Arminianism
This article can stand alone, but it is a part two of sorts. This will stand in contrast to an article written about Calvinism, so if you have the time, check it out. If not, no biggie.
The Background Info
Arminianism, like Calvinism, is a system of soteriology, which is the study of salvation. It provides a series of insights regarding the state of man, his ability to seek God, and God’s treatment towards man. Arminianism is going to be much more familiar to you than Calvinism was, because a vast majority of churches today accept most of the theological points that you will read about. The Methodists are the most Arminian of a bunch that also includes most Baptists, the Churches of Christ, Adventists, Mennonites, Pentecostals (Assemblies of God and others), Charismatics, and more. But its popularity doesn’t automatically make it correct, so let’s take a closer look.
Arminianism takes its name from Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian who lived in the second half of the 16th century. He went to Calvin’s school of theology and, after studying the Scriptures, decided that he took issue with the idea of unconditional election. Though he died before anything big happened with his disagreement, his successors put together the Five Articles of Remonstrance - five ways in which they diverged with Calvinism. The Calvinists condemned the Five Articles and persecuted the lot (I believe this is the first time that Protestants had enough power to oppress people they disagreed with) until Holland finally recognized the Arminians as legit. They started a few churches, but they were highly marginal until John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist movement, did a lot of work to bring Arminius’ views to the public.
It should be noted that the Five Articles came before the Five Points of Calvinism that we discussed last week, and that the Five Points were crafted as a response to the Five Articles. Thus, it can be argued that Calvinism isn’t “all about” the Five Points, nor is Arminianism “all about” the Five Articles. Both sides have a lot in common and are concerned with far greater issues; these are merely the divergent points.
If Calvinism was all about the sovereignty of God, Arminianism is all about the will of man and faith. This doesn’t sound as catchy or as cool, but the Arminian will say that Calvinist thought makes man into a robot, at the mercy of a whimsical God who chooses whomever He wants for reasons unknown to us. If God chooses man, then there really isn’t a need for faith. Arminians address this, and thus paint a picture of a God that some would see as more fair and loving.
The Five Articles of Remonstrance
If you want to read the original words that the Arminians submitted, click here. I like primary sources, especially when they’re short, but the wording is very old and very subtle, so I won’t completely lift them.
Conditional election. This comes first because, as my background info stated, Arminius’ main problem was with unconditional election. This one also forms the basis of the idea of free will, so let’s define the term. Conditional election means that we have a choice, plain and simple. God presents the possibility to salvation, He knocks at the door, but we have to open the door and let God in. This isn’t because God is weak and unable to make us choose, it’s because He loves us and wants us to choose.
I mentioned that Arminians see their portrayal of God as more fair and loving, and here’s why they’d say so. What’s the difference between you holding a dog by the collar and petting and it running up to you and sitting in your lap so you may pet it in the same way? In the first scenario, it’s forced. That dog will run away as soon as you let go and you know it. You get to pet it, but it is much less gratifying than when the dog loves you enough that they’ll run into your lap and let you rub its back. If God chooses you, then you’re as stuck as a dog on a leash, though, as the Calvinism article mentioned, God’s irresistible grace isn’t so much of a rape as a really really good wooing. But if you choose God, then it is a gratifying love.
We have to be clear about one thing, though: God knows who will say yes and who will say no. No one ever makes a decision that surprises God; He exists in the past, present, and future, so His absolute sovereignty is upheld.
I’m all about Scriptural support, so let’s do it.
John 3:36 (emphasis mine)
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.
2 Peter 1:10a
Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure…
John 16:27 (emphasis mine)
for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.
The first verse hinges on the word ‘believe,’ which means to “accept something as true,” and to ‘accept’ means to consent, so in order to believe something there has to be that moment in your head where you decide that you believe something is true. The second verse can’t be true under Calvinism, because if you’ve been unconditionally elected then you don’t have to do anything to make it sure. The third verse hinges on ‘because,’ and is pretty self-explanatory.
Unlimited Atonement. If you accept conditional election, then you believe that man has free will, the ability to choose God. If that’s the case, then the Calvinistic view that Jesus’ atoning work on the cross was only for the elect doesn’t cut it. If salvation is available to everyone and you need the atonement to get the salvation, then the atonement also has to be available to everyone, and that is the core of unlimited atonement. Jesus died for everyone, not just for those who become Christians. His sacrifice is enough to pay for every sin of everyone who ever lived.
Don’t let the term ‘unlimited’ fool you, though. Just because Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross was enough to pay for every sin doesn’t mean that it did pay for every sin. Think of it as a hostage taker who is holding ten people, and they want $1,000 for each hostage. Calvinism says that though Jesus has 10,000 bucks in the bank, He only offers $3,000 so that He can get the three out that He wants. Arminianism says that Jesus offers all $10,000 so that everyone could be free to go, but only three choose to leave, so Jesus pays the $3,000 for them alone. So, in the second scenario, Jesus has the money and anyone can be set free, but only three out of the ten chose it.
Now that we have a sweet analogy to understand the point, let’s look at the Scripture that supports it.
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Titus 2:11
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people…
1 Timothy 2:3-4
3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior,
4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
If you remember some of the limited atonement verses, there are some pretty opposite Scriptures that can be tough to reconcile. But this view fits in well with conditional election, and leads very well into prevenient grace, which we’ll get to after we touch on total depravity.
Total depravity. Hey! Something we all agree on, right? Pretty much. As mentioned in the Calvinism article, total depravity is agreed on by most Protestants. The doctrine says that man is so dead in his sins that he is completely unable to follow God on his own ability. Here are the verses again (the fourth one I added because it was what the Remonstrants used in their Articles):
Psalm 51:5
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Romans 3:10-11
None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.
1 Corinthians 2:14
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
John 15:5b
…for apart from me you can do nothing.
Where the disagreement comes in is how man is able to enter into a relationship with God if he is so lost in his sins that he can’t seek God by himself. The universal answer is “grace,” because “by grace you have been saved” (Ephesians 2:8). But how is this grace given to us? The Calvinists espouse “irresistible grace,” which says that God offers His grace to those whom He has unconditionally elected, and those whom He chooses have no choice but to accept that grace. Since the Arminians reject unconditional election, what do they offer instead?
Prevenient grace. This one isn’t one of the Five Articles directly. The Fourth Article basically says that grace is resistible, citing Stephen’s speech in Acts 7 which has the punch line in verse 51: “You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit.”
If the word prevenient scares you, then let’s just go with ‘preceding’ grace. Basically, because we’re dead in our sins, God has to offer His grace to us, which we then choose to accept or reject. We can’t find grace on our own; but when it’s presented to us we have the ability to choose. This is really really close to unlimited atonement.
Let’s go back to the hostage analogy. The hostages are stuck, with no chance of getting out (total depravity). Under both scenarios mentioned previously, Jesus puts up a ransom. This is the grace that is offered, this is the way out. Under the Calvinist scenario, Jesus offered the $3,000 to free three people who He wanted out; that’s the limited atonement bit. The irresistible grace happens when these people are so moved and excited by the offer of freedom that they take it and leave the hostage scene. In the Arminian scenario, the unlimited atonement happened when the offer was made to everyone. This also illustrates preceding grace, because it gave everyone a chance to leave, which some chose. The choice is the key. While the difference in the atonement doctrines focuses on all ten, the difference in the grace doctrines focuses on the three and why they left the scene.
Here’s the Scripture.
1 John 4:19
We love because he first loved us.
Romans 2:4b
…God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance.
John 6:44
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.
All of these and many others carry the idea that God extended love, and we then have a choice to respond.
Well, let’s take this concept of choice one step further into the question of eternal security.
Conditional preservation of the saints. Since Arminians are all about choice, then there has to be a provision for choosing to reject God, and this is it. This doctrine stands in oppositon to Calvin’s “Perseverance of the saints” and says that while no force can pluck a Christian out of God’s hands, a Christian can choose to walk away. This is a complex and difficult issue. Arminius himself wasn’t completely convinced of this one, and the wording of the Fifth Article shows that it was written more out of hesitance to accept the Calvinist position rather than an outright rejection of it. There are many levels to this too, ranging from “you can slip away” to “you can’t slip away, you have to consciously reject God” to “once you reject God there’s no turning back.”
Regardless of how far you go with it, there is plenty of Scripture to support the notion that we can indeed fall from grace:
John 15:6
If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.
1 Samuel 10:24, 15:23
10:24 And Samuel said to all the people, “Do you see him whom the LORD has chosen [Saul, the first king of Israel]? There is none like him among all the people.15:23 For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and presumption is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has rejected you from being king.
Hebrews 6:4-6
4 For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit,
5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6 if they then fall away, since they are crucifying again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.
The first verse is pretty straightforward. The second example doesn’t apply so much to salvation but it establishes a principle of calling and rejecting, and the third one is downright scary, though it doesn’t state that people who have shared in the Holy Spirit actually fall away, only that IF they did bad stuff would happen. Again, this is perhaps the grayest of issues; both Calvin and Arminius were unsure of the stances that they took.
Conclusion
After all of that research and writing, where does this leave you, the reader?
First off, you have to realize that we’re splitting hairs. At the end of the day, in our analogy, Jesus pays $3,000 and three people leave the hostage scene, regardless of how much money was offered, how the hostages chose (if they chose at all), etc.
So why spend the time then, if we end up at the same place? Well, there are some implications to these beliefs. You’ll notice that a Calvinist will rarely do an altar call; he’d prefer you go home to your room and pray that God might save you, because you going to an altar doesn’t do jack since you can’t choose your salvation. That kind of thing. However, there aren’t a lot of practicalities, I doubt that there are many that I needed two marathon posts to set them up.
No, the point of the Calvinism and Arminianism articles is more about knowledge and thinking and reasoning and researching. Realize that what you believe is based on principles that have been examined and argued by many people who have gone before you. Realize that there is a huge world that you probably have never touched, but can be incredibly rewarding to study if you’re ready for it and your heart is in the right place. Realize that despite our best efforts to seek absolute truths and find answers, we end up in a mess of gray instead of a black and white. This is okay!
What’s important is that you’re seeking truth, not accepting what you believe because someone told you to but finding out what you believe and why. In doing so, you’ll learn more about God as well as yourself. And as you learn more and become more grounded in doctrine, you’ll find yourself much more able to weather the storms that the enemy will throw your way!
God bless you if you made it to the end…I know this was long and tedious, but praise God for giving you the fortitude to plug through and get it done!
Grace and peace,
Brendan
