The Christian Girl Chat

For many years, I have struggled with the doctrine of salvation and what the correct view is. Most Christians fall under Calvinism, Arminianism, or somewhere in between. While it’s important to note that there are many more views on salvation outside of these two systems, this article will focus on Calvinism and Arminianism.

The debate between Calvinism and Arminianism has been a defining theological divide in Christianity for centuries. These theological systems, named after prominent theologians John Calvin and Jacobus Arminius, offer differing views on salvation, the nature of God’s grace, free will, and predestination. While both aim to remain faithful to Scripture, they interpret certain passages and doctrines in fundamentally different ways. In this post, we will explore the key differences between Calvinism and Arminianism and examine their distinct approaches to core theological concepts.

1. Predestination: The Foundation of Salvation

One of the primary differences between Calvinism and Arminianism lies in their understanding of predestination—the doctrine that God eternally determines who will be saved and who will be damned.

• Calvinism: At the heart of Calvinist theology is the doctrine of unconditional election, which states that God, before the foundation of the world, chose certain individuals to be saved—not based on any merit or action of their own, but purely because of God’s will and grace. This decision is unconditional, meaning it is not based on the individual’s faith or works. Calvinists believe that God’s choice is final and irreversible, and that those whom God has elected will inevitably come to faith and be saved. (Ephesians 1:4-5, Romans 8:29-30, 2 Timothy 1:9, John 15:16)

• Arminianism: In contrast, Arminianism emphasizes conditional election, which teaches that God’s choice to save an individual is based on His foreknowledge. Arminians believe that God, in His omniscience, knows in advance who will freely choose to accept His grace and who will reject it. Therefore, election is conditional upon the individual’s faith. This allows for a more synergistic view of salvation, where God’s grace works in cooperation with human free will. (1 Peter 1:1-2, Romans 8:29, Revelation 3:20, Matthew 23:37)

2. Free Will and Human Responsibility

Both Calvinism and Arminianism address free will, but they do so in very different ways.

• Calvinism: Calvinists believe in the total depravity of humanity, meaning that as a result of sin, every part of human nature is corrupted, and humans are incapable of choosing God on their own. Therefore, God must intervene and enable the individual to believe through the work of the Holy Spirit. Calvinism teaches that God’s grace is irresistible; when God calls someone to salvation, they cannot resist His will. The idea is that God’s sovereignty is ultimate, and humans cannot thwart His plans. (Romans 3:10-12, Ephesians 2:1-3, Genesis 6:5, Jeremiah 17:9, Psalm 51:5, John 6:44)

• Arminianism: Arminians, on the other hand, argue for the libertarian freedom of the will. They believe that, while humanity is affected by sin, God’s grace enables every individual to freely choose or reject salvation. This view holds that God’s grace, while necessary, does not override human free will. Humans are responsible for their decisions, and it is through the free exercise of their will that they can accept or reject God’s offer of salvation. (Deuteronomy 30:19-20, Joshua 24:15, Matthew 7:13-14, John 7:17, Galatians 5:13, 1 Corinthians 10:13)

3. The Nature of Grace

The concept of divine grace is another area where Calvinism and Arminianism differ significantly.

• Calvinism: Calvinists believe in irresistible grace, meaning that when God chooses to save someone, His grace cannot be resisted. This grace is not offered to everyone equally, but only to the elect, and it effectively guarantees that those who are chosen will respond to God’s call and be saved. Grace, in this sense, is not a mere offer; it is a powerful, transforming force that leads the individual to salvation. (John 6:37, 44, 65, Acts 13:48, Romans 8:30, Philippians 1:6, John 10:27-28)

• Arminianism: Arminians believe in prevenient grace, which is the grace that precedes a person’s ability to respond to the gospel. According to this view, God’s grace is offered to all people, enabling them to respond to the gospel, but it is not irresistible. Human beings are free to accept or reject this grace. While God’s grace is necessary for salvation, individuals still have the ability to choose whether or not to accept it. (John 1:9, John 12:32, Titus 2:11, 2 Corinthians 5:14-15, Acts 7:51)

4. Atonement: For Whom Did Christ Die?

The question of the extent of Christ’s atonement is another theological difference that divides Calvinism and Arminianism.

• Calvinism: Calvinists hold to the doctrine of limited atonement, which teaches that Christ’s death was intended specifically for the elect—those whom God has chosen to save. According to this view, Christ’s atonement is sufficient for all but effective only for those who are predestined to receive it. In essence, Christ died for the elect alone, ensuring their salvation. (Matthew 1:21, John 10:14-15, John 17:9, Ephesians 5:25, Acts 20:28, Romans 8:32-33)

• Arminianism: Arminians, in contrast, believe in unlimited atonement, which teaches that Christ died for all people, not just the elect. The atonement is sufficient for everyone, but its effectiveness depends on the individual’s response. Arminians maintain that while Christ’s death provides the potential for all to be saved, it becomes effective only when individuals choose to accept the offer of salvation. (1 John 2:2, John 3:16, 1 Timothy 2:6, 2 Peter 3:9, Titus 2:11, Hebrews 2:9, Romans 5:8)

5. Security of the Believer

The issue of salvation and whether it can be lost is another area where Calvinism and Arminianism diverge.

• Calvinism: Calvinists believe in the doctrine of perseverance of the saints, which teaches that once a person is truly saved, they will persevere in faith and cannot lose their salvation. This is often referred to as “eternal security” or the idea that the elect will continue in faith until the end. God’s grace guarantees that those He has chosen will ultimately remain faithful. (John 10:28-29, Romans 8:38-39, Philippians 1:6, 1 Peter 1:5, Hebrews 12:1-2, Jude 1:24-25, 1 Corinthians 1:8-9, 2 Timothy 4:7-8)

• Arminianism: Arminians, in contrast, teach that it is possible for a true believer to fall away from faith and lose their salvation. They argue that while God’s grace is sufficient to save, it is possible for a person to reject that grace or turn away from it through a deliberate decision to sin. This view emphasizes the ongoing responsibility of the believer to remain faithful and respond to God’s grace. (Hebrews 6:4-6, Hebrews 10:26-27, Matthew 7:21-23, 1 Timothy 4:1, 2 Peter 2:20-22, Galatians 5:4, Revelation 3:5, Luke 8:31)

Conclusion

In summary, the debate between Calvinism and Arminianism centers on the nature of God’s sovereignty, human free will, the scope of Christ’s atonement, and the security of the believer. Calvinism emphasizes God’s ultimate control over salvation, asserting that God predestines individuals and offers irresistible grace. Arminianism, on the other hand, places greater emphasis on human free will, teaching that salvation is available to all but requires a personal decision to accept or reject God’s grace.

Both systems are deeply rooted in biblical theology and have their strengths and challenges. Ultimately, Christians within both traditions share the core beliefs of the gospel: that salvation is found in Christ alone, through faith alone, by grace alone. Whether one leans toward Calvinism or Arminianism, the essential truth remains that God is sovereign, and salvation is a gracious gift from Him to all who believe.

So, which one is right?

I know many won’t like my answer, but I don’t know. I agree with some aspects of both Calvinism and Arminianism. I believe it’s unwise to use certain scriptures to support an argument without also considering those that may contradict it; what the scriptures say as a whole is what we should hold as truth. While both sides of the debate highlight different aspects of God’s nature, I continually return to the understanding that God is sovereign, He loves the whole world, He is faithful to secure our salvation when we truly believe in Christ, and Jesus’ sacrifice is for everyone.

When I started following Jesus, I made a choice to follow Him. Whether it was the Holy Spirit or my free will that enabled me to make that choice, I don’t know for sure. I can’t fully explain the doctrine of salvation, so instead of ruminating over the different arguments and trying to figure out which is correct, I choose to stand on God’s character. He is sovereign, faithful, and loving; our understanding of God’s ways is limited. So, with my limited mind, I’ll never fully understand. Though I may not fully comprehend the doctrine of salvation, I do know who God is. My faith is not based on my understanding of how salvation works; it is rooted in knowing the character of God. With this in mind, I will continue pursuing the truth in hopes of coming to a better understanding, but it is Jesus Christ I stand on.