Calvinism Versus Arminian
    HOW TO USE THIS WEB SITE: This web site is divided into 21 main sites as represented by the twenty one yellow buttons on the top of each page. The user can surf from one main site to another using these bottons. Within each main site use the vertical navigation bar on the left hand side to navigate from one page to another. Use the search command on the upper left to find what you are looking for.

    Join these leading companies today!
    China Hotels & China Tours
    China Tours Tailor
    China Tours and Cruises
    China Tours & China travel
    China Expetition Tours,China Holidays, China Family Tours & China Travel Guide

    China Tours & Yangtze Cruises
    Your Advertisement here
    Mahjong Solitaire
    China Culture Tour, Private China Tours, China City Tours
    China Tours, China Hotels, China Flights and YangtzeCruise,
    China Tours, China Flights, Hotel in China, Beijing Tours
    Beijing Tours & Tour of Beijing
    For advertising information, please click here

    Please Visit Our Sponsor

    Gift Shop

    Calvinism Versus Arminian


    A brief summary of Calvinism vs. Arminian can be found in the following table.

    Table 1-Comparison of Calvinism and Arminian




    Total Depravity

    Man in his fallen, sinful state, cannot receive God's spirit, nor can he understand God's truth (1 Cor 2:14), unless God elects him.

    Man can neither himself nor of his freewill do anything truly good until he chooses God and is born again of God, in Christ, through the Holy Spirit.

    Unconditional Election?

    God chose his elects before he laid the foundation of the earth (Ephesians 1:4). Those who will be saved are those chosen by the sovereign Lord (Roman 9:15, John 6:44). God does not base his election on the work of man (Ephesians 2:9).

    Since God is omnipresence, He elects those whom He foreknows will come to Him (Roman 8:29). This verse has often been used by Calvinists to proof God’s election, however, careful consideration of this verse shows emphasis of God’s foreknown ability.

    Limited Atonement or Salvation for All

    Christ's atonement is specifically for his people (John 10:15, John 17:9).

    Christ died for all man (not just for the elect), but no one except the believer has remission of sin (John 3:16, Acts 17:30, 1 Tim 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9, Rev. 22:17).

    Irresistible Grace?

    Those who are chosen by God will surely come to him (John 10:27, John 6:37).

    God's grace is not irresistible. Man has the freewill of choosing God or not. God did choose Saul (1 Sam 10:23,24) but Saul later rejected God.

    Can One Lose his Salvation?

    Perseverance of the Saints- Once saved, Christians are always saved (John 10:29, Phillipians 1:6)

    It is possible for the believer to fall from grace and loses his salvation (2 Peter 1:10). Another example is Saul, who was chosen by God to be the King but failed Him (1 Sam 15:23)

    The Definition of Free Will

    Much of the arguments between Calvinism and Arminian evolve around the term Free Will. We believe that Free Will is not a good term to use because the fallen man has a radical sin bias that blinds him to the truth about God, Christ and the Scripture (1 Cor 2:14). He suppresses the truth in unrighteousness and exchanges the truth of God for the lie (Roman 1:18, 25). Thus left alone, man will not (by his free will) choose God over evil, or light over darkness. However, after God gives us His special revelation (of His salvation plan), man begins to see light and can choose Him.

    Who Chooses Whom?

    As one can see, supports for both Calvinistic and Arminian views can readily be found in the Bible, for example, Eph 1:4, 2Th 2:13, Isa 41:8, 1Pe 1:2, and Mt 22:14 reflect God's choice over that of man's, and Rom 11:7, Rom 9:17,18, and Ex 4:21 stresses Gods sovereignty. Of course, on the flip side of the coin, there is the famous verse of those who choose to believe in God, shall not perish (John 3:16) which supports the Arminian view. So who is correct? Since both views are well supported by the Bible, we believe that both views are correct; i.e., God elected us and we choose God. At a glance, this statement seems contradicting. There are two reasons why we cannot comprehend this. First, it is not God's intention to be revealed this to us (Dan 12:9) at this time. Second, we don't understand it because of our limitations in our fallen state. Being restricted by time is one of our limitations. From an overly simplified model, let's look at how the time restriction might skew our view. In the view of a Calvinist, its God who chooses his elect even before he or she was born (Fig. 1a). (Calvinists believe that Gods grace is irresistible; once chosen by God, it is impossible for this person to lose his salvation.)

    Fig 1a Calvinists View

    Figure 1b Arminius View

    Figure 1c Gods View

    In the view of an Arminian, its man who chooses God (Fig 1b), before he dies (Arminians believe that one can lose his or her salvation; thus unless this person comes to God before he dies, he is lost in eternity). Note that the above views are only meaningful in the context of time. However, God is not constrained by time. The omnipresence concept is very difficult for us mortals to understand. In God's view, He elected believers before we were born, but at the same time, He gave us freedom to choose (Fig 1c). Of course, this is an over-simplified model. The sole intention of this model is to show the difficulty of understanding God's omnipresence and omniscience in light of mans limited knowledge in our fallen state. However, one thing is clear; God wants us to interact with Him, in His salvation plan. This is the way how God operates as indicated by other doctrines in Christianity. Therefore, although He chose us first, we are held responsible for our decision of choosing Him.

    Can We Lose Our Salvation?

    If a Christian goes astray, the Arminian camp would likely say that he or she has lost his salvation, while the Calvinist camp would say that the person was never saved in the first place. Who are we to argue if this person was genuinely saved. By the same token should we argue if Jesus died for this person, or whether he was able to resist God's grace? In doing so, are we not playing God?

    A Few Thoughts

    When stand alone, Calvinism and Arminian can lead to serious problems. Calvinists believe that they cannot lose their salvation and may pay less attention to 'the fruits' that they should be bearing as Christians. (Most of them truly believe that they are the chosen ones though). On the other hand, Arminians may slip in their spiritual lives, emphasizing that God's grace is over everything. (They truely believe that they can always exercise their freewill and come back to God when they choose to). To both, we have the following advice. Don't play God by trying to decide whether others are truly saved, but make sure that you are (Matthew 7:22,23).


    As pointed out, Calvinism and Arminian, when stand alone can lead to serious problems. Only by accepting both views can one become a better Christian. Accepting both views does NOT mean that one can selectively pick from the five points from each camp as listed in the Table 1, but by accepting all five points from both sides. One may be confused by this at a glance, however, this is how God operates as supported by a number of important doctrines in Christianity, including the Inerrancy of the Bible, virgin birth of Christ, and of course the theology of predistination.

    About the author.

    Bookmark This Page

    Send This Page To A Friend

    Place Your Ad Here For As Little As $1 Per Day

    Home | Arts | Books | Cooking | Entertainment | Games | Genealogy | Gifts | Health | History | Kids | Literatures | Music | News | Religion | Society | Software | Sports | Tea | Travel | Weightloss | Zodiac
    About Us | Add URL | Advertise with Us | Auction | Awards | Contact Us | Discussion Forum | Links | Search This Site | Send This Page | Shop | Top Ten Sites
    Copyright 2000 Yutopian, All Rights Reserved

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .