This page is available Online at the #1 Spot on the Yahoo Search Engine with the Title "Arminianism," under the selection "Koornhert". Click Here to View
And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and He doeth according to His Will in the Army of Heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay His Hand, or say unto Him, What doest Thou? Daniel 4:35.
CORRECTLY IDENTIFYING THE "LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES" IN OUR OWN DAY
Many Evangelicals today say, "we don't follow a mans' words, we only follow Jesus' words" and "we don't have any 'doctrines' we only preach what the Bible says".[1] Those that aren't men-pleasers, deceivers or tricksters may be completely and totally unaware that the Doctrine they ARE preaching and the mans' words they DO FOLLOW usually have a name. In this study, it is what is called "Arminianism" as taught by Arminius. What is Arminianism? Who was Arminius?
The doctrine of Arminianism is associated with name of Jakobus Arminius, but actually it is Romanist theology.
Jakob (or James) Arminius (1560-1609), a Dutchman, originally had accepted, studied and taught the Doctrines of the Reformation [2] under the tuteledge of Theodore Beza (of Geneva Bible fame). Arminius became a highly-respected Pastor in Holland where he grew to settle. Since many believed him strong in the Faith, when some aspects of Reformed theology came under fire from a certain Dirck Koornhert, Arminius was selected to Defend the Reformed position: (the Augustinian-Lutherian position) of Unconditional Election and Irresistable Grace.
An interesting passage: Who said it?
ALL THINGS whatsoever arise from, and depend upon, the Divine Appointment (Predestination); where it was Foreordained who should Receive (be Given) the Word of Life (Salvation in Christ Jesus; the Elect alone), and who should disbelieve it (the non-elect cannot presevere); who should be Delivered from their sins (the Elect alone), and who should be hardened in them (the non-elect who are Predestined to Damnation); and who should be Justified (Saved Forever) and who should be condemned (Damned Eternally).
The Essenes? no. Calvin? no. This above (represents) Martin Luthers' teaching affirming the Doctrines of Predestination and Election. Arminius rejected Luther.
ARMINIUS GOES TO DEBATE KOORNHERT
Arminius supposedly went to defeat the arguments of Koornhert. He met with Koornhert in debate, but what happened then? There were a few that knew that Arminius was secretly in disagreement with the Reformed Faith. He was unfaithful to his Church. He even never prepared for Koornhert. As the debate progressed, it became increasingly more clear that Arminius was going to "go public" with his actual beliefs. At first, Arminus tried to keep up the charade, but because of the debating techniques Koornhert used and force of Koornherts' arguments, Arminius was swayed, became completely confused and then fully went over to Koornherts' position.
THE ATTEMPTED REINTRODUCTION OF PELAGIANISM
After the debate, Arminius publically announced his total switch and began vigorous opposition to Election and Irresistable Grace, especially Double Predestination as it is found in Augustines' writings and Luther and also Calvins' teachings.[3]
WHAT WAS HAPPENING HERE?
Beginning Bible students should not be confused by what really happened here. The fact is that Arminius accepted the Romanist interpretations long before and his teachings had been reintroducing a form of Roman Catholic theology for years. The Romish teaching saying Election is not based on G-ds' Pre-Ordainae Purpose of Election, which causes rhem to disagrees with John 6:44, Ephesians 1 and many other passages.
Arminius then went back to Romanist teaching that "election" doesn't mean to "choose", but only means that G-d "foreknows" who would believe "by their own free will" at some point in time and that is why they are called "elect". G-d never really "chooses" anyone as a Sovereign Act they teach, He just "foreknows" who will choose Him.
LUTHERS' ARGUMENTS WERE THROWN OUT BY ARMINIUS JUST AS THE ROMAN CHURCH HAD DONE
Martin Luther had already met and defeated this line of thinking recorded in the work The Bondage of the Will when Luther publically debated Erasmus of Rotterdam, who was the "resident genius" of the Roman Catholic Church (and much smarter than Koornhert could ever dream of being), and Luther had soundly thrashed all of Erasmus' arguments. Erasmus had written the work The Freedom of the Will which he wrote at the popes' urging to defeat Luthers' teaching. Erasmus was then picked and sent by Rome specifically to confront and to defeat Luther. Erasmus lost, big time.[4] For this, Luther was declared heretic and a reward for capturing Luther "dead or alive" was offered by Rome so that he could be tried for heresy and burned. Luthers' followers were called "Lutherian heretics". Luther was taken by a German Prince and secretly kept safe in his castle. The rest is Reformation history.
THE ENTIRE PROTESTANT CHURCH REBUKES ARMINIUS
The Protestant Churches were shocked that any Protestant Pastor would do such a thing. What did they do? They called a Council (a Synod) to go on Record that Arminius' teachings were totally false, and that he had been duped. This was put on Record by the Protestant Churches at the Synod of Dort.
THE SYNOD OF DORT (1618-1619)
The Synod of Dort was Convened especially to deal with the challenges brought by Arminianism.
It should be known that there were more recognized Protestant theologians and Protestant divines present at this Synod than have ever been assembled in one place before or since.
Upon Convocation, the Synod of Dort unanimously reaffirmed the Augustinian-Lutherian-Calvinist teachings regarding Election and Irresistable Grace, and denied that it was contingent upon G-ds' Foreknowledge
All of the Reformation Protestants, in other words, rejected the teachings of Arminius (which were actually their teachings of Rome all over again) totally.
WHAT ARMINIANISM TEACHES AND WHY WE WILL ALWAYS DISAGREE
Those that teach Arminianism, in the main, woll sooner or later place all of the power to Save on mans' free will.[5] It says that all can be Saved, and that Grace can be resisted by man. All of this makes for Conditional Salvation with unregenerate man at the center making his own mind up, and having the power to Save himself. Since man can "Save himself" then man can also "lose himself" by not "willing enough" to effect his own final Salvation.
This type teaching (emphasizing unregenerate mans' "free wiil") has naturally led many "denominations" to accept some form of other Heresies, Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism!
By teaching that an "Elect person" (for which they have a different definition of Elect) can be Saved, and then later quite possibly LOSE his Salvation, or "refuse, or give back the gift" deny G-ds' Sovereign Purpose in Election. People who teach this seem unaware of the Power and Love of His Calling? How can the persons who teach this ever have been Saved at all if they have not experienced these things?
After Arminius' death, his followers were careful to word their teaching to avoid Pelagianism, but todays' false teachers who use some part of Arminius' arguments may not even have the slightest idea that they have gotten way off-track and teach full-blown Pelagianism!
THE WITNESS OF HISTORY - JOSEPHUS
Josephus recorded the Jewish sects present at the time of Jesus Christ. He also recorded exactly the doctrine that they each believed and taught. Two groups that radically opposed each other were the Pharisees and the Essenes. The Pharisees taught that man is Saved only "by his own free will".
The Essenes taught what could be called "B.C. Reformation Theology": that man is only Saved by G-ds' G-DS' ELECTION, no other way.
Yeshua taught that the "leaven of the Pharisees" is to be rejected. Since this doctrine was the main belief OF the Pharisees, this means that any dependance on "mans' free will alone" does not in any way represent the True Teaching of Yeshua, the Apostles or the True Assemblies.
One of the chief defenders and preachers of Arminianism was John Wesley who founded the Methodist Church.[6]
MORE FOLLOWING SOON!
PEOPLE OF G-D MINISTRIES
� Copyright 2001 - 2004 People of G-d Ministries, Inc. No reproduction or redistribution without the Prior Written Consent and Approval of People of G-d.
FOOTNOTES
[1
Also, any reliance on "mans' ability" is Humanistic teaching and spiritual adultery.
[2
[3
Both Arminius and Gomarus believed in Predestination. Arminius however, taught that Election was based on G-ds' Foreknowledge of who would later have faith in Jesus Christ. Gomarus taught that Divine Faith itself is a result of Predestination, Given by G-d to His Elect only, because G-d Decreed who would and who would not be Given Divine Faith; as Augustine, Luther and Calvin (and the Essenes) all taught and believed.
Arminius, who was a staunch Calvinist otherwise, unwittingly gave his name (Arminianism) to the position that has come to be identified as the very antithesis of "Calvinism".
Here is what Lex Rex says:
"Here be soft words, but is subversion of religion, laws, and liberties of church and state. Introduction of popery, Arminianism, of idolatry, altar-worship, the mass (proved by a learned treatise, 'The Canterburian self-conviction,' printed 1641, third ed., never answered, couched under the name of inconveniency), the pardoning of innocent blood of hundreds of thousands in Ireland, the killing of many thousand nobles, barons, commons, by the hands of papists in arms against the law of the land, the making of England a field of blood, the obtruding of an idolatrous service book, the armies of men, by sea and land, to block up the kingdom of Scotland, are all these inconveniences only?" Lex Rex or, The Law and the Prince, Rev. Samuel Rutherford, Question XLI.
[4
In other words, as if by design, a nominal Protestants' name (Arminius) is attached to this teaching serving to quietly disassociate the doctrine from the Roman Catholic Church (where it is still taught today) and from the Pharisees, who also taught this doctrine.
[5
The Lutheran Church today has departed from the teachings of Martin Luther. They do accept Predestination for the Elect, but deny Double Predestination as taught by Augustine, Luther and Calvin.
"When Luther's followers, in a subsequent generation, openly deviated from scriptural orthodoxy on these points, they set themselves to prove that Luther had never held Calvinistic principles. . . But we have no hesitation in saying, that it can be established beyond all reasonable question, that Luther held the doctrines which are commonly regarded as most peculiarly Calvinistic, though he was never led to explain and apply, to illustrate and defend some of them, so fully as Calvin did." (Cunningham, p. 109.)
[6
Reportedly, they now "ordain" women, have open Fellowship with declared homosexuals, and Same-sex marriages have also received some acceptance.
We neither Permit, Approve, Condone or Support any of these things.
Erasmus of Rotterdam. The Freedom of the Will.
Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity. Peabody, Massachusetts. Prince Press. 1999.
Josephus, Flavius. Complete Works.
London Confession of Faith.
Luther, Dr. Martin. The Bondage of the Will.
ibid. Sermons.
Philadelphia Confession of Faith.
Rutherford, Reverend Samuel. Lex Rex or, The Law and the Prince. London. 1644. Reprinted: Sprinkle Publications. P.O. Box 1094. Harrisonburg, Virginia. 22801.
The Westminster Confession of Faith.
