Arminianism

[Robert William]

Calvinism Arminianism comparison grid

 

by Matt Slick
12/18/13

Calvinism and Arminianism are two main theological perspectives that deal with salvation. Calvinism is named after the teachings of the theologian John Calvin (1509-1564). Arminianism is named after the teachings of the theologian Jacobus Arminius (1559-1609). The Calvinist perspective has been summarized in TULIP:  Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, Perseverance of the saints.  No corresponding acronym is widely used for the Arminian perspective.

Calvinism emphasizes the sovereignty of God and God's right to choose people for salvation (Acts 13:48; 2 Thessalonians 2:13). Arminians emphasize the ability and freedom of man to choose God (Joshua 24:15).

In Calvinism, God is the ultimate and deciding factor in the salvation of individuals. In Arminianism, man's response to God's grace is the deciding factor.

Calvinists affirm God's sovereignty over his creation (Rom. 9:22-23), sinful man's inability to freely choose God (1 Cor. 2:14), in God's electing and predestining people to salvation (2 Thess. 2:13) which is by God's choice not man's (John 1:13; Rom. 9:16), and that the saved are eternally secure because their salvation rests in Christ's work, not man's faithfulness (John 10:27-28). Arminians affirm the sovereignty of man's will and ability to choose God, that God's predestining of people is based on his foreseen knowledge of their choices, that Jesus died for all people who ever lived, and that is possible to lose one's salvation.

Calvinism and Arminianism comparison grid
	CALVINISM	ARMINIANISM
Man	Total depravity.  Man is completely touched/affected by sin in all that he is (in nature he is completely fallen) but is not as bad as he could be (in action, i.e., not all murder, etc.). Furthermore, this total depravity means that the unregenerate will not, of their own sinful free will, choose to receive Christ.	Free Will.  Man is totally affected by sin in all that he is, but with the prompting of the Holy Spirit the unbeliever is capable of freely choosing God.
Election	Unconditional election.  God elects a person based upon nothing in that person because there is nothing in him that would make him worthy of being chosen; rather, God's election is based on what is in God. God chose us because he decided to bestow his love and grace upon us, not because we are worthy, in and of ourselves, of being saved.	Conditional Election.  Election to salvation is conditioned upon God's foreseen faith in the person.
Atonement	Limited atonement.  Christ bore the sin only of the elect, not everyone who ever lived.1	Universal Atonement.  Jesus bore the sin of all people, the elect and the non-elect.
Regeneration	Irresistible grace.  The act of God making the person willing to receive him. It does not mean that a person cannot resist God's will.  It means that when God moves to save/regenerate a person, the sinner cannot successfully resist God's movement and he will be regenerated.	Resistible Grace.  The sinner can successfully resist the grace of God and not be regenerated when God convicts that person.
Security	Perseverance of the saints.  We are so secure in Christ that we cannot fall away.	Falling From Grace.  It is possible to fall away from the faith and lose one's salvation.2

[missmuffet]

Question: "What is Arminianism, and is it biblical?"

Answer: Arminianism is a system of belief that attempts to explain the relationship between God’s sovereignty and mankind’s free will, especially in relation to salvation. Arminianism is named after Jacobus Arminius (1560—1609), a Dutch theologian. While Calvinism emphasizes the sovereignty of God, Arminianism emphasizes the responsibility of man. If Arminianism is broken down into five points, similar to the five points of Calvinism, these would be the five points:

(1) Partial Depravity – humanity is depraved but still able to seek God. We are fallen and tainted by sin but not to the extent that we cannot chose to come to God and accept salvation, with the help of prevenient grace from God. Given such grace, human will is free and has the power to yield to the influence of the Spirit. Note: many Arminians reject partial depravity and hold a view very close to Calvinistic total depravity. (2) Conditional Election – God only “chooses” those whom He knows will choose to believe. No one is predetermined for either heaven or hell. (3) Unlimited Atonement – Jesus died for everyone, even those who are not chosen and will not believe. Jesus’ death was for all of humanity, and anyone can be saved by belief in Him. (4) Resistible Grace – God’s call to be saved can be resisted and/or rejected. We can resist God’s pull toward salvation if we choose to. (5) Conditional Salvation – Christians can lose their salvation if they actively reject the Holy Spirit’s influence in their lives. The maintenance of salvation is required for a Christian to retain it. Note: many Arminians deny "conditional salvation" and instead hold to "eternal security."

The only point of Arminianism that four-point Calvinists believe to be biblical is point #3—Unlimited Atonement. First John 2:2 says, “He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” Second Peter 2:1 tells us that Jesus even bought the false prophets who are doomed: “But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.” Jesus’ salvation is available to anyone and everyone who will believe in Him. Jesus did not just die for those who will be saved.

Four-point Calvinism (the official position of Got Questions Ministries) finds the other four points of Arminianism to be unbiblical, to varying degrees. Romans 3:10–18 strongly argues for total depravity. Conditional election, or election based on God’s foreknowledge of human action, underemphasizes God’s sovereignty (Romans 8:28–30). Resistible grace underestimates the power and determination of God. Conditional salvation makes salvation a reward for work rather than a gift of grace (Ephesians 2:8–10). There are problems with both systems, but we see Calvinism as more biblically based than Arminianism. However, both systems fail to adequately explain the relationship between God’s sovereignty and mankind’s free will—due to the fact that it is impossible for a finite human mind to discern a concept only God can fully understand.

https://www.gotquestions.org/arminianism.html

[GandalfTheWise]

I would reduce the initial chart to a single entry:  Who determines an individual's salvation?  Calvinists say God does and Arminians say the individual does.

Many years ago, I was reading one of Millard Erickson's theology books.  He summarized the fundamental difference between all the varieties of Calvinists and Arminians as this:   Calvinists believe that an individual's salvation is God's decision whereas Arminians believe that salvation is the individual's decision.  Erickson's conclusion was basically that while there were problems with both, Calvinism seemed the more consistent with scripture. 

I would add one further point that never seems to be considered.  Calvinists and Arminians both believe that human logic dictates that only one or the other is correct and hence centuries of Christian infighting over the point.  It is a belief in this logic that it is simply assumed to be common sense and accepted without question.  However, is it Biblical to simply accept that it has to be one or the other?

Neither side is willing to consider that it is possible that sovereignty vs. free will is perhaps one of those mysteries of the faith such as Jesus being fully human and fully divine or the Trinity where God is at the same time one God but 3 Persons.  We accept Christ's full humanity and full deity and we simply say that Bible passages which point to His humanity do not disprove His deity nor do Bible passages which point to His deity disprove His humanity.  We accept both as true.  In the same way, we do not use verses pointing to God being one God as disproving He is not 3 Persons, nor do we use verses clearing showing 3 Persons as proof of tri-theism.   We take passages showing God's unity as well as 3 Persons on their face value and accept both as something we as finite beings cannot wrap our heads around.   We comfortably talk about Jesus being human.  We comfortably talk about Jesus being God.  We do not use logic to prove that we must choose between the two options as many heresies that either reject the humanity or the deity of Christ (or force a modality where He was first human and then divine or talk about a human "Jesus" and a divine "Christ").

Over the years, I've come to accept scripture passages both dealing with God's sovereignty and human free will to be taken on their face value and not to explain them away.  I've come to accept both as true and fit this under the same category as the Trinity and the Humanity/Deity of Christ.       It does make reading the Bible much more enjoyable.  I don't have to spend my time worrying about whether Pharaoh hardened his heart or God hardened Pharaoh's heart and which of those verses are the "real" ones and which need to be "explained".  I just take both as written and say that it seems that the Bible teaches both are equally true statements.  I've decided to reject logic that says one or the other is correct and go with the preponderance of Biblical evidence that seems to say that both are true.

So, basically this means everyone thinks I'm a fruit cake that needs Biblical correction because I now refuse to join either side in a centuries long schism.

 

 

[ravindran]

10 minutes ago, GandalfTheWise said:

So, basically this means everyone thinks I'm a fruit cake that needs Biblical correction because I now refuse to join either side in a centuries long schism

LOL! If you don't take a stand, then you don't know something!  You are an ideal candidate for others to shove down their doctrine.

[Amazing Horse]

I think both points of view are wrong , there can be 3rd point of view about it . Go to youtube and search

Chuck Missler Inheritance And Rewards Session 1

And skip to 9:00 for middle ground between Arminism and Calvinism

[AngelKaring]

I don't follow Calvinism or Arminianism either...I follow Christ...two fruitcakes in a tin