Jacobus Arminius: On Predestination & Election (Part 2 of 2)
In Monday’s post, we introduced Arminius’ theology of election. We began by defining it as God’s eternal decree, according to His good pleasure, with its basis in Christ. We considered the important role of Trinitarian grace in Arminius, which takes all boasting away from man. Finally, we examined Arminius’ view of foreknowledge, which speaks to the fact rather than the cause of a given event. Thus established, we now consider what God foreknows.
Election In Christ (for sub-points a. and b., see Part 1)
c. The Faith of the Believer
According to His foreknowledge, God graciously gives faith to believers in Christ—or as Arminius says in his definition, “believers on whom he [God] had decreed to bestow faith.” At least three components follow: (1) foreknowledge, (2) faith, and (3) believers.
i. Faith & Foreknowledge
First, God gives faith to believers according to His foreknowledge. Arminius explicitly links foreknowledge with faith. He interprets Romans 8:29, which states that “those whom He [God] foreknew, He also predestined,” to signify “foreknowledge or prescience of faith in Christ” (cf. Jn. 1:12, 3:16; Gal. 3:9; Heb. 11:6).[1]
ii. Persevering Faith & Conditional Election
Second, God gives faith to believers as a gift. Arminius is careful to emphasize that faith is not a meritorious work of man, but a gracious gift of God. He writes that faith does not result “from our own strength,” but is “produced in us by the free gift of God.”[2] Elsewhere he states, “[F]aith is the mere gift of the gracious mercy of God.”[3] So insistent is Arminius to guard against any charge of Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism that Picirilli describes him as being “at pains to deny that faith results from our own strength.”[4]
In addition, this gift is both indispensable and conditional. Speaking to the first point, Arminius writes, “Without faith, it is impossible for any man to please God, or to be saved.”[5] Speaking to its conditionality, he writes, “[N]o one is in Christ, except by faith; for Christ dwells in our hearts by faith, and we are engrafted and incorporated in him by faith.”[6] By except, Arminius introduces a conditional clause, thereby affirming conditional election.[7] F. Leroy Forlines writes,
The ground of election is that God foreknew us as being in Christ (in union with Christ, Thus, He chose us in Christ. That is what Ephesians 1:4 tells us. Since the condition for being in Christ is faith in Christ, it necessarily implied that God foreknew that the person would meet the condition of faith.[8]
Arminius continues,
[T]hose persons who have been grafted into Christ by true faith, and have thus been made partakers of his life-giving Spirit, possess sufficient powers [or strength] to . . . gain the victory over those enemies—yet not without the assistance of the grace of the same Holy Spirit.[9]
By so stating, Arminius shows that election is conditional upon persevering faith, which is given according to God’s grace.
iii. Believers & Individual Election
Third, God gives faith to believers. Arminius writes, “It follows then that God acknowledges His own, and chooses to eternal life no sinner, unless He considers him as a believer in Christ, and as made one with him by faith.”[10] Like his prior statement about faith, he continues, “Election is made in Christ. But no one is in Christ, except he is a believer. Therefore no one is elected in Christ, unless he is a believer.”[11] For this proposition, Arminius turns to Acts 16:31, which states, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved.” “The word ‘believe,’” he writes, “has the force of a demand or requirement; and that phrase ‘thou shalt be saved’ has that of a persuasion, by means of a good that is promised.”[12] He goes onto add, “This truth is so clear and perspicuous, that the denial of it would be a proof of great perversity or of extreme unskilfulness.”[13]
By emphasizing the individual “believer,” Arminius affirms individual election. That is, there is an individual component to God’s election of believers. God elects “particular persons.”[14] As Picirilli puts it, “What Arminius taught was election of individuals as believers, but individuals nevertheless.”[15]
Again, Arminius is careful to emphasize that the designation of believer in no way signifies a meritorious work of man: “But we give the name of ‘believers’ not to those who would be such by their own merits or strength, but to those who by the gratuitous and peculiar kindness of God would believe in Christ (Rom 9:32; Gal 2:20; Matt 11:25; 13:11; John 6:44; Phil 1:29).”[16] Arminius further presses this point by identifying believers as “sinners” (Mt. 9:13; 11:28), which he interprets to signify the lack of personal ability.[17] Thus, contrary to John Wesley (1703-91) and certain later Arminians, Arminius himself appears to affirm some version of the simul justus et peccator Reformation principle.[18]
iv. Grace & Free Will
“What part does free will play?” we may ask. For Arminius, free will does not refer to some capacity that mankind has in himself to accomplish salvation. Instead, it is the medium through which salvation is effected. Citing Bernardus Silvestris (1085-1178), Arminius writes, “Take away free will, and nothing will be left to be saved. Take away grace, and nothing will be left as the source of salvation. . . . No one, except God, is able to bestow salvation; and nothing, except free will, is capable of receiving it.”[19] To read more on this topic, see “Arminius on the Human Condition,” by Jackson Watts.
Election Unto Righteousness
Having discussed the basis of election in Christ, Arminius explains its purpose unto righteousness. Referring back to the definition of election, this follows God’s “good pleasure . . . to justify, adopt, and endow with everlasting life, to the praise of his own glorious grace, believers.” At different times, he uses different terms to describe this, including end, fruit, goal, object, and purpose.
Arminius divides the purpose of election into two categories: (1) grace, which refers to the commencement and increase of election; and (2) glory, which refers to the complete consummation of union.[20] More specifically, with supporting quotes from Arminius, this includes, but is not limited to:
– Justification: “This very thing—that God reckons the righteousness of Christ to have been performed for us and for our benefit—is the cause why God imputes to us for righteousness our faith, which has Christ and his righteousness for its object and foundation, and why he justifies us by faith, from faith, and through faith.”[21]
– Adoption (Jn. 1:12; Rom. 8:29-30; Gal. 4:5-7, 19; Eph. 1:5): The “purpose” of predestination “is that of adopting believers in Christ to sonship.”[22]
– Redemption and Forgiveness (Mt. 11:28; Rom. 10:13-15; Gal. 1:4; Eph. 1:7; 2 Tim. 1:9; 1 Pet. 2:9-10; 3:19; 2 Pet. 2:20): Election includes redemption “from the pollutions and corruptions of this world.”[23]
– Spiritual Blessings (1 Cor. 1:9; Gal. 2:20; Eph. 1:3): God has called us “unto ‘the fellowship of Jesus Christ’ and of his kingdom and its benefits. . . . [B]eing united unto Him as their Head, [we] may derive from him life, sensation, motion, and a plenitude of every spiritual blessing.”[24]
– Conformity to Jesus Christ, the Head (Eph. 1:22; 5:23; Heb. 5:9): God has elected believers to “conformity to the image of Christ.”[25]
– Everlasting Righteousness (Dan. 9:24): This decree “is election to righteousness, or righteousness itself.”[26]
– Eternal life (Jn. 3:15-16; 6:51): Another “purpose” of predestination “is that of adopting believers in Christ to . . . eternal life.”[27]
– Glory of God (Rom. 11:36; Eph. 1:6): “The end of Predestination is the praise of the glorious grace of God”[28]; and, “[N]ot only the act of Predestination, but also every other divine act has ‘the illustration of the glory of God’ as its final cause.”[29]
As this list is non-exhaustive and surveys only some of the purposes of election, it simply serves as an introduction to the topic; much more should be said. However, for more on this general topic, see “Arminius on the Sanctification of the Believer,” by Jeremy Craft.
Conclusion
Arminius reminds us that we can and should champion the doctrines of predestination and election. After all, these are biblical categories. Far from preferring that we underemphasize, or even eliminate these doctrines from our theology, Arminius writes that they “ought to resound, not only within private walls and in schools, but also in the assemblies of the saints and in the church of God.”[30] Indeed, great is the encouragement that a robust view of these doctrines offers.
In addition, although Classical Arminians and Calvinists will likely not agree on the basis of election, perhaps these groups’ dialogue can be improved and strengthened on the purpose of election. Although we can legitimately disagree as to how it occurs, we can celebrate its fruit. As one body in Christ (Jn. 17:20-23; Eph. 4:4-6), we can rejoice for what God has done, is doing, and will do in our own lives, as well as the broader Church and world.
____________________
[1] James Arminius, “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks: Essential Writings on Predestination, Free Will, and the Nature of God, John Wagner (ed.) (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2011), 117.
[2] Arminius, “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 117.
[3] Ibid., “A Letter to Hippolytus A. Collibus,” inArminius Speaks, 375.
[4] Robert E. Picirilli, Grace, Faith, Free Will: Contrasting Views of Salvation: Calvinism & Arminianism (Nashville: Randall House, 2002), 161; see also F. Leroy Forlines, who says, “Faith in no way whatever gets any consideration as any form of merit that would form the smallest part of the ground of my justification” (F. Leroy Forlines, The Quest for Truth: Answering Life’s Inescapable Questions (Nashville: Randall House, 2001), 265).
[5] Arminius, “A Defense Against Several Theological Articles Extensively Distributed,” in Arminius Speaks, 313. He writes further, “There is therefore in God no other will, by which he wills anyone to be absolutely saved without consideration of faith” (313).
[6] Ibid., “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 116.
[7] See Forlines, 257-58, 403; Picirill, 53-55.
[8] Forlines, 403 (italics in original).
[9] James Arminius, The Writings of James Arminius (three vols.), tr. James Nichols and W.R. Bagnall (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1956), I:254; cited in Picirilli, 197 (italics and brackets included in original).
[10] Arminius, “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 116.
[11] Ibid., “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 2,” in Arminius Speaks, 270.
[12] Ibid., “A Defense Against Several Theological Articles Extensively Distributed,” in Arminius Speaks, 312.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid., The Writings, I;247, 248; see also II:494, 495; cited in Picirilli, 50.
[15] Picirilli, 52 (italics in original); see also Forlines, 365-67.
[16] Arminius, “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 10.
[17] See Ibid., 9-10; and “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 96.
[18] See Roger E. Olsen, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2006), 154-55; and Roger E. Olsen, “Arminian Theology Is Evangelical Theology,” Patheos, January 24, 2011, accessed June 12, 2014, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2011/01/arminian-theology-is-evangelical-theology-long/.
[19] Arminius, “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 7-8.
[20] Ibid., 9-10.
[21] Ibid., “A Letter to Hippolytus A. Collibus,” in Arminius Speaks, 378; cf. “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 8.
[22] Ibid., “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 2,” in Arminius Speaks, 270; cf. “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 8-10; and “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 96. In addition, Arminius remarks further that this occurs in the Spirit of grace and faith” (“Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 9).
[23] Ibid., “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 24; cf. “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 96.
[24] Ibid., 24; cf. 9-10.
[25] Ibid., ““An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 118; cf. “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 9-10.
[26] Ibid., “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 2,” in Arminius Speaks, 270; cf. “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 9-10.
[27] Ibid., “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 2,” in Arminius Speaks, 270; cf. “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 8-10; and “An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 96.
[28] Ibid., “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 10.
[29] Ibid., ““An Examination of Predestination and Grace in Perkins’ Pamphlet: Part 1,” in Arminius Speaks, 97.
[30] Ibid., “Public Disputations,” in Arminius Speaks, 10.
Recent Comments