I just wanted to drop you a line and say that you've done some excellent legwork on several great articles dealing with Arminian topics. As you'll find out, and I'm sure you know, most hardcore Calvinists think that Arminianism is nothing but Semi-Pelagianism and Universalism (thanks a lot Finney!), and numerous errors crop up on Wikipedia articles relating to Classical or Reformed Arminianism. (The more magnanimous Calvinists just equated Arminian theology with Methodism and Wesley.) So, I say keep up the good work, and you're gonna have to keep a watchful eye on articles. (And so you know, I was raised a Southern Baptist who was drawn to Calvinism via Jonathan Edwards, only to find that no Calvinists, with the possible exception of Spurgeon, seriously addressed Hebrews 6:4-6—then I found the Free Will Baptists and their great scholars F. Leroy Forlines and Robert Picirilli, so now I consider myself a Free Will Baptist.)
- I agree on the typical Calvinist interpretation of the warning passages. I might add too I can't buy their explanations for a limited atonement, as they must ignore or reinterpret all the instances where God wishes all be saved. I agree on Picirilli, Grace, Faith, Free Will: Contrasting Views of Salvation: Calvinism and Arminianism is one of the best books on theology I've ever read.
- As to the articles, just drop a note at this page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Assessment, and the editors of the WikiProject will re-assess the articles. As to the references, that's a lot of work redoing the Conditional article, so I wouldn't worry about it.
- TuckerResearch (talk) 18:07, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- I am presuaded that corporate election is the type of election that most reflects the biblical teaching. While there is some overlap with conditional election, I would not be the best person to do the conditional election view. I have put together a lot of notes on corporate election, but I don't know when I will be able to organize all the material. I have been giving my attention to other projects. Thanks for the encouraging words. Take care, ClassArm (talk) 22:30, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Corporate election. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the . Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Vrenator (talk) 15:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
- Greetings, I am sorry for not specifying a reason in the edit summary and causing some concern. My intention was to totally revamp the article because it cited no references and it was not comprehensive in its scope. I have put a lot of research into the article and followed the Wikipedia standards. I am having a problem with the references showing up even though I have put them in correctly. I started putting one reference in at a time to see if they would show up correctly. That did not work, and so I will just put the information in and see if someone can help me. I have totally revamped the Apostasy in Christianity article so I am familiar with putting together the information so it works. Any help would be appreciated. ThanksClassArm (talk) 16:04, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe you should set it up in your user space here User:ClassArm/Corporate election first before putting the revisions into the main article. I'm sorry if I was a bit hasty in reverting - it just shows up as vandalism if someone removes content without giving a reason why. Vrenator (talk) 16:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)