- Category: DOCTRINE & THEOLOGY
Calvinism vs Arminianism Comparison Chart
What are the Differences between Calvin vs Arminian? - Chosen vs Free-Will - Videos & Articles
Calvinism vs Arminianism Comparison Chart— Compare between Calvinism & Arminianism— the Five Points of Calvinism (TULIP) & Arminianism summed up. What is the Difference between Calvin vs Arminian? Chosen vs Free-Will. John MacArthur, and Commentary on the Problems of the Arminianism Belief. Videos on Election and/or Predestination— Calvinism. Videos of the Amazing Grace Documentary DVD on the History & Theology of Calvinism.
- CALVINISM VS ARMINIANISM COMPARISON CHART - 5 POINTS - TULIP
- ELECTION / PREDESTINATION / CALVINISM - CROSS TV MARK KIELAR & MORE - VIDEOS
- JOHN MACARTHUR - PROBLEMS WITH ARMINIANISM - COMMENTARY / ARTICLE - CALVINISM IN A NUTSHELL
- PREVIEW VIDEOS OF THE AMAZING GRACE DOCUMENTARY DVDS - HISTORY & THEORY OF CALVINISM
- CALVINISM VS ARMINIANISM - WHICH VIEW IS CORRECT? - GOT QUESTIONS - ARTICLE
(SO4J note: Calvin did not create the acronym "TULIP". The 5 points were in answer to the 5 points submitted by Arminians in 1610. This was affirmed and expanded in 1618-1619 by the Canons of Dordt / Synod of Dordrecht.)
CALVINISM VS ARMINIANISM COMPARISON CHART
The Five Points of Calvinism, also known as the acronym T.U.L.I.P. and the Five Points of Arminianism
|T - Total Inability or Total Depravity||Free-Will or Human Ability|
|Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not - indeed he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit's assistance to bring a sinner to Christ - it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation - it is God's gift to the sinner, not the sinner's gift to God.||Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man's freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man's freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God's Spirit and be regenerated or resist God's grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit's assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man's act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation.|
|U - Unconditional Election||Conditional Election|
|God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will. His choice of particular sinners was not based on any foreseen response of obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance, etc. On the contrary, God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected. These acts are the result, not the cause of God's choice. Election therefore was not determined by or conditioned upon any virtuous quality or act foreseen in man. Those whom God sovereignly elected He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. Thus God's choice of the sinner, not the sinner's choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.||God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world was based upon His foreseeing that they would respond to His call. He selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel. Election therefore was determined by or conditioned upon what man would do. The faith which God foresaw and upon which He based His choice was not given to the sinner by God (it was not created by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit) but resulted solely from man's will. It was left entirely up to man as to who would believe and therefore as to who would be elected unto salvation. God chose those whom He knew would, of their own free will, choose Christ. Thus the sinner's choice of Christ, not God's choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation.|
|L- Limited Atonement/ Particular Redemption||Universal Redemption or General Atonement|
|Christ's redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them. His death was substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners. In addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ's redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation, including faith which unites them to Him. The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, therefore guaranteeing their salvation.||Christ's redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved but did not actually secure the salvation of anyone. Although Christ died for all men and for every man, only those who believe on Him are saved. His death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe, but it did not actually put away anyone's sins. Christ's redemption becomes effective only if man chooses to accept it.|
|I - Irresistible Grace or the Efficacious Call of the Spirit||The Holy Spirit Can Be Effectually Resisted|
|In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion. By means of this special call the Spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ. He is not limited in His work of applying salvation by man's will, nor is He dependent upon man's cooperation for success. The Spirit graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ. God's grace, therefore, is invincible; it never fails to result in the salvation of those to whom it is extended.||The Spirit calls inwardly all those who are called outwardly by the gospel invitation; He does all that He can to bring every sinner to salvation. But inasmuch as man is free, he can successfully resist the Spirit's call. The Spirit cannot regenerate the sinner until he believes; faith (which is man's contribution) proceeds and makes possible the new birth. Thus, man's free will limits the Spirit in the application of Christ's saving work. The Holy Spirit can only draw to Christ those who allow Him to have His way with them. Until the sinner responds, the Spirit cannot give life. God's grace, therefore, is not invincible; it can be, and often is, resisted and thwarted by man.|
|P - Perseverance of the Saints||Falling from Grace|
|All who are chosen by God, redeemed by Christ, and given faith by the Spirit are eternally saved. They are kept in faith by the power of Almighty God and thus persevere to the end.||Those who believe and are truly saved can lose their salvation by failing to keep up their faith, etc. All Arminians have not been agreed on this point; some have held that believers are eternally secure in Christ - that once a sinner is regenerated, he can never be lost.|
According to Calvinism
Salvation is accomplished by the almighty power of the Triune God. The Father chose a people, the Son died for them, the Holy Spirit makes Christ's death effective by bringing the elect to faith and repentance, thereby causing them to willingly obey the gospel. The entire process (election, redemption, regeneration) is the work of God and is by grace alone. Thus God, not man, determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation.
According to Arminianism
Salvation is accomplished through the combined efforts of God (who takes the initiative) and man (who must respond) - man's response being the determining factor. God has provided salvation for everyone, but His provision becomes effective only for those who, of their own free will, "choose" to cooperate with Him and accept His offer of grace. At the crucial point, man's will plays a decisive role; thus man, not God, determines who will be recipients of the gift of salvation.
SOURCE & CREDIT: Above material was taken from: THE FIVE POINTS OF CALVINISM - Defined, Defended, Documented.
David N. Steele and Curtis Thomas, are Baptist Ministers in Little Rock, Arkansas.
What Is The Doctrine of Election? Videos & Articles
Go Here for: What is the Doctrine of Election? Is Predestination & being Chosen Biblical? Videos & Articles
Does God Elect & Choose certain people to be Saved and/or go to Hell? Videos, Articles, Scriptures
John MacArthur - Problems with Arminianism - Is it Biblical? / Calvinism in a Nutshell - Summed-Up
Question to John MacArthur: "Can you talk a little bit about Arminian Theology? Is it Biblical? And, if a Church embraces that Theology, are they Saved? In other words can somebody who holds an Arminian view be a Christian?”
(The following above "Question" was asked by a member of the congregation at Grace Community Church in Panorama City, California, and "Answered" by their Pastor, John MacArthur Jr.)
Yes, if you’re talking about Arminian theology. We always want to make the distinction between Armenians and Arminians. Armenians [are] a people; Arminian is a theology from Arminius. Let me just say this. This debate comes up all the time, and I like to answer the thing by saying I really don’t land, necessarily, with labels very comfortably. You know, you can be called a Calvinist or a Hyper-Calvinist or a Four-point Calvinist or…I’ve been called a Four-and-a-half-point Calvinist… One guy called me a One-point Calvinist--I don’t know how he came up with that. And people can be labeled Arminian.
I understand what they mean by that, but I, personally, try to resist those labels because those labels are loaded with different content for different people. And people love to slap a label on you and then everybody defines that label in a different way. So, I really run from those labels.
At the same time, to put it simply, the debate of Calvinism and Arminianism falls along five simple lines that we all know about called T.U.L.I.P.: Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and the Perseverance of the saints--T.U.L.I.P.
John Calvin rightly interpreted the Bible to teach that man is totally depraved. What that means, is that, not every human being is as sinful as he could be or she could be, but that every human being is sinful to the point that they’re incapable of altering their condition. That is to say, total depravity means you can’t do anything to save yourself. You can’t even make a right choice. You can’t awaken your spiritual deadness. You can’t give life where there is death. You can’t come to a right conclusion on your own. Total depravity means that everyone, is by virtue of their own will and their own power and their own choices, incapable of redemption. That’s total depravity.
Arminius would say--Arminian theology, Palagian theology, as it’s also called--would say “man is capable.” That while man is, in the general sense, a sinner, he has capacities within himself to choose to be saved. That is the debate. I don’t think that’s biblical. I think we are dead in trespasses and sin, and dead people don’t make choices. Dead people can’t make themselves alive. So, I think there is a clear distinction there.
In the case of unconditional election, you have the view in the Scripture that the people who are saved are saved because they were chosen by God apart from any merit of their own, apart from any condition. Whereas, typically, the person who holds Arminian theology would say that we are saved by acts of our own will. We have still the power to believe on our own, and therefore, when we choose to believe, we become elect. It isn’t something that God determined in eternity past; it’s something that occurs sort of ‘de facto’ or ‘ipso facto,’--“after the fact.”
And then you have limited atonement; in the typical reformed view, means that the atonement, in its actual work, the actual efficacy of the atonement, was only for the elect. That is, it’s limited to those who believe and were chosen by God, whereas the Arminian side of it would say that everybody’s sins have been paid for, all across the world, whether people believe or not. So that, in the end, Jesus paid the penalty for the sins of people who don’t believe. That’s a problem because if your sins are paid for already by Jesus and you go to hell, then that’s double jeopardy.
And then you have irresistible grace, which is the idea that when the spirit of God works on the heart of a sinner, the sinner can’t resist. Arminian theology would say the sinner can resist.
And perseverance of the saints, the last in the five points, is the idea that if you’re saved, you’re going to persevere to glory. Arminian theology says you might not--you could lose your salvation along the way.
So, they are diametrically opposed. The question comes, “Can somebody who holds an Arminian view be a Christian?” And I would hate to say they couldn’t be. I really believe that it is possible to be Arminian and to be a Christian…to misunderstand your human capability, to misunderstand the election, to misunderstand the extent of the atonement, even to misunderstand the irresistible nature of God’s saving grace, and even to think you could lose your salvation. But, at the same time--while being confused or ignorant of those things--to know that you’re a sinner and know that the only way of salvation is through Jesus Christ. I guess you could say that someone could be an Arminian and push those points far enough, where they could jeopardize my confidence that they really are a Christian. You could push the point of not being totally depraved far enough where you’re actually being saved by your own works, by your own belief, by your own ingenuity, by your own self-induced faith. And you could get to the point where you could really wonder whether someone understands that it’s all a work of God.
But, I think it would be going too far to say someone who holds an Arminian view, or anyone who holds an Arminian view, is, by virtue of that view, not a Christian. I think there are people who just don’t understand rightly those things, but who know they’re sinners and who cry out in their sin for the Lord to save them. They don’t understand how what they’re doing works together with the great purposes and power of God, and consequently can’t give God fully the glory He deserves for all of that, but they could be genuinely saved, by hoping in Christ and Christ alone.
Even if they are Teachers of Churches who teach that? Why wouldn’t they understand if they’re so scholarly?
Well, they don’t understand--there are a number of reasons why people get it wrong. One is they are in a tradition where people have had it wrong for a long time. And so, that’s the way they grew up, that’s the tradition they’re in, and that’s what they understand. In other words, there is a predigested, passed-down system. Let me tell you, Arminian people can make an argument. They can make the case; they’ve been making the case for centuries for their viewpoint.
I remember one of the exercises that I had to do when I was a seminary student, in fact, I did it on my own; I don’t think it was an assignment, but I did it--it was to read Shank’s book on Life in the Son, which is I think the best, concise argument for the Arminian position. And it is a very carefully thought out, systematic argument. I also studied the theology of Arminians--Wiley and Miley--systematic theologies written by these men. They can systematize their viewpoint and once that viewpoint is systematized at some point in history and passed down and passed down and refined and refined and refined, they have a scholastic system. I mean, essentially, Roman Catholicism is Arminian! It’s a pretty sophisticated system that can rise to pretty high levels of scholasticism.
So, it isn’t that they’re not scholars; it’s that they tend to be in a mold or in a rut (I guess you could say) that traditionally gets passed down.
I also think a second reason why people get it wrong--and this is true for anything--is because they don’t do the really hard work of studying the Word of God, and you have to drop your presuppositions at some point.
One of the benefits that I had, is I grew up in an environment where my dad was the preacher and it was basically a Baptist kind of environment. And what I learned growing up was sort of a middle ground. In my upbringing, we didn’t like the Calvinists and we didn’t like the Arminians; we sort of had that Baptist middle ground. That’s probably what a lot of you…you grew in the same kind of environment. You didn’t talk about predestination or election--that was kind of a frightening thing and that was for dead Presbyterians, and there were only about 30 of them in the whole city of Los Angeles--at the time, and they were over in a room somewhere contemplating their navel and reading John Calvin. You know, it was very introspective and they were thrilled with their theology, but they were a small little group and we weren’t into that.
I went away to college and essentially I went to two colleges, the roots of which were both Methodist. So, they were steeped in Arminian theology. One was sort of a Revivalist environment, and the other was a more traditional Wesleyan environment, where we read Wiley and Miley and all of that, and we had to imbibe all of this Arminian theology. I got out of that; I went to a seminary that had Presbyterian influences. So, I went from the Arminian kind of side to the Reformed side, and there I was in the middle of this mix and I just decided I’d go to the Bible and find out what the Bible said. I think, in a sense, all of that experience sort of canceled each other out, which was good for me, and I went back to the Word of God and in the Word of God, without all the presuppositions cast in stone, I was able to let the Bible speak. Through the years, the Bible I believe speaks very clearly about what the truth is.
But, I think if people could divest themselves of their presuppositions and if they could be willing to eat a little humble pie and say, “It’s possible that I might be wrong,” and take another hard look at the Word of God, they would come to the right answers. It’s a very simple point to make, and it is this: if two people take two opposing views of something, they cannot both be right. Somebody is wrong. And it’s not us, right? Well, I mean, I don’t say that in a proud way. I just believe that we are where we are because we believe this is true.
Preview the "Amazing Grace Documentary: The History & Theology of Calvinism - 4 Hour DVD
Here is an Excellent 4 Hour DVD that SO4J-TV recommends. It is Produced by The Apologetics Group, and itis a thorough look into the: The History & Theology of Calvinism. The First 1 Hour takes an in depth Foundational look at Church History— at around 70 min it talks about the differences between Calvinism vs Arminianism— and at the 90 min mark or so it talks about the Doctrine of Election which is very good—as well as then showing the difference between the Modern-day gospel (watered down) vs the Biblical Gospel, and Law & Grace, as well as the 10 Principles to Biblical Evangelism, and more.
Amazing Grace Documentary DVD - By The Apologetics Group - STUDY GUIDE - PDF (FREE 229 PAGE STUDY GUIDE - PDF)
Calvinism vs Arminianism Which View Is Correct?
Calvinism and Arminianism are two systems of theology that attempt to explain the relationship between God's sovereignty and man's responsibility in the matter of salvation.
Calvinism is named for John Calvin, a French theologian who lived from 1509-1564.
Arminianism is named for Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian who lived from 1560-1609.
Both systems can be summarized with five points. Calvinism holds to the total depravity of man while Arminianism holds to partial depravity. Total depravity states that every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin; therefore, human beings are unable to come to God on their own accord. Partial depravity states that every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin, but not to the extent that they are unable to place faith in God of their own accord.
Calvinism includes the belief that election is unconditional, while Arminianism believes in conditional election. Unconditional election is the view that God elects individuals to salvation based entirely on His will alone, not on anything inherently worthy in the individual. Conditional election states that God elects individuals to salvation based on His foreknowledge of who will believe in Christ unto salvation, thereby on the condition that the individual chooses God.
Calvinism sees the atonement as limited, while Arminianism sees it as unlimited. This is the most controversial of the five points. Limited atonement is the belief that Jesus only died for the elect. Unlimited atonement is the belief that Jesus died for all, but that His death is not effectual until a person receives Him by faith.
Calvinism includes the belief that God’s grace is irresistible, while Arminianism says that an individual can resist the grace of God. Irresistible grace argues that when God calls a person to salvation, that person will inevitably come to salvation. Resistible grace states that God calls all to salvation, but that many people resist and reject this call.
Calvinism holds to perseverance of the saints while Arminianism holds to conditional salvation. Perseverance of the saints refers to the concept that a person who is elected by God will persevere in faith and will not permanently deny Christ or turn away from Him. Conditional salvation is the view that a believer in Christ can, of his/her own free will, turn away from Christ and thereby lose salvation.
So, in the Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate, who is correct? It is interesting to note that in the diversity of the body of Christ, there are all sorts of mixtures of Calvinism and Arminianism. There are five-point Calvinists and five-point Arminians, and at the same time three-point Calvinists and two-point Arminians. Many believers arrive at some sort of mixture of the two views. Ultimately, it is our view that both systems fail in that they attempt to explain the unexplainable. Human beings are incapable of fully grasping a concept such as this. Yes, God is absolutely sovereign and knows all. Yes, human beings are called to make a genuine decision to place faith in Christ unto salvation. These two facts seem contradictory to us, but in the mind of God they make perfect sense.
The above Article is from Gotquestions.org, and is Posted on SO4J.com to show the Different Views between Calvinism & Arminianism.
John MacArthur Q & A - was Transcribed from the CD, GC 70-19, titled "Bible Questions and Answers."
Copyright 2000 by John MacArthur Jr - GTY.org
Calvinism vs Arminianism - Which View is Correct?
Copyright - Gotquestions.org
COPYRIGHT / SO4J.com / SO4J-TV & VIDEO PRODUCTIONS