The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum MJM, 5-Point Calvinism and the Bible

(Fred) With all due respect Joe, there is such a thing as "Reformed Arminianism." The word "Reformed" is not exclusive to Calvinistic thought and no Calvinist, at least in my opinion, should think he has a corner of exclusivity with its usage. Dr. Robert Picirilli of the Free Will Baptist College in Nashville asserts his position as a Reformed Arminian and wrote a book on the subject defending it. There is a gracious review of it written by Roger Nicole found here at the Founders website:

Founder Journal reviews

Scroll down to the fourth review.

And I have reviewed that book at my own site, which I think I have linked here on other posts in the past:

Picirilli Review

The FWB consider themselves "Reformed" in the sense that they affirm Jacob Arminius's initial theology that he articulated before his death. Reformed Arminians embrace the substitutionary view of the atonement as opposed to later Arminian development (with in the first generation of Arminianism) of the governmental view of the atonement developed by the lawyer Grotius. Reformed Arminianism also embraces the five solas of the Reformation. So as much as we Calvinist may crinkle our noses at the thought of Arminians holding to Reformed thought, I believe it is being historically dishonest to blanketedly claim there is "no such thing."

However, on the other hand, the fact that historical Reformed Arminianism had to "adjust" its theology, almost immediately after Arminius's followers published their Remonstrants, demonstrates the bald inconsistency of the entire system. Honest, Bible believing Arminians cannot affirm the 5 solas for too long before their system implodes upon itself, because it cannot withstand any meaningful exegetical criticism. I think some of the more thoughtful critics of Reformed Arminianism in recent years has been from the Open Theism camp. They are honest enough to recognize the problems inherent with Arminianism.

Also, Arminius himself was heavily influenced by Molina and middle knowledge, even though he picked and chose those parts of molinism that he favored for his interest. Reformed Arminians tend to gloss over this fact and pretend there is nothing to that, though it reveals that Arminius gained a lot of his thinking from Roman Catholicism rather than the theology of the Reformation.

Anyhow, I will be curious to read how our new friend will defend his theology. I am always eager to learn from dissenters.

Fred