Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
Arminians vs Calvinists a spectrum

Arminians vs Calvinists a spectrum

Last updated on: January 7, 2019 at 1:33 pm by Adrian Warnock

Arminians vs Calvinists a spectrum 2019-01-07T13:33:09+00:00 Adrian Warnock

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Source: pixabay.com

In this post I outline an Arminocalvinist spectrum, and explain why it’s not so simple as Arminians vs Calvinists. I think when we come to the Arminian / Calvinist debate we must understand it is not simply a clear cut issue. When I meet other Christians and get to know them, the most important question I have is not whether they agree with every line of theology I have, and express that agreement with the same wordings I do. I am much more concerned with what is their attitude to the Bible.

Some on each side seem more attached to their system than the Bible itself. Others love the Bible, but do not realize that the other side is not as extreme as they were told. There are many who have been taught to reject either Calvinism or Arminianism as rank heresy that fail to realize that as a moderate they have much more in common than they believe. For more on this see my previous post on the subject.

Today I thought I would share a breakdown of different perspectives on this debate, in a similar style to one I called the “Evolutionary Spectrum.” Where are you on this spectrum and why?

The following spectrum aims to reflect the views of people I am aware of, but I would value anyone who wants to suggest that it needs to be tweaked. Indeed, the eagle-eyed among you will notice that I have incorporated feedback from, among others, Roger Olson who was eager to emphasise that while he understands my desire for a mutual respect between Bible-believers from both sides, there really is a divide between the Arminians and the Calvinists. I remain open to tweak this further, but here is my Arminocalvinist spectrum:

1. Hyper Calvinist

Believes in double-predestination (God actively chooses to damn unbelievers in a similar way to which he chooses to save the elect)
Believes God in a sense stands behind every act that occurs, including sin. Opponents will say this makes them sound like they believe God is the author of sin.
Believes in the so-called Five Points of Calvinism or TULIP
Often has a tendency to work around certain scriptures (or, as their enemies might accuse them, “twists” or uses some Bible verses to “trump” others.) Parts of the Bible which are not convenient to their theology are conveniently ignored.
Believes that the Gospel offer is only valid for the elect so there is no need to preach gospel till people seem under conviction.
Is often passive in evangelism, believing God will save whoever he chooses so there is no point preaching to everyone.
May discourage the gospel of grace being taught to anyone unless they already seem convicted of sin.
May argue we should not say that “Jesus died for you” or “God loves you” to anyone unless we are sure they are part of the elect.
May argue that God hates sinners.
Does not see that faith is a duty to be commanded (see Wikipedia’s Hypercalvinist article).
God’s sovereignty rules supreme, but man’s responsibility is essentially denied.

2. Strong Calvinist

Believes in double-predestination, may well describe this decision as unequal in weight, endevoring to maintain the idea that God is not willing that any should perish. In other words, God stands behind the decision to save and the decision to damn in different ways.
Believes that Jesus only trully died for the elect (strong limited atonement) though may accept that his death had implications for all.
May believe that the world is the best of all possible worlds (These first two bullets are the so-called “sixth and seventh points of Calvinism according to Piper).
Believes God is entirely sovereign over all acts but not in such a way as to make him the author of sin.
Believes in TULIP in its classical sense.
John Piper would be a good example of a strong Calvinist.

3. Moderate Calvinist

Believes in all the TULIP but may understand some of them in a slightly different way to stronger Calvinists. For example “limited atonement” may be moderated by saying that there are some senses in which Jesus died generally for the whole world, and others in which he died especially for the elect. (see for example Edwards on Limited Atonement)
Does not believe in double predestination. In other words does not believe God damns sinners willingly. Despite the apparent illogicality of this statement believes that man condemns himself entirely freely and rejects a genuine offer of salvation from God, while the believer is saved only because of God’s irresistible grace and predestination.
Another way of putting this would be to say that God gets all the credit for saving us, but man gets all the blame for damnation. Spurgeon was a strong advocate of this position.
Is likely to believe that although salvation is secure, a mere response at a gospel event is not sufficient to be sure that someone is genuinely saved, and many backsliders were never saved at all.
Believes the Gospel must be preached to all, and Jesus commands everyone to repent.
Will freely teach God loves sinners, and that Jesus died for the world.
Believes that God chooses some to be saved out of his love for them rather than any foreseen faith.

4. Soft Calvinist

Drops at least one of the five “points” or so extensively redifines one of them they would be unrecognizable to stronger Calvinists. Mark Driscoll is hard to place in this scheme as he desrcibes himself as a four and a half point Calvinist, modifying one of the points so much that he calls it “limited/unlimited atonement.”
In fact Driscoll’s view is very similar to many others who would fit in the moderate Calvinist group.
Many soft Calvinists would doubt irresistible grace, and may begin to speak in some way about God’s predestination being in some way associated with man’s response.
Eagerly stress both God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility

5. Reformed Arminian (often called Classical or Evangelical Arminianism.)

The really key point that separates all Arminians from all Calvinists is this, that they do not believe in irresistible grace, in other words they do not believe that in some way God overcomes our resistance to being saved in order to save us.
Would very much see themselves in the Reformed part of the church, and as the heirs of a man like Wesley who by the end of his life could agree with the Calvinist Simeon, although would surely have been considered strong Arminian during his earlier years. Arguably Arminius himself was a Reformed Arminian.
Believes (as do all the groups above this one) in the so-called “Five Solas of the Reformation“
Like the other groups above will passionately believe in Penal Subsitution, holding that it is central to our understanding of the work of Jesus.
Deny some or all of the so-called TULIP, though very likely to believe in a form of Total Depravity, and Total Inability, i.e. that without God’s help we are incapable of responding to the gospel. (see for example the Society of Evangelical Arminians).
Likely to believe that someone who is truly saved cannot be un-born again.
Believes in regeneration, and that salvation is only possible if God acts upon the human heart. Unlikely to believe that this process is irresistible.
May well believe that election is in some way resultant from faith foreseen i.e. that it is not entirely unconditional
Will boldly say that Jesus died for all.
Still believes that God is sovereign over the universe and over every event that happens (as does every group above this) and yet that he limits himself, thereby giving man free will, but God remains able at any time to restrict this.
Would join all Calvinists in upholding that as per the words of Romans 8:28, God is working all things together for good to those who love him.
Some Reformed Arminians will in actual fact believe very similar things to those held in the TULIP but will express them in different ways.

6. Strong Arminian

May adamantly deny all points from TULIP, although many would make an exception for Total Depravity, and believe in that (see for example this post although the author of that post identifies himself as a Reformed Arminian)
Rejects as contrary to God’s character that he could choose to save people irrespective of any act in them or cause in them.
Believes that faith is a response of the human heart (possibly aided by God) that is the trigger for salvation.
Believes it is possible to lose your salvation.
May well still believe in penal substitution but likely to stress that it is only one aspect of the work of Jesus for us.

7. “Open” Arminian

Believes that God has chosen to limit himself to make room for love and freedom to truly exist (See this Tweet).
Critics accuse them of using human logic to deny critical aspects of our faith: For example, if a future event has not happened, some argue it is impossible for God to foreknow it. Thus God is surprised by faith in us, or indeed by whether or not we sin
God is portrayed as somehow weaker and less God-like than any of the other groups would suggest
Many deny aspects of the gospel, and see the Bible as culture-bound.
God is no longer truly sovereign, but man’s responsibility rules.

Where would you place yourself?

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and *whoever* comes to me I will never cast out. John 6:27

Divine sovereignty AND human responsibility.

If your theology rejects one half of this verse or the other, your theology is incorrect not Jesus:https://t.co/z34z4dxfZz

— Adrian Warnock (@adrianwarnock) January 7, 2019

Arminocalvinist Spectrum

Calvinism

Theologcial Spectrums

Previous Post

December 9, 2010

Christmas at Jubilee Church London

Next Post

December 10, 2010 Tweets from 2010-12-10

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 and 2 Corinthians 1 and 2 Thessalonians 1 and 2 Timothy 1 John 300 Leaders A Life of Joy Abortion Acts of the Apostles Adrian on radio Adrian on TV Adrian's Story Albert Mohler Amazing Grace Arminocalvinist Spectrum Assurance Atonement Atonement Series Attributes of God Barnabas Best of the Blog Bible Bible Software Bible Translation Biblical Inerrancy Billy Graham Bob Roberts Books C. J. Mahaney Calvinism Cessationism Charis Warnock Charismatic Spectrum Charles Simeon Charles Spurgeon Church Leadership Colossians Complementarian - Egalitarian Spectrum Complementarianism Conferences Culture Daniel Debates Deuteronomy DGM08 DGM13 Discernment Doctrine Don Carson Ed Stetzer Eddy Leo Ephesians ESV Bible Translators Interview Evangelism in a Post-Christian World evolution Exodus Expository Preaching Ezekial Faith and Feelings Family Florida Galatians General Genesis Get Wisdom - Proverbs sermons Gifts of The Holy Spirit Gifts of the Holy Spirit 2006 Global Faith Forum Godly Attitudes Gospel Gospels Grace Greg Haslam Grudem vs Piper: The Baptism Debate Healing Heaven Hell and Rob Bell Hebrews Henry Tyler Henry Warnock Holy Spirit Holy Spirit Baptism Hope Reborn Hugh Palmer Irresistable Grace Isaiah J. I. Packer Jack Hayford Joel Joel Warnock John John Lanferman John MacArthur John Newton John Owen John Piper John Smyth Jonathan Edwards Josh Harris Justification Justin Taylor Kenneth Ulmer Leadership Leadership Lessons from 1 & 2 Samuel Lex Loizides Liam Goligher Lig Duncan Limited Atonement Lou Fellingham Mark Dever Mark Driscoll Martyn Lloyd-Jones Matt Chandler Mental Health Missionary Methods: St Paul’s or Ours? My Story N. T. Wright Nehemiah NWA08 NWA09 NWA10 Opinion OT History Books Pentateuch Personal Personal Revival Philippians PJ Smyth Podcast Politics Preaching Prophecy Proverbs Psalms Raised With Christ Reformed Charismatic Regeneration Relationships Resurrection Resurrection & Salvation Revival Rice Broocks Rich Man and Lazarus Rick Warren Rob Rufus Roland Allen Romans Sam Storms Sanctification Series Sermons Sermons on Philippians Serving Jesus at Work Sexuality Sin St Paul Steve Chalke Strange Fire Suffering T4G T4G Statement TAB09 Tamasin Warnock Teamwork Terry Virgo The Atonement Debate - Chalke book The Soulwinner The Spirit-Filled Church The Traitor Within Theologcial Spectrums Theosis Tim Challies Tim Keller Titus TOAM06 TOAM07 TOAM08 TOAM09 TOAM10 TOAM11 Todd Bentley Tope Koleoso Total Depravity Video Water Baptism Wayne Grudem Worship

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 May 2025 April 2025 January 2025 November 2024 October 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 August 2023 May 2023 April 2023 February 2023 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 August 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 January 2019 December 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 June 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What was the primary construction in Biblical times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Bronze chisel Iron hammer Stone hammer Wooden mallet

Books by This Author Books by Adrian Warnock

See All Titles »