and then refuting them by examining the theological trajectory on the given topic beginning with Arminius and passing through his earliest followers, then Wesley, and then the 19th century Wesleyan theologians, and then concluding with contemporary Arminian theologians.*

The subject of God's knowledge has been a seed bed of debate lately. Modern day Molinists believe that their system offers a middle-ground approach to theology, avoiding both Calvinism and Arminianism. One of my professors at SEBTS is somewhat convinced that Arminius was a Molinist.

The Calvinist theologian Richard A. Muller noted that Arminius had studied from the likes of Luis de Molina, as well as others, but Arminius never declared himself to be a follower of Molina's systematic thought concerning God's knowledge. However, there are traces of Molina's thought in the writings of Arminius (see Muller, God, Creation, and Providence in the Thought of Jacob Arminius, Baker Books, pp. 159-161).

I'm sure you have heard it before: "I used to be an Arminian, so recognize that I know what I'm talking about."

The conversion argument is actually a common argument among all forms of debate, especially religon. It is the argument of personal experience and a claim to understand both sides. I've used it myself before, since I have changed my mind on several topics.

It is worthy to note that we are not dealing with a logical fallacy here. First of all, one cannot refute personal experience. I cannot argue with you about whether or not you truly experienced something: I wasn't there. Secondly, if one was fully committed to one point of view, and understood it, and then changed sides, then there is probably a truly powerful reason for it. Finally, given the same two conditions of the second point, the person would understand both conditions.

Well, since so many Calvinists have in fact converted from an Arminian position, shouldn't this argument bear a lot of wieght? Well, in this case, no. Why?

Dennis M. Rokser is the pastor of Duluth Bible Church in Duluth, Minnesota, and has authored a publication entitled: “Seven Reasons NOT to ask Jesus into your heart.” Here is a link to his article, and I will provide a response:

http://duluthbible.org/widgets/download.aspx?file=%2ffiles%2fResources%2fPublications%2fBooklet_PDF_Files%2fSeven_Reason_3rdEdition.pdf

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. - Genesis 1:27 AV

What does it mean for us to have been made in the image of a Holy Lord God? There have been some who contend it is a past state, lost to the fall of man in the garden. Others have suggested it is an image reserved for those redeemed souls who abide in Christ. Others still have staked a claim in promoting an image formed only in the elect of God from before the foundations of the world. Most of Christianity seems to accept the idea that all of mankind was formed in the image of God and scripture appears to bear this out. When establishing the covenant with Noah, the LORD provided an injunction against murder and its penalty with the following:

People are often tempted to believe that there is some mediate option which will allow them to avoid the Calvinist/Arminian debate. This inclination comes from a commendable impulse -- to hold fast to Scriptural truth without imposing a man-made system, and avoid being sidetracked in the work of the Gospel by endless doctrinal controversy. These impulses lead people to declare that they are "Biblicist" or that they are both Arminian and Calvinist.

Now, within Calvinist and Arminian frameworks there are many different issues and nuances of dispute. There are systematizers and systemic implications, but there is really only one basic issue: Does God unconditionally choose who will be saved, and who will not? If you believe this you are a Calvinist, if you do not, you are, in the general sense an Arminian. It really is as simple as that.

http://www.gospeltruth.net/foster_on_cal/otc_index.htm

This link will take you off site. Please come back here for more reources on soteriology.

Moore, Bob. "Calvinism -- Ten Little Caveats"

This link will take you off site. Please remember to come back here for more resources on soteriolgy.

The following essay first appeared in Clark H. Pinnock (ed.), The Grace of God and the Will of Man (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1989) pp. 15-29. This version does not include the endnotes from the original. Please take note that Pinnock advocates open theism in this article, which is a position that SEA rejects and is at odds with classic Arminianism (our statement of faith, which every member muts affirm, precludes open theism). There may be other points of disagreement as well. We make the article availabe because it still makes a number of good points about the issue of soteriology in support of a more Arminian view. Please remember that articles included on the site do not necessarily represent SEA's official position.

This article was taken from http://revivaltheology.gharvest.com/1_cal_arm/pilgrim.html

From Augustine to Arminius: A Pilgrimage in Theology

by Clark H. Pinnock