Arminianism is not Semi-Pelagian

[HatGuy]

I think it's a good thing to discuss theological views without putting words in the mouth of others with different views or making assumptions.

One of those assumptions Calvinists, especially, make is that they assume Arminianism is semi-pelagian.

I get why they do this. I thought this was true for many years, and so (somewhat grudgingly) was a Calvinist because I thought there really wasn't any other option besides Calvinist or Semi-Pelagian.

But, as time went by, I gradually began to shed each letter from TULIP (it started with Limited Atonement) and by the time I got to something like a 2-point Calvinist, I realised that I could never call myself a Calvinist if I only accepted like 2 points of its 5 point doctrine.

When I actually studied Arminian thought, I was surprised.

So without further ado, let me lay my case down as briefly as possible and let the fiery discussion begin! (I'm sorry I cannot explain some of these terms in detail - for those who don't know what some of these terms mean, just ask!).

A. There are four options when it comes to your soteriology:

1. Augustinian (Calvinist)
2. Semi-Augustinian (Arminian)
3. Semi-Pelagian
4. Pelagian

I won't venture to guess who sits at (3) and (4) at this point, perhaps that'll come up under the discussion.

Calvinists, especially, tend to never consider (2) above. They think it consists of Augustinian and then Semi-Pelagian, and then full-blown Pelagianism. But there is another option.

B. Arminianism is semi-Augustinian because it does not claim a person has the ability to put their faith in Christ.

Classical Arminianism (I'm talking Arminius himself and Wesley here) teaches that a person is totally depraved and incapable of having faith in Christ by themselves. What is required is the Holy Spirit to convict and give someone faith. However, the difference between a Calvinist here and an Arminian is that an Arminian believes that the grace given by God to a person (it is in this grace that faith is given) can be rejected, whereas a Calvinist believes it can't.

The point to note is that both the Calvinist and the Arminian believe that a person does not have anything in them to have faith in Christ. Both believe in Total Depravity. Faith must be given by the Holy Spirit. So there is a point of similarity / unity here.

The difference also, of course, revolves around the 'who' is given grace. The Calvinist bases the grace ultimately on the hidden will of God (predestination). God chooses before time who he will elect and who he passes over. This is 'unconditional election'. The Arminian believes that everyone is given grace at some point in their lives. God's revelation of Himself is given to all at some stage by the Holy Spirit. Everyone has the ability at some stage to accept or reject Christ. This is not a once-off moment but it may be gradually over their lives.

One can think of this as a 'grace' that 'comes before' salvation. It's a grace where God is drawing a person in, wooing them. This is called 'prevenient (comes before) grace'. If a person responds to this grace they are eventually given faith (most especially through the preaching of the Word - Romans 10:17). This grace can be resisted, however.

The important thing to note in this, however, is that God is the initiatior. God is in charge of when revelation comes, how it comes, at what rate it comes, and so on. God prepares the heart for faith and subsequent salvation. This is a work of God and not of man.

Modern day stories abound of Muslims given dreams etc. of Christ. I myself have met one. But scriptural support comes in many forms. I'll simply paste one here and refer to another:

Acts 17:
26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth, determining their set times and the fixed limits of the places where they would live, 27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

Romans 1, 2 and 3 is also a very interesting read - note how even though the Gentiles do not have the Law, they still have an understanding of their obligations to God.

Okay, I'm trying to be brief.

This is why an Arminian (in the pure, classical sense) is not Semi-Pelagian, because an Arminian does not believe that mankind still possesses something to come to God or to find God - some sort of inherent goodness that leads a person to salvation based on their own nature.

Therefore, Arminianism is semi-Augustinian.

C. Arminianism does believe in predestination - but it's also different

Lastly, let's talk predestination.

Two schools of thought essentially are at work here with Arminians, and sometimes they work together.

The first thing to note is that predestination in Ephesians 1 is 'in Christ'. This is an important point. For the Calvinist, predestination is found in God's hidden will - we can't really know who he elects and who he doesn't, and we can't even know if we're elected until we get to the end. This point is difficult for me when it comes to assurance because I find it hard to place my assurance on something that I cannot know.

To put it simply, the Calvinist then bases salvation on God's hidden will.

For the Arminian, salvation is conditioned on faith, not predestination. I realise a Calvinist does not say salvation isn't dependent on faith, but I think that ultimately the Calvinist conditions salvation on predestination.

Faith is not a work. That's why the Arminian can claim that salvation is not by work. Faith is given by God and to not resist this gift is not a work. Faith is always faith.

Okay, so the point is to note that Arminians see predestination as:
1. God predestines those he saw, ahead of time, would put their faith in Christ.
2. God predestines an elect 'group' (the church) and anyone who puts their faith in Christ is put in this group.

Briefly, predestination is primarily of God's anointed one (Christ). God predestined Christ. And he predestined a Church - a people to be found "in Christ". Anyone found 'in Christ' is therefore predestined. This pretty much sums up my view right now. It is true that God has predestined a call for every single person in this world, saved or unsaved, but if they come into Christ they get to walk in that call.

As a final point, one might note that the Arminian's position is an effort to make salvation more relational (it's more influence and response) and less mechanical (cause and effect).

If I've been a bit biased in this, please forgive me. But I do want to simply discuss why Arminianism is not semi-pelagian. Even some well known Calvinists seem to insist it is, which is disappointing, because it is intellectually dishonest to claim so.

Oh, one more point. I'm aware that some Arminians are actually semi-pelagian but they still call themselves "Arminians". Obviously this sort of discrepancy can be found in just about every form of belief, so I would consider that point irrelevant in this discussion - although worth noting.

 

[Not David]

It's just Calvinist ad hominem.

 

[mark kennedy]

I think it's a good thing to discuss theological views without putting words in the mouth of others with different views or making assumptions.

One of those assumptions Calvinists, especially, make is that they assume Arminianism is semi-pelagian.

I get why they do this. I thought this was true for many years, and so (somewhat grudgingly) was a Calvinist because I thought there really wasn't any other option besides Calvinist or Semi-Pelagian.

But, as time went by, I gradually began to shed each letter from TULIP (it started with Limited Atonement) and by the time I got to something like a 2-point Calvinist, I realised that I could never call myself a Calvinist if I only accepted like 2 points of its 5 point doctrine.

When I actually studied Arminian thought, I was surprised.

So without further ado, let me lay my case down as briefly as possible and let the fiery discussion begin! (I'm sorry I cannot explain some of these terms in detail - for those who don't know what some of these terms mean, just ask!).

A. There are four options when it comes to your soteriology:

1. Augustinian (Calvinist)
2. Semi-Augustinian (Arminian)
3. Semi-Pelagian
4. Pelagian

I won't venture to guess who sits at (3) and (4) at this point, perhaps that'll come up under the discussion.

Calvinists, especially, tend to never consider (2) above. They think it consists of Augustinian and then Semi-Pelagian, and then full-blown Pelagianism. But there is another option.

B. Arminianism is semi-Augustinian because it does not claim a person has the ability to put their faith in Christ.

Classical Arminianism (I'm talking Arminius himself and Wesley here) teaches that a person is totally depraved and incapable of having faith in Christ by themselves. What is required is the Holy Spirit to convict and give someone faith. However, the difference between a Calvinist here and an Arminian is that an Arminian believes that the grace given by God to a person (it is in this grace that faith is given) can be rejected, whereas a Calvinist believes it can't.

A nice opening discussion then you come up with this, of course Calvinists realize grace through faith can be rejected, they just insist it won't be. It comes down to the sovereign will of God, Calvinists are actually kind of ambiquise about that.

The point to note is that both the Calvinist and the Arminian believe that a person does not have anything in them to have faith in Christ. Both believe in Total Depravity. Faith must be given by the Holy Spirit. So there is a point of similarity / unity here.

Total depravity is an understanding that our estate is ruined, in Catholicism for example, it's considered redeemable.

The difference also, of course, revolves around the 'who' is given grace. The Calvinist bases the grace ultimately on the hidden will of God (predestination). God chooses before time who he will elect and who he passes over. This is 'unconditional election'. The Arminian believes that everyone is given grace at some point in their lives. God's revelation of Himself is given to all at some stage by the Holy Spirit. Everyone has the ability at some stage to accept or reject Christ. This is not a once-off moment but it may be gradually over their lives.

God chose before all time that all who would be saved would be the righteousness of God in Christ. How you approach this understanding is a matter of experience, but all will come to this realization and must decide.

One can think of this as a 'grace' that 'comes before' salvation. It's a grace where God is drawing a person in, wooing them. This is called 'prevenient (comes before) grace'. If a person responds to this grace they are eventually given faith (most especially through the preaching of the Word - Romans 10:17). This grace can be resisted, however.

We all suppress the truth in unrighteousness, that's a given. The revelation of God is evident and obvious to all (Romans 1:18-20). We are all guilty before God and God's divine attributes and eternal nature are known to all, thus we are without excuse. God's grace is the only way we approach God, and more importantly, how God approaches us.

The important thing to note in this, however, is that God is the initiatior. God is in charge of when revelation comes, how it comes, at what rate it comes, and so on. God prepares the heart for faith and subsequent salvation. This is a work of God and not of man.

Now that we can agree on.

Modern day stories abound of Muslims given dreams etc. of Christ. I myself have met one. But scriptural support comes in many forms. I'll simply paste one here and refer to another:

Acts 17:
26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth, determining their set times and the fixed limits of the places where they would live, 27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

Romans 1, 2 and 3 is also a very interesting read - note how even though the Gentiles do not have the Law, they still have an understanding of their obligations to God.

That much I can handle.

Okay, I'm trying to be brief.

Hard to do given the subject matter.

This is why an Arminian (in the pure, classical sense) is not Semi-Pelagian, because an Arminian does not believe that mankind still possesses something to come to God or to find God - some sort of inherent goodness that leads a person to salvation based on their own nature.

Therefore, Arminianism is semi-Augustinian.

Calvinists love Augustine because he taught that original sin, it doesn't start the first time you commit an offense, it happened before you were born.

C. Arminianism does believe in predestination - but it's also different

Lastly, let's talk predestination.

Two schools of thought essentially are at work here with Arminians, and sometimes they work together.

The first thing to note is that predestination in Ephesians 1 is 'in Christ'. This is an important point. For the Calvinist, predestination is found in God's hidden will - we can't really know who he elects and who he doesn't, and we can't even know if we're elected until we get to the end. This point is difficult for me when it comes to assurance because I find it hard to place my assurance on something that I cannot know.

To put it simply, the Calvinist then bases salvation on God's hidden will.

For the Arminian, salvation is conditioned on faith, not predestination. I realise a Calvinist does not say salvation isn't dependent on faith, but I think that ultimately the Calvinist conditions salvation on predestination.

Not so fast, no self respecting Calvinist would deny justification by grace through faith. You have really strayed from the Calvinist doctrine of Predestination and you might want to consider what Paul had to say about it. Paul tells us that God predestined him to be an apostle before the foundation of the world, or do I misunderstand his discussion in the first chapter of Ephesians?

Faith is not a work. That's why the Arminian can claim that salvation is not by work. Faith is given by God and to not resist this gift is not a work. Faith is always faith.

Glad you managed to untangle faith from works.

Okay, so the point is to note that Arminians see predestination as:
1. God predestines those he saw, ahead of time, would put their faith in Christ.
2. God predestines an elect 'group' (the church) and anyone who puts their faith in Christ is put in this group.

How about this since we are just tossing out ideas, the new nature is based on the communicable attributes of God so there was never any doubt how those who would be saved, would be saved.

Briefly, predestination is primarily of God's anointed one (Christ). God predestined Christ. And he predestined a Church - a people to be found "in Christ". Anyone found 'in Christ' is therefore predestined. This pretty much sums up my view right now. It is true that God has predestined a call for every single person in this world, saved or unsaved, but if they come into Christ they get to walk in that call.

Sure, I can agree with that, if you are 'in Christ', you are predestined. No problem.

As a final point, one might note that the Arminian's position is an effort to make salvation more relational (it's more influence and response) and less mechanical (cause and effect).

If I've been a bit biased in this, please forgive me. But I do want to simply discuss why Arminianism is not semi-pelagian. Even some well known Calvinists seem to insist it is, which is disappointing, because it is intellectually dishonest to claim so.

Oh, one more point. I'm aware that some Arminians are actually semi-pelagian but they still call themselves "Arminians". Obviously this sort of discrepancy can be found in just about every form of belief, so I would consider that point irrelevant in this discussion - although worth noting.

There is only one point of belief that is relevant, it's whether or not you salvation is based on what you do. Arminians can be pelagian, so can Calvinists for that matter, Catholics have always been suspect. What I look for and what I so seldom hear is the gospel, it's based on what Christ did and when in Christ you are no more likely to be cast out then Christ is likely to be cast out of the Trinity. The plans and purposes of God have not changed since the foundation of the world, because he doesn't change.

You seem to realize we are not that far apart, because truth be known Christians never are. We can wrangle over the semantics and should, if we want to work in doctrine but the bottom line is, if we can take God at his Word, it's enough. He does ask one thing and it's a commandment, we are to love one another. If we are going to sort through the strangled mess that is semantics, we do well to remember that.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[bcbsr]

I think it's a good thing to discuss theological views without putting words in the mouth of others with different views or making assumptions.

One of those assumptions Calvinists, especially, make is that they assume Arminianism is semi-pelagian.

I get why they do this. I thought this was true for many years, and so (somewhat grudgingly) was a Calvinist because I thought there really wasn't any other option besides Calvinist or Semi-Pelagian.

But, as time went by, I gradually began to shed each letter from TULIP (it started with Limited Atonement) and by the time I got to something like a 2-point Calvinist, I realised that I could never call myself a Calvinist if I only accepted like 2 points of its 5 point doctrine.

When I actually studied Arminian thought, I was surprised.

So without further ado, let me lay my case down as briefly as possible and let the fiery discussion begin! (I'm sorry I cannot explain some of these terms in detail - for those who don't know what some of these terms mean, just ask!).

A. There are four options when it comes to your soteriology:

1. Augustinian (Calvinist)
2. Semi-Augustinian (Arminian)
3. Semi-Pelagian
4. Pelagian

I won't venture to guess who sits at (3) and (4) at this point, perhaps that'll come up under the discussion.

Calvinists, especially, tend to never consider (2) above. They think it consists of Augustinian and then Semi-Pelagian, and then full-blown Pelagianism. But there is another option.

B. Arminianism is semi-Augustinian because it does not claim a person has the ability to put their faith in Christ.

Classical Arminianism (I'm talking Arminius himself and Wesley here) teaches that a person is totally depraved and incapable of having faith in Christ by themselves. What is required is the Holy Spirit to convict and give someone faith. However, the difference between a Calvinist here and an Arminian is that an Arminian believes that the grace given by God to a person (it is in this grace that faith is given) can be rejected, whereas a Calvinist believes it can't.

The point to note is that both the Calvinist and the Arminian believe that a person does not have anything in them to have faith in Christ. Both believe in Total Depravity. Faith must be given by the Holy Spirit. So there is a point of similarity / unity here.

The difference also, of course, revolves around the 'who' is given grace. The Calvinist bases the grace ultimately on the hidden will of God (predestination). God chooses before time who he will elect and who he passes over. This is 'unconditional election'. The Arminian believes that everyone is given grace at some point in their lives. God's revelation of Himself is given to all at some stage by the Holy Spirit. Everyone has the ability at some stage to accept or reject Christ. This is not a once-off moment but it may be gradually over their lives.

One can think of this as a 'grace' that 'comes before' salvation. It's a grace where God is drawing a person in, wooing them. This is called 'prevenient (comes before) grace'. If a person responds to this grace they are eventually given faith (most especially through the preaching of the Word - Romans 10:17). This grace can be resisted, however.

The important thing to note in this, however, is that God is the initiatior. God is in charge of when revelation comes, how it comes, at what rate it comes, and so on. God prepares the heart for faith and subsequent salvation. This is a work of God and not of man.

Modern day stories abound of Muslims given dreams etc. of Christ. I myself have met one. But scriptural support comes in many forms. I'll simply paste one here and refer to another:

Acts 17:
26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth, determining their set times and the fixed limits of the places where they would live, 27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

Romans 1, 2 and 3 is also a very interesting read - note how even though the Gentiles do not have the Law, they still have an understanding of their obligations to God.

Okay, I'm trying to be brief.

This is why an Arminian (in the pure, classical sense) is not Semi-Pelagian, because an Arminian does not believe that mankind still possesses something to come to God or to find God - some sort of inherent goodness that leads a person to salvation based on their own nature.

Therefore, Arminianism is semi-Augustinian.

C. Arminianism does believe in predestination - but it's also different

Lastly, let's talk predestination.

Two schools of thought essentially are at work here with Arminians, and sometimes they work together.

The first thing to note is that predestination in Ephesians 1 is 'in Christ'. This is an important point. For the Calvinist, predestination is found in God's hidden will - we can't really know who he elects and who he doesn't, and we can't even know if we're elected until we get to the end. This point is difficult for me when it comes to assurance because I find it hard to place my assurance on something that I cannot know.

To put it simply, the Calvinist then bases salvation on God's hidden will.

For the Arminian, salvation is conditioned on faith, not predestination. I realise a Calvinist does not say salvation isn't dependent on faith, but I think that ultimately the Calvinist conditions salvation on predestination.

Faith is not a work. That's why the Arminian can claim that salvation is not by work. Faith is given by God and to not resist this gift is not a work. Faith is always faith.

Okay, so the point is to note that Arminians see predestination as:
1. God predestines those he saw, ahead of time, would put their faith in Christ.
2. God predestines an elect 'group' (the church) and anyone who puts their faith in Christ is put in this group.

Briefly, predestination is primarily of God's anointed one (Christ). God predestined Christ. And he predestined a Church - a people to be found "in Christ". Anyone found 'in Christ' is therefore predestined. This pretty much sums up my view right now. It is true that God has predestined a call for every single person in this world, saved or unsaved, but if they come into Christ they get to walk in that call.

As a final point, one might note that the Arminian's position is an effort to make salvation more relational (it's more influence and response) and less mechanical (cause and effect).

If I've been a bit biased in this, please forgive me. But I do want to simply discuss why Arminianism is not semi-pelagian. Even some well known Calvinists seem to insist it is, which is disappointing, because it is intellectually dishonest to claim so.

Oh, one more point. I'm aware that some Arminians are actually semi-pelagian but they still call themselves "Arminians". Obviously this sort of discrepancy can be found in just about every form of belief, so I would consider that point irrelevant in this discussion - although worth noting.

I agree that Calvinists typically misconstrue Armininism as Semi-Pelagianism. But they are in fact different and a number of people have pointed this out online, such as below.

Differences between Semi-Pelagianism and Arminian Beliefs
by John Hendryx
[Semi-Pelagianism]
While not denying the necessity of Grace for salvation, Semi-Pelagianism maintains that the first steps towards the Christian life are ordinarily taken by the human will and that Grace supervened only later.

[Arminianism]
In contrast to semi-pelagianism, Arminianism teaches that the first steps of grace are taken by God. This teaching derives from the Remonstrance of 1610, a codification of the teachings of Jacob Arminius (1559-1609). Here are the 3rd and 4th articles of five to show how close it actually approaches traditional Calvinism, but still leaves man with a small island of righteousness, as it affirms that, unregenerate man can think spiritual thoughts, perceive the beauty and excellency of Christ, create affections for Him and thus turn in faith to Him, apart from the quickening of the Holy Spirit. They affirm that God's grace is always resistible, therefore, when one believes, it is not grace which makes one to differ from another person, but naturally produced faith:

III.That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the working of his own free-will, inasmuch as in his state of apostasy and sin he can for himself and by himself think nothing that is good--nothing, that is, truly good, such as saving faith is, above all else. But that it is necessary that by God, in Christ and through his Holy Spirit he be born again and renewed in understanding, affections and will and in all his faculties, that he may be able to understand, think, will, and perform what is truly good, according to the Word of God [John 15:5].

IV.That this grace of God is the beginning, the progress and the end of all good; so that even the regenerate man can neither think, will nor effect any good, nor withstand any temptation to evil, without grace precedent (or prevenient), awakening, following and co-operating. So that all good deeds and all movements towards good that can be conceived in through must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. But with respect to the mode of operation, grace is not irresistible; for it is written of many that they resisted the Holy Spirit [Acts 7 and elsewhere passim].

 

[HatGuy]

Here are the 3rd and 4th articles of five to show how close it actually approaches traditional Calvinism, but still leaves man with a small island of righteousness, as it affirms that, unregenerate man can think spiritual thoughts, perceive the beauty and excellency of Christ, create affections for Him and thus turn in faith to Him, apart from the quickening of the Holy Spirit. They affirm that God's grace is always resistible, therefore, when one believes, it is not grace which makes one to differ from another person, but naturally produced faith:

John Hendryx here (whoever that is) makes incorrect statements here and then quotes the two articles to prove his point, but in fact they disprove his point.

The articles quoted state that in Arminianism unregenerate man can't think true spiritual thoughts about Christ and there is no 'naturally produced' faith. "That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the working of his own free-will, inasmuch as in his state of apostasy and sin he can for himself and by himself think nothing that is good..." and so on.

No idea who this Hendryx dude is but his statement about Arminianism leaving man with a 'small state of righteousness' is exactly the kind of assumption I'm talking about in my OP. It's incorrect.

 

[bcbsr]

John Hendryx here (whoever that is) makes incorrect statements here and then quotes the two articles to prove his point, but in fact they disprove his point.

The articles quoted state that in Arminianism unregenerate man can't think true spiritual thoughts about Christ and there is no 'naturally produced' faith. "That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the working of his own free-will, inasmuch as in his state of apostasy and sin he can for himself and by himself think nothing that is good..." and so on.

No idea who this Hendryx dude is but his statement about Arminianism leaving man with a 'small state of righteousness' is exactly the kind of assumption I'm talking about in my OP. It's incorrect.

The point he was making was that Arminianism is not semi-pelagianism, which is what the title of the thread is talking about.

 

[MDC]

I think it's a good thing to discuss theological views without putting words in the mouth of others with different views or making assumptions.

One of those assumptions Calvinists, especially, make is that they assume Arminianism is semi-pelagian.

I get why they do this. I thought this was true for many years, and so (somewhat grudgingly) was a Calvinist because I thought there really wasn't any other option besides Calvinist or Semi-Pelagian.

But, as time went by, I gradually began to shed each letter from TULIP (it started with Limited Atonement) and by the time I got to something like a 2-point Calvinist, I realised that I could never call myself a Calvinist if I only accepted like 2 points of its 5 point doctrine.

When I actually studied Arminian thought, I was surprised.

So without further ado, let me lay my case down as briefly as possible and let the fiery discussion begin! (I'm sorry I cannot explain some of these terms in detail - for those who don't know what some of these terms mean, just ask!).

A. There are four options when it comes to your soteriology:

1. Augustinian (Calvinist)
2. Semi-Augustinian (Arminian)
3. Semi-Pelagian
4. Pelagian

I won't venture to guess who sits at (3) and (4) at this point, perhaps that'll come up under the discussion.

Calvinists, especially, tend to never consider (2) above. They think it consists of Augustinian and then Semi-Pelagian, and then full-blown Pelagianism. But there is another option.

B. Arminianism is semi-Augustinian because it does not claim a person has the ability to put their faith in Christ.

Classical Arminianism (I'm talking Arminius himself and Wesley here) teaches that a person is totally depraved and incapable of having faith in Christ by themselves. What is required is the Holy Spirit to convict and give someone faith. However, the difference between a Calvinist here and an Arminian is that an Arminian believes that the grace given by God to a person (it is in this grace that faith is given) can be rejected, whereas a Calvinist believes it can't.

The point to note is that both the Calvinist and the Arminian believe that a person does not have anything in them to have faith in Christ. Both believe in Total Depravity. Faith must be given by the Holy Spirit. So there is a point of similarity / unity here.

The difference also, of course, revolves around the 'who' is given grace. The Calvinist bases the grace ultimately on the hidden will of God (predestination). God chooses before time who he will elect and who he passes over. This is 'unconditional election'. The Arminian believes that everyone is given grace at some point in their lives. God's revelation of Himself is given to all at some stage by the Holy Spirit. Everyone has the ability at some stage to accept or reject Christ. This is not a once-off moment but it may be gradually over their lives.

One can think of this as a 'grace' that 'comes before' salvation. It's a grace where God is drawing a person in, wooing them. This is called 'prevenient (comes before) grace'. If a person responds to this grace they are eventually given faith (most especially through the preaching of the Word - Romans 10:17). This grace can be resisted, however.

The important thing to note in this, however, is that God is the initiatior. God is in charge of when revelation comes, how it comes, at what rate it comes, and so on. God prepares the heart for faith and subsequent salvation. This is a work of God and not of man.

Modern day stories abound of Muslims given dreams etc. of Christ. I myself have met one. But scriptural support comes in many forms. I'll simply paste one here and refer to another:

Acts 17:
26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth, determining their set times and the fixed limits of the places where they would live, 27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

Romans 1, 2 and 3 is also a very interesting read - note how even though the Gentiles do not have the Law, they still have an understanding of their obligations to God.

Okay, I'm trying to be brief.

This is why an Arminian (in the pure, classical sense) is not Semi-Pelagian, because an Arminian does not believe that mankind still possesses something to come to God or to find God - some sort of inherent goodness that leads a person to salvation based on their own nature.

Therefore, Arminianism is semi-Augustinian.

C. Arminianism does believe in predestination - but it's also different

Lastly, let's talk predestination.

Two schools of thought essentially are at work here with Arminians, and sometimes they work together.

The first thing to note is that predestination in Ephesians 1 is 'in Christ'. This is an important point. For the Calvinist, predestination is found in God's hidden will - we can't really know who he elects and who he doesn't, and we can't even know if we're elected until we get to the end. This point is difficult for me when it comes to assurance because I find it hard to place my assurance on something that I cannot know.

To put it simply, the Calvinist then bases salvation on God's hidden will.

For the Arminian, salvation is conditioned on faith, not predestination. I realise a Calvinist does not say salvation isn't dependent on faith, but I think that ultimately the Calvinist conditions salvation on predestination.

Faith is not a work. That's why the Arminian can claim that salvation is not by work. Faith is given by God and to not resist this gift is not a work. Faith is always faith.

Okay, so the point is to note that Arminians see predestination as:
1. God predestines those he saw, ahead of time, would put their faith in Christ.
2. God predestines an elect 'group' (the church) and anyone who puts their faith in Christ is put in this group.

Briefly, predestination is primarily of God's anointed one (Christ). God predestined Christ. And he predestined a Church - a people to be found "in Christ". Anyone found 'in Christ' is therefore predestined. This pretty much sums up my view right now. It is true that God has predestined a call for every single person in this world, saved or unsaved, but if they come into Christ they get to walk in that call.

As a final point, one might note that the Arminian's position is an effort to make salvation more relational (it's more influence and response) and less mechanical (cause and effect).

If I've been a bit biased in this, please forgive me. But I do want to simply discuss why Arminianism is not semi-pelagian. Even some well known Calvinists seem to insist it is, which is disappointing, because it is intellectually dishonest to claim so.

Oh, one more point. I'm aware that some Arminians are actually semi-pelagian but they still call themselves "Arminians". Obviously this sort of discrepancy can be found in just about every form of belief, so I would consider that point irrelevant in this discussion - although worth noting.

If Arminianism does not ascribe all of salvation to God alone, then how is that in any way stemming from Augustinianism? Whether it believes salvation starts with man or not, the decisive factor and bases for salvation in Arminianism rest in man, does it not? Therefore nullifying grace altogether. The religion of fallen man is pelagianism. And any synergistic system of soteriology at that. Arminianism denies that salvation is based on the eternal decrees of God. Arminianism denies unconditional elective grace in salvation. Arminianism itself stems from pelagianism regardless of how much it acknowledges Gods grace in salvation. Because ultimately, the decisive grounds for salvation in Arminianism rest in man and not in God alone. There is no truer statement than what Martin Luther said, “ If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright”. Arminianism knows nothing of Gods grace and has not learnt Christ aright. Augustus Toplady said it right, Arminianism is the road to Rome

 

[MDC]

It's just Calvinist ad hominem.

The synod of Dort condemned Arminianism for what it was. The leaven of pelagianism

 

[Not David]

The synod of Dort condemned Arminianism for what it was. The leaven of pelagianism

Pelagius believed man did not need God's grace to be saved, I am sure Arminians believe in God's grace.

 

[BobRyan]

I think it's a good thing to discuss theological views without putting words in the mouth of others with different views or making assumptions.

One of those assumptions Calvinists, especially, make is that they assume Arminianism is semi-pelagian.

I get why they do this. I thought this was true for many years, and so (somewhat grudgingly) was a Calvinist because I thought there really wasn't any other option besides Calvinist or Semi-Pelagian.

But, as time went by, I gradually began to shed each letter from TULIP (it started with Limited Atonement) and by the time I got to something like a 2-point Calvinist, I realised that I could never call myself a Calvinist if I only accepted like 2 points of its 5 point doctrine.

When I actually studied Arminian thought, I was surprised.

So without further ado, let me lay my case down as briefly as possible and let the fiery discussion begin! (I'm sorry I cannot explain some of these terms in detail - for those who don't know what some of these terms mean, just ask!).

A. There are four options when it comes to your soteriology:

1. Augustinian (Calvinist)
2. Semi-Augustinian (Arminian)
3. Semi-Pelagian
4. Pelagian

I won't venture to guess who sits at (3) and (4) at this point, perhaps that'll come up under the discussion.

Calvinists, especially, tend to never consider (2) above. They think it consists of Augustinian and then Semi-Pelagian, and then full-blown Pelagianism. But there is another option.

B. Arminianism is semi-Augustinian because it does not claim a person has the ability to put their faith in Christ.

Classical Arminianism (I'm talking Arminius himself and Wesley here) teaches that a person is totally depraved and incapable of having faith in Christ by themselves. What is required is the Holy Spirit to convict and give someone faith. However, the difference between a Calvinist here and an Arminian is that an Arminian believes that the grace given by God to a person (it is in this grace that faith is given) can be rejected, whereas a Calvinist believes it can't.

The point to note is that both the Calvinist and the Arminian believe that a person does not have anything in them to have faith in Christ. Both believe in Total Depravity. Faith must be given by the Holy Spirit. So there is a point of similarity / unity here.

The difference also, of course, revolves around the 'who' is given grace. The Calvinist bases the grace ultimately on the hidden will of God (predestination). God chooses before time who he will elect and who he passes over. This is 'unconditional election'. The Arminian believes that everyone is given grace at some point in their lives. God's revelation of Himself is given to all at some stage by the Holy Spirit. Everyone has the ability at some stage to accept or reject Christ. This is not a once-off moment but it may be gradually over their lives.

One can think of this as a 'grace' that 'comes before' salvation. It's a grace where God is drawing a person in, wooing them. This is called 'prevenient (comes before) grace'. If a person responds to this grace they are eventually given faith (most especially through the preaching of the Word - Romans 10:17). This grace can be resisted, however.

The important thing to note in this, however, is that God is the initiatior. God is in charge of when revelation comes, how it comes, at what rate it comes, and so on. God prepares the heart for faith and subsequent salvation. This is a work of God and not of man.

Modern day stories abound of Muslims given dreams etc. of Christ. I myself have met one. But scriptural support comes in many forms. I'll simply paste one here and refer to another:

Acts 17:
26 From one man he made every nation of the human race to inhabit the entire earth, determining their set times and the fixed limits of the places where they would live, 27 so that they would search for God and perhaps grope around for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

Romans 1, 2 and 3 is also a very interesting read - note how even though the Gentiles do not have the Law, they still have an understanding of their obligations to God.

Okay, I'm trying to be brief.

This is why an Arminian (in the pure, classical sense) is not Semi-Pelagian, because an Arminian does not believe that mankind still possesses something to come to God or to find God - some sort of inherent goodness that leads a person to salvation based on their own nature.

Therefore, Arminianism is semi-Augustinian.

C. Arminianism does believe in predestination - but it's also different

Lastly, let's talk predestination.

Two schools of thought essentially are at work here with Arminians, and sometimes they work together.

The first thing to note is that predestination in Ephesians 1 is 'in Christ'. This is an important point. For the Calvinist, predestination is found in God's hidden will - we can't really know who he elects and who he doesn't, and we can't even know if we're elected until we get to the end. This point is difficult for me when it comes to assurance because I find it hard to place my assurance on something that I cannot know.

To put it simply, the Calvinist then bases salvation on God's hidden will.

For the Arminian, salvation is conditioned on faith, not predestination. I realise a Calvinist does not say salvation isn't dependent on faith, but I think that ultimately the Calvinist conditions salvation on predestination.

Faith is not a work. That's why the Arminian can claim that salvation is not by work. Faith is given by God and to not resist this gift is not a work. Faith is always faith.

Okay, so the point is to note that Arminians see predestination as:
1. God predestines those he saw, ahead of time, would put their faith in Christ.
2. God predestines an elect 'group' (the church) and anyone who puts their faith in Christ is put in this group.

Briefly, predestination is primarily of God's anointed one (Christ). God predestined Christ. And he predestined a Church - a people to be found "in Christ". Anyone found 'in Christ' is therefore predestined. This pretty much sums up my view right now. It is true that God has predestined a call for every single person in this world, saved or unsaved, but if they come into Christ they get to walk in that call.

As a final point, one might note that the Arminian's position is an effort to make salvation more relational (it's more influence and response) and less mechanical (cause and effect).

If I've been a bit biased in this, please forgive me. But I do want to simply discuss why Arminianism is not semi-pelagian. Even some well known Calvinists seem to insist it is, which is disappointing, because it is intellectually dishonest to claim so.

Oh, one more point. I'm aware that some Arminians are actually semi-pelagian but they still call themselves "Arminians". Obviously this sort of discrepancy can be found in just about every form of belief, so I would consider that point irrelevant in this discussion - although worth noting.

interesting post - thanks for sharing that.

3 points to keep it simple.

1. none can come to Christ unless super naturally DRAWN by God - John 6
2. Even Calvinists will admit that the supernatural drawing of God - enables all the "choice" that depravity disables.
3. "I will draw ALL mankind unto Me" John 12:32
John 16 - the Holy Spirit "convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment"

So then all are drawn - but only the "Few" of Matthew 7 are saved. Even though our sovereign "God is not WILLING that any should perish but that ALL should come to repentance" 2 Peter 3.

1John 4:14 God sent His Son to be "Savior of the WORLD"
And so He is the atoning sacrifice "for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1 John 2:2

So then the Arminian evangelistic appeal "WE BEG you on behalf of Christ - be reconciled to God" 2 Cor 5

And the Arminian process that "results in salvation" in Romans 10
The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation

 

[BobRyan]

so that was the Arminian "win".

But where many Arminians "give away the farm" - is in not accepting God's full Lev 16 teaching on Atonement. When Arminians accept the Calvinist definition of Atonement -- the Calvinists then argue that Arminians have no basis at all to reject limited atonement.

Once atonement is complete for one individual - they are fully atoned for and nothing remains to be done. If all aspects of Atonement were full and completed 2000 years ago - then limited atonement is irrefutable given the Matt 7 statement that not all are saved.

But in the bullet-proof form of the Arminian model
1. The Atoning Sacrifice was full and complete on the cross - for all mankind.
2. But Christ's role as High Priest in heaven is just as necessary as the cross - just as Lev 16 "Day of Atonement" says it is. Thus to avail of the completed sacrifice we need our High Priest and an appeal to God for a clean conscience - a relationship to and with Christ.

And without that - there is no full and complete "nothing left to do" form of Atonement for a lost person. Instead there is the "we BEG you on behalf of Christ - be reconciled to God" condition.

 

[BobRyan]

It's just Calvinist ad hominem.

until you read it.

No, I am saying Calvinist calling Arminians "Semi-Pelagians" is ad hominem.

Ok - sorry for my misunderstanding.

 

[Not David]

until you read it.

What do you mean?

 

[BobRyan]

The synod of Dort condemned Arminianism for what it was. The leaven of pelagianism

Even though in "real life" Arminians freely admit that all have a sinful nature and that without the work of the Holy Spirit - no one is saved.

I prefer "real life" to the synod of Dort.

 

[BobRyan]

What do you mean?

Assuming your comment was to summarize the OP -- then

Ad hominem "to the man" there is no personal attack on anyone in the OP

 

[Not David]

Ad hominem "to the man" there is no personal attack on anyone in the OP

No, I am saying Calvinist calling Arminians "Semi-Pelagians" is ad hominem.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

you said;
Briefly, predestination is primarily of God's anointed one (Christ). God predestined Christ.
The Lord Jesus Christ is the Elect Servant of the Lord

And he predestined a Church - a people to be found "in Christ".
A church is an assembly of people. Individual persons are elected to be In Christ before the world was. Jesus dies for them.

[Anyone found 'in Christ' is therefore predestined. ]
No...those elected are drawn out of the Kingdom of Darkness, into the Kingdom of the Son....each of these foreknown persons once saved is predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son

It is true that God has predestined a call for every single person in this world,
This is a complete falsehood

saved or unsaved, but if they come into Christ they get to walk in
that call.

lol....not in the bible...not even close, no one seeks God, no not one.

 

[BobRyan]

No, I am saying Calvinist calling Arminians "Semi-Pelagians" is ad hominem.

in that case ... "my bad" -- I will change my post. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[BobRyan]

saved or unsaved, but if they come into Christ they get to walk in
that call.

lol....not in the bible...not even close, no one seeks God, no not one.

you are conflating two different things.

Romans 3 deals with the sinful nature that all have.

But "we beg YOU on behalf of Christ be reconciled to God" 2 Cor 5 is an appeal TO that lost person with that same sinful nature.

What is more "I will draw ALL MANKIND " John 12:32 is the very supernatural drawing of ALL that Calvinism most loves to deny. Because in Calvinism all would be saved if all were drawn since some forms of Calvinism project an almost robot like condition for mankind with 'switch on' or 'switch off' and no free will enabled by God -- only the "discovery" that "switch is on" or "switch is still off" -- no matter what God says to the contrary.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

you are conflating two different things.

Romans 3 deals with the sinful nature that all have.

But "we beg YOU on behalf of Christ be reconciled to God" 2 Cor 5 is an appeal TO that lost person with that same sinful nature.

What is more "I will draw ALL MANKIND " John 12:32 is the very supernatural drawing of ALL that Calvinism most loves to deny. Because in Calvinism all would be saved if all were drawn since some forms of Calvinism project an almost robot like condition for mankind with 'switch on' or 'switch off' and no free will enabled by God -- only the "discovery" that "switch is on" or "switch is still off" -- no matter what God says to the contrary.

When Jesus died on the cross, many , multitudes of people had already died. How were they drawn to Christ according to your theory Bob.....you are saying it is all men ever born.