Skip to main content

Calvinism vs Arminianism



Calvinism and Arminianism have come to represent two major themes over the years as it relates to the salvation of mankind with Calvinism placing an emphasis on God’s sovereignty and Arminianism placing an emphasis on human free will. Thus we have the popular disagreements that surface all across Christendom regarding free will vs the Sovereignty of God.

It became a major issue during the 15 and 1600’s after Martin Luther started the Great Reformation which birthed the Protestant church. John Calvin was a prominent protestant theologian of that era who wrote his thesis entitled “The Intitutes of the Christian religion.” Within Calvin's theology we find many teachings that later developed into what we know today as Calvinism.

Jacobus Arminius was a critic of John Calvin’s theology and after some time his disciples developed 5 counter points to John Calvin’s teachings on salvation and human free will. This was all brought to a formal organization of theology in 1610 in a document called the Remonstrance. About 9 years later at the Synod of Dort followers of John Calvin rejected the 5 points of Arminianism and developed their own five points which are widely used today in an acrostic spelled “TULIP.”

The T in tulip stands for total depravity. This means that humans are sinful in every component of their nature including mind, will, and emotions. So much so that they are unable to even respond positively to the gospel without the regeneration of their hearts by the Holy Spirit beforehand. Arminianism would argue that the flip side of this means that God leaves most human beings in a condition in which they are unable to be saved and this goes against His loving nature. They argue that human beings are depraved but everyone has a dose of Grace that gives them the ability to receive the Gospel freely if they choose.

The U in tulip stands for unconditional election. This means that those who are chosen by God are not chosen on the basis of their free decision to receive the Gospel but rather with no conditions at all in mind. That is God chooses them on the basis of his own private reasons and not any action that they chose to do. Arminianism would argue that this makes God's choosing arbitrary, rather than His Word teaching that he chooses to save all who humble themselves and receive the Gospel.

The L in tulip stands for limited atonement. This is often an element of Calvinism that is even rejected by some Calvinists. It essentially teaches that because God already chose beforehand whom He would save then it follows that the atonement of Christ was only specifically for those who would be redeemed and not for the whole world. Arminianism responds to this by arguing that the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus died for the whole world.

The I in tulip stands for irresistible Grace. This is deeply connected with total depravity in that it teaches that because of our depravity God must irresistibly draw the people He has chosen, otherwise the calvinist argues, no one who is totally depraved would ever choose to receive the Gospel. The arminian responds to this by arguing but it goes against God's loving nature to essentially Force somebody to be saved and although human beings are depraved God still by his grace gives them an opportunity to choose salvation.

The P in tulip stands for perseverance of the Saints. This teaches that since God chose those who would be saved irresistibly then it makes no sense that they would not persevere in their righteousness until the very end. As a result no one who is truly saved can lose their salvation. Arminianism responds do this by arguing that God is so loving that if someone wants to walk away from their salvation He would let them.

It's important to understand that many theologians who do not identify with Calvinism or arminianism believe in what is called eternal security. This teaches that True Believers cannot lose their salvation however it's not related to the election of God but rather evidence found within the scriptures. Jesus said in John 10 verses 28 through 30- "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all[a]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.” This goes to show that Christians can believe that you can't lose your salvation without actually being a calvinist as a whole.

It's important to understand that Free Will and God's sovereignty may appear to be contradictory however if we understand the Transcendent nature of God it's reasonable to assume that these two things can be reconciled even if they are difficult to comprehend with our human mind. It is possible within the Transcendence of God for humans to be 100% free to choose to receive the Gospel and for God to be 100% Sovereign at the same time.

Written by: Kyle Bailey, D.Min.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A letter to Modern Christians on Church Attendance...

On March 22nd of 2020 an unprecedented event occurred. This wasn't the first time that a widespread disease afflicted human-kind, nor was it the first time that health measures were taken by a human government in order to mitigate the risk of an epidemic. The unprecedented event that occurred on Sunday, March 22nd of 2020 was the physical absence of worshippers gathering as the visible Church of Jesus Christ in the United States as well as other places around the world. The 10 person gathering limit issued by the Centers for Disease Control led to the widespread closure of house's of worship across the country. Up to that point in Church History there had never been an example of this magnitude in which faithful Christians avoided the physical gathering together to worship Jesus Christ and study His Word in a community of fellowship. The typical reason offered by many Christian leaders in an attempt to justify the temporary closure of churches was something like this, "Chr

Is it ok to let your kids believe in Santa Claus?

"A wink of his eye, and a twist of his head, soon led me to know I had nothing to dread."- Twas' the Night Before Christmas, Clement C. Moore As a kid I was taught that Santa Claus was going to bring me the presents I wished for on Christmas morning. I watched movies and cartoons about Santa riding his sleigh with gifts to give to all of the children around the world. Some of the stories depicted Santa as giving coal to bad kids and toys to good kids and I was told jokingly by my parents that I would "receive coal if I was bad," but it was never made to be a serious threat. Up until around the age of seven I really believed that Santa magically came down the chimney and left presents for my brothers and I, and it never caused me to have any resentment toward my parents for telling me he was real. I saw it as my parents wanting to give me a fun Christmas adventure, a magical experience that my brothers and I could use our imagination with. As I learned

How should Christians respond to "cancel culture?"

With the rise of modern technology and social media platforms in the past decade or so we have seen a vast increase certain ideological groups seeking to cancel, ban, and silence those with different, offensive, or annoying opinions. Most of this has been done in the name of seeking to preserve a "safe environment" for people to engage the internet with less of a risk of being "triggered" by a differing opinion. Though on a historical level the ability to limit certain free speech that incites physical violence or destructive behavior has been pretty much agreed upon by most people. It seems clear that the idea that those who say things which are wrong, offensive, or annoying should be canceled, silenced and sidelined is entirely un-American and ultimately not Christian.  Cancel culture is demonic and oppressive. It's the same tactic used by the enemy to oppose the gospel around the world. The message of the cross is offensive to those who don't