Neogillist
Puritan Board Freshman
To most of you, it is probably not an new fact that most synergist Christians do not want to be known as "Arminians," the term being somewhat one of abuse within various circles. The same is probably true for "calvinism," as many people use the label without knowing what they are talking about. Some ignorant evangelicals think that hyper-Calvinism and Five-point Calvinism are one and the same, and other synergists have sought to adopt a moderate position on grace, claiming to be neither Arminian nor Calvinistic, but somewhere in the middle of the road. In this short article, I attempt to classify Arminians into five different groups, based on their disagreements over certain points of their soteriology, and their historical origins.
There are obviously some problems that arise in trying to sort out Arminians based on their beliefs, as many of them do not want to be identified with any particular camps in the fear of being rejected by some. Ironically, this is somewhat the tactic that Arminius took in promoting his poisonous ideas, and even the Remonstrants were hoping to be accepted as part of the Reformed Church of Holland, believing their views, or at least portraying them as mild divergences from the doctrine of the reformers. Secondly, in classifying Arminians here, I am not trying to label ignorant laymen within evangelical churches who do not believe the doctrines of grace, as most of these people are simply too ignorant of theology to really know where they truly stand, adding to the fact that they have not carefully studied good exegetical works in defense of TULIP such as John Gill's "The Cause of God and Truth," in which he finally inflicts a last blow to the scholarship of the Arminians of his day. My goal is simply to outline the five most popular strains of Arminianism found within evangelicalism today, which are adopted by countless numbers of popular theologians and "evangelists" today, and in past history. It is possible that my classification system needs improvement, or that I might have omitted a sixth category of Arminians that you know to exist. If this is so, feel free to expand on the list.
Strains of Arminianism
While England had been the centre of both Arminian and Calvinistic strains of Protestantism over the past four hundred years, Christianity in America was almost exclusively Calvinistic in its soteriology for the first two hundred years following the arrival of the Pilgrims, and it was not before the 1800s that some Baptist and Congregationalist churches begun to move away from their Calvinistic roots to embrace Wesleyan Arminianism following several waves of revivalism, notably a large one lead by Charles G. Finney in the 1830s. It is also noteworthy to point out that the large majority of Baptists in the United States were all strong five-point Calvinists until the beginning of the twentieth century, when their seminaries begun to substitute the old Calvinist textbooks for Arminian ones, such as did the Southern Baptist Convention. Today’s Christianity in America, but also around the whole world is largely dominated by various strains of Arminianism, but not so much as to have actually overthrown the Calvinist camp, which is appearantly making a new ressurgeance. In the following section, I shall highlight various types of Arminianisms that are commonly found in today’s churches, having all evolved from the historic Arminianism of the Remonstrants, and yet differring from this latter on various points.
Historic Arminianism
As mentioned previously, Historic Arminianism is the purest form of Arminianism, which arose shortly after the Protestant Reformation, following the teachings of James Arminius and his followers. Historic Arminianism teaches that man has a libertarian free-will, and is thus capable for turning to God in Faith, apart from an effectual regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Historic Arminians are quite few in numbers today, their view being perceived by many as "extreme," and heterodox. Historic Arminians included men such as Episcopius and Covinius.
Old Wesleyanism
John Wesley who grew up within an Arminian Anglican home, reformed the Historic Arminianism of his day so as to add some evangelical flavour to it, while also borrowing bits and pieces from Calvinism. Unlike Historic Arminianism, Old Wesleyanism maintains that justification is imputed on the believer on account of Christ’s righteousness, rather than infused progressively through repentance and good works. Sanctification, however, must be carefully sought by the believer following repentance, without which he may see his justification revocked, and be ultimately and eternally lost. There actually remains few Old Wesleyans today, and practically few Methodist denominations that have remained true to John Wesley’s Armimianism, most of them now adhering to the New Wesleyansim that I shall describe next. The Old Wesleyan process of salvation is descibed below, and proponents to this system of soteriology included Adam Clark and the Methodists. A very popular Old Wesleyan preacher today would be A. W. Tozer, who unlike many New Wesleyans, rejects the concept of "Lordship Salvation" as being optional for the believer.
Holy Spirit, Freed will (decision for Christ), Justification (imputed), Sanctification (infused and mendatory), Regeneration, Glorification.
New Wesleyanism
Following the Holiness Movement of the late 1800s a new strain of Arminianism made surface in America, which departed drastically with the traditional Wesleyan view of sanctification as being infused gradually into the believer. John Wesley who had promoted the theology of "perfect love" as a work of grace that is part of our sanctification, always refused to label it as a "second work of grace" that the believer must seek following his conversion. Indeed, it has been said that Wesley spent more time explaining what "Perfect love" was not than he did defining what he meant by the term. He did not want to identify it with the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" either, since that could have alluded to some mystical experience. The perfectionism that Wesley sought was somewhat too much of a complex nature for the average Wesleyan Christian to understand, in addition to being more conceptual than pragmatic. Wesley himself denied having experienced this "Perfect Love" that he theorized. Consequently, New Wesleyans reformed the perfectionism of Wesley, and taught instead that "Perfect Love" was a "second work of grace" that not all Christians have the previlege of experiencing, but should seek as part of their sanctification. This experience which they equated with "the baptism of the Holy Spirit," also known as "entire sanctification," a term coined by Phoebe Palmer, begun to be sought by a countless number of Christians and gave rise to Pentecostalism. New Wesleyanism basically maintains that once justified by faith, a believer may experience "a second work of grace," which is wrought by the Holy Spirit and eradicates all remnants of original sin, enabling him to live without sinning any longer. This experience is reversible, however, and even the "holiest" Christian living in the state of entire sanctification must guard himself from apostasizing. Moreover, in order to avoid making sanctification an optional process altogether, the majority of New Wesleyans still identify a type of sanctification termed "initial sanctification," which all believers have, but strongly encourage their adherents to seek the second work of grace of "entire sanctification." Just like Old Wesleyans and Historic Arminians, however, New Wesleyans still believe that salvation may be lost, even for those who abide in the state of entire sanctification. Some pentecostal denominations, as well as the majority of Wesleyan denominations left to this day hold to this type of Arminianism, including the Christian Missionary Alliance and Church of the Nazarene, although some of their pastors will lean more towards Old Wesleyanism. The New Wesleyan process of salvation is outlined below.
Holy Spirit, Freed will (decision for Christ), Justification (imputed), Initial sanctification (mendatory), Regeneration, Entire sanctification (optional), Glorification.
Dispensational Arminianism
Probably the most popular strain of Arminianism, especially among today’s Baptists that were formely strong 5-point Calvinists is what I shall call Dispensational Arminianism, because of a modification made to the soteriology of traditional Arminianism which arose largely within the circle of dispensationalism. Note that not all Dispensational Arminians are Dispensationalists, neither are all Dispensationalists Arminians, some like John F. MacArthurs holding to Calvinistic soteriology. Unlike Historic Arminians, Dispensational Arminians have found a way of reconciling the doctrine of "eternal security" with the other four articles of the Remonstrants, thus claiming to hold to the "T" and "P" of TULIP, while rejecting the other three points. Unfortunately, we shall see however that what they understand by "total depravity" and "preservation of the saints" is not quite the same as what historical Calvinists understand them to be. Calvinism maintains that total depravity is a complete sinfulness that is found in all unbelievers and is so diametrically opposed to the will of God that only a supernatural work of monergistic regeneration through "irresitible grace" can bring a sinner to repentance and faith. Consequently, from the Calvinist’s viewpoint, one cannot hold both to free will and to total depravity, these two doctrines being opposed in definition and meaning. I would personally challenge any Arminian to agree with Jonathan Edwards’ perception of the nature of man as being "half animal and half devil," to describe total depravity. Almost all of them will shy away from such a definition, ultimately embracing a more moderate definition of total depravity. As for dispensational Arminians, most of them will either hold to free will or Wesley’s freed will rather than embracing the true "T" of TULIP. Regarding the last point on the perseverance and preservation of the saints, I know not how they manage to reconcile it with their rejection of unconditional election, for preservation logically follows unconditional election as God cannot fail in his eternal decree to bring His elects through sanctification and glorification (Romans 8:30). As a consequence of their belief in preservation, many dispensational Arminians have opposed the concept of "Lordship Salvation" and maintained that sanctification is only an optional part of salvation that believers may experience if they will and set their minds to it. Indeed, it is not uncommon to see antinomianism creeping into dispensational Arminian circles, as well as the rejection of church discipline within such denominations, for professing Christians who live carnally are simply labelled as "carnal Christians" or "worldly Christians," and a distinction is maintained between disciples and believers, the former having experienced lordship, and the latter not necessarily. It is important to point out however, that most dispensationalists still try to promote holiness within churches through moralistic preaching and the use of the Carnal Christian doctrine as a means of encouraging people to seek sanctification through discipleship. Well known Dispensational Arminians include Rick Warren and Bill Bright, although Bright would inconsistently call himself a "moderate Calvinist," claiming to hold to two of the points of Calvinism. The process of salvation that most Dispensational Arminians hold to is outlined below. Note that they like to place regeneration before other Arminians to make their position look more "Calvinistic."
Free will (decision for Christ), Regeneration (Holy Spirit indwells), Justification (imputed), Sanctification (optional), Glorification.
Open Theism
Probably the most radical brand of Arminianism that is gaining popularity these days is known as "Open Theism" or Neo-Arminianism. Proponents to this view deny that God actually foreknows the future and they reject the concept of divine decrees altogether. They claim that whenever prophecies are given in the Bible, they merely happen to be "correct predictions" that God has made because of His extensive knowledge of past history, and ability to interract with His creatures. According to Open Theists, God is "open-minded" and not unchangeable in His nature and His decrees but is limited by time and the free will of His creatures. Many Open Theists also adhere to other doctrines that drastically depart from the general circle of evangelical orthodoxy such as Anahilationism. A Well known Open Theist today is Clark Pinnock. The process of salvation that Open Theists hold to is to indeterminate to be outlined here, and is probably a mixture of those outlined above.
There are obviously some problems that arise in trying to sort out Arminians based on their beliefs, as many of them do not want to be identified with any particular camps in the fear of being rejected by some. Ironically, this is somewhat the tactic that Arminius took in promoting his poisonous ideas, and even the Remonstrants were hoping to be accepted as part of the Reformed Church of Holland, believing their views, or at least portraying them as mild divergences from the doctrine of the reformers. Secondly, in classifying Arminians here, I am not trying to label ignorant laymen within evangelical churches who do not believe the doctrines of grace, as most of these people are simply too ignorant of theology to really know where they truly stand, adding to the fact that they have not carefully studied good exegetical works in defense of TULIP such as John Gill's "The Cause of God and Truth," in which he finally inflicts a last blow to the scholarship of the Arminians of his day. My goal is simply to outline the five most popular strains of Arminianism found within evangelicalism today, which are adopted by countless numbers of popular theologians and "evangelists" today, and in past history. It is possible that my classification system needs improvement, or that I might have omitted a sixth category of Arminians that you know to exist. If this is so, feel free to expand on the list.
Strains of Arminianism
While England had been the centre of both Arminian and Calvinistic strains of Protestantism over the past four hundred years, Christianity in America was almost exclusively Calvinistic in its soteriology for the first two hundred years following the arrival of the Pilgrims, and it was not before the 1800s that some Baptist and Congregationalist churches begun to move away from their Calvinistic roots to embrace Wesleyan Arminianism following several waves of revivalism, notably a large one lead by Charles G. Finney in the 1830s. It is also noteworthy to point out that the large majority of Baptists in the United States were all strong five-point Calvinists until the beginning of the twentieth century, when their seminaries begun to substitute the old Calvinist textbooks for Arminian ones, such as did the Southern Baptist Convention. Today’s Christianity in America, but also around the whole world is largely dominated by various strains of Arminianism, but not so much as to have actually overthrown the Calvinist camp, which is appearantly making a new ressurgeance. In the following section, I shall highlight various types of Arminianisms that are commonly found in today’s churches, having all evolved from the historic Arminianism of the Remonstrants, and yet differring from this latter on various points.
Historic Arminianism
As mentioned previously, Historic Arminianism is the purest form of Arminianism, which arose shortly after the Protestant Reformation, following the teachings of James Arminius and his followers. Historic Arminianism teaches that man has a libertarian free-will, and is thus capable for turning to God in Faith, apart from an effectual regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Historic Arminians are quite few in numbers today, their view being perceived by many as "extreme," and heterodox. Historic Arminians included men such as Episcopius and Covinius.
Old Wesleyanism
John Wesley who grew up within an Arminian Anglican home, reformed the Historic Arminianism of his day so as to add some evangelical flavour to it, while also borrowing bits and pieces from Calvinism. Unlike Historic Arminianism, Old Wesleyanism maintains that justification is imputed on the believer on account of Christ’s righteousness, rather than infused progressively through repentance and good works. Sanctification, however, must be carefully sought by the believer following repentance, without which he may see his justification revocked, and be ultimately and eternally lost. There actually remains few Old Wesleyans today, and practically few Methodist denominations that have remained true to John Wesley’s Armimianism, most of them now adhering to the New Wesleyansim that I shall describe next. The Old Wesleyan process of salvation is descibed below, and proponents to this system of soteriology included Adam Clark and the Methodists. A very popular Old Wesleyan preacher today would be A. W. Tozer, who unlike many New Wesleyans, rejects the concept of "Lordship Salvation" as being optional for the believer.
Holy Spirit, Freed will (decision for Christ), Justification (imputed), Sanctification (infused and mendatory), Regeneration, Glorification.
New Wesleyanism
Following the Holiness Movement of the late 1800s a new strain of Arminianism made surface in America, which departed drastically with the traditional Wesleyan view of sanctification as being infused gradually into the believer. John Wesley who had promoted the theology of "perfect love" as a work of grace that is part of our sanctification, always refused to label it as a "second work of grace" that the believer must seek following his conversion. Indeed, it has been said that Wesley spent more time explaining what "Perfect love" was not than he did defining what he meant by the term. He did not want to identify it with the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" either, since that could have alluded to some mystical experience. The perfectionism that Wesley sought was somewhat too much of a complex nature for the average Wesleyan Christian to understand, in addition to being more conceptual than pragmatic. Wesley himself denied having experienced this "Perfect Love" that he theorized. Consequently, New Wesleyans reformed the perfectionism of Wesley, and taught instead that "Perfect Love" was a "second work of grace" that not all Christians have the previlege of experiencing, but should seek as part of their sanctification. This experience which they equated with "the baptism of the Holy Spirit," also known as "entire sanctification," a term coined by Phoebe Palmer, begun to be sought by a countless number of Christians and gave rise to Pentecostalism. New Wesleyanism basically maintains that once justified by faith, a believer may experience "a second work of grace," which is wrought by the Holy Spirit and eradicates all remnants of original sin, enabling him to live without sinning any longer. This experience is reversible, however, and even the "holiest" Christian living in the state of entire sanctification must guard himself from apostasizing. Moreover, in order to avoid making sanctification an optional process altogether, the majority of New Wesleyans still identify a type of sanctification termed "initial sanctification," which all believers have, but strongly encourage their adherents to seek the second work of grace of "entire sanctification." Just like Old Wesleyans and Historic Arminians, however, New Wesleyans still believe that salvation may be lost, even for those who abide in the state of entire sanctification. Some pentecostal denominations, as well as the majority of Wesleyan denominations left to this day hold to this type of Arminianism, including the Christian Missionary Alliance and Church of the Nazarene, although some of their pastors will lean more towards Old Wesleyanism. The New Wesleyan process of salvation is outlined below.
Holy Spirit, Freed will (decision for Christ), Justification (imputed), Initial sanctification (mendatory), Regeneration, Entire sanctification (optional), Glorification.
Dispensational Arminianism
Probably the most popular strain of Arminianism, especially among today’s Baptists that were formely strong 5-point Calvinists is what I shall call Dispensational Arminianism, because of a modification made to the soteriology of traditional Arminianism which arose largely within the circle of dispensationalism. Note that not all Dispensational Arminians are Dispensationalists, neither are all Dispensationalists Arminians, some like John F. MacArthurs holding to Calvinistic soteriology. Unlike Historic Arminians, Dispensational Arminians have found a way of reconciling the doctrine of "eternal security" with the other four articles of the Remonstrants, thus claiming to hold to the "T" and "P" of TULIP, while rejecting the other three points. Unfortunately, we shall see however that what they understand by "total depravity" and "preservation of the saints" is not quite the same as what historical Calvinists understand them to be. Calvinism maintains that total depravity is a complete sinfulness that is found in all unbelievers and is so diametrically opposed to the will of God that only a supernatural work of monergistic regeneration through "irresitible grace" can bring a sinner to repentance and faith. Consequently, from the Calvinist’s viewpoint, one cannot hold both to free will and to total depravity, these two doctrines being opposed in definition and meaning. I would personally challenge any Arminian to agree with Jonathan Edwards’ perception of the nature of man as being "half animal and half devil," to describe total depravity. Almost all of them will shy away from such a definition, ultimately embracing a more moderate definition of total depravity. As for dispensational Arminians, most of them will either hold to free will or Wesley’s freed will rather than embracing the true "T" of TULIP. Regarding the last point on the perseverance and preservation of the saints, I know not how they manage to reconcile it with their rejection of unconditional election, for preservation logically follows unconditional election as God cannot fail in his eternal decree to bring His elects through sanctification and glorification (Romans 8:30). As a consequence of their belief in preservation, many dispensational Arminians have opposed the concept of "Lordship Salvation" and maintained that sanctification is only an optional part of salvation that believers may experience if they will and set their minds to it. Indeed, it is not uncommon to see antinomianism creeping into dispensational Arminian circles, as well as the rejection of church discipline within such denominations, for professing Christians who live carnally are simply labelled as "carnal Christians" or "worldly Christians," and a distinction is maintained between disciples and believers, the former having experienced lordship, and the latter not necessarily. It is important to point out however, that most dispensationalists still try to promote holiness within churches through moralistic preaching and the use of the Carnal Christian doctrine as a means of encouraging people to seek sanctification through discipleship. Well known Dispensational Arminians include Rick Warren and Bill Bright, although Bright would inconsistently call himself a "moderate Calvinist," claiming to hold to two of the points of Calvinism. The process of salvation that most Dispensational Arminians hold to is outlined below. Note that they like to place regeneration before other Arminians to make their position look more "Calvinistic."
Free will (decision for Christ), Regeneration (Holy Spirit indwells), Justification (imputed), Sanctification (optional), Glorification.
Open Theism
Probably the most radical brand of Arminianism that is gaining popularity these days is known as "Open Theism" or Neo-Arminianism. Proponents to this view deny that God actually foreknows the future and they reject the concept of divine decrees altogether. They claim that whenever prophecies are given in the Bible, they merely happen to be "correct predictions" that God has made because of His extensive knowledge of past history, and ability to interract with His creatures. According to Open Theists, God is "open-minded" and not unchangeable in His nature and His decrees but is limited by time and the free will of His creatures. Many Open Theists also adhere to other doctrines that drastically depart from the general circle of evangelical orthodoxy such as Anahilationism. A Well known Open Theist today is Clark Pinnock. The process of salvation that Open Theists hold to is to indeterminate to be outlined here, and is probably a mixture of those outlined above.