It is vital that the elect of God understand the evil of free will and where it originates. Never should we ever embrace this doctrine or those who defend it.
I want to share a couple of resources exposing the Jesuits and their agenda against Protestant churches.....
August Toplady, who penned 'Rock of ages' also wrote 'Arminianism: the road to Rome'. I want to share a bit of what he wrote in that article...
"The "Sovereign drug, Arminianism," which said the Jesuit, "we (i.e. we Papists) have planted" in England, did indeed bid fair "to purge our Protestant Church effectually. How merrily Popery and Arminianism, at that time, danced hand in hand, may be learned from Tindal: "The churches were adorned with paintings, images, altar-pieces, & etc. and, instead of communion tables, alters were set up, and bowings to them and the sacramental elements enjoined. The predestinarian doctrines were forbidden, not only to be preached, but to be printed; and the Arminian sense of the Articles was encouraged and propagated."10 The Jesuit, therefore, did not exult without cause. The "sovereign drug," so lately "planted," did indeed take deep root downward, and bring forth fruit upward, under the cherishing auspices of Charles and Laud. Heylyn, too, acknowledges, that the state of things was truly described by another Jesuit of that age, who wrote: "Protestantism waxeth weary of itself. The doctrine (by the Arminians, who then sat at the helm) is altered in many things, for which their progenitors forsook the Church of Rome: as limbus patrum; prayer for the dead, and possibility of keeping God's commandments; and the accounting of Calvinism to be heresy at least, if not treason." - source http://www.swrb.com/newslett/actualNLs/RHNarmin.htm
There's a book written by Michael Bunker entitled 'Swarm of Locusts' that gives us greater detail and insight into the origin of free will and the Jesuit ties to Jacob Arminius. Here is an excerpt from that book...
The following quote came from a Jesuit, written in 1628 to the Jesuit Rector at Bruxels, to calm his nerves about an ensuing parliamentary call. The Jesuit writer tells the Rector that he has nothing to worry about, because the Jesuits have planted the seed arminianisme and it will certainly come to fruition:
"March, 1628. Father Rector, let not the damp of astonishment seize upon your ardent and zealous soul, in apprehending the sodaine (sudden) and unexpected calling of a Parliament. We have now many strings to our bow. We have planted that soveraigne drugge Arminianisme, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their heresie; and it flourisheth and beares fruit in due season. For the better prevention of the Puritanes, the
Arminians have already locked up the Duke’s (of Buckingham) eares; and we have those of our owne religion, which stand continually at the Duke’s chamber, to see who goes in and out: we cannot be too circumspect and carefull in this regard. I am, at this time, transported with joy, to see how happily all instruments and means, as well great as lesser, co-operate unto our purposes. But, to return unto the maine fabricke:--OUR FOUNDATION IS ARMINIANISME" [Hidden works of darkness, p. 89, 90. Edit. 1645.] (emphasis added)
The young man Arminius lost his family during a war with the Spanish in 1575. As a fifteen year old orphan, he entered the University of Leyden, and under scholarship by the government of the City of Amsterdam, he was sent to the Theological school in Geneva for studies at the feet of the great Protestant reformers. At Geneva, Arminius studied under a professor named Theodore Beza, the man who had assumed the leadership role of the Protestant movement in Switzerland from John Calvin. For some reason that seems to be lost to history, Arminius immediately took a disliking to Beza, and found his forceful defense of the Doctrines of Grace to be harsh and unyielding.
Here is where our mystery gets increasingly interesting. Back in Amsterdam there was a movement of counter-reformation begun supposedly by a rich merchant named Dirck Coornhert. Coornhert was a Dutch humanist who was enamored with the teachings of the Catholic humanist Desiderius Erasmus and a Spanish Jesuit monk named Luis de Molina.
Erasmus has been rightly identified by Martin Luther and others as a Pelagian in Catholic clothing, so we can readily trace the Pelagian and Semi-Pelagian heresies as they traversed their way through Amsterdam while Arminius was away in Geneva.
Dirck Coornhert disdained the Reformation teachings on the Doctrines of Grace, and sought to confront them wherever he found them. Coornhert had read with growing affections the teachings of Luis de Molina regarding Free Will and Predestination. The Jesuits had hit on a brilliant way of dismantling the debate. They would preach that BOTH free will and predestination were true and that a good God who was truly sovereign surely might have given his creations a freedom of the will in order to allow them to choose to be saved. Luis de Molina was creating a doctrine that would eventually be called Media Scientia or Middle-Knowledge. Eventually this heresy would be known as Molinism.
In an article on Luis de Molina entitled, Contending for the Faith, Rev. Bernard Woudenberg said of the Jesuit Luis de Molina,
Being a Romanist, he was forced to honor the theology of Thomas Aquinas with its acceptance of divine sovereignty, but at the same time, as a Jesuit, he was committed to defending the papacy against the growing influences of Calvinism. And so de Molina set forth to steer between these by proposing his original and highly influential concept of the media scientia, or "middle- knowledge." In this he proposed that between God’s knowledge of the cause and effect relations which He had implanted in the universe, and that of divine freedom whereby He remains free at any time to do what He wills, there is an area of middle-knowledge which God provides for man in which man is granted freedom to do whatever he chooses without outside necessity or predetermination of any kind. (emphasis added)
The Catholic lie on co-operative Justification had been countered by the true Grace doctrine of Salvation by Grace through Faith, so now an evil compromise was offered to the world, and by deceit and subterfuge the compromise would eventually become the predominant teaching in all the churches of the world.
Back in Geneva, Theodore Beza had a growing suspicion that his student Jacobus Arminius was not who he proposed to be. Questions were being asked about comments that Arminius was making to fellow students, and there were still questions about his financial support from the rich, aristocratic merchants of Holland. Apparently Arminius was able to lie well enough to get past Bezas questioning, a skill that would come in handy years later when he would be looking for a teaching job in Amsterdam. Beza then asked Arminius to answer and publicly refute the teachings of Dirck Coornhert. Although Arminius completed the task, he later claimed to be convinced by Coornherts arguments, and he became ardently opposed to the teachings of the Reformers. Please do remember that Coornhert had developed his ideas from the writings of the Catholic humanist Erasmus and the Jesuit Luis de Molina.
In 1586, Arminius was released from Geneva, but instead of heading back to Amsterdam where he was under contract to the City to labor in order to pay back his tuition, he headed to Rome for a vacation.
Most Calvinists believe that it was during this vacation in Rome that Arminius was recruited by the Jesuits to their point of view. I believe that there is enough other evidence that Arminius was compromised long before his pilgrimage to Rome, particularly in that he had already embraced the Jesuitical writings of Dirck Coornhert. By this time, Arminius had become a private student of the writings of Luis de Molina, and in 1588, the same year in which Arminius was ordained a minister (by the strange endorsement of Theodore Beza), de Molina published his treatise on the will entitled A Reconciliation of Free Choice with the Gifts of Grace, Divine Foreknowledge, Providence, Predestination and Reprobation which is commonly referred to as the Concordia.
What the Jesuits were loathe to admit, was that Molinism was nothing more than a rebirth of the ancient Semi-Pelagianism heresy, which contends that man cannot be saved apart from God’s grace; however, fallen man must cooperate and assent to God’s grace before he will be saved. The Jesuits recognized that the Protestants would never embrace the teachings of a Catholic Spanish monk, so they capitalized on the growing and open debates taking place within Protestantism. Molinism would be recast as Arminianism, and eventually, it would take over the ecclesiastical world.
A famous quote from de Molina eerily foretells of the Jesuit lie that proceeds from the mouths of evangelical leaders today:
all human beings are endowed with equal and sufficient divine grace without distinction as to their individual merits, and that salvation depends on the sinner’s willingness to receive grace. (Concordia, 1588)
The Catholics say of Molinism:
Molinism is an influential system within Catholic theology for reconciling human free choice with God’s grace, providence, foreknowledge and predestination. Originating within the Society of Jesus (The Jesuits) in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, it encountered stiff opposition from Bañezian Thomists and from the self-styled Augustinian disciples of Michael Baius and Cornelius Jansen. - [Alfred J. Freddoso, Catholic Professor at Notre Dame.] (emphasis added)
It is clear from history that the Society of Jesus readily accepted Molinism as an effective and efficient tool in the war against Protestantism. That fact has never changed.
ARMINIANISM IS CATHOLICISM
The fact that Arminius derived his doctrine wholly from the Jesuits may be one of the worst kept secrets of all time, but if you asked the average pew-sitting pseudo-protestant religionist in America today from where they derived their theology, they would likely tell you,
Why, from the Bible, of course.
But we live in the age of mass media driven religion. Almost 100% of the pop-theology that pours forth from the pulpits, the television, the radio and Christian print media is Arminian and has its roots in the teachings of the Jesuit monk Luis de Molina.
Augustus Toplady, the great Calvinist hymn writer who wrote ROCK OF AGES said this about the ties between Arminius and the Jesuits:
The Jesuits were moulded into a regular body, towards the middle of the sixteenth century: toward the close of the same century, Arminius began to infest the Protestant churches. It needs therefore no great penetration, to discern from what source he drew his poison. His journey to Rome (though Monsicur Bayle affects to make light of the inferences which were at that very time deduced from it) was not for nothing. If, however, any are disposed to believe, that Arminius imbibed his doctrines from the Socinians in Poland, with whom, it is certain, he was on terms of intimate friendship, I have no objection to splitting the difference: he might import some of his tenets from the Racovian brethren, and yet be indebted, for others, to the disciples of Loyola. (Augustus Toplady The Road to Rome)
Just in case you think that tying Arminius to the Jesuits is a concoction contrived by militant Calvinists, lets consult the Jesuits on the matter. The following quote came from a Jesuit, written in 1628 to the Jesuit Rector at Bruxels, to calm his nerves about an ensuing parliamentary call. The Jesuit writer tells the Rector that he has nothing to worry about, because the Jesuits have planted the seed arminianisme and it will certainly come to fruition:
"March, 1628. Father Rector, let not the damp of astonishment seize upon your ardent and zealous soul, in apprehending the sodaine (sudden) and unexpected calling of a Parliament. We have now many strings to our bow. We have planted that soveraigne drugge Arminianisme, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their heresie; and it flourisheth and beares fruit in due season. For the better prevention of the Puritanes, the Arminians have already locked up the Duke’s (of Buckingham) eares; and we have those of our owne religion, which stand continually at the Duke’s chamber, to see who goes in and out: we cannot be too circumspect and carefull in this regard. I am, at this time, transported with joy, to see how happily all instruments and means, as well great as lesser, co-operate unto our purposes. But, to return unto the maine fabricke:--OUR FOUNDATION IS ARMINIANISME" [Hidden works of darkness, p. 89, 90. Edit. 1645.] (emphasis added)
source - https://elijah1757.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/swarms_of_locusts.pdf
This is from Edward Hindrie's book, 'The anti-gospel, the strange anti-Christ doctrine of free will being preached in heathen churches today"...
The anti-gospel is a dethroning of God and enthroning of man. God is no longer sovereign. Man is made the sovereign master of his destiny with God merely a hopeful observer. The anti-gospel rejects the sovereign grace of God in his election of those for salvation. This injection of the Roman Catholic free will theological poison into nominal “Christian” denominations is the result of a satanic conspiracy. This strategy will give rise to an ecumenical movement that will ultimately result in the nominal “Christian” denominations falling under the yoke of the Vatican.
Under Semi-Pelagianism, man was fallen and his will was hindered by sin, but not totally so. According to Semi-Pelagians, man is not spiritually dead, but only spiritually sick. They taught that man could utilize his faith to cooperate with God in facilitating his own salvation. Semi-Pelagians accepted that God was sovereign but at the same time they promoted the inconsistent view that man had free will in order to choose whether to be saved. SemiPelagianism became the generally accepted doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. The Catholic Church codified this semi-pelagian anti-gospel, with accompanying curses, at the Council of Trent (circa 1547). If anyone saith that, since Adam’s sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished; or that it is a thing with only a name, yea, a name without reality, a figment, in fine, introduced into the Church by Satan; let him be anathema. COUNCIL OF TRENT, SESSION VI, DECREE ON JUSTIFICATION, Canon V, January 13, 1547. If anyone saith that man’s free will, moved and excited by God, by assenting to God exciting and calling, no wise cooperates towards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of justification; that it cannot refuse its consent, if it would, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive; let him be anathema. COUNCIL OF TRENT, SESSION IV, DECREE ON JUSTIFICATION, Canon IV, January 13, 1547. If anyone saith that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to the obtaining the grace of justification, and that is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema. COUNCIL OF TRENT, SESSION VI, DECREE ON JUSTIFICATION, Canon IX, January 13, 1547.
Semi-Pelagianism was promoted by a Jesuit priest named Luis de Molina. This doctrine became popularly known as Molinism. The Roman Catholic church knew that Protestant Christians would never adopt Molinism if it were known to have sprung from a Jesuit priest, so they decided to use a front man in order to introduce this anti-gospel into the Protestant churches. They used a man named Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609), who was an admirer of Molina, to popularized the free will doctrine of Molina among Protestants. As a result of the successful efforts of Arminius and other Jesuit agents, Molinism has since become popularized not as Molinism but as Arminianism. Many view Arminianism as an orthodox Christian view of Scripture, when in fact it is a corruption of the gospel that has been injected into the Protestant denominations by Jacobus Arminius. Arminianism is simply repackaged Roman Catholic doctrine. source - http://usa-the-republic.com/religion/Antigospel.pdf
A.W. Pink stated this, "In the year 1563 by the order of the Pope, there was a council held at Trent. And Rome then and there defined her theological position on the points that had been made by the Reformers, and one of their decrees read thus [now the decrees of the Council of Trent are their standard today on controverted points], "If anyone shall affirm that since the fall of Adam man's free will is lost, let him be accursed". I want to read that again, what I am reading now is Roman Catholic Doctrine according to their own standards the decrees of the Council of Trent 1563, "If anyone shall affirm that since the fall of Adam man's free will is lost, let him be accursed". So that those who insist on man's free will place themselves side by side with Rome on that doctrine!"- from 'studies in the Scriptures' April 1926
When you dig into the origin of the 'free will' and its influences, it becomes clear Pink was right. The Jesuits/RCC have infiltrated Protestantism with their doctrines of demons, which have taken such a deep hold on most churches today that I am convinced only the return of Christ will finally destroy this horrendous evil. Free will does not exist, is not biblical, and will lead multitudes down the broad road. May it please the Most High to teach His elect this truth and cause us to vehemently uphold it.