Reformed Theology and the Doctrines of Grace — Unit 9: Arminian, Wesleyan and Amyraldian Objections Answered

Key Verse

"The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deuteronomy 29:29, NKJV)

Learning Objectives

When you finish this unit, you should be able to:

1. Name the three families of objection (Arminian, Wesleyan and Amyraldian) and say where each came from.

2. State the Arminian objections to unconditional election and to the Reformed view of grace, in their own best terms.

3. State the Wesleyan emphasis on God's universal love, prevenient grace and holiness, and the Reformed answer.

4. State the Amyraldian objection to particular redemption and answer it.

5. Explain how a Reformed pastor can disagree with these brothers and sisters while honoring them.

The Voice of This Course

This course is written from inside the Reformed and Presbyterian tradition, for students who belong to it. It is conservative and confessional. We hold the Bible to be the inspired and inerrant Word of God, and we confess the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, the Canons of Dort, or the Westminster Standards. This unit must describe the views of our opponents as their own best teachers would, and only then give our answer. A teacher who cannot state another view fairly has not earned the right to answer it. We write as brothers speaking to brothers (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

Three Families of Objection

Arminian. Jacob Arminius was a Dutch Reformed pastor and professor who died in 1609. After his death, his followers presented a statement of five articles, the Remonstrance, in 1610, and they are called the Remonstrants. The Synod of Dort (1618-19) answered them in the Canons of Dort. Course 1, Unit 6 told that history.

Wesleyan. John Wesley (1703-1791), an Anglican priest and the founder of the Methodist movement, held the Arminian view of election and added his own emphases: God's love for every person, a stress on holiness and Christian perfection, and the assurance of present pardon. The Wesleyan, Methodist and Holiness churches are his heirs.

Amyraldian. Moïse Amyraut was a French Reformed professor at Saumur in the seventeenth century. He taught what is often called hypothetical universalism: Christ died for all people in the sense that salvation is available to all who believe, but God decreed to give faith only to the elect. Amyraldians are not Arminians. They hold to unconditional election and to the Spirit's effectual call, and they differ on the extent of the atonement.

What We Share

Arminian and Wesleyan Christians confess the Trinity, the deity and the atoning death of Christ, the resurrection, justification by grace through faith, and the new birth. They teach that fallen people cannot save themselves apart from grace, and the Remonstrance itself says that without grace man can do nothing good. Their objections come from a sincere love for God's character and a concern for holiness and evangelism. Amyraldians share even more with us.

Objection One: Election Should Be Conditional

Stated in their best terms. The Remonstrants taught that God, before the world began, chose in Christ those whom He foresaw would believe and persevere. They said that this protects God's justice and love. God truly wishes all to be saved, and the Bible calls all people to repent (Acts 17:30). If God chose some and passed over others without regard to anything in them, then, they say, His call to the non-elect would not be sincere. They hold that "whom He foreknew" in Romans 8:29 means that God foreknew who would believe. Faith is made possible by grace, but whether a person accepts that grace is his own act, and election responds to it.

The Reformed answer. We make five points.

First, foreknowledge in the Bible is relational. When God says He "knew" Israel (Amos 3:2), He means that He set His love on them. In Romans 8:29, the object of "foreknew" is "whom," that is, persons, and not their faith. Paul does not write that God foreknew what they would do.

Second, Paul says that we were chosen "in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love" (Ephesians 1:4). We were chosen to be holy, and not because we would be. If election were based on foreseen faith, then faith would come first, and God's choice would follow.

Third, faith itself is given (Ephesians 2:8). Foreseen faith is therefore the result of God's work, and cannot be the reason for His choice.

Fourth, Romans 9 teaches that election does not rest on works. Jacob and Esau were not yet born when God spoke, "that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls" (Romans 9:11). Paul expects the objection and answers with God's right as Creator (Romans 9:14-21), not by saying that God foresaw their faith.

Fifth, the charge of insincerity. Reformed teachers distinguish God's revealed will, the commands and invitations given to all, from His secret purpose. Deuteronomy 29:29, our key verse, draws this line. We preach Christ to every sinner, because that is God's command. Units 5 and 10 take this up.

Objection Two: Christ Died for Everyone

Stated in their best terms. Arminian, Wesleyan and Amyraldian Christians together read the Bible's "all" and "world" at face value. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life" (John 3:16). God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4). Peter says that the Lord is "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). John writes that Christ "is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2). If Christ did not die for all, they ask, how can the gospel be honestly offered to all, and on what ground can any sinner be told, "Christ died for you"?

The Reformed answer. We agree with much of this. Christ's death has infinite worth, enough for the sins of the whole world, and the gospel is to be offered to all without distinction; Dort says both in its Second Head. The question is God's intention in the cross. Did Christ die to make salvation possible for all, or to secure it for His people?

First, the Bible speaks of Christ's death as accomplishing something. He "gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed" (Titus 2:14). He is the Good Shepherd who "lays down His life for the sheep" (John 10:11), and he "loved the church and gave Himself for her" (Ephesians 5:25). The language is of redemption secured.

Second, the words "world" and "all" in the New Testament have more than one sense. In John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2, the point is largely that salvation is not limited to Israel. It extends to people of every nation. In 1 Timothy 2:1-4, Paul has just spoken of praying for kings and all in authority, so "all men" naturally means all kinds of people. And 2 Peter 3:9 is written "toward us," to believers, as the passage says; the patience of the Lord is for the sake of the elect, whom He will bring to repentance. Reformed teachers do not read every text in exactly the same way, but the pattern holds.

Third, if Christ paid for the sins of all, what of the sins of those who perish? Either they are punished for sins already paid, or Christ's payment was not for those sins. Reformed teachers have argued that the first is inconsistent with God's justice, and that the only other way to avoid the second is to teach that all are saved in the end.

Fourth, the objection that the gospel cannot be offered to all unless Christ died for all misunderstands the offer. We command all to repent and believe, and we promise that whoever comes will be received (John 6:37). We do not need to know who the elect are in order to preach.

Objection Three: Grace Must Be Resisted or Rejected Freely

Stated in their best terms. Wesleyan teachers hold that God's "prevenient" grace comes before every person and restores a measure of freedom and light. Without it, fallen people could not answer God at all; with it, they can say yes or no. Love that was forced would not be love. Wesley preached against predestination in his sermon "Free Grace," and his motive was a burning love for lost sinners.

The Reformed answer. Unit 6 gave the answer in full. In brief: the new birth is God's work (John 1:13), the Spirit makes us willing, and the difference between a believer and an unbeliever lies in God's gracious choice. Paul asks, "For who makes you differ from another?" (1 Corinthians 4:7). Reformed teachers also rejoice in the common grace that God gives to all, but we deny that it is enough to save.

Objection Four: A Believer Can Fall Away

Unit 8 stated and answered this objection. Christ's promise, "they shall never perish," stands, and the warnings are the means by which God keeps His people.

Objection Five: This Makes God the Author of Sin

Stated in their best terms. If God has ordained all that comes to pass, say Arminian and Wesleyan critics, then sin and the damnation of the lost are decreed by Him. This makes God the author of evil, takes away human responsibility and cannot be squared with a God who is love.

The Reformed answer. The Westminster Confession, chapter 3, teaches that God from all eternity ordained whatever comes to pass, and in the same sentence says that He is not the author of sin, that no violence is offered to the will of the creatures, and that the liberty or contingency of second causes is not taken away. Scripture itself holds both truths together. Joseph told his brothers, "But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good" (Genesis 50:20). The brothers acted by their own evil will and were guilty, and God's purpose was good. Acts 2:23 says the same of the cross. This is a mystery, not a contradiction (Romans 11:33).

The Wesleyan Doctrine of Holiness

Wesleyan teachers hold that a believer can in this life be so filled with love for God and neighbor that he is free from willful sin, which they call entire sanctification or Christian perfection. They fear that Reformed teaching makes people content to stay in sin. We honor the Wesleyan hunger for holiness, which rebukes our complacency. We answer that Scripture says, "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us" (1 John 1:8). The Westminster Confession, chapter 13, teaches that sanctification is real but incomplete in this life, and that there remain remnants of corruption in every part. We press forward, as Paul did (Philippians 3:12-14).

Objection Six: The Amyraldian Middle Way

Stated in their best terms. Amyraldians hold to election and effectual calling as we do, and want also to keep the universal language of Scripture. So they teach that God, out of love for fallen humanity, first willed that Christ would die for all on the condition of faith, and then, seeing that none would believe, decreed to give faith to the elect. In this way, Christ's death is for all, and the elect alone are saved by it. They say this gives a true basis for the free offer and preserves the biblical language about the world. They note that respected Reformed men have held it.

The Reformed answer. We treat this position with particular respect, since it holds firmly to the sovereignty of grace. Reformed churches have differed on how far they tolerate it, and historians debate whether the Westminster Assembly excluded it or left room for it. We make four points.

First, it divides the work of the Trinity. The Father chooses a people, the Son dies for all, and the Spirit applies the benefit to the elect. But Scripture shows the three persons working for the same people. In Romans 8:32-34, Paul argues from the cross to the rest of salvation: God "did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all," and with Him will freely give us all things. The same Christ who died intercedes, and Jesus said in John 17:9, "I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me." His death and His prayer reach the same people.

Second, the hypothetical grant of salvation to all gives no one anything more. If no one can believe without the Spirit's gift, and that gift is given only to the elect, the Amyraldian and the Reformed pastor preach in the same way, on the same basis: God's command and promise.

Third, it places a universal saving intention in the cross, and sets it beside a second purpose to give faith to only some. Reformed teaching places the universal call in the offer, and the saving intention of the cross in God's single purpose.

Fourth, the Canons of Dort teach in the Second Head that the death of Christ is sufficient for all, and that its saving power was intended for the elect (II.3, 8). We believe this expresses both the width of the offer and the certainty of the result.

Honoring Those Who Disagree

State their view in words they would accept. Begin from what we share. Go to the text with them. Admit the difficulties on our own side. Do not use "Arminian" or "Calvinist" as an insult. Scripture commands us to be gentle, "in humility correcting those who are in opposition" (2 Timothy 2:25).

Pastoral Application

A Methodist neighbor, who is a sincere man and loves the Lord, visits your Bible study. He hears a lesson on election. Afterward he says, "My God is a God of love for everyone. Yours picks favorites."

First, listen without defending yourself. His concern is real.

Second, restate his view: "You are saying that God loves all people, and that a God who chose only some would not be fair. Is that right?" Let him correct you.

Third, tell him what you also believe: God loves the world, and the gospel is for everyone.

Fourth, ask him to look with you at Ephesians 1:3-6 and Romans 9. Disagreement over election is not a reason to end a friendship.

Summary

Three families of Christians object to Reformed teaching. Arminians hold that election is based on foreseen faith and that grace can be resisted. Wesleyans stress God's universal love, prevenient grace and entire sanctification. Amyraldians hold to election but teach that Christ died for all on condition of faith. We stated their best arguments: that God's love is universal, that the Bible uses "world" and "all," that love must be free, and that sovereignty seems to make God the author of sin. We answered that foreknowledge is relational, faith is a gift, Christ's death accomplished redemption for His people, the Trinity works as one, and God's decree does not make Him the author of sin. We hold these convictions with humility and honor our brothers who differ.

Further Reading

• Canons of Dort (1619), including the Rejection of Errors, which records the Remonstrant positions.

• The Remonstrance (1610), five articles, a primary source for the Arminian position.

• John Wesley, sermon "Free Grace" (1739), a primary source for the Wesleyan objection.

• Westminster Confession of Faith (1646-47), chapters 3, 9, 10 and 13.

• John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Beveridge translation, 1845), Book III, chapters 21 to 24.

• Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (1872-73), the sections on election and on the extent of the atonement.

Submit Exam & Check Pass Reset