Recent Posts

Arminius vs. Calvin on Limited Atonement

, , No Comment

Theologians are divided as to whether Calvin held to an Unlimited or Limited view of the Atonement. And while most Christians, whether Arminian, non-Calvinist, Amyraldian, or four-point compatibilist Calvinist, would agree that Christ’s atoning sacrifice…

Read Post →

Unitarianism and Arminianism at Odds

, , No Comment

It has been noted that historically, future generations of “Arminians” departed from the orthodox view of the Trinity, falling into the Unitarian heresy. The same sad state of affairs happened to many Presbyterian (i.e. Calvinistic) congregations during the eighteenth century. Therefore, it is puzzling how Arminianism is solely charged with inevitably leading one to a Unitarian understanding of God.

Read Post →

The Influence of Arminianism in England

, , No Comment

The following is part of Geoffrey F. Nuttall’s address presented at the Arminius Symposium in Holland, August 1960: “The Influence of Arminianism in England.”

I am inclined to begin by recounting two recent incidents which together may serve as an interesting pointer. Among the papers required for a higher degree in one of the English universities is an essay with three or four alternative subjects, and one of these subjects a few years ago, I remember, was: “Since Wesley, we are all Arminians.”

One of the alternatives that year was an invitation to discuss the dictum, “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live” ~ so we need not assume that the assertion that Arminianism is now universally accepted was regarded as indisputable! It is interesting, nonetheless, that the assertion could be made.

Read Post →

“Thoughts on Original Sin” by Robert Hamilton

, , 1 Comment

You may view this article as a web page or as a downloadable .pdf file in it’s original formatting. To view it as a .pdf file, please click on the attachment located at the bottom of this page.

Thoughts on Original Sin

Bob Hamilton, Copyright 2000

Introduction.

The traditional view of “original sin” includes two related ideas:

Read Post →

Jack Cottrell on “Whether God Has Free Will If He Can’t Sin And What This Means For Human Free Will”

, , Comment Closed

Taken from http://arminiantoday.blogspot.com/2010/06/jack-cottrell-on-free-will.html

QUESTION: Many (usually Arminians) argue that without free will in a significant (libertarian) sense, i.e., the ability to choose between good and evil, human actions would not be worthy of praise or blame. Thus in order to preserve moral responsibility, human beings must have free will in the libertarian sense—the freedom of opposite moral choice. But is this consistent with the freedom of God Himself, whom we assume to be the ultimate model for freedom? The following are said to be true of God:

1. God is surely the freest being in the universe. He is free to do whatever he pleases (Psalm 115:3), and all his choices are surely praiseworthy.

Read Post →

The Historical Orthodoxy of Arminianism (Part Two)

, , No Comment

It has been noted by some Calvinists that Calvinism was the dominant theological position of the Church throughout its history. For example, Calvinist Loraine Boettner writes:

    The great majority of the creeds of historic Christendom have set forth the doctrines of Election, Predestination, and final Perseverance, as will readily be seen by any one who will make even a cursory study of the subject. On the other hand Arminianism existed for centuries only as a heresy on the outskirts of true religion, and in fact it was not championed by an organized Christian church until the year 1784, at which time it was incorporated into the system of doctrine of the Methodist Church in England.1

Read Post →

Verses All Arminians Should Know

, , No Comment

This list was compiled about a year ago by many members of The Society of Evangelical Arminians. I was asked to put it into blog form, and have finally sat down and gotten it done.

I hope for this to be a useful resource for any Arminian needing good scriptural texts that display his or her view. It should be cautioned that proof texting is far too easy for anyone to do, and with any of these verses the context should be considered. Far too often, context is ignored and erroneous interpretations are formed. So, use these verses, but corroborate their contexts. We strove to carefully consider the contexts and, in our minds, these verses and explanations faithfully represent the author’s intent, showing Arminianism to have strong Biblical support.

Also, if you see any verses that you think should be added, comment on the post and let me know.

Verses that show election is conditional: