View source for Religion:Arminianism

{{Short description|Protestant theological movement}}
{{hatnote|"Arminism" and "Arminians" redirect here. They should not be confused with Armanism, Armenians or [[Religion:Arianism|Arianism]].}}
'''Arminianism''' is a movement of [[Religion:Protestantism|Protestantism]] initiated in the early 17th century, based on the [[Religion:Christian theology|theological]] ideas of the Dutch Reformed theologian Jacobus Arminius and his historic supporters known as [[Religion:Remonstrants|Remonstrants]]. Dutch Arminianism was originally articulated in the ''Remonstrance'' (1610), a theological statement submitted to the States General of the Netherlands. This expressed an attempt to moderate the doctrines of [[Religion:Calvinism|Calvinism]] related to its interpretation of [[Religion:Predestination in Calvinism|predestination]].

Classical Arminianism, to which Arminius is the main contributor, and Wesleyan Arminianism, to which [[Biography:John Wesley|John Wesley]] is the main contributor, are the two main schools of thought. Central Arminian beliefs are that God's preparing ([[Religion:Prevenient grace|prevenient]]) [[Religion:Grace in Christianity|grace]] to [[Religion:Regeneration (theology)|regeneration]] is universal, and that God's [[Religion:Justification (theology)|justifying]] grace allowing regeneration is resistible.

Many Christian denominations have been influenced by Arminian views, notably the [[Religion:Baptists|Baptists]] in the 17th century, the [[Religion:Methodism|Methodists]] in the 18th century, and the [[Religion:Pentecostalism|Pentecostals]] in the 20th century.

==History==
{{Further|Religion:History of the Calvinist–Arminian debate}}
=== Precursor movements and theological influences ===
According to Roger E. Olson, Arminius’ beliefs, i.e. Arminianism, did not begin with him.{{sfn|Olson|2014|p=1}} Denominations such as the [[Religion:Waldensians|Waldensians]] and other groups prior to the Reformation have, similarly to Arminianism, affirmed that each person may choose the contingent response of either resisting God's grace or yielding to it.{{sfn|Visconti|2003|pp=253–}} [[Religion:Anabaptism|Anabaptist]] theologian Balthasar Hubmaier also promoted much the same view as Arminius nearly a century before him.{{sfn|Olson|2014|p=1}} The soteriological doctrines of Arminianism and Anabaptism are roughly equivalent.{{sfn|Sutton|2012|p=86}}{{sfn|Bangs|1985|p=170}} In particular, Mennonites have been historically Arminian whether they distinctly espoused the Arminian viewpoint or not, and rejected Calvinism soteriology.{{sfn|Bender|1953|ps=. "Mennonites have been historically Arminian in their theology whether they distinctly espoused the Arminian viewpoint or not. They never accepted Calvinism either in the Swiss-South German branch or in the Dutch-North German wing. Nor did any Mennonite confession of faith in any country teach any of the five points of Calvinism. However, in the 20th century, particularly in North America, some Mennonites, having come under the influence of certain Bible institutes and the literature produced by this movement and its schools, have adopted the Calvinist doctrine of the perseverance of the saints or "once in grace always in grace." In doing so, they have departed from the historic Arminianism of the Anabaptist-Mennonite movement."}} Anabaptist theology seems to have influenced Jacobus Arminius.{{sfn|Sutton|2012|p=86}} At least, he was "sympathetic to the Anabaptist point of view, and Anabaptists were commonly in attendance on his preaching."{{sfn|Bangs|1985|p=170}} Similarly, Arminius mentions {{wipe|Denmark}} Lutheran theologian [[Biography:Niels Hemmingsen|Niels Hemmingsen]] as holding the basic view of soteriology he held and he may have been influenced by Hemmingsen.{{sfn|Olson|2013b|ps=. "I am using "Arminianism" as a handy [...] synonym for "evangelical synergism" (a term I borrow from Donald Bloesch). [...] It’s simply a Protestant perspective on salvation, God’s role and ours, that is similar to, if not identical with, what was assumed by the Greek church fathers and taught by Hubmaier, Menno Simons, and even Philipp Melanchthon (after Luther died). It was also taught by Danish Lutheran theologian Niels Hemmingsen (d. 1600)—independently of Arminius. (Arminius mentions Hemmingsen as holding the basic view of soteriology he held and he may have been influenced by Hemmingsen.")}}

===Emergence of Arminianism===
[[File:Jacobus Arminius 02 IV 13 2 0026 01 0309 a Seite 1 Bild 0001.jpg|thumb|right|Portrait of Jacobus Arminius, from ''Kupferstich aus Theatrum Europaeum'' by Matthaeus Merian in 1662]]
Jacobus Arminius was a Dutch pastor and theologian in the late 16th and early 17th centuries.{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}} He was taught by [[Biography:Theodore Beza|Theodore Beza]], [[Biography:John Calvin|Calvin's]] hand-picked successor, but after examination of the scriptures, he rejected his teacher's theology that it is God who [[Religion:Unconditional election|unconditionally elects]] some for [[Religion:Salvation in Christianity|salvation]].{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}} Instead Arminius proposed that the election of God was ''of believers'', thereby making it [[Religion:Conditional election|conditional on faith]].{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}} Arminius's views were challenged by the Dutch Calvinists, especially Franciscus Gomarus, but Arminius died before a national synod could occur.{{sfn|Wynkoop |1967 |loc=chap. 3}}

Arminius died before he could satisfy Holland's State General's request for a 14-page paper outlining his views. Arminius's followers replied in his stead crafting the ''Five articles of Remonstrance'' (1610), in which they express their points of divergence with the stricter Calvinism of the ''Belgic Confession''.{{sfn|Wynkoop|1967|loc=chap. 3}} This is how Arminius's followers were called [[Religion:Remonstrants|Remonstrants]], and following a ''Counter Remonstrance'' in 1611, Gomarus' followers were called Counter-Remonstrants.{{sfn|Loughlin|1907}}

After some political maneuvering, the Dutch Calvinists were able to convince Prince Maurice of Nassau to deal with the situation.{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}} Maurice systematically removed Arminian magistrates from office and called a national synod at Dordrecht. This Synod of Dort was open primarily to Dutch Calvinists (102 people), while the Arminians were excluded (13 people banned from voting), with Calvinist representatives from other countries (28 people), and in 1618 published a condemnation of Arminius and his followers as heretics. Part of this publication was the famous Five points of Calvinism in response to the five articles of Remonstrance.{{sfn|Wynkoop |1967 |loc=chap. 3}}

Arminians across Holland were removed from office, imprisoned, banished, and sworn to silence. Twelve years later Holland officially granted Arminianism protection as a religion, although animosity between Arminians and Calvinists continued.{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}} Most of the early Remonstrants followed a classical version of Arminianism. However, some of them such as Philipp van Limborch, moved in the direction of [[Religion:Semi-Pelagianism|semi-Pelagianism]] and rationalism.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=23}}

===Arminianism in the Church of England===
In England, the so-labelled Arminian doctrines{{Sfn|Tyacke|1990|p=24|loc={{zwnj}}}} were held, in substance, before and in parallel of Arminius.{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1880}} The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion (finalised in 1571), were sufficiently ambiguous that they were compatible with either Arminian or Calvinistic interpretations.{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1880}} Arminianism in the Church of England was fundamentally an expression of negation of Calvinism, and only some theologians held to classical Arminianism, but for the rest they were either [[Religion:Semi-Pelagianism|semi-Pelagian]] or [[Religion:Pelagianism|Pelagian]].{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}}{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1880}}{{Sfn|Tyacke|1990|p=245|ps=. "Of the various terms which can be used to describe the thrust of religions change at the time Arminian is the least misleading. It does ''not'' mean that the Dutch theologian Jacobus Arminius was normally the source of the ideas so labelled. Rather Arminian denotes a coherent body of anti-Calvinist religious thought, which was gaining ground in various regions of early seventeenth-century Europe."}} In this specific context, contemporary historians prefer to use the term "proto-Arminians" rather than "Arminians" to designate the leanings of divines who didn't follow classical Arminianism.{{sfn|MacCulloch|1990|p=94|ps=. "If we use the label "Arminian" for English Churchmen, it must be with these important qualification in mind [of been related to the theology of Arminius]; "proto-Arminian" would be a more accurate term."}} English Arminianism was represented by Arminian [[Religion:Puritans|Puritans]] such as John Goodwin or [[Religion:High church|High Anglican]] Arminians such as Jeremy Taylor and Henry Hammond.{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1880}} Anglican Arminians of the 17th century such as William Laud fought Calvinist Puritans.{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1880}} They actually saw Arminianism in terms of a state church, an idea that was alien to the views of Arminius.{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}} This position became particularly evident under the reign (1625–1649) of Charles I of England.{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1880}} Following the English Civil War (1642–1651) Charles II of England, who tolerated the [[Religion:Presbyterianism|Presbyterians]], re-instituted Arminian thought in the Church of England.{{sfn|Delumeau|Wanegffelen|Cottret|2012|p=65-66}} It was dominant there after the Restoration (1660){{sfn|Wallace|2011|p=233|ps=. "According to Edwards, it was only after the Restoration that non-Calvinist views come to be adopted by many of the clergy of the Church of England. Foremost among those who rejected Calvinism had been the Arminians, and Edwards appeared on the scene as a defender of Calvinism against Arminianism at a time when it was more often the Dissenters who were battling it and calling attention to the triumph of Arminianism in the Church of England."}} for some fifty years.{{sfn|McClintock|Strong|1880}}

===Baptists===
The debate between Calvin's followers and Arminius's followers is characteristic of post-Reformation church history. The emerging Baptist movement in 17th-century England, for example, was a microcosm of the historic debate between Calvinists and Arminians. The first Baptists—called "[[Religion:General Baptists|General Baptists]]" because of their confession of a "general" or unlimited atonement—were Arminians.{{sfn|Gonzalez|2014|pp=225–226}} The Baptist movement originated with Thomas Helwys, who left his mentor John Smyth (who had moved into shared belief and other distinctives of the Dutch Waterlander Mennonites of Amsterdam) and returned to London to start the first English Baptist Church in 1611. Later General Baptists such as John Griffith, Samuel Loveday, and Thomas Grantham defended a Reformed Arminian theology that reflected the Arminianism of Arminius. The General Baptists encapsulated their Arminian views in numerous [[Religion:Creed|confessions]], the most influential of which was the Standard Confession of 1660. In the 1640s the Particular Baptists were formed, diverging from Arminian doctrine and embracing the strong Calvinism of the Presbyterians and [[Religion:Independent|Independents]]. Their robust Calvinism was publicized in such confessions as the London Baptist Confession of 1644 and the Second London Confession of 1689. The London Confession of 1689 was later used by Calvinistic Baptists in America (called the Philadelphia Baptist Confession), whereas the Standard Confession of 1660 was used by the American heirs of the English General Baptists, who soon came to be known as Free Will Baptists.{{sfn|Torbet|1963|p=37, 145, 507}}

===Methodists===
This same dynamic between Arminianism and Calvinism can be seen in the heated discussions between friends and fellow Anglican ministers [[Biography:John Wesley|John Wesley]] and George Whitefield. Wesley was highly influenced by 17th-century English Arminianism and thinkers such as John Goodwin, Jeremy Taylor and Henry Hammond of the Anglican "Holy Living" school, and the Remonstrant [[Biography:Hugo Grotius|Hugo Grotius]]. Wesley knew very little about the beliefs of Jacobus Arminius and arrived at his religious views independently of Arminius.{{sfn|Grider|1982|p=55}} Wesley acknowledged late in life, with the 1778 publication of a periodical titled ''The Arminian'', that he and Arminius were in general agreement. Theology Professor W. Stephen Gunther concludes he was "a faithful representative" of Arminius' beliefs.{{sfn|Gunter|2007|p=82}} Wesley was a champion of Arminian teachings, defending his [[Religion:Soteriology|soteriology]] in ''The Arminian'' and writing articles such as ''Predestination Calmly Considered''. He defended Arminianism against charges of [[Religion:Semi-Pelagianism|semi-Pelagianism]], holding strongly to beliefs in [[Religion:Original sin|original sin]] and [[Philosophy:Total depravity|total depravity]]. At the same time, Wesley attacked the [[Determinism|determinism]] that he claimed characterized Calvinistic doctrines of unconditional election and [[Religion:Reprobation|reprobation]] and maintained a belief in the ability to lose salvation. Wesley also clarified the doctrine of [[Religion:Prevenient grace|prevenient grace]] and preached the ability of Christians to attain to [[Religion:Christian perfection|perfection]] (fully mature, not "sinlessness"). His system of thought has become known as Wesleyan Arminianism, the foundations of which were laid by Wesley and his fellow preacher [[Biography:John William Fletcher|John William Fletcher]].{{sfn|Knight|2018|p=115}}

=== Pentecostals ===
[[Religion:Pentecostalism|Pentecostalism]] has its background in the activity of Charles Parham (1873–1929). Its origin as a movement was in the Azusa Street Revival in Los Angeles in 1906. This revival was led by William J. Seymour (1870–1922).{{sfn|Knight|2010|p=201}} Due to the Methodist and [[Religion:Holiness movement|Holiness]] background of many early Pentecostal preachers, the Pentecostal churches usually possessed practices that arose from the Wesleyan Arminianism.{{sfn|Knight|2010|p=5}}{{sfn|Satama|2009|pp=17–18}} During the 20th century, as Pentecostal churches began to settle and incorporate more standard forms, they started to formulate theology that was fully Arminian.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=93}} Today, the two largest Pentecostal denominations in the world, the Assemblies of God and the Pentecostal Church of God denominations, hold to Arminian views such as [[Religion:Prevenient grace|resistible grace]],{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2021|p=240|ps=. "[T]he specifically Pentecostal denominations —such as the Assemblies of God, founded in 1914— have remained broadly Arminian when it comes to the matters of free, resistible grace and choice in salvation [...]"}} [[Religion:Conditional election|conditional election]],{{sfn|Satama|2009|pp=17–18}} or [[Religion:Conditional preservation of the saints|conditional security of the believer]] for the first.{{sfn|AG|2017}}

== Current landscape ==
=== Protestant denominations ===
Advocates of Arminianism find a home in many Protestant denominations,{{sfn|Olson|2014|pp=2–3|loc={{zwnj}}|ps=. "Methodism, in all its forms (including ones that do not bear that name), tends to be Arminian. (Calvinist Methodist churches once existed. They were founded by followers of Wesley’s co-evangelist George Whitefield. But, so far as I am able to tell, they have all died out or merged with traditionally Reformed-Calvinist denominations.) Officially Arminian denominations include ones in the so-called "Holiness" tradition (e.g., Church of the Nazarene) and in the Pentecostal tradition (e.g., Assemblies of God). Arminianism is also the common belief of Free Will Baptists (also known as General Baptists). Many Brethren [anabaptists-pietists] churches are Arminian as well. But one can find Arminians in many denominations that are not historically officially Arminian, such as many Baptist conventions/conferences."}} and sometimes other beliefs such as Calvinism exist within the same denomination.{{sfn|Akin|1993|ps=. "In Protestant circles there are two major camps when it comes to predestination: Calvinism and Arminianism. Calvinism is common in Presbyterian, Reformed, and a few Baptist churches. Arminianism is common in Methodist, Pentecostal, and most Baptist churches."}} The Lutheran theological tradition bears certain similarities to Arminianism{{sfn|Dorner|2004|p=419|ps=. "Through its opposition to Predestinarianism, Arminianism possesses a certain similarity to the Lutheran doctrine, in the shape which the latter in the seventeenth century more and more assumed, but the similarity is rather a superficial one."}} and there may be some Lutheran churches that are open to it.{{sfn|Olson|2012}} Faiths leaning at least in part in the Arminian direction include some of high-church Anglicanism.{{sfn|Satama|2009|p=16}} Anabaptist denominations, such as the Mennonites, Hutterites, Amish and Schwarzenau Brethren, adhere to Anabaptist theology, which espouses a soteriology that is similar to Arminianism "in some respects".{{sfn|Sutton|2012|p=56|ps=. "Interestingly, Anabaptism and Arminianism are similar is some respects. Underwood wrote that the Anabaptist movement anticipated Arminius by about a century with respect to its reaction against Calvinism."}}{{sfn|Olson|2014|pp=2–3}}{{sfn|Olson|2012}} Arminianism is found within the General Baptists,{{sfn|Olson|2014|pp=2–3}} including the subset of General Baptists known as Free Will Baptists.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=87}} The majority of Southern Baptists accept Arminianism, with an exception allowing for a doctrine of [[Religion:Eternal security|eternal security]],{{sfn|SBC|2000|loc=chap. 5}}{{sfn|Harmon|1984|pp=17–18, 45–46}}{{sfn|Walls|Dongell|2004|pp=12–13, 16–17}}{{sfn|Olson|2012}} though many see Calvinism as growing in acceptance.{{sfn|Walls|Dongell|2004|pp=7–20}} Certain proponents of Arminianism may be found within the Restoration movement in the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=87}} Additionally, it is found in the [[Religion:Seventh-day Adventist Church|Seventh-day Adventist Church]].{{sfn|Olson|2012}} Arminianism (specifically Wesleyan–Arminian theology) is taught in the Methodist churches,{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2021|p=139}} inclusive of those denominations aligned with the [[Religion:Holiness movement|holiness movement]] such as the Evangelical Methodist Church, [[Religion:Church of the Nazarene|Church of the Nazarene]], the Free Methodist Church, the Wesleyan Church,{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=87}} and the Salvation Army.{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2021|p=241}} It is also found in a part of the Charismatics, including the [[Religion:Pentecostalism|Pentecostals]].{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=87}}{{sfn|Akin|1993|loc={{zwnj}}}}{{sfn|Olson|2014|pp=2–3}}{{sfn|Gause|2007|ps=. "Pentecostals are almost universally Wesleyan-Arminian rather than Calvinist/Reformed, with rare exceptions among denominational Charismatic."}}

=== Scholarly support ===
Contemporary scholars widely endorse Arminianism across various theological circles. In Baptist traditions, advocates include: Roger E. Olson, F. Leroy Forlines, Robert Picirilli and J. Matthew Pinson. In the expansive Methodist tradition, a multitude of theologians, Bible scholars, and apologists align with Arminian theology, including: Thomas Oden,{{sfn|Driscoll|2013|pp=99–100}} Ben Witherington III,{{sfn|Witherington III|2013|ps=. "The first and most important reason I'm a Wesleyan is because of the character of God [...] which is love freely given and freely received. [...] According to the Calvinistic message we are saved by grace through faith alone and our actions have nothing to do with it. [...] According to the Wesleyan approach to the gospel, it's not just about notional assent [...] it's about trusting the truth about God and that is an activity."}} David Pawson,{{sfn|Pawson|1996}} B. J. Oropeza,{{sfn|Oropeza|2000}} Thomas H. McCall{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012}} and Fred Sanders. The Holiness movement, in particular, boasts theologians such as: [[Biography:Henry Orton Wiley|Henry Orton Wiley]], Carl O. Bangs and [[Biography:J. Kenneth Grider|J. Kenneth Grider]].{{sfn|Grider|1982}} Additionally, scholars like Keith D. Stanglin,{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012}} Craig S. Keener and Grant R. Osborne also support Arminian perspectives.

==Theology==
=== Theological legacy ===
The original beliefs of Jacobus Arminius are commonly called Arminianism, but more broadly, the term may embrace the teachings of Simon Episcopius,{{sfn|Episcopius|Ellis|2005|p=8|ps=. "Episcopius was singularly responsible for the survival of the Remonstrant movement after the Synod of Dort. We may rightly regard him as the theological founder of Arminianism, since he both developed and systematized ideas which Arminius was tentatively exploring before his death and then perpetuated that theology through founding the Remonstrant seminary and teaching the next generation of pastors and teachers."}} [[Biography:Hugo Grotius|Hugo Grotius]], [[Biography:John Wesley|John Wesley]], and others. Arminian theology usually falls into one of two groups: Classical Arminianism, drawn from the teaching of Jacobus Arminius, and Wesleyan Arminian, drawing primarily from Wesley. The two groups overlap substantially.

In 529, at the [[Religion:Council of Orange (529)|Second Council of Orange]], the question at hand was whether the doctrines of Augustine on God's providence were to be affirmed, or if [[Religion:Semi-Pelagianism|semi-Pelagianism]] could be affirmed. Semi-Pelagianism was a moderate form of [[Religion:Pelagianism|Pelagianism]] that teaches that the first step of salvation is by human will and not the grace of God.{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012|p=160}} The determination of the Council could be considered "semi-Augustinian".{{sfn|Oakley|1988|p=64}}{{sfn|Thorsen|2007|loc=ch. 20.3.4}}{{sfn|Bounds|2011|pp=39–43}} It defined that faith, though a free act of man, resulted, even in its beginnings, from the grace of God, enlightening the [[Religion:Christian anthropology|human mind]] and enabling belief.{{sfn|Denzinger|1954|loc=ch. Second Council of Orange, art. 5–7}}{{sfn|Pickar|1981|p=797|loc=ch. Faith}}{{sfn|Cross|2005|p=701}} This describes the operation of [[Religion:Prevenient grace|prevenient grace]] allowing the unregenerate to repent in faith.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=81}}{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012|p=153}} On the other hand, the Council of Orange condemned the Augustinian teaching of predestination to damnation.{{sfn|Denzinger|1954|loc=ch. Second Council of Orange, art. 199|ps=. "We not only do not believe that some have been truly predestined to evil by divine power, but also with every execration we pronounce anathema upon those, if there are [any such], who wish to believe so great an evil."}} Since Arminianism is aligned with those characteristic semi-Augustinian views,{{sfn|Bounds|2011|pp=39–43}} it has been seen by some as a reclamation of early church theological consensus.{{sfn|Keathley|2014|p=703|loc=ch. 12}} Moreover, Arminianism can also be seen as a soteriological diversification of Calvinism{{sfn|Magnusson|1995|p=62}} or more specifically, as a theological middle ground between Calvinism and semi-Pelagianism.{{sfn|Olson|2014|p=6}}

===Classical Arminianism===
[[File:Simon_Episcopius,_by_Anonymous.jpg|thumb|right|Portrait of Simon Episcopius, (Anonymous)]]
Classical Arminianism is the theological system that was presented by Jacobus Arminius and maintained by some of the Remonstrants.{{sfn|Pinson|2002|p=137}} Theologians as Forlines and Olson have referred to this system as "classical Arminianism",{{sfn|Forlines|2011}}{{sfn|Olson|2009}} while others as Picirilli and Pinson prefer to term it "Reformation Arminianism"{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|p=1}} or "Reformed Arminianism".{{sfn|Pinson|2002|pp=149–150}} 

The teachings of Arminius held to ''[[Religion:Sola fide|Sola fide]]'' and ''[[Religion:Sola gratia|Sola gratia]]'' of the Reformation, but they were distinct from particular teachings of [[Biography:Martin Luther|Martin Luther]], Huldrych Zwingli, [[Biography:John Calvin|John Calvin]], and other Protestant Reformers.{{sfn|Pinson|2003|pp=135, 139}}

Classical Arminianism was originally articulated in the ''Five Articles of Remonstrance''. "These points", note Keith D. Stanglin and Thomas H. McCall, "are consistent with the views of Arminius; indeed, some come verbatim from his ''Declaration of Sentiments''."{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012|p=190}} A list of beliefs of classical Arminianism is given below:

==== God's providence and human free will ====
Arminianism accepts [[Philosophy:Classical theism|classical theism]], which states that God is [[Philosophy:Omnipresence|omnipresent]], [[Philosophy:Omnipotence|omnipotent]], and [[Philosophy:Omniscience|omniscient]].{{sfn|Olson|2009|pp=90–91}} In that view, God's power, knowledge, and presence have no external limitations, that is, outside of his divine nature and character.

Besides, Arminianism view on God's [[Religion:Sovereignty of God in Christianity|sovereignty]] is based on postulates stemming from God's character, especially as fully revealed in Jesus Christ.{{sfn|Olson|2014|p=11}} On the first hand, divine election must be defined in such a way that God is not in any case, and even in a secondary way, the author of [[Philosophy:Evil|evil]]. It would not correspond to the character of God.{{sfn|Olson|2013a|ps=. "Basic to Arminianism is God’s love. The fundamental conflict between Calvinism and Arminianism is not ''sovereignty'' but ''God’s character''. ''If Calvinism is true, God is the author of sin, evil, innocent suffering and hell''. [...] Let me repeat. The most basic issue is ''not'' providence or predestination or the sovereignty of God. The most basic issue is ''God’s character''."}} On the other hand, man's responsibility for evil must be preserved.{{sfn|Olson|2010|ps=. "Classical Arminianism does NOT say God never interferes with free will. It says God NEVER foreordains or renders certain evil. [...] An Arminian COULD believe in divine dictation of Scripture and not do violence to his or her Arminian beliefs. [...] Arminianism is not in love with libertarian free will –as if that were central in and of itself. Classical Arminians have gone out of our way (beginning with Arminius himself) to make clear that our sole reasons for believe in free will AS ARMINIANS [...] are 1) to avoid making God the author of sin and evil, and 2) to make clear human responsibility for sin and evil."}} Those two postulates require a specific way by which God chooses to manifest his sovereignty when interacting with his creatures.

On one hand, it requires for God to operate according to a limited mode of [[Philosophy:Divine providence|providence]]. This means that God deliberately exercises sovereignty without determining every event. On the other hand, it requires for God's [[Religion:Election in Christianity|election]] to be a "[[Philosophy:Predestination|predestination]] by foreknowledge".{{sfn|Olson| 2018|ps=. "What is Arminianism? A) Belief that God limits himself to give human beings free will to go against his perfect will so that God did not design or ordain sin and evil (or their consequences such as innocent suffering); B) Belief that, although sinners cannot achieve salvation on their own, without "prevenient grace" (enabling grace), God makes salvation possible for all through Jesus Christ and offers free salvation to all through the gospel. "A" is called "limited providence," "B" is called "predestination by foreknowledge.""}}

In that respect, God's foreknowledge reconciles with human free will in the following way: Human [[Philosophy:Free will in theology|free will]] is limited by original sin, though God's [[Religion:Prevenient grace|prevenient grace]] restores to humanity the ability to accept God's call of salvation.{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|pp=42–43, 59-}}{{sfn|Pinson|2002|pp=146–147}} God's foreknowledge of the future is exhaustive and complete, and therefore the future is certain and not [[Philosophy:Contingency|contingent]] on human action. God does not determine the future, but He does know it. God's certainty and human contingency are compatible.{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|p=40}}

Roger Olson expressed those defining ideas in a more practical way:<blockquote>""Arminianism," [...] is simply a term we use in theology for the view, held by some people before Arminius and many after him, that sinners who hear the [[Religion:Gospel|gospel]] have the free will to accept or reject God’s offer of saving grace and that nobody is excluded by God from the possibility of salvation except those who freely exclude themselves. But true, historical, classical Arminianism includes the belief that this free will [to repent and believe unto salvation] is itself a gift of God through prevenient grace."{{sfn|Olson| 2017}}</blockquote>

==== Condition of humanity ====
[[Philosophy:Total depravity|Depravity is total]]: Arminius states "In this [fallen] state, the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost. And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they be assisted by grace, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace."{{sfn|Arminius|1853a|p=526}}

==== Extent and nature of the atonement ====
[[Religion:Unlimited atonement|Atonement is intended for all]]: Jesus's death was for all people, Jesus draws all people to himself, and all people have opportunity for salvation through [[Philosophy:Faith in Christianity|faith]].{{sfn|Arminius|1853a|p=316}}

Jesus's death satisfies God's justice: The penalty for the sins of the elect is paid in full through the [[Religion:Crucifixion of Jesus|crucifixion of Christ]]. Thus Christ's death atones for the sins of all, but requires faith to be effected. Arminius states that "Justification, when used for the act of a Judge, is either purely the imputation of righteousness through mercy [...] or that man is justified before God [...] according to the rigor of justice without any forgiveness."{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|p=454}} Stephen Ashby clarifies: "Arminius allowed for only two possible ways in which the sinner might be [[Religion:Justification (theology)|justified]]: (1) by our absolute and perfect adherence to the law, or (2) purely by God's imputation of Christ's righteousness."{{sfn|Pinson|2002|p=140}} W. Stephen Gunter concurs that Arminius would not take a rigid position on the doctrine of [[Religion:Imputed righteousness|imputed righteousness]] (the righteousness of Christ is imputed for righteousness of the believer).{{sfn|Gann|2014}} For Keith D. Stanglin and Thomas H. McCall, Arminius would not object to saying rather that "the righteousness of Christ is imputed to righteousness".{{sfn|Gann|2014}} Forlines put it this way: "On the condition of faith, we are placed in union with Christ. Based on that union, we receive His death and righteousness".{{sfn|Forlines|2011|p=403}}

Christ's atonement has a substitutionary effect which is limited only to the elect. Arminius held that God's justice was satisfied by [[Religion:Penal substitution|penal substitution]].{{sfn|Pinson|2002|pp=140–}} Hugo Grotius taught that it was satisfied [[Religion:Governmental theory of atonement|governmentally]].{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|p=132}} According to Roger Olson, historical and contemporary Arminians have held to one of these views.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=224|loc={{zwnj}}}}

==== Conversion of man ====
God takes initiative in the salvation process and his grace comes to all people. This grace, often called [[Religion:Prevenient grace|''prevenient'' grace]], acts on all people to convince them of the Gospel, draw them strongly towards salvation, and enable the possibility of sincere faith. Picirilli states that "indeed this grace is so close to regeneration that it inevitably leads to [[Religion:Regeneration (theology)|regeneration]] unless finally resisted."{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|pp= 154-}} The offer of salvation through grace does not act irresistibly in a purely cause-effect, deterministic method but rather in an influence-and-response fashion that can be both freely accepted and freely denied.{{sfn|Forlines|2001|pp=313–321}}

Man has a freed will to respond or resist: Free will is granted and limited by God's sovereignty, but God's sovereignty allows all men the choice to accept the Gospel of Jesus through faith, simultaneously allowing all men to resist.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=142}}

Conversion is [[Religion:Synergism|synergistic]]: As Roger Olson put it: "[Arminius]' evangelical synergism reserves all the power, ability and efficacy in salvation to grace, but allows humans the God-granted ability to resist or not resist it. The only "contribution" humans make is nonresistance to grace."{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=165}}

==== Election of man ====
[[Religion:Conditional election|Election is conditional]]: Arminius defined ''election'' as "the decree of God by which, of Himself, from eternity, He decreed to justify in Christ, believers, and to accept them unto eternal life."{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|p=311}} God alone determines who will be saved and his determination is that all who believe Jesus through faith will be justified. According to Arminius, "God regards no one in Christ unless they are engrafted in him by faith."{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|p=311}}

[[Philosophy:Predestination|God predestines the elect]] to a glorious future: Predestination is not the predetermination of who will believe, but rather the predetermination of the believer's future inheritance. The elect are therefore predestined to sonship through [[Religion:Adoption (theology)|adoption]], [[Religion:Glorification (theology)|glorification]], and [[Religion:Eternal life (Christianity)|eternal life]].{{sfn|Pawson| 1996|pp=109-}}

==== Preservation of man ====
Related to [[Religion:Christian eschatology|eschatological]] considerations, Jacobus Arminius{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|p=376|ps=. "First, you say, and truly, that hell-fire is the punishment ordained for sin and the transgression of the law."}} and the first Remonstrants, including Simon Episcopius{{sfn|Episcopius|Ellis|2005|loc=ch. 20, item 4}} believed in [[Earth:Lake of fire|everlasting fire]] where the [[Philosophy:Wickedness|wicked]] are thrown by God at judgment day.

[[Religion:Conditional preservation of the saints|Preservation is conditional]]: All believers have full [[Religion:Assurance (theology)|assurance of salvation]] with the condition that they remain in Christ. Salvation is conditioned on faith, therefore perseverance is also conditioned.{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|p=203}} Arminius believed the Scriptures taught that believers are graciously empowered by Christ and the [[Religion:Holy Spirit in Christianity|Holy Spirit]] "to fight against Satan, sin, the world and their own flesh, and to gain the victory over these enemies."{{sfn|Arminius|1853b|pp=219–220}} Furthermore, Christ and the Spirit are ever present to aid and assist believers through various temptations. But this security was not unconditional but conditional—"provided they [believers] stand prepared for the battle, implore his help, and be not wanting to themselves, Christ preserves them from [[Religion:Backsliding|falling]]."{{sfn|Arminius|1853b|pp=465, 466|ps=. "This seems to fit with Arminius’ other statements on the need for perseverance in faith. For example: "God resolves to receive into favor those who repent and believe, and to save in Christ, on account of Christ, and through Christ, those who persevere [in faith], but to leave under sin and wrath those who are impenitent and unbelievers, and to condemn them as aliens from Christ"."}}{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|pp=412, 413|ps=. "[God] wills that they, who believe and persevere in faith, shall be saved, but that those, who are unbelieving and impenitent, shall remain under condemnation".}}

==== Possibility of apostasy ====
Arminius believed in the possibility for a believer to commit [[Religion:Apostasy in Christianity|apostasy]] (i.e., desert Christ by cleaving again to this evil world, losing a good conscience, or by failing to hold on to sound doctrine). However, over the period of time Arminius wrote on this question,{{sfn|Stanglin|Muller|2009}} he sometimes expressed himself more cautiously out of consideration for the faith of his readers.{{sfn|Cameron|1992|p=226}} For instance, Arminius declared in 1599 that this matter required further study in the [[Religion:Religious text|Scriptures]].{{sfn|Arminius|1853b|pp=219–220|loc=A Dissertation on the True and Genuine Sense of the Seventh Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans|ps=. [1599]}} Arminius said also in his "Declaration of Sentiments" (1607), "I never taught that a true believer can, either totally or finally fall away from the faith, and perish; yet I will not conceal, that there are passages of scripture which seem to me to wear this aspect; and those answers to them which I have been permitted to see, are not of such a kind as to approve themselves on all points to my understanding."{{sfn|Arminius|1853a|p=665|ps=. "William Nichols notes: "Arminius spoke nearly the same modest words when interrogated on this subject in the last Conference which he had with Gomarus [a Calvinist], before the states of Holland, on the 12th of Aug. 1609, only two months prior to his decease"".}}

But in his other writings he expressed certainty about the possibility of falling away: Arminius wrote in ca. 1602, that "a person who is being 'built' into the church of Christ may resist the continuation of this process". Concerning the believers he said "It may suffice to encourage them, if they know that no power or prudence can dislodge them from the rock, unless they of their own will forsake their position."{{sfn|Oropeza|2000|p=16|ps=. "Although Arminius denied having taught final apostasy in his ''Declaration of Sentiments'', in the ''Examination of the Treatise of Perkins on the Order and Mode of Predestination'' [ca. 1602] he writes that "a person who is being 'built' into the church of Christ may resist the continuation of this process". Concerning the believers, "It may suffice to encourage them, if they know that no power or prudence can dislodge them from the rock, unless they of their own will forsake their position."}}{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|p=455|loc=Examination of the Treatise of Perkins on the Order and Mode of Predestination|ps=. [ca. 1602]}} He continued by saying that the covenant of God (Jeremiah 23) "does not contain in itself an impossibility of defection from God, but a promise of the gift of fear, whereby they shall be hindered from going away from God so long as that shall flourish in their hearts."{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|p=458|loc=Examination of the Treatise of Perkins on the Order and Mode of Predestination|ps=. [ca. 1602]}} He then taught that had King David died in his sins he would have been lost.{{sfn|Arminius|1853c|pp=463–464|loc=Examination of the Treatise of Perkins on the Order and Mode of Predestination|ps=. [ca. 1602]}}{{sfn|Gann|2014}} In 1602, Arminius also wrote: "A believing member of Christ may become slothful, give place to sin, and gradually die altogether, ceasing to be a member".{{sfn|Arminius|1853a|p=667|loc=Disputation 25, on Magistracy|ps=. [1602]}}

For Arminius, a certain class of sin would cause a believer to fall, especially sin motivated by malice.{{sfn|Gann|2014}}{{sfn|Stanglin|2007|p=137}} In 1605 Arminius wrote: “But it is possible for a believer to fall into a mortal sin, as is seen in David. Therefore he can fall at that moment in which if he were to die, he would be condemned".{{sfn|Arminius|1853a|p=388|loc=Letter to Wtenbogaert, trans. as ''Remarks on the Preceding
Questions, and on those opposed to them''|ps=. [1605]}} Stanglin, along with McCall, point out that Arminius clearly sets forth two paths to apostasy 1. "rejection", or 2. "malicious sinning".{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012|p=190}}{{sfn|Gann|2014}} Oropeza concludes: "If there is any consistency in Arminius' position, he did not seem to deny the possibility of falling away".{{sfn|Oropeza|2000|p=16|loc={{zwnj}}}} 

After the death of Arminius in 1609, his followers wrote a ''Remonstrance'' (1610) based quite literally on their leader's "Declaration of Sentiments" (1607) which expressed prudence on the possibility of apostasy.{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012|p=190}} In particular, its fifth article expressed the necessity of further study on the possibility of apostasy.{{sfn|Schaff|2007}} Sometime between 1610 and the official proceeding of the Synod of Dort (1618), the [[Religion:Remonstrants|Remonstrants]] became fully persuaded in their minds that the Scriptures taught that a true believer was capable of falling away from faith and perishing eternally as an unbeliever. They formalized their views in "The Opinion of the Remonstrants" (1618) which was their official stand during the Synod of Dort.{{sfn|De Jong|1968|pp=220-|loc=art. 5, points 3–4|ps=. "True believers can fall from true faith and can fall into such sins as cannot be consistent with true and justifying faith; not only is it possible for this to happen, but it even happens frequently. True believers are able to fall through their own fault into shameful and atrocious deeds, to persevere and to die in them; and therefore finally to fall and to perish."}} Picirilli remarks: "Ever since that early period, then, when the issue was being examined again, Arminians have taught that those who are truly saved need to be warned against apostasy as a real and possible danger."{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|p=198}} They later expressed this same view in the ''[[Religion:Remonstrant Confession|Remonstrant Confession]]'' (1621).{{sfn|Witzki|2010}} 

==== Forgivability of apostasy ====
Stanglin points out that Arminius held that if the apostasy came from "malicious" sin, then it was forgivable.{{sfn|Gann|2014}}{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012|p=174}} If it came from "rejection" it was not.{{sfn|Stanglin|2007|p=139}} Following Arminius, the Remonstrants believed that, though possible, apostasy was not in general irremediable.{{sfn|De Jong|1968|pp=220-|loc=chap. 5.5|ps=. "Nevertheless we do not believe that true believers, though they may sometimes fall into grave sins which are vexing to their consciences, immediately fall out of every hope of repentance; but we acknowledge that it can happen that God, according to the multitude of His mercies, may recall them through His grace to repentance; in fact, we believe that this happens not infrequently, although we cannot be persuaded that this will certainly and indubitably happen."}} However, other classical Arminians as the Free Will Baptists have taught that apostasy is irremediable.{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|pp=204-}}{{sfn|Pinson|2002|p=159}}

===Wesleyan Arminianism===
[[File:John Wesley by George Romney.jpg|thumb|right|Portrait of John Wesley, by George Romney]]
{{further|Religion:Wesleyan theology|Religion:Methodism}}
[[Biography:John Wesley|John Wesley]] thoroughly agreed with the vast majority of what Arminius himself taught.{{sfn|Gunter|2007|p=82}} Wesleyan Arminianism is classical Arminianism with the addition of Wesleyan perfectionism.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=189|loc=note 20}}{{sfn|Sayer|2006|loc=Ch. Wesleyan-Arminian theology|ps=. "Evangelical Wesleyan-Arminianism has as its center the merger of both Wesley’s concept of holiness and Arminianism’s emphasis on synergistic soteriology."}} Here are mentioned some positions on specific issues within Wesleyan Arminianism:

==== Nature of the atonement ====
Steven Harper proposed that Wesley's atonement is a hybrid of the [[Religion:Penal substitution|penal substitution]] theory and the governmental theory.{{sfn|Pinson|2002|pp=227-|ps=. "Wesley does not place the substitionary element primarily within a legal framework [...] Rather [his doctrine seeks] to bring into proper relationship the 'justice' between God's love for persons and God's hatred of sin [...] it is not the satisfaction of a legal demand for justice so much as it is an act of mediated reconciliation."}} However, theologians Robert Picirilli, Roger Olson and Darren Cushman Wood consider that the view of Wesley concerning atonement is by penal substitution.{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|pp= 104–105, 132–}}{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=224|ps=. "Arminius did not believe [in the governmental theory of atonement], neither did Wesley nor some of his nineteenth-century followers. Nor do all contemporary Arminians."}}{{sfn|Wood|2007|p=67}} Wesleyan Arminians have historically adopted either the penal or governmental theory of atonement.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=224|loc={{zwnj}}}}

==== Preservation and apostasy of man ====
Wesley accepted the Arminian view that genuine Christians could [[Religion:Apostasy in Christianity|apostatize]] and lose their salvation, as his famous sermon "A Call to Backsliders" clearly demonstrates. Harper summarizes as follows: "the act of committing sin is not in itself ground for the loss of salvation [...] the loss of salvation is much more related to experiences that are profound and prolonged. Wesley sees two primary pathways that could result in a permanent fall from grace: unconfessed sin and the actual expression of apostasy."{{sfn|Pinson|2002|pp=239–240}} Wesley believed that such apostasy was not irremediable. When talking about those who have made "shipwreck" of their faith,(1 Tim 1:19) Wesley claims that "not one, or a hundred only, but I am persuaded, several thousands [...] innumerable are the instances [...] of those who had fallen but now stand upright."{{sfn|Wesley|Emory|1835|p=247|loc="A Call to Backsliders"}}

==== Christian perfection ====
One issue that typifies Wesleyan Arminianism is [[Religion:Christian perfection|Christian perfection]].{{sfn|Heron|1999|p=128}} According to Wesley's teaching, Christians could attain a state of practical perfection, meaning a lack of all voluntary sin by the empowerment of the Holy Spirit, in this life. Christian perfection (or ''entire sanctification''), according to Wesley, is "purity of intention, dedicating all the life to God" and "the mind which was in Christ, enabling us to walk as Christ walked." It is "loving God with all our heart, and our neighbor as ourselves".{{sfn|Wesley|1827|p=66|loc="A Plain Account of Christian Perfection"}} It is "a restoration not only to the favour, but likewise to the image of God," our "being filled with the fullness of God".{{sfn|Wesley|Emory|1835|p=73|loc="The End of Christ’s Coming"}} Wesley was clear that Christian perfection did not imply perfection of bodily health or an infallibility of judgment. It also does not mean we no longer violate the will of God, for involuntary transgressions remain. Perfected Christians remain subject to temptation, and have continued need to pray for forgiveness and holiness. It is not an absolute perfection but a perfection in love. Furthermore, Wesley did not teach a salvation by perfection, but rather says that, "Even perfect holiness is acceptable to God only through Jesus Christ."{{sfn|Wesley|1827|p=45|loc="Of Christian Perfection"}}

===Other variations===
====Corporate view of election====
{{Main|Religion:Corporate election}}
The majority Arminian view is that election is individual and based on God's foreknowledge of faith. According to the corporate election view, God never chose individuals to elect to salvation, but rather He chose to elect the believing church to salvation.{{sfn|Ridderbos|1997|p=351|ps=. "[The certainty of salvation] does not rest on the fact that the church belongs to a certain "number", but that it belongs to Christ, from before the foundation of the world. Fixity does not lie in a hidden decree, therefore, but in corporate unity of the Church with Christ, whom it has come to know in the gospel and has learned to embrace in faith."}} Jesus was the only human ever elected and individuals must be "in Christ" through faith to be part of the elect.{{sfn|Walls|Dongell|2004|p=76|ps=. "The most conspicuous feature of Ephesians 1:3–2:10 is the phrase 'in Christ', which occurs twelve times in Ephesians 1:3–14 alone [...] this means that Jesus Christ himself is the chosen one, the predestined one. Whenever one is incorporated into him by grace through faith, one comes to share in Jesus' special status as chosen of God."}}{{sfn|Barth|1974|p=108|ps=. "Election in Christ must be understood as the election of God's people. Only as members of that community do individuals share in the benefits of God's gracious choice."}} Corporate election draws support from a similar concept of corporate election found in the Old Testament and Jewish law. Identity stemmed from membership in a group more than individuality.{{sfn|Abasciano|2005|p=}}

==Arminianism and other views==
===Divergence with Pelagianism===
[[File:Allegory of theological dispute-Abraham van der Eyk-MBA Lyon H1151-IMG 0428.jpg|thumb|''Allegory of the theological dispute between the Arminianists and their opponents'' by Abraham van der Eyk (1721), allegorically represents what many Arminians thought about the Synod: the Bible on the Arminian side was outweighed by the sword, representing the power of the state, and Calvin's Institutes on the other.]]

[[Religion:Pelagianism|Pelagianism]] is a doctrine denying [[Religion:Original sin|original sin]] and [[Philosophy:Total depravity|total depravity]]. No system of Arminianism founded on Arminius or Wesley denies original sin or total depravity;{{sfn|Pinson|2002|pp=138–139}} both Arminius and Wesley ''strongly'' affirmed that man's basic condition is one in which he cannot be righteous, understand God, or seek God.{{sfn|Arminius|1853b|p=192}} Arminius referred to Pelagianism as "the grand falsehood" and stated that he "must confess that I detest, from my heart, the consequences [of that theology]."{{sfn|Arminius|1853b|p=219|ps=. The entire treatise occupies pages 196–452}} David Pawson, a British pastor, decries this association as "libelous" when attributed to Arminius' or Wesley's doctrine.{{sfn|Pawson| 1996|p=106}} Most Arminians reject all accusations of Pelagianism.{{sfn|Pawson| 1996|pp= 97–98, 106}}{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|pp= 6-}}

=== Divergence with semi-Pelagianism ===
Some schools of thought, notably [[Religion:Semi-Pelagianism|semi-Pelagianism]], which teaches that the first step of Salvation is by human will,{{sfn|Stanglin|McCall|2012|p=160}} are confused as being Arminian in nature. But classical Arminianism and Wesleyan Arminianism hold that the first step of Salvation is through the [[Religion:Prevenient grace|prevenient grace]] of God, though "the subsequent grace entails a cooperative relationship."{{sfn|Schwartz|Bechtold|2015|p=165}}{{sfn|Forlines|2011|pp=20–24}} 

===Divergence with Calvinism===
The two systems of Calvinism and Arminianism share history, many doctrines, and the history of Christian theology. However, because of their differences over the doctrines of divine predestination and election, many people view these schools of thought as opposed to each other. The distinction is whether God desires to save all yet allows individuals to resist the grace offered (in the Arminian doctrine) or if God desires to save only some and grace is irresistible to those chosen (in the Calvinist doctrine). Many consider the theological differences to be crucial differences in doctrine, while others find them to be relatively minor.{{sfn|Gonzalez|2014|p=180}}

====Similarities====
* [[Philosophy:Total depravity|Total depravity]] – Arminians agree with Calvinists over the doctrine of total depravity. The differences come in the understanding of how God remedies this human depravity.{{sfn|Olson|2009|pp=31–34, 55–59}}

====Differences====
* Nature of election – Arminians hold that election to eternal salvation has the [[Religion:Conditional election|condition of faith]] attached. The Calvinist doctrine of [[Religion:Unconditional election|unconditional election]] states that salvation cannot be earned or achieved and is therefore not conditional upon any human effort, so faith is not a condition of salvation but the divinely apportioned means to it. In other words, Arminians believe that they owe their election to their faith, whereas Calvinists believe that they owe their faith to their election.
* Nature of grace – Arminians believe that, through [[Religion:Prevenient grace|grace]], God restores free will concerning salvation to all humanity, and each individual, therefore, is able either to accept the Gospel call through faith or resist it through unbelief. Calvinists hold that God's grace to enable salvation is given only to the elect and [[Religion:Irresistible grace|irresistibly]] leads to salvation.
* Extent of the atonement – Arminians, along with four-point Calvinists or Amyraldians, hold to a [[Religion:Unlimited atonement|universal atonement]] instead of the Calvinist doctrine that atonement is [[Religion:Limited atonement|limited]] to the elect only.{{sfn|Spurgeon|1858}}{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=221}} Both sides (with the exception of [[Religion:Hyper-Calvinism|hyper-Calvinists]]) believe the invitation of the gospel is universal and "must be presented to everyone [they] can reach without any distinction."{{sfn|Nicole|1995}} 
* Perseverance in faith – Arminians believe that future salvation and eternal life is secured in Christ and protected from all external forces but is [[Religion:Conditional preservation of the saints|conditional on remaining in Christ]] and can be lost through apostasy. Traditional Calvinists believe in the doctrine of the [[Religion:Perseverance of the saints|perseverance of the saints]], which says that because God chose some unto salvation and actually paid for their particular sins, he keeps them from apostasy and that those who do apostatize were never truly regenerated (that is, born again) or saved. Non-traditional Calvinists and other evangelicals advocate the similar but distinct doctrine of eternal security that teaches if a person was once saved, his or her salvation can never be in jeopardy, even if the person completely apostatizes.

===Divergence with open theism===
The doctrine of [[Religion:Open theism|open theism]] states that God is omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient, but differs on the nature of the future. Open theists claim that the future is not completely determined (or "settled") because people have not made their free decisions yet. God therefore knows the future partially in possibilities (human free actions) rather than solely certainties (divinely determined events).{{sfn|Sanders|2007|loc= Summary of Openness of God}} Some Arminians, such as professor and theologian Robert Picirilli, reject the doctrine of open theism as a "deformed Arminianism".{{sfn|Picirilli|2002|pp= 40, 59-|ps=. Picirilli actually objects so strongly to the link between Arminianism and Open theism that he devotes an entire section to his objections}} Joseph Dongell stated that "open theism actually moves beyond classical Arminianism towards [[Religion:Process theology|process theology]]."{{sfn|Walls|Dongell|2004|p=45}} There are also some Arminians, like Roger Olson, who believe Open theism to be an alternative view that a Christian can have.{{sfn|Olson|2009|p=199|loc=note 67}}

== See also ==
* [[Religion:Covenant theology|Covenant theology]]
* [[Religion:Salvation in Christianity|Salvation in Christianity]]
* [[Religion:Grace in Christianity|Grace in Christianity]]
* [[Religion:Sovereignty of God in Christianity|Sovereignty of God in Christianity]]
* [[Religion:Ordo salutis|Order of salvation]]
* [[Religion:Substitutionary atonement|Substitutionary atonement]]
** [[Religion:Satisfaction theory of atonement|Satisfaction theory]]
** [[Religion:Penal substitution|Penal theory]]
** [[Religion:Governmental theory of atonement|Governmental theory]]
* [[Religion:Justification (theology)|Justification]]
* [[Philosophy:Free will in theology|Free will in theology]]
* [[Religion:Decision theology|Decisional regeneration]]
* [[Religion:Synergism|Synergism]]
* [[Religion:Apostasy in Christianity|Apostasy in Christianity]]

== Notes and references ==
{{Reflist}}

==Sources==
{{refbegin|indent=yes}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Abasciano |first=Brian J. |title=Paul's Use of the Old Testament in Romans 9.1–9: An Intertextual and Theological Exegesis |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6_DTAwAAQBAJ |year=2005 |publisher=A&C Black |isbn=978-0-567-03073-3}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=AG |title=Assurance-Of-Salvation : Position paper |url=https://ag.org/Beliefs/Position-Papers/Assurance-Of-Salvation |agency=AG |date=2017 |access-date=15 December 2021}}
* {{cite web |last=Akin |first=James |title=A Tiptoe Through Tulip |url=https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/tiptoe-through-tulip-1163 |agency=EWTN |language=en |date=1993 |access-date=15 June 2019}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Arminius |first=Jacobus |translator-last1=Nichols |translator-first1=James |translator-last2=Bagnall |translator-first2=W. R. |title=The Works of James Arminius |publisher=Derby, Miller and Orton |location=Auburn, New York |year=1853a |url=https://archive.org/details/worksofjamesarmi01armi_0/page/n8 |volume=1}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Arminius |first=Jacobus |translator-last1=Nichols |translator-first1=James |translator-last2=Bagnall |translator-first2=W. R. |title=The Works of James Arminius |publisher=Derby and Miller |location=Auburn, New York |year=1853b |url=https://archive.org/details/worksofjamesarmi02armi/page/n6 |volume=2}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Arminius |first=Jacobus |translator-last1=Nichols |translator-first1=James |translator-last2=Bagnall |translator-first2=W. R. |title=The Works of James Arminius |publisher=Derby and Miller |location=Auburn, New York |year=1853c |url=https://archive.org/details/worksofjamesarmi03armi_0/page/n10 |volume=3}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Bangs |first=Carl |title=Arminius: A Study in the Dutch Reformation |date=1985 |place=Eugene, Oregon |editor=Wipf & Stock}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Barth |first=Markus |title=Ephesians |url=https://archive.org/details/ephesians34tari |url-access=registration |year=1974 |publisher=Doubleday |isbn=978-0-385-08037-8}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Bender |first=Harold S. |title=Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online |chapter=Arminianism |date=1953 |chapter-url=https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Arminianism}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last=Bounds |first=Christopher. T. |title=How are People Saved? The Major Views of Salvation with a Focus on Wesleyan Perspectives and their Implications |journal=Wesley and Methodist Studies |year=2011 |volume=3 |pages=31–54 |doi=10.5325/weslmethstud.3.2011.0031 |jstor=42909800 |s2cid=171804441 |doi-access=free}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last=Cameron |first=Charles M. |title=Arminius–Hero or heretic? |journal=Evangelical Quarterly |volume=64 |issue=3 |year=1992 |pages=213–227 |doi=10.1163/27725472-06403003 |s2cid=252237177 |url=https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/eq/1992-3_213.pdf}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=Cross |first1=F. L. |title=The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church |location=New York |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |date=2005}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=De Jong |first=Peter |chapter-url=https://evangelicalarminians.org/1618-opinions-of-the-remonstrants-with-a-memorial-to-james-arminius/ |title=Crisis in the Reformed Churches: Essays in Commemoration of the Great Synod of Dordt, 1618–1619 |publisher=Reformed Fellowship |year=1968 |place=Grand Rapids, Michigan |chapter=The Opinions of the Remonstrants (1618)}}
* {{Cite book |language=fr |last1=Delumeau |first1=Jean |last2=Wanegffelen |first2=Thierry |last3=Cottret |first3=Bernard |chapter=Chapitre XII. Les conflits internes du protestantisme |title=Naissance et affirmation de la Réforme |place=Paris, France |publisher=Presses Universitaires de France |date=2012}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Demarest |first=Bruce A. |title=The Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=U0_1wAEACAAJ |year=1997 |publisher=Crossway Books |isbn=978-0-89107-937-8}}
* {{Cite book |language=en |last=Denzinger |first=Henricus |title=Enchiridion Symbolorum et Definitionum |edition=30th |location=Freiburg im Breisgau |publisher=Herder |year=1954 |url=http://patristica.net/denzinger/}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last1=Dorner |first1=Isaak A. |title=History of Protestant Theology |place=Eugene, Oregon |publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers |date=2004}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Driscoll |first=Mark |title=A Call to Resurgence: Will Christianity Have a Funeral or a Future? |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wJPv1JiR6XEC |year=2013 |publisher=Tyndale House |isbn=978-1-4143-8907-3}}
* {{Cite book |language=en-us |last1=Episcopius |first1=Simon |last2=Ellis |first2=Mark A. |chapter=Introduction |title=The Arminian confession of 1621 |publisher=Pickwick Publications |place=Eugene, Oregon |date=2005 |chapter-url=https://evangelicalarminians.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Ellis.-Arminian-Confession-1621-Intro.pdf}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Forlines |first=F. Leroy |title=The Quest for Truth: Answering Life's Inescapable Questions |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LYCOTh4jpFoC |year=2001 |publisher=Randall House Publications |isbn=978-0-89265-962-3}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Forlines |first=F. Leroy |editor-first=J. Matthew |editor-last=Pinson |title=Classical Arminianism: A Theology of Salvation |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=khsYTwEACAAJ |year=2011 |publisher=Randall House |isbn=978-0-89265-607-3}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last=Gann |first=Gerald |title=Arminius on Apostasy |journal=The Arminian Magazine |year=2014 |volume=32 |issue=2 |pages=5–6 |url=https://evangelicalarminians.org/arminius-on-apostasy/}}
* {{Cite book |language=en |last=Gause |first=R. Hollis |title=Living in the Spirit: The Way of Salvation |location=Cleveland, Ohio |publisher=CPT Press |date=2007}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Gonzalez |first=Justo L. |title=The Story of Christianity |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3llUAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA180 |volume=2: The Reformation to the Present Day |year=2014 |publisher=HarperOne |isbn=978-0-06-236490-6}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last=Grider |first=J. Kenneth |title=The Nature of Wesleyan Theology |journal=Wesleyan Theological Journal |volume=17 |issue=2 |year=1982 |pages=43–57 |url=http://wesley.nnu.edu/fileadmin/imported_site/wesleyjournal/1982-wtj-17-2.pdf}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last=Gunter |first=William Stephen |title=John Wesley, a Faithful Representative of Jacobus Arminius |journal=Wesleyan Theological Journal |date=2007 |volume=42 |issue=2 |pages=65–82 |url=http://wesley.nnu.edu/fileadmin/imported_site/wesleyjournal/2007-wtj-42-2.pdf}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Harmon |first=Richard W. |title=Baptists and Other Denominations |location=Nashville, Tennessee |publisher=Convention Press |date=1984}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Heron |first=Alasdair I. C. |chapter=Arminianism |year=1999 |title=Encyclopedia of Christianity |editor-last=Fahlbusch |editor-first=Erwin |volume=1 |pages=128–129 |place=Grand Rapids, Michigan |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofch0001unse_t6f2/page/128}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Kang |first=Paul ChulHong |title=Justification: The Imputation of Christ's Righteousness from Reformation Theology to the American Great Awakening and the Korean Revivals |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jNIpgIkTMHIC |year=2006 |publisher=Peter Lang |isbn=978-0-8204-8605-5 |location=New York}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Keathley |first=Kenneth D. |editor-first=Dr. Daniel L. |editor-last=Akin |title=A Theology for the Church |chapter-url={{google books |id=ZnHxAwAAQBAJ |plain-url=yes |keywords=The Work of God: Salvation}} |year=2014 |publisher=B&H |isbn=978-1-4336-8214-8 |chapter=Ch 12. The Work of God: Salvation}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Knight |first=Henry H. |title=From Aldersgate to Azusa Street: Wesleyan, Holiness, and Pentecostal Visions |location=Eugene, Oregon |publisher=Wipf and Stock |date=2010}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Knight |first=Henry H. |title=John Wesley: Optimist of Grace |location=Eugene, Oregon |publisher=Wipf and Stock |date=2018}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Lange |first=Lyle W. |title=God So Loved the World: A Study of Christian Doctrine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5W0yOQAACAAJ |year=2005 |publisher=Northwestern Publishing House |location=Milwaukee, Wisconsin |isbn=978-0-8100-1744-3}}
* {{cite CE1913|wstitle= Arminianism |volume= 1 |last= Loughlin |first= James Francis |short=1}}
* {{cite book |language=en-uk |last=Luther |first=Martin |translator-first=Henry |translator-last=Cole |title=Martin Luther on the Bondage of the Will: Written in Answer to the Diatribe of Erasmus on Free-will. First Pub. in the Year of Our Lord 1525 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4CkBAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA66 |year=1823 |publisher=T. Bensley |location=London, England}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=MacCulloch |first1=Diarmaid |title=The Later Reformation in England 1547–1603 |location=New York |publisher=Macmillan International Higher Education |year=1990}}
* {{cite book |language=en |editor-last=Magnusson |editor-first=Magnus |title=Chambers Biographical Dictionary |title-link=Chambers Biographical Dictionary |publisher=Chambers |via={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |date=1995}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=McClintock |first1=John |last2=Strong |first2=James |chapter=Arminianism |title=The Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature |location=New York |publisher=Harper and Brothers |year=1880 |chapter-url=https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/A/arminianism.html}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Mcgonigle |first=Herbert |title=Sufficient Saving Grace |publisher=Paternoster |location=Carlisle |year=2001 |isbn=1-84227-045-1}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Muller |first=Richard A. |title=Calvin and the Reformed Tradition: On the Work of Christ and the Order of Salvation |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jUhexw_A7AUC&pg=PA45 |year=2012 |publisher=Baker Books |isbn=978-1-4412-4254-9}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last1=Nicole |first1=Roger |date=1995 |title=Covenant, Universal Call And Definite Atonement |journal=Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society |volume=38 |issue=3 |url=https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/38/38-3/38-3-pp403-412_JETS.pdf}}
* {{Cite book |language=en |last=Oakley |first=Francis |title=The Medieval Experience: Foundations of Western Cultural Singularity |location=Toronto |publisher=University of Toronto Press |date=1988}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities |location=Downers Grove, Illinois |publisher=InterVarsity Press |date=2009}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=One more quick sidebar about clarifying Arminianism |website=Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings |publisher=Patheos |date=2010 |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2010/08/a-quick-sidebar-comment-on-civility/ |access-date=2019-08-27}}
* {{cite web |language=en-us |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=My List of "Approved Denominations" |website=My evangelical, Arminian theological musings |date=2012 |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2012/11/my-list-of-approved-denominations/ |access-date=2019-09-06}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=What's Wrong with Calvinism? |website=Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings |publisher=Patheos |date=2013a |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/03/whats-wrong-with-calvinism/ |access-date=2018-09-27}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=Must One Agree with Arminius to be Arminian? |website=Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings |publisher=Patheos |date=2013b |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/11/must-one-agree-with-arminius-to-be-arminian/ |access-date=2019-12-07}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=Arminianism FAQ: Everything You Always Wanted to Know |publisher=Seebed |location=[Franklin, Tennessee] |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-62824-162-4 |url=https://store.seedbed.com/products/arminianism-faq-by-roger-e-olson?_fs=9c5cfc09-a722-400f-9bdc-11fac927fd9d}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=Arminianism Is Grace-Centered Theology |website=Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings |publisher=Patheos |date=2017 |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2017/09/arminianism-grace-centered-theology/ |access-date=2019-08-27}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Olson |first=Roger E. |title=Calvinism and Arminianism Compared |website=Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings |publisher=Patheos |date=2018 |url=https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2018/11/calvinism-and-arminianism-compared-by-roger-e-olson/ |access-date=2019-08-27}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Oropeza |first=B. J. |title=Paul and Apostasy: Eschatology, Perseverance, and Falling Away in the Corinthian Congregation |location=Tübingen |publisher=Mohr Siebeck |year=2000}}.
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Pawson |first=David |title=Once Saved, Always Saved? A Study in Perseverance and Inheritance |publisher=Hodder & Stoughton |location=London, England |year=1996 |isbn=0-340-61066-2}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Picirilli |first=Robert |title=Grace, Faith, Free Will: Contrasting Views of Salvation |publisher=Randall House |location=Nashville, Tennessee |year=2002 |isbn=0-89265-648-4}}
* {{Cite book |language=en |last=Pickar |first=C. H. |title=The New Catholic Encyclopedia |location=Washington, D.C. |orig-year=1967 |year=1981 |volume=5}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Pinson |first=J. Matthew |title=Four Views on Eternal Security |location=Grand Rapids, Michigan |publisher=Harper Collins |year=2002}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last=Pinson |first=J. Matthew |title=Will the Real Arminius Please Stand Up? A Study of the Theology of Jacobus Arminius in Light of His Interpreters |journal=Integrity: A Journal of Christian Thought |year=2003 |volume=2 |pages=121–139 |url=https://evangelicalarminians.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Pinson-on-Arminius.pdf}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Ridderbos |first=Herman |title=Paul: An Outline of His Theology |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W_OJNyhn8kgC&pg=PA351 |year=1997 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |isbn=978-0-8028-4469-9}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last1=Rupp |first1=Ernest Gordon |last2=Watson |first2=Philip Saville |title=Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation |url=https://archive.org/details/luthererasmus0000rupp |url-access=registration |year=1969 |publisher=Westminster John Knox Press |location=Louisville, Kentucky |isbn=978-0-664-24158-2}}
* {{Cite journal |language=en |last=Sanders |first=John |title=An introduction to open theism |date=July 30, 2007 |journal=Reformed Review |volume=60 |issue=2}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Satama |first=Mikko |title=Aspects of Arminian Soteriology in Methodist-Lutheran Ecumenical Dialogues in 20th and 21st Century |type=Master's Thesis |publisher=University of Helsinki, Faculty of Theology |date=2009 |hdl=10138/21669}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Sayer |first=M. James |title=The Survivor's Guide to Theology |location=Grand Rapids, Michigan |publisher=Zondervan |date=2006}}
* {{Cite web |language=en-us |last=SBC |title=The Baptist Faith and Message |work=Southern Baptist Convention |date=2000 |access-date=19 August 2019 |url=http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfm2000.asp}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Schaff |first=Phillip |chapter=The Five Arminian Articles. A.D. 1610 |title=The Creeds of Christendom |volume=3 |isbn=978-0-8010-8232-0 |place=Grand Rapids, Michigan |publisher=Baker Books |year=2007 |url=http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds3.iv.xv.html |pages=545–549}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last1=Schwartz |first1=William Andrew |last2=Bechtold |first2=John M. |title=Embracing the Past—Forging the Future: A New Generation of Wesleyan Theology |date=2015 |publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers |location=Eugene, Oregon}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Spurgeon |first=C. H. |url=https://www.spurgeon.org/resource-library/sermons/particular-redemption--2#flipbook/ |title=Particular Redemption |date=1858 |website=The Spurgeon Center |access-date=2019-05-19}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last1=Stanglin |first1=Keith D. |title=Arminius on the Assurance of Salvation |location=Boston, Massachusetts |publisher=Brill |date=2007}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last1=Stanglin |first1=Keith D. |last2=Muller |first2=Richard A. |title=Arminius, Arminianism, and Europe |chapter=Bibliographia Arminiana: A Comprehensive, Annotated Bibliography Of The Works Of Arminius |location=Boston, Massachusetts |publisher=Brill |date=2009 |pages=263–290}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=Stanglin |first1=Keith D. |last2=McCall |first2=Thomas H. |title=Jacob Arminius: Theologian of Grace |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=00ulN0NOINsC |date=15 November 2012 |publisher=Oxford University Press USA |location=New York |isbn=978-0-19-975567-7}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=Stanglin |first1=Keith D. |last2=McCall |first2=Thomas H. |title=After Arminius: A Historical Introduction to Arminian Theology |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |date=2021}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last=Sutton |first=Jerry |title=Anabaptism and James Arminius: A Study in Soteriological Kinship and Its Implications |journal=Midwestern Journal of Theology |year=2012 |volume=11 |issue=2 |pages=121–139 |url=https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/midwestern-journal-theology/11-2_054.pdf}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Thorsen |first=Don |title=An Exploration of Christian Theology |location=Grand Rapids, Michigan |publisher=Baker Books |year=2007}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Torbet |first=Robert George |title=A History of the Baptists |url=https://archive.org/details/historyofbaptist0000torb |url-access=registration |edition=3rd |year=1963 |publisher=Judson Press |isbn=978-0-8170-0074-5}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Tyacke |first=Nicholas |title=Anti-Calvinists: the rise of English Arminianism, c. 1590–1640 |url=https://archive.org/details/isbn_0198201842/page/244 |year=1990 |publisher=Clarendon |location=Oxford |isbn=978-0-19-820184-7}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last=Visconti |first=Joseph |title=The Waldensian Way to God |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4TmARujuu-EC&pg=PA253 |year=2003 |publisher=Xulon Press |isbn=978-1-59160-792-2}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=Wallace |first1=Dewey D. |title=Shapers of English Calvinism, 1660-1714: Variety, Persistence, and Transformation |date=2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last1=Walls |first1=Jerry L. |last2=Dongell |first2=Joseph R. |title=Why I Am Not a Calvinist |publisher=InterVarsity Press |location=Downers Grove, Illinois |year=2004 |isbn=0-8308-3249-1}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=Wesley |first1=John |last2=Emory |first2=John |title=The Works of the Late Reverend John Wesley |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=R_MsAQAAMAAJ |year=1835 |publisher=B. Waugh and T. Mason |location=New York |volume=2}}
* {{cite book |language=en |last1=Wesley |first1=John |title=The Works of the Rev. John Wesley |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=UNZhAAAAIAAJ |year=1827 |publisher=J.& J. Harper |location=New York |volume=8}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Witherington III |first=Ben |title=Why a Wesleyan Approach to Theology? |website=Seebed |location=[Franklin, Tennessee] |date=2013 |url=https://www.seedbed.com/why-a-wesleyan-approach-to-theology/ |access-date=2019-12-07}}
* {{cite web |language=en |last=Witzki |first=Steve |title=The Arminian Confession of 1621 and Apostasy |website=Society of Evangelical Arminians |year=2010 |access-date=2019-05-25 |url=https://evangelicalarminians.org/arminian-confession-of-1621-and-apostasy/}}
* {{cite journal |language=en |last1=Wood |first1=Darren Cushman |title=John Wesley's Use of the Atonement |journal=The Asbury Journal |date=2007 |volume=62 |issue=2 |pages=55–70 |url=https://place.asburyseminary.edu/asburyjournal/vol62/iss2/4}}
* {{cite book |language=en-us |last=Wynkoop |first=Mildred Bangs |title=Foundations of Wesleyan-Arminian Theology |location=Kansas City, Missouri |publisher=Beacon Hill Press |year=1967}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
* [http://evangelicalarminians.org/ The Society of Evangelical Arminians]
{{Clear}}
{{Christian theology}}
{{Heresies condemned by the Catholic Church}}

[[Category:Christian terminology]]
[[Category:Methodism]]

{{Sourceattribution|Arminianism}}