I first encountered Dr. Sonny Hernandez when he participated in a 2 on 2 debate, in which his behavior was unacceptable and his arguments akin to that of a rabid internet cage-stager. Needless to say, it was no surprise to say when I clicked the article I am responding to, I had no high hopes for it.
As expected, the misrepresentation begins in the very first sentence. He states:
“Arminianism is a foul heresy!”
The imagery of a man slapping his bible against the pulpit Steven Anderson style readily enters my mind. I guess the principle is if you shout it loud it sounds better. In reality, he is putting restrictions on the gospel that the Bible never does.
To say the Bible talks about Calvinism or Arminianism would of course be anachronistic, however, nothing Arminians teach contradict 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, the gospel that Paul defends. It also doesn’t explicitly contradict Ephesians 2:8-9. Now, do I think Calvinism does more justice to these verses? Absolutely. This line of reasoning is the equivalent of saying because you got a B on a test and not an A, your results cannot be a success, for it is not an A.
” No prophet of God, nor Paul, nor Christ, ever proclaimed this semi-Pelagian, cheap grace gospel that is powerless to save because it is no gospel at all.”
Here we get into some category errors. Modern Arminians can lend semi-pelagian but classical Arminians, like those at the Society of Evangelical Arminians are not. Historically, this is invalid. But if we are comparing doctrines, the HUGE difference is that Arminians believe in prevenient grace.
In contrast, an actual semi-pelagian would be a proponent of Massilianism.
In reality, Semi-Pelagianism has been dead since the 500’s. The Synod of Orange closed the book on the issue in history. Sure, you might find a group of people who fly the banner of Pelagius-lite, but the rampant labeling of Arminians as Semi-Pelagians is like an SJW calling everyone who disagrees with them a Nazi.
He goes on to say
” Arminianism teaches that human beings are not totally depraved because they can exercise their frail and fickle free-will to save themselves.”
He goes through the five points and while I agree with him that TULIP is correct, he doesn’t do a good job in defending those points. His set-up is like this.
Arminians are icky
Calvinism Is Biblical
It’s embarrassing to Calvinists everywhere when we are asked to explain such behavior from such a learned man. (You don’t a get a Ph.D easily, unless you’re Kent Hovind.)
Since you call Arminians Semi-Pelagians because of some similarities, can I call you a Hyper-Calvinist?