Search

Within Protestant theology, Arminianism is a theological perception based on the views of Jacob Arminius (1559-1609), who lived in the Netherlands in the 16th century, and it opposes Calvinism’s theological propositions on fate, grace, human will, the atonement of Jesus, and the perseverance of believers. Arminianism, which started to find a place in England with the influence of Remonstrants, later moved to America with intense migrations. In America especially John Wesley and Methodists played an important role in the spread of Arminianism. Many Protestant denominations in America prefer the belief in destiny based on the emphasis of Arminianism on universal atonement and the will of man in salvation rather than the principles of Calvinism. In this article, firstly, the life of Arminius will be presented, and then his objections to Calvin’s Reformed theology will be discussed. Later, the spread of Arminianism in America will be mentioned. At this point, John Wesley’s Arminianism will be discussed. Then the Protestant communities that are closer to the Arminian approach rather than Calvinism will be mentioned. By this study, Arminian Protestant theology in America will be explained although this theology is not completely based on the arguments of classical Arminianism. Thus, the origin and course of the theological debates between Calvinism and Arminianism that have continued until today in America will be revealed.

Within Protestant theology, Arminianism is a theological perception based on the views of Jacob Arminius (1559-1609), who lived in the Netherlands in the 16th century, and it opposes Calvinism's theological propositions on fate, grace, human will, the atonement of Jesus, and the perseverance of believers. Arminianism, which started to find a place in England with the influence of Remonstrants, later moved to America with intense migrations. In America, John Wesley and Methodists especially played an essential role in the spread of Arminianism. Many Protestant denominations in America prefer the belief in destiny based on the emphasis of Arminianism on universal atonement and the will of man in salvation rather than the principles of Calvinism. This article begins by presenting an overview of Arminius' biography, followed by an examination of his challenges to Calvin's Reformed theology. After mentioning the dissemination of Arminianism in America, it discusses John Wesley's Arminianism. Then, the Protestant communities closer to the Arminian approach rather than Calvinism are addressed. This study explains Arminian Protestant theology in America although this theology is not entirely based on the arguments of classical Arminianism. Thus, it reveals the origin and course of the theological debates between Calvinism and Arminianism that have continued until today in America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how Samuel Rutherford, a leading Reformed theologian in seventeenth-century Scotland, discussed Adam's obedience and merit within the doctrine of the covenant of works and underscored grace as given by God's free will. Rutherford utilised the late medieval Augustinian Thomas Bradwardine's voluntarist thought on grace and ethics and highlighted the prevenient nature of grace. The distinctive features of Rutherford's covenant of works stem from his rejection of the Arminian elevation of human ability and imposition of necessity on God's ad extra activities by binding these activities with divine goodness and love. Thus, Rutherford's doctrine of the pre-fall covenant was shaped by anti-Arminian and anti-Pelagian concerns. To pursue this polemic, two late mediaeval traditions of Bradwardinian Augustinianism and God's covenantal acceptance eventually converged in the development of Rutherford's covenant of works. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responding to the too-optimistic theology of fellow Arminian, John Taylor, John Wesley wrote his lengthy treatise on the doctrine of original sin. In an optimistic effort to make fellow personalist theologians' works accessible, Methodist theologian Georgia Harkness tersely disdained the same doctrine in her first major book. She soon found her liberal theology "chastened" by interactions with neo-orthodox opponents and experiences of depravity—in world events and gender-based discrimination reflecting systemic sin. This article examines her later works for evidence of whether Harkness modified her attitude toward original sin and innovations she made to accommodate both her disdain for the doctrine and the realities of depravity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on emergence and transformations of Puritanism in England. It mentions opposition between a minority puritanism, necessarily locked into a posture reactionary, even revolutionary, and the Church of England established by law and members spanned a wide religious spectrum ranging from separatism to conformity. It also mentions conjunctural of the civil war, and last war of religion rather than the first European revolution and precision of Puritan piety.

This paper attempts to analyze Jacobus Arminius's theology from a different perspective than usually addressed, in order to stress the merits of his theology. This is especially necessary because theologians like Calvin and Luther, both living in the same century, were given much more credit than Arminius, which in our opinion ill-favours both history and Arminius' theological work. Thus, this paper will mostly deal with the 16 and 17th centuries political and religious background, as well as the core of Arminius' theological input. We consider these parts to be essential for a holistic understanding of Arminius, and a proper understanding of these two sides can bring about a better understanding of his theological influence throughout history. These steps will reveal how one could come to appreciate his theological inquiries. The last part of our paper focuses on the influence of Arminius' theology especially on the Pentecostal movement. Although, in general, his theological influence is received pessimistically in contemporary theological circles, the present study strives to show the need to differentiate between Arminius' own theology and that of his successors. This step will hopefully inspire the reconsideration of Arminius' core theology, which, contrary to the popular understanding, does not emphasize the human being, but the person of God. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides a theological analysis of the figure of Hugo Grotius, one of the founders of the modern international law, who had a great influence for the peace-process in the last time of the Thirty Years’ War. He also played a role in the European history of the Enlightenment and secularisation eras. In our time analysis of Grotius’s heritage is connected with new liberal understanding of religion in the spirit of tolerance, as well as with the connection between religion and politics. Grotius recommends to build a foundation of law and peace without any use or misuse of the name of God — could it be helpful also in our time? The German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer expected a non-religious time, but we have to see a growing influence of religion for political decisions and in consequence a growing mistrust against religion in the secular society. But it gives also an overview about new literature to Grotius and about his life and works and his significance in contemporary theological discussions. A short point is the reception of Grotius in the Russian tradition. The article is based on the report made at the historical conference devoted to the Thirty Years War (Saint-Petersburg, Russia, 2018).

Responding to the too-optimistic theology of fellow Arminian, John Taylor, John Wesley wrote his lengthy treatise on the doctrine of original sin. In an optimistic effort to make fellow personalist theologians’ works accessible, Methodist theologian Georgia Harkness tersely disdained the same doctrine in her first major book. She soon found her liberal theology “chastened” by interactions with neo-orthodox opponents and experiences of depravity—in world events and gender-based discrimination reflecting systemic sin. This article examines her later works for evidence of whether Harkness modified her attitude toward original sin and innovations she made to accommodate both her disdain for the doctrine and the realities of depravity.

The knowledge of James Arminius' theology is still incipient in Brazil. It was debated by Calvinist theologians and under a reformed perspective, although Armínio's works were only recently published in Portuguese. The familiarity with the theological thought of James Arminius was tenuous at the time, as it happened through foreign publications, both American and European, which mostly had a Calvinist nature. Qualified scholars in various fields of knowledge wrote about James Arminius, however devoid of the theologian's true thinking, and much of the debate on Arminianism occurs in the field of Soteriology, with other issues less explored. The doctrine of Justification represents one of the doctrines little discussed in Arminian theology. This article deals with the arguments of James Arminius on the theme of Justification and concluded that he defended a thought with a biblical, Protestant and Reformed identity regarding justification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The early modern afterlife of Pope Joan has been remarkably little studied, perhaps because its contours have seemed familiar: Joan’s existence was embraced by Protestants for its challenge to the apostolic succession of the papacy and rejected by Catholics for the same reason. This role reversal, which cast Protestants as defenders of monastic chronicles and Catholics as their critics, offers ostensible proof for the mercenary use of history in confessional polemics. This article uses an overlooked 1635 defence of the popess, the longest ever written, as a case study to argue the opposite: debates over Pope Joan could be vehicles for popular confessional grievances and identities, and they can teach us much about the difficulties facing the Catholic and Reformed churches in the 1620s and 1630s. Written in Dutch by a German minister of the Church of England, this lengthy treatise possesses a significance well beyond the local conditions – a public disputation in a small biconfessional town in the Duchy of Cleves – that gave rise to its publication.

This article maintains that Locke’s consciousness-based theory of personal identity, which Locke expounded in book 2, chapter 27 of the second edition of An Essay concerning Human Understanding (1694), perfectly fits with his views on the resurrection of the dead, the Last Judgment, and salvation. The compatibility of Locke’s theory of personal identity with his soteriology has been questioned by Udo Thiel and Galen Strawson. These two authors have claimed that Locke’s emphasis on repentance, which he described as necessary to salvation in The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695), clashes with his notion of punishment as annexed to personality and, hence, to consciousness. Pace Thiel and Strawson, I argue that Locke’s theory of personal identity is compatible with his concept of repentance. To this purpose, I first explain Locke’s views on the soul’s death and the resurrection of the dead on Judgment Day, when, according to Locke, we will all be raised from death by divine miracle, but only the repentant faithful will be admitted to eternal bliss while the wicked will be annihilated. Locke’s mortalism, along with his agnosticism on the ontological constitution of thinking substances or souls, played a role in his formulation of a non-substantialist account of personal identity, because it denied the temporal continuity of the soul between physical death and resurrection and it rejected the resurrection of the same body. I then analyze Locke’s consciousness-based theory of personal identity, with a focus on the implications of this theory regarding moral accountability. Finally, I turn my attention to Thiel’s and Strawson’s considerations about Locke’s views on consciousness and repentance. To prove that Locke’s views on salvation are consistent with his theory of personal identity, I clarify Locke’s soteriology, which describes not only repentance, but also obedience, faith, and the conscientious study of Scripture as necessary to salvation.

A Display of Arminianisme (1643) was John Owen's first published work. It gained him recognition and preferment. He had set himself forth as a man with an impressive command of continental Remonstrant sources, but close examination of the work reveals a high degree of dependence on two Contra-Remonstrant compendia for access to many of these sources. Owen's circumstances are taken into consideration in suggesting reasons for his reliance on intermediate sources before evaluating the implications of these findings for the status of this work and for Owen's reputation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present article has the objective of presenting the main doctrines of Jacó Armínio on anthropology, hamartiology and soteriology, which were summarized in the five points of the Remonstrance of 1610, contrasting this presentation with that undertaken by Jeverson Nascimento, in his article "The doctrinal differences of the Calvinism and Arminianism". In order to undertake an analysis of the thought of any exponent, it is necessary to understand its true propositions, considered from primary sources. This research will explain the points of Arminianism following the FACTS acrostic, which are: Freed by Grace, Atonement for All, Conditional Election, Total Depravity and Security in Christ, having as main theoretical reference "The Works of Armínio". It was found that Arminianism truly considered highlights the free divine grace for all, supports a pessimistic anthropology, contrasted by an optimistic soteriology, with a balance between unlimited atonement and the election conditioned by faith that was made possible by the necessary divine grace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In what follows, I contend that Arminianism—when properly nuanced—provides a more satisfying framework for holding together free will, God's sovereignty, and God's knowledge of the future than does open theism, Molinism, or Reformed theology. I turn to quantum entanglement as a model for teaching how God's eternal nature allows him to be simultaneously present to all times and events in a way that allows room for both God's providence and human free will. Throughout the essay, I attempt to remain faithful to the biblical witness, to be rooted in a well-represented and ancient stream of theological tradition, and to avoid inherently illogical claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a reply to Christopher C. Emerick's reply to two articles the author has written on the doctrine of predestination, one of which offers a constructive proposal for the doctrine; the other sets out a creative reading of Romans 9–11. In this article, the author responds to Emerick's complaints, and points out the convergences and divergences in his understanding of the doctrine and the author's. Finally, the author will reiterate what he said previously, not only rephrasing what he said but also going beyond it in explanation for the sake of clarity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently rekindled an interest in the Reformed Dutch theologian James Arminius. This article examines recent arguments that describe James Arminius’ theology as mistakenly disparaged. Authors like K.D. Stanglin, T. H. McCall, C.O. Bangs, R. Olson, Z. Rodrigues, W. S. Gunter, L.H. Silva and V. Couto affirm J. Arminius’ theology as biblical and Protestant, then confronting the theologian's critics. This article is a descriptive study based on a bibliographic review, by national and foreign authors, who discuss the importance of correcting the wrong criticisms about J. Arminius through the strictest study of his theology. The conclusion was that researchers belonging to different denominations of the Christian Church manifest that the opponents of James Arminius make mistakes in their criticisms of the theologian and draws attention to the importance of accurate knowledge of the theology of James Arminius and greater caution in scrutinizing texts that are discussed about the theologian. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present article has the objective of presenting reflections on the doctrinal differences Calvinism (defended by Calvinism), and Arminian (from the point of view of Arminianism), conceptualizing them, addressing the main doctrines that support these theological lines, their divergences, their main followers and reflections on them. Calvinism bears this name because of its forerunner John Calvin, and its main doctrines are Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints. Already Arminianism was the name given to the theological and doctrinal line coming from the followers of Jacob Arminius, whose main doctrines are: Free Will, Conditional Predestination, Universal Atonement, Grace can be prevented and Decay of Grace. The divergences between these two lines theological doctrines circulate between these main doctrines presented and in the conceptualization of each of them. It is concluded that both Calvinism and Arminianism constitute two theological systems that attempt to explain the relationship between God's sovereignty and human responsibility for salvation and that both are based on biblical texts, a fact that has generated divergences since 1610 and still reflects in the Christian life of society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The early modern afterlife of Pope Joan has been remarkably little studied, perhaps because its contours have seemed familiar: Joan's existence was embraced by Protestants for its challenge to the apostolic succession of the papacy and rejected by Catholics for the same reason. This role reversal, which cast Protestants as defenders of monastic chronicles and Catholics as their critics, offers ostensible proof for the mercenary use of history in confessional polemics. This article uses an overlooked 1635 defence of the popess, the longest ever written, as a case study to argue the opposite: debates over Pope Joan could be vehicles for popular confessional grievances and identities, and they can teach us much about the difficulties facing the Catholic and Reformed churches in the 1620s and 1630s. Written in Dutch by a German minister of the Church of England, this lengthy treatise possesses a significance well beyond the local conditions - a public disputation in a small biconfessional town in the Duchy of Cleves - that gave rise to its publication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies the theology in Scotland during the period 1618 to 1640. History of Arminianism in Scotland; Influence of Amerianism to students by professor in the 1620s; Contributions of John Cameron and William Forbes to Scotland's religion; Difference between Arminians and Covenanters.

Traditional Christian Trinitarianism confronts the impacts and challenges from Unitarianism, Arminianism, Deism and philosophy in the age of enlightenment. Jonathan Edwards renewed trinitarianism by discussing on the position of idealism in new context and new rational discourse system. On the one hand, he absorbed John Locke’s epistemology and psychology, and applied them to explain the mode of psychological Trinity. On the other hand, he demonstrated the mode of social Trinity regarding God as a society of love on the two standpoints of “goodness” or “love”, and “beauty” of God. Edwards’ Trinitarianism differs from Augustine by not starting with “unity” but with “individuality”. Edwards offered a unique approach to synthesize the western psychological Trinity and eastern social Trinity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]