There are many who are not Calvinists and yet when they examine the teachings of Arminius they come to the conclusion that they are not Arminians as well. Am I such a person? I think that in order for us to determine if we are non-Arminian, we must first understand what doctrines it is that most non-Calvinists have trouble with within Arminianism. Obviously, there is no need for me to cover the basics of Calvinism since non-Calvinists reject Calvinism as a whole. But what are the key doctrines within Arminianism that cause these people to reject Arminianism.
1. Total Depravity
This is the watershed issue for many non-Calvinists who agree with Arminians in rejecting Calvinism, but they still are not Arminians in that they likewise reject total depravity, which Arminius affirmed. There is no denying that Arminius differed with Calvinists over the extent of depravity maintaining that the grace of God freed us in Christ Jesus to respond to the grace of God and the work of the Spirit in conversion (John 3:3-7; Titus 3:5-7). Yet some non-Calvinists who reject Arminianism do so because they simply do not see total depravity in Scripture.
An example of such a theologian would be Dr. Jack Cottrell. Dr. Cottrell rejects total depravity. He believes the Bible teaches that people are not born totally depraved but are born in original grace (a state of sinlessness) but in time they become depraved through their own choice to rebel against God. In his book, The Faith Once For All, Dr. Cottrell defends his position by working through the classic passages such as Romans 5:12 and Ephesians 2:1-3 that many use to justify total depravity.
2. Eternal Security
There are some who would gladly be labeled Arminian and yet hold to eternal security (once saved, always saved or perseverance of the saints), but many non-Calvinists simply choose to avoid the label Arminian since they believe that this holds universally that one can lose their salvation.
However, within Arminianism there is no clear unification on the issue. I, for example, believe in apostasy, but I do know some who would claim to be Arminian who reject my view. I believe there should be liberty on this issue. I do believe that, at times, the teaching of eternal security can turn into a gross misunderstanding of grace (Jude 4) but I also can pray, worship, and evangelize with brothers and sisters who disagree with me so long as there is a passion for holiness and a zeal for Jesus (Hebrews 12:14; 1 Peter 1:15-16).
Conclusion
I suppose that others could perhaps come up with other issues that cause them to reject Arminianism, but for me these two issues (total depravity and eternal security) are the two main issues that I find cause people, who reject Calvinism, to also reject Arminianism. They prefer to remain non-Calvinists. I used to believe that people were either Calvinist or Arminian and that was the extent of it, but I have since learned that there are those in-between the battle lines who do not fall into either camp. Some reject Arminianism for the above while some choose simply to stay outside any camp out of fear of 1 Corinthians 3:4. While I can see their point, I know of no Arminian who would claim Arminius is perfect, our Saviour, or that Arminius’ theology is perfect. I do believe that Arminius was a godly man who loved Christ and I agree with much of his exegesis, but he was a man and he is liable to be wrong.
[Link to original post and comments at Roy Ingle’s website.]
