Arminianism is a theological perspective named after Jacob Arminius (1560-1609), a Dutch theologian. It emphasizes the free will of humans to accept or reject God’s offer of salvation and opposes the Calvinist doctrine of predestination. Here is a 9,000 word overview of what Arminianism teaches and whether it aligns with the Bible.
Total Depravity
Like Calvinism, Arminianism affirms the doctrine of total depravity – that humans are born with a sinful nature and are incapable of seeking God on their own (Romans 3:10-12). Due to the Fall, humanity’s free will was corrupted by original sin but not eliminated. People remain responsible for their choices even though their natures are inclined toward sin (John 8:34, Romans 6:16).
Conditional Election
Arminians disagree with the Calvinist view of unconditional election, which claims God predestined people either to salvation or damnation. Instead, they argue election is based on God’s foreknowledge of those who would freely choose to accept Christ. God’s decision to save someone is conditional on their willingness to believe (1 Peter 1:1-2).
Scripture portrays election as based on foreknowledge (Romans 8:29) and occurring through faith (Mark 16:16). Passages like 2 Peter 3:9 also suggest God desires everyone to be saved. The offer of salvation seems genuine for all, not just an illusion for the non-elect. Additionally, the Bible urges unbelievers to repent and place their faith in Christ (Acts 16:31). Such invitations would be disingenuous if election were unconditional.
Universal Atonement
Arminians hold to universal atonement – that Christ died for all people, not just for the elect (1 John 2:2). His sacrifice made salvation possible for everyone, but effectual only for those who freely accept it. Calvinists argue a limitation in Christ’s atonement that He died strictly for the elect alone. But Scripture presents His death as having removed the sins of the world (John 1:29) and tasting death for everyone (Hebrews 2:9).
The universal offer of the gospel also implies a universal payment. The free gift of salvation would not truly be for “whoever believes” (Romans 10:11-13) if Christ did not sufficiently atone for whoever believes. The Bible’s descriptions of Christ’s death for all (1 Timothy 2:6), the whole world (1 John 4:14), and every man (Hebrews 2:9) fit better with Arminianism than a limited atonement only for the elect.
The Resistibility of God’s Grace
Arminians argue that God’s saving grace can be resisted. Hebrews 4:2 states that the gospel message “did not meet with faith in the hearers.” Calvinism instead sees God’s irresistible grace as overcoming man’s depraved nature to bring them to salvation. But even those who witnessed Christ’s miracles could still oppose Him (John 12:37-41), showing an ability to resist God’s persuasion. The parable of the sower also depicts the gospel being rejected by those who initially received it with joy (Matthew 13:20-21).
Further evidence for resistible grace is the Bible’s pleading for sinners to repent (Acts 3:19), turn from wickedness (Ezekiel 33:11), and return to God (James 4:8) – implying this gracious call can be spurned. Additionally, passages warning believers against falling away (Hebrews 6:4-6) indicate they have the freedom to forsake God’s grace rather than persevering by irresistible grace.
The Uncertainty of Eternal Security
While Calvinists believe in the perseverance of the saints (those saved can never lose their salvation), Arminians hold that believers can give up their faith and forfeit their relationship with God. Several warning passages, like Hebrews 6:4-6 and 10:26-29, caution against falling away. The parable of the sower also warns that sowing seed (the gospel) does not always lead to fruitful faith (Matthew 13:1-23).
Arminians argue such warnings would be pointless if eternal security were guaranteed. The possibility of apostasy seems real, not hypothetical. They also point to examples like King Saul, who experienced God’s Spirit for ministry but later was rejected for disobedience (1 Samuel 16:14). Judas also abandoned his apostleship. These cases demonstrate that those in a genuine relationship with God can later reject Him.
Prevenient Grace
Since humans are unable to seek God on their own due to the Fall, Arminians believe God extends “prevenient grace” – grace that goes before salvation – to every person. This grace removes the guilt of original sin, enlightens the mind, and enables people to place faith in Christ. It mitigates original sin enough to allow a free response to the gospel. Prevenient grace is given to all, allowing anyone the freedom to choose or reject Christ.
Scripture teaches that no one seeks after God (Romans 3:11) and that fallen man cannot understand spiritual truths (1 Corinthians 2:14). Humanity is helpless without God’s initiative to first liberate the will. Titus 2:11 depicts salvation appearing to all people, not just the elect. Prevenient grace prepares the heart for faith and enables true freedom of the will to accept or reject God’s gift of salvation.
God’s Sovereignty and Foreknowledge
Arminians uphold both God’s sovereignty and human free will. They see God as completely sovereign but insist He has sovereignly decreed not to coerce human free will or treat people as robots. Out of His foreknowledge, God sees who will respond to prevenient grace and places them in Christ – not based on human initiative but on His sovereign choice.
Ephesians 1:5 says believers were predestined according to God’s pleasure and will – but Arminians argue His pleasure and will were based on foreseeing their free choice to accept Christ. Romans 8:29 similarly says believers were foreknown by God and predestined to salvation. God does not predestine apart from human free will but in conjunction with it. His omniscience foresees human decisions.
God’s Desire for All to be Saved
Arminians argue that although God could decree for all people to be saved, He has chosen to allow human freedom instead. They cite verses like Ezekiel 18:23 and 1 Timothy 2:4 to show God desires everyone to repent and come to salvation. But by upholding free will rather than irresistible grace, He has sovereignly permitted people to resist His grace if they so choose.
Some Arminians hold to corporate election – that God elected a people (the church) but not individuals. This avoids claims that God predestines some while desiring all to be saved. The offer of salvation is made to all indiscriminately, not effectually applied to specific pre-chosen individuals. The atonement is unlimited, God’s grace resistible.
Emphasis on Human Decision and Responsibility
Arminians emphasize human free will because Scripture presents salvation as a choice to accept or reject God’s offer. Verses like John 3:16 and Revelation 22:17 depict human decision. Arminianism argues God’s election is based on His foreknowledge of human choice. Believers are predestined and elected according to God’s foreknowledge of their faith.
Arminians also argue that their view better promotes evangelism and missions. The Calvinist doctrine of election may lead some to wonder why share the gospel if people’s destinies are already set. But Arminians believe salvation depends on human response, so the urgency of preaching the gospel is greater. The offer is for all and brings genuine opportunity to repent.
Common Misunderstandings
Arminianism is sometimes misunderstood as synergistic – that is, suggesting humans contribute meritoriously to their salvation. But Arminians clearly argue that humans do not have saving righteousness apart from God’s grace. Their choice to believe is not a “good work” but simply a genuine response to the light God has given them through prevenient grace.
Arminians are also accused of embracing works righteousness due to their view that believers can fall away. They insist that salvation is by faith alone but that genuine faith can later be abandoned. Maintaining faith is not a “work” but simply persevering in trust in Christ until death or His return.
Additionally, Arminians reject the notion they diminish God’s sovereignty. They argue God is completely sovereign but has sovereignly decreed to give humans free will regarding salvation. God in His sovereignty sets the terms for salvation, and Arminians believe the biblical terms include human free will.
Key Arminian Figures
Some notable Arminian figures throughout church history include:
- Jacob Arminius – 16th century Dutch theologian, founder of Arminianism
- John Wesley – 18th century Anglican church leader, founder of Methodism
- Free Will Baptists – a Baptist denomination holding general atonement and conditional election
- Asbury Theological Seminary – a Wesleyan and Arminian seminary
- Adam Clarke – 18th century Methodist theologian and commentator
- Richard Watson – 19th century Wesleyan theologian
- William Burton Pope – 19th century Methodist theologian
- Robert Shank – 20th century Wesleyan author on life in Christ
- I. Howard Marshall – 20th century New Testament scholar and Arminian
- J. I. Packer – 20th century evangelical theologian with Arminian leanings on free will
While Calvinism has exerted great influence on evangelicalism, Arminianism remains an important tradition within Protestantism embraced by Methodists, Pentecostals, Wesleyans, and others. It strongly shapes their doctrine of salvation and evangelistic emphasis.
Criticisms of Arminianism
Arminianism has been critiqued on several fronts by Calvinists and others:
- It portrays God’s sovereign decrees as being subordinate to human free will.
- It includes the possibility of losing one’s salvation, conflicting with perseverance of the saints.
- Its doctrine of apostasy undermines assurance of salvation.
- It depends on prevenient grace which is not clearly taught in Scripture.
- It implies that predestination is based on foreseen human actions rather than God’s eternal purposes.
- It diminishes God’s glory in salvation by emphasizing human action.
- It depends on proof-texts while ignoring the overall redemptive narrative of Scripture.
- Its emphasis on human decision in salvation leads to viewing evangelism quantitatively rather than qualitatively.
These critiques argue Arminian theology wrongly exalts human free will over divine sovereignty in salvation. Its doctrines of conditional election and resistible grace favor human action over God’s purposes. Its system is seen as relying more on philosophical logic than biblical revelation.
Cases for Arminianism
Arminians argue their theology is firmly grounded in Scripture and that the Calvinist case is not as airtight as claimed. Supporting Arminian principles include:
- Clear verses showing God desires the salvation of all (2 Peter 3:9; 1 Timothy 2:4; Ezekiel 18:23).
- Universal gospel invitations and calls for human response (Revelation 22:7; Acts 2:21).
- Warnings against falling away that imply ability to resist grace (Hebrews 6:4-6; 10:29).
- Affirmations of human free will (John 7:17; James 4:8).
- Biblical examples of believers falling away (1 Timothy 1:19-20; 2 Timothy 2:16-18).
- Evidence that grace can be resisted (John 12:32; Acts 7:51; Hebrews 10:29).
- Salvation comes through faith, a free human act (John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8).
- Election presented as based on foreknowledge, not predetermined choice (Romans 8:29; 1 Peter 1:2).
They argue these show election involves God’s foreknowledge of human free response. The atonement extends to all, and God genuinely wills the salvation of all.
Balancing Sovereignty and Free Will
A key issue in evaluating Arminian theology is determining how best to understand God’s sovereignty in relation to human free will and responsibility. Both Calvinists and Arminians aim to be faithful to all of Scripture.
Calvinism places heavy emphasis on God’s sovereignty in salvation – election is unconditional, the atonement definite, and saving grace irresistible. But Arminians argue this diminishes free will. In contrast, their emphasis upholds both meaningful human choice and unconditional election – God’s choice is based on His foreknowledge of free human response.
There are thoughtful arguments on both sides. In the end, Christians may have to accept a paradox between divine sovereignty and human choice that escapes full comprehension. But the contours of this paradox must be shaped by Scripture itself.
Conclusion
Arminian theology offers an important perspective on salvation and the nature of God. Its differences with Calvinism center on the relationship between God’s sovereignty and human free will. Arminians argue their view derives from a careful reading of Scripture and that Calvinism over-emphasizes sovereignty at the expense of meaningful human responsibility.
While debates continue, Arminianism remains influential among Protestants and an important tradition for understanding soteriology. Determining which system best reflects the tensions in Scripture is challenging. But robust discussion can help lead to deeper understanding and praise for the mysteries of God’s gracious salvation.