Jacobus Arminius, damnable heresy

[R. Scott Clark]

I believe that William Ames said that Arminianism is an error tending to heresy.

In the strict sense it's best to define heresy as that which transgresses the catholic (universal, e.g. Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed, Chalcedon, Athanasian) creeds. Thus, we should drop the H bomb very carefully.

We should also avoid speculating about who will and won't be in heaven. Apart from public, ecclesiastical judgment on a particular individual, who knows? Even in the case of ecclesiastical judgment the church is only saying that it does not see evidence of true faith. Churches err. Only God knows these things.

Finally, Arminius made serious errors and laid the foundation for a great deal of damage in the Reformed Churches and even for the rise of aspects of modern Unitarianism (later Remonstrants became Unitarians and the UUA--Unitarian Universalist Assoc-- sometimes traces its roots to Arminius) but he was not as radical as his followers became.

 

[Guido's Brother]

I agree with Scott, especially given the way that the TFU use the word.

I've recently written an article that deals with article 16 of the Belgic Confession. Article 16 speaks about the Christological heresy of some of the Anabaptists. This was truly heresy, for it ran into problems with the Athanasian Creed.

See here for the article.

 

[CarsonLAllen]

This is from the O.P.C. Q&A

Is Arminianism a damnable heresy?


Answer:


Having been condemned by the Synod of Dordrecht (Dort) in 1618-1619, Arminianism is indeed a heresy, a serious departure from the historic faith of the Christian church. "Arminius, a theological professor at the University of Leyden, departed from the Reformed faith in his teaching concerning five important points. He taught conditional election on the ground of foreseen faith, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace. These views were rejected by the Synod ..." (from the introduction to the Canons of Dort in the Psalter Hymnal, 1959 ed.).


The Bible teaches that God elected his people in Christ before time began. "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world ..." (Eph. 1:4). This election was out of God's mere free grace and love, with nothing in the creature as a condition or cause inducing him to do this. "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth ... So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy" (Rom. 9:11, 16).


The Bible teaches that Christ did his atoning work on behalf of his elect people, and no others. "Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it" (Eph. 5:25). "I lay down my life for the sheep" (John 10:15). "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine" (John 17:9).


The Bible teaches total depravity, that is, that man, in every part of his nature (intellect, emotions and will) is hopelessly ruined by the fall. Fallen man is dead in trespasses and sins and cannot give himself spiritual birth. Regeneration is entirely the working of our gracious, sovereign God. "And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1). "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:13).


The Bible teaches that God is absolutely sovereign and all-powerful. "... the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will ... and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?" (Dan. 4:32, 35). "The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power ..." (Ps. 110:2-3). "For who hath resisted his will?" (Rom. 9:19). "Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth" (Rev. 19:6). If God's will cannot be resisted, then his grace cannot be resisted either; his grace is irresistible.


The Bible teaches that Christ's true sheep have eternal life and shall never perish. "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand" (John 10:27-29).


Since the teachings of Arminianism are contrary to Scripture, they are manifestly false. They are serious perversions of the gospel of Jesus Christ. There is only one gospel, not two. Anyone who preaches any other gospel is preaching a false gospel and is accursed. "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9).


Jesus Christ is the true and faithful witness (Rev. 3:14). Since he has chosen that his gospel be preached by fallible men (Acts 9:15; Eph. 4:11), it is evident that there is no perfect preacher among the sons of men, born by ordinary generation. A true preacher might make an honest mistake, but he will not intentionally deceive or distort the gospel of Jesus Christ. Only the Lord Jesus Christ is the unerring discerner of men's hearts who will infallibly judge the motivations of all his ministers at the final day. "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire" (1 Cor. 3:15).


The Oxford English Dictionary defines "damnable" as "worthy of condemnation" or "subject to divine condemnation." Surely all false doctrine, including Arminianism, is both worthy of condemnation and will ultimately be subject to divine condemnation at the final judgment. Since the Arminian doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace are contrary to Scripture, they are false and worthy of condemnation: therefore damnable.


Is Arminianism a heresy? Yes. Are Arminian preachers heretics? In a sense, yes, though most have not been condemned as such by a church council having the authority to make such a determination.


Can an Arminian preacher be a "damnable heretic" who preaches a false gospel of man's free will instead of the true gospel of God's sovereign grace? Yes, surely.


Is it possible for an Arminian preacher to preach the false doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace, while still (inconsistently) calling upon his hearers to trust in Jesus Christ alone, to the saving of their souls? I believe so.


Is it possible to believe the false doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace, while still (inconsistently) trusting in Jesus Christ alone for one's salvation. Perhaps, but ultimately this is up to God to judge.


Is Arminianism a damnable heresy? Yes. The false doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace originate in the pit of hell with the father of lies (John 8:44). They are contrary to Scripture and worthy of condemnation. This is a serious matter. "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction" (2 Pet. 2:1).


Are pastors who teach Arminianism damnable heretics who are not Christians and who will certainly go to hell? Ultimately, this is up to God to decide, and he surely will decide—on a case-by-case basis. The only ones who go to heaven are those who trust in Jesus Christ alone for their salvation. It would seem to be very difficult, if not impossible, to be trusting in Jesus Christ alone if you hold to conditional election on the ground of foreseen faith, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace. Those who hold to these false doctrines consistently must believe that their salvation depends, in part, on their own merit, and persons who are depending on their own merit instead of the merit of Christ are on their way to perdition.


If you hold, for example, that God elected you because he foresaw that you would have faith, then why do you have faith, while someone else does not? Don't you really believe that your faith is meritorious, that you merited salvation by your faith, while your neighbor did not have faith, and thus did not merit salvation? If you hold this consistently you are not trusting on the merit of Christ alone but upon your own merit, and you are lost. The biblical Christian believes that salvation is all of grace; otherwise all men are lost. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9).

 

[Archlute]

It should be noted that the answers found in the Q&A section on the OPC's website are composed by individual ministers (anonymously, if I remember correctly?), and are not authoritative expositions endorsed by the whole church as to the details. Some are well written, and some could be improved.

This is from the O.P.C. Q&A

Is Arminianism a damnable heresy?


Answer:


Having been condemned by the Synod of Dordrecht (Dort) in 1618-1619, Arminianism is indeed a heresy, a serious departure from the historic faith of the Christian church. "Arminius, a theological professor at the University of Leyden, departed from the Reformed faith in his teaching concerning five important points. He taught conditional election on the ground of foreseen faith, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace. These views were rejected by the Synod ..." (from the introduction to the Canons of Dort in the Psalter Hymnal, 1959 ed.).


The Bible teaches that God elected his people in Christ before time began. "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world ..." (Eph. 1:4). This election was out of God's mere free grace and love, with nothing in the creature as a condition or cause inducing him to do this. "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth ... So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy" (Rom. 9:11, 16).


The Bible teaches that Christ did his atoning work on behalf of his elect people, and no others. "Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it" (Eph. 5:25). "I lay down my life for the sheep" (John 10:15). "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine" (John 17:9).


The Bible teaches total depravity, that is, that man, in every part of his nature (intellect, emotions and will) is hopelessly ruined by the fall. Fallen man is dead in trespasses and sins and cannot give himself spiritual birth. Regeneration is entirely the working of our gracious, sovereign God. "And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1). "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:13).


The Bible teaches that God is absolutely sovereign and all-powerful. "... the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will ... and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?" (Dan. 4:32, 35). "The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power ..." (Ps. 110:2-3). "For who hath resisted his will?" (Rom. 9:19). "Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth" (Rev. 19:6). If God's will cannot be resisted, then his grace cannot be resisted either; his grace is irresistible.


The Bible teaches that Christ's true sheep have eternal life and shall never perish. "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand" (John 10:27-29).


Since the teachings of Arminianism are contrary to Scripture, they are manifestly false. They are serious perversions of the gospel of Jesus Christ. There is only one gospel, not two. Anyone who preaches any other gospel is preaching a false gospel and is accursed. "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:8-9).


Jesus Christ is the true and faithful witness (Rev. 3:14). Since he has chosen that his gospel be preached by fallible men (Acts 9:15; Eph. 4:11), it is evident that there is no perfect preacher among the sons of men, born by ordinary generation. A true preacher might make an honest mistake, but he will not intentionally deceive or distort the gospel of Jesus Christ. Only the Lord Jesus Christ is the unerring discerner of men's hearts who will infallibly judge the motivations of all his ministers at the final day. "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire" (1 Cor. 3:15).


The Oxford English Dictionary defines "damnable" as "worthy of condemnation" or "subject to divine condemnation." Surely all false doctrine, including Arminianism, is both worthy of condemnation and will ultimately be subject to divine condemnation at the final judgment. Since the Arminian doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace are contrary to Scripture, they are false and worthy of condemnation: therefore damnable.


Is Arminianism a heresy? Yes. Are Arminian preachers heretics? In a sense, yes, though most have not been condemned as such by a church council having the authority to make such a determination.


Can an Arminian preacher be a "damnable heretic" who preaches a false gospel of man's free will instead of the true gospel of God's sovereign grace? Yes, surely.


Is it possible for an Arminian preacher to preach the false doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace, while still (inconsistently) calling upon his hearers to trust in Jesus Christ alone, to the saving of their souls? I believe so.


Is it possible to believe the false doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace, while still (inconsistently) trusting in Jesus Christ alone for one's salvation. Perhaps, but ultimately this is up to God to judge.


Is Arminianism a damnable heresy? Yes. The false doctrines of conditional election, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace originate in the pit of hell with the father of lies (John 8:44). They are contrary to Scripture and worthy of condemnation. This is a serious matter. "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction" (2 Pet. 2:1).


Are pastors who teach Arminianism damnable heretics who are not Christians and who will certainly go to hell? Ultimately, this is up to God to decide, and he surely will decide—on a case-by-case basis. The only ones who go to heaven are those who trust in Jesus Christ alone for their salvation. It would seem to be very difficult, if not impossible, to be trusting in Jesus Christ alone if you hold to conditional election on the ground of foreseen faith, universal atonement, partial depravity, resistible grace, and the possibility of a lapse from grace. Those who hold to these false doctrines consistently must believe that their salvation depends, in part, on their own merit, and persons who are depending on their own merit instead of the merit of Christ are on their way to perdition.


If you hold, for example, that God elected you because he foresaw that you would have faith, then why do you have faith, while someone else does not? Don't you really believe that your faith is meritorious, that you merited salvation by your faith, while your neighbor did not have faith, and thus did not merit salvation? If you hold this consistently you are not trusting on the merit of Christ alone but upon your own merit, and you are lost. The biblical Christian believes that salvation is all of grace; otherwise all men are lost. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9).

 

[Herald]

If no one has said it yet, not all of what passes for Armianism today is actually classical Armianism. I know many "Arminians" who are closet Calvinists. While full blown Arminianism is either heresy or on the doorstep of, I tend to view so-called Arminians as Calvinists in training. Don't give up on them. Many PB'ers were in that camp; yours truly included.

 

[Notthemama1984]

I just wanted to add that many whom we call Arminians are not Arminians. We tend to group people as either Calvinists or Arminians, but there is a third group. I do not know what to call them, but they are there. Liberty University teaches this third group. Dr. Towns who is their theology professor goes through both the five points of Calvinism and Arminianism and disputes all points for both sides (except for Perseverance of the Saints). He is strongly against Calvinism, but is even stronger against Arminianism.


I think we should be careful when labeling people and through this label attempting to determine one's eternal resting place.

 

[Archlute]

I just wanted to add that many whom we call Arminians are not Arminians. We tend to group people as either Calvinists or Arminians, but there is a third group. I do not know what to call them, but they are there. Liberty University teaches this third group. Dr. Towns who is their theology professor goes through both the five points of Calvinism and Arminianism and disputes all points for both sides (except for Perseverance of the Saints). He is strongly against Calvinism, but is even stronger against Arminianism.


I think we should be careful when labeling people and through this label attempting to determine one's eternal resting place.

From my experience, men of that type should be considered 'equivocators' and not professors of theology. I studied under a man such as this during my brief stay at Western seminary. Every course consisted of presenting 'all the sides', and then letting you 'pick your own theology', with the occasional snide remark against Calvinism/covenant theologians thrown in for kicks. However, after studying at WSC, it was clear to me that he didn't know other than caricatures of historical theology, and often ignored (was ignorant of?) the issues involved in the debates.

For what it's worth, if you are not an Augustinian/Calvinist on issues of soteriology, you are some stripe of semi-pelagian (excluding from Christian discussion the category of full-blown Pelagianism); whether you consider yourself to be an Arminian, or define yourself as "something in between". There really is no middle ground. I've read some works that would take the approach of Towns, but as noted above, they refuse to engage the classic issues of the debates, and come off as equivocators, finally unwilling to commit to any position, not really holding a clearly defined theology of their own.

BTW, isn't Elmer Towns the fellow who defends an unorthodox view of hell? I believe that I heard him in a debate on the issue once, and he came off sounding pretty confused.

 

[CarsonLAllen]

Either someone is dead in sin or they are not. Either the blood of Christ saved men, or it made them savable. I don’t see how someone can claim that they are neither Calvinist or Arminian. If you do not embrace limited atonement you are an Arminian period.

 

[Pilgrim's Progeny]

Can one safely assume that Jacobus was teaching such? If so, we can then assume that we will not see him in eternity? Am I going to far in this thinking?

Alll I know is that the Arminian god is not worshippable.

 

[Pergamum]

Arminius was mostly concerned about practical holiness.


Also, it is to be noted that Armianism seems to be semi-pelagian at most in most cases and not Pelagian.

I like Dr. Clark's quote of Ames: "error tending towards heresy."

 

[TsonMariytho]

I just wanted to add that many whom we call Arminians are not Arminians. We tend to group people as either Calvinists or Arminians, but there is a third group.

There are a lot more than three groups. Where do we put Richard Baxter?

I think we should be careful when labeling people and through this label attempting to determine one's eternal resting place.

This is a good caution, and echos what Dr. Clark said above as well.

Will there be people who were very confused here below, who are nonetheless redeemed by the blood of Christ and ushered into glory? This confused person hopes so.

 

[cih1355]

If an Arminian were to consistently hold to his Arminianism, then he would believe that man contributes to his salvation. However, not everyone who claims to be an Arminian consistently holds to Arminianism.

 

[AThornquist]

Was I filled with the Spirit when I became a Calvinist? No, but when I was saved as an ignorant Arminian. Many on the PB share this same story. Can one go to hell if they are truly filled with the Spirit of God?

 

[ReformedChapin]

Hello Everyone. I have been attending calvary chapel south bay for over 3 years close to 4. If any of you know or you have attended CC you will know that they hold to a middle ground. But as far as to what is being taught in the Pulpit seems like very essence of arminiannism. They have a strong anti-calvinist stance if you check their website:

While we would not classify Calvinism in the same class as the false religions we address on this website (e.g., Islam, Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses), we believe Calvinists have unknowingly made some serious theological errors. Below are a few resources that will help you see where Calvinists have drifted away from "sound doctrine" (Titus 2:1) when it comes to their views of total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints.

AlwaysBeReady.com - Reformed Theology: Calvinism

Even through this every member fully adheres to God's soverignty, even inconsistanly. Not one member sees the connection between God's full power and Man's free will to choose. Their main concern I think its out of ignorance. When I have talked to many members they say if God saves the elect why bother preaching to them? Very elementary questions. They, like all of us I think want everyone to have an equal chance, ita a very human stance. Even if they are in error I can't damn this as heresy.

-----Added 12/29/2008 at 04:04:16 EST-----


I would just like to add that I don't know a single arminian or potential arminian that denies God's soverignty. Nor do they assert that man contributes to their salvation. Instead they just want people to have the ability to believe. I also don't know if I would classify all middle views as arminian either. The Luthern view of salvation although it's paradoxial gives full glory to God and allows everyone the ability to believe.

 

[ReformedWretch]

I would just like to add that I don't know a single arminian or potential arminian that denies God's soverignty. Nor do they assert that man contributes to their salvation. Instead they just want people to have the ability to believe.

You have to press them to find out what they believe. I used to believe the foolishness I'm talking about but by the grace of God I came out of it. I do think all of those that are truly God's people will come out of damnable error.

For example, you say most arminians don't believe they contribute to their own salvation but just want everyone to be able to believe. What happens when you press that idea? You wind up with someone who insists that all are called and simply have to decide. It's been my experience that those who feel this way will cling to it no matter what biblical evidence they are shown.

 

[ReformedChapin]

I would just like to add that I don't know a single arminian or potential arminian that denies God's soverignty. Nor do they assert that man contributes to their salvation. Instead they just want people to have the ability to believe.

You have to press them to find out what they believe. I used to believe the foolishness I'm talking about but by the grace of God I came out of it. I do think all of those that are truly God's people will come out of damnable error.

For example, you say most arminians don't believe they contribute to their own salvation but just want everyone to be able to believe. What happens when you press that idea? You wind up with someone who insists that all are called and simply have to decide. It's been my experience that those who feel this way will cling to it no matter what biblical evidence they are shown.

Brother I agree with you. The logical implications of any arminian/semi-palegian doctrine is works based salvation. However, our arminian brotheren don't see it that way. Many of them actually have never been exposed to the doctrines of grace, they have a very simplified view of Grace.

 

[ReformedWretch]

Have you ever heard Paul Washer preach and say "I've turned down requests to preach revival services, and when asked why I tell the Pastor's that if I did that I would split your church right down the middle! Half your members would storm out of the church insisting they could never serve a God like that because there God is nothing like that!"

I encounter that pretty often.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Have you ever heard Paul Washer preach and say "I've turned down requests to preach revival services, and when asked why I tell the Pastor's that if I did that I would split your church right down the middle! Half your members would storm out of the church insisting they could never serve a God like that because there God is nothing like that!"

I encounter that pretty often.

Paul Washer isn't one of my favorite preachers. I find his style too combative. And yes I think I have heard that specific sermon online.

I have found that with many my ariminian brothers if you encounter them with love and with a logical argument of scripture it will breach more barriers than attacking them and calling them heretics.

 

[Theoretical]

Considering that many of the mis-perceptions of Calvinism that I've encountered have been opposed to it because the god they describe as the "Calvinist" one looks far more like Allah than YHWH, love and logical scriptural arguments are better than sand-blasting.

That said, how people respond AFTER you do the love and logical arguments does say a lot about their theology. Example: My father (who is a universalist Pelagian) and several other people I know who clearly reject the Biblical God.

 

[Yodas_Prodigy]

Can one safely assume that Jacobus was teaching such? If so, we can then assume that we will not see him in eternity? Am I going to far in this thinking?

No
No
Yes

 

[ReformedWretch]

Can one safely assume that Jacobus was teaching such? If so, we can then assume that we will not see him in eternity? Am I going to far in this thinking?

No
No
Yes

Well that clears that up!

 

[Yodas_Prodigy]

Can one safely assume that Jacobus was teaching such? If so, we can then assume that we will not see him in eternity? Am I going to far in this thinking?

No
No
Yes

Well that clears that up!

I am glad that you saw the humor in my answers. I do not think that JA taught damnable heresy. I don’t agree with what he taught. But his teachings fall within the Reformed point of view.

BTW, from what I am told, JA died in good standing with the Dutch Reformed Church

JA taught both Total Depravity and Justification by Faith. From what I understand, he did not discuss perseverance of the Saints. Where he varied in his view was the U, the L, and I.

The starting point of Arminian theology is God’s love. And since Jesus represents God, Arminian theology starts at that point.

Now, I am a five-pointer. My non-negotiable points are the T and the P. Having said that, I see the starting point with God is his holiness. Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God almighty. He is not Love, Love, Love or Justice, Justice, Justice. God’s other attributes flow from his holiness which include grace and justice. People receive grace or justice, but never injustice. They all receive love. This from a Holy God.