Wesley and Regeneration
Recently I saw someone post the following quote by Paul Washer on Facebook with my response following:
"Calvinism is not the issue. Iâ€™ll tell you what the issue is. Regeneration. And that is why I can have fellowship with Wesley and Ravenhill and Tozer and all the rest because regardless of where they stood on the other issues they believed that salvation could not be manipulated by the preacher, that it was a magnificent work of the power of almighty God. And with them, therefore, I stand, that it was a work of God." -Paul WasherRegeneration is actually the crux of where we differ with Wesley. Wesley wholeheartedly believed regeneration was synergistic, not monergistic. I agree with Washer's statement, that Calvinism is not the issue, regeneration is. But regeneration is precisely where Wesley went wrong.
You quote Washer saying "with them [Arminians], therefore, I stand, that it was a work of God."
Yes Arminians believed regeneration was a work of God but they rejected the idea that regeneration was a work of God ALONE. That is the main difference.
However, my willingness to have fellowship with Wesleyan Arminians is not based on this at all. It is based on the fact that perfect theology is not what saves, the Person, Work and applied grace of Jesus Christ is what saves. Any Wesleyan/Arminian would tell you that there is "no hope save in the Person and work of Jesus Christ" ... even though their theology makes them wildly inconsistent on this issue.