Here is an interesting link to Michael Newnham’s blog:

http://phoenixpreacher.com/cms/?p=2645

Newnham is a former Calvary Chapel preacher who has converted from the strongly Arminian theology of the Calvary Chapel movement, and now is a Reformed pastor.

It is amazing that Dave Hunt could write a book branding Calvinism as a false gospel, and then admit to James White that he had not read any of the Reformer’s works. There are some people who are so prone to want to destroy what they perceive as Calvinism, that they will stoop to any lengths to do so.

Stan

I know Ive said this before but I really dont know why Calvinists and Arminians feel like they have to spend so much time trying to destroy each other.  Ill be happy to discuss the ideas of election, the sovereignty of God and predestination with a Calvinist, and thought I may not agree with him/her and he/she may not agree with me, I do not see that as a reason to break fellowship and allow it be a huge point of contention.  I believe in Christ and that he is the only way to salvation and so does the Calvinist. So...why argue?

Hi ChiaPet,

let me use a personal example. Before I came to realize that God is truly sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by my will, and not I, but He is finally responsible for my salvation because I was chosen by him from eternity and his plan with me cannot fail, it was impossible for me to truly believe in the assurance of salvation which the Bible gives based on the fact that we are justified by faith alone, and There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” (Rom. 8:1 ESV). Since I believed that my will is determining my final position, I still allowed room for a future condemnation waiting for me in case I will apostatize. I sincerely believed that my present status of being justified is conditional and temporary, depending on my ability to keep my life in order. Consequently, because I allowed room for a future condemnation, I was not able to believe that now, in the present, there is “no condemnation”. Surely a condemnation was just around the corner if I would not hit the spiritual brakes in order to escape from an accident. There was no assurance that I’ll arrive safely at the destination, no assurance of salvation at all.

To be consistent, an Arminian has no assurance of salvation, because finally what determines his perseverance in faith is his own will, which is capricious, no guarantee of steadfastness. The heart is deceitful and causes us thousands of unexpected surprises. It is true that many Arminians today believe in assurance of salvation, but they are sustaining this position based on a blessed inconsistency with their basic premise, the freedom of the will.

The Arminian system of faith is unstable. Unstable because at any time people can fall on the side of denial of some essential parts of the gospel. The history proves that this is the case with the present situation of the evangelical world in which more and more voices are arguing for abandonment of the Sola Fide, Faith Alone principle of reformation. There are also denials of the imputation and penal substitution, all of these things following consequently the departure of the protestants from the reformed faith which they inherited from the first reformers.

Because of these and other considerations, fighting for Calvinism (which, by the way, was not peculiar to Calvin, but Luther, Zwingly, and the other reformers believed these doctrines) is a fight for stability in faith necessary for the preservation of the gospel. Because Arminian ideas are inconsistent with the gospel of justification by faith alone, through grace alone, even if the gospel is still believed in these circles, the instability inherent in these ideas leaves a door open to works righteousness.

Hope it helps

Gabriel

I do see your point.  I guess my thought was that the instability apparent in Arminianism was really due to human nature and the tendency for humanity to trust their own works versus those of a soveriegn God instead of the instability being the result from a flaw in the system itself.  By this I am not saying that the system is flawless, in fact I would say that no human system of belief is flawless. (including Calvinism)
In fact I would venture to say that Calvinist doctrine also leaves the door open for certain kinds of errors, that does not mean Calvinists could then be said to believe in those errors, just that a misunderstanding of Calvinism could result in those errors.  In that same way I would say the door is open to the error of salvation by works in Arminianism only if someone misunderstands Arminianism and fails to realize that their justification is not contingent on their continued sanctification.  Simply put doors are open to errors in both the beliefs of Calvinism and the beliefs of Arminianism, this does not mean that the beliefs themselves are inherently wrong, just that a misunderstanding could be disastrous.  I am not sure it is fair to say the possible errors are due to the belief system itself instead of the the natural human tendency to go the extreme of any belief system if they are not careful.  (think Hyper-Calvinism and Semi-Pelagianism)

Christianity itself leaves the door open to errors of certain kinds (think Judgmentalism, dogamtism, etc) does that mean Christianity itself is a flawed belief system, no it means it if inhabitated by flawed human beings.  I would venture to say the same is true of Arminianism and Calvinism, both leave doors open to errors because of the flawed human beings that believe them (beings subject to total depravity, the part of this we can agree on. ) not because of the belief systems themselves.  I think what we might have here is both sides trying to balance out the possible errors of the other, which I would venture to say is impossible, let us be aware of the possible errors of both Arminiansim and Calvinism and do our best not to go through those doors. 
Thats just my two cents regarding the issue, I guess I just react strongly when any discussion over these issues resorts to the depths of dogmatism and distracts one or more from what really matters, Jesus Christ!  I am not in any way saying thats what you or I are doing, I am only saying that was the impetus behind my “appeal” I guess for a seize fire between Calvinists and Arminians.

Another factor here is that I think Arminianism is often associated with Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism which really is not true.  While pelagianism is a works based theology Arminianism is not.  As I said without an understanding one may begin to think their works play a part but properly understood I do not think it is fair to call Arminianism a doctrine of Rome or a false Gospel; just as I would not criticize Calvinism and call it a false Gospel for its tendency to descend into Hyper Calvinism if not properly understood, I also think that it is equally not right for Calvinists to criticize and call Arminianism A false gospel for its tendecncy to descend into Semi Pelgianism or Pelagianism if not properly understood.  Both sides have pitfalls if not understood properly.  What it really comes down to is in Christ there is no Calvinist or Arminian, both are just man made systems to describe something that humans cannot fully understand, there are only those that believe in Jesus as the one who saves them and the only source of their salvation and those people come from both sides.  It really is time both sides see that.