Reformed Arminians?

In the ABSTRACT of an article at desiringgod web page (begun by Dr. John Piper) written by Stephen M. Davis (See here) we find these words (emphasis mine): 

"The Reformation disrupted the religious status quo of early sixteenth-century Europe when multitudes embraced the teachings of Martin Luther (1483–1546) and John Calvin (1509–1564). Their followers were respectively called Lutherans and the Reformed, the latter known also as Calvinists and Huguenots."

So many times I read similar statements by others who falsely equate the noun or adjective "Reformed" and "Calvinist." The fact is, many "Reformed" folks have been Arminian, yea, even Arminius himself! Those terms are not to be equated even though some Calvinists, especially those with Hyper Calvinistic leanings and beliefs, want all to believe. Here again we may say "the devil is in the definition."

In an article titled "Meet A Reformed Arminian" (See here) Dr. Jeff Robinson says (emphasis mine):

"The first time I heard Matt Pinson speak, he repeatedly dropped a term that rolled around in my mind for several days: “Reformed Arminian.” Such a phrase seems an oxymoron along the lines of jumbo shrimp, heated ice, or left-wing conservative."

Well, lots of folks do not know that there are "Reformed Arminians." But, we will inform them.

Robinson says further:

"As a trained church historian, I was fairly certain that by “Reformed Arminian” he meant one who affirms the teaching of Jacob Arminius, a figure who arose out of the Protestant Reformation, a figure whose theology departs at numerous key points from much popular Arminian theology today. Was I correct? I had to know more, and the interview below is a product of my query." 

Yes, the fact that Arminius is considered both "Reformed" and "Arminian" shows that "Reformed" is not a synonym for "Calvinist." 

Wrote Dr. Robinson:

"A growing number of Arminians are embracing a non-Wesleyan variety of Arminianism that’s coming to be known as “Reformed Arminianism.” The mainstream of this movement in the United States is found in the Free Will Baptist denomination, the origins of which date back to the English General Baptist movement of the 17th century. Early proponents of this approach include 17th-century English figures such as Thomas Helwys and Thomas Grantham. Twentieth-century proponents include Free Will Baptist scholars Leroy Forlines and Robert Picirilli, who see themselves as representing a type of Arminianism more like the theology of Arminius than most modern Arminianism. Forlines and Picirilli have also found much in common with scholars from outside the General/Free Will Baptist tradition like Thomas Oden."

Thus, "Reformed Arminianism" to me is equated with what theologians also call "classical Arminianism." For my own self, I can say as a Calvinist that I have much in common with classical or reformed Arminians. 

Wrote Dr. Robinson:

"A growing number of evangelicals fit a unique profile in the Calvinist-Arminian conversation: They see Scripture as not supporting a traditional Calvinistic view of predestination, grace, and human freedom. Yet they disagree with most Arminians’ rejection of the Reformed doctrines of total depravity, penal substitutionary atonement, the imputation of Christ’s righteousness of Christ in justification, and progressive (as opposed to entire) sanctification. For these individuals, and for the entire Calvinist-Arminian conversation, this Reformed Arminian stream of thought offers fruitful possibilities."

This is also why I have, along with others, referred to "Hyper Arminianism" as well as "Hyper Calvinism." 

Wrote Dr. Robinson:

"It’s funny that Arminians (or Calvinists) can work together with fellow Arminians (or Calvinists) who differ with them on whether infants should be baptized, the timing of Christ’s return, and charismatic gifts, and yet Calvinism and Arminianism has become a litmus test for evangelical fellowship in those same circles. This situation is precisely what keeps people from understanding and reading authors from the other side, which is unhealthy."

Yes, it is "funny" or odd, but it is sad too. Thankfully, we will all understand it better by and by, for there will be no disagreement about these things by departed saints in heaven.

Wrote Dr. Robinson:

"Reformed Arminian soteriology diverges from Wesleyan and Holiness models of Arminianism by embracing the more Reformed categories of Arminius. Unlike Wesleyan-Arminian theology as it developed in the Holiness movement, Reformed Arminianism holds the traditional Reformed notion of original sin and radical depravity that only the grace of God via the convicting and drawing power of the Holy Spirit can counteract. It puts forward a thoroughgoing Reformed, penal-satisfaction view of atonement. This entails that Christ’s active and passive obedience are imputed to the believer in justification."

Wrote Dr. Robinson further:

"I believe Reformed Arminianism can reinvigorate the current Arminian-Calvinist dialogue (or lack of dialogue). It’s a more grace-oriented appropriation of Reformed teaching on the nature of atonement, justification, sanctification, and spirituality, combined with its Arminian stance on predestination and freedom (before and after conversion) to resist divine salvific grace...Unfortunately, most popular Arminianism is semi-Pelagian, closer to Finney than Wesley."

Wrote Dr. Robinson further:

"The fact so many Calvinists love to sing the gospel-rich hymns of Charles Wesley, which John loved and printed and commended and sang, shows what Wesley meant when he said he was within a “hair’s breadth” of Calvinism."

Amen to that!

What think ye?