I just ran across this little beauty: Two Views of Regeneration, by John Hendryx. I don't know too much about Hendryx, other than that J.C. Thibodaux likes to take him to task. I see why now.
Simply put, Hendryx's representation of Arminian Theology is about the most biased that one will ever run across. His descriptions are worthless for accurately representing what Arminians hold to. These descriptions are not even an accurate representation of Semi-Pelagianism.
Either Hendrix is uninformed, or is completely dishonest. I hope the former. He really needs to read Arminian Theology, by Roger Olson.
Ok, I'm done ranting now. Stuff like this really ticks me off. :)
2 days ago
4 comments:
"Stuff like this really ticks me off. :)
You're not a-kiddin'. I had to take a few days off because it gets so frustrating sometimes, lol.
Yeah, it increases the blood pressure at times. :)
Wow. The guys over at pyro know more what they're talking about, and that's the lowest comment I can think of.
His arguments are standard Calvinist arguments for those who have not read neither Arminius nor Wesley. They operate on assumptions but not actual Arminian theologians.
Post a Comment