How to Use this Site

The autobiography Who Am I , and the posts Arminius did not Found the Arminian System and The Five Pillars of Arminianism will always appear on this page. To read other posts, look at Topics for this New Site at the sidebar to your right. Find the topic you would like to read, click that topic, and enjoy.

Who am I?

My name, Latinized, is Jacobus Arminius (also known as James Arminius, James being a derivative of Jacob). The Latinizing of my name was a normal custom for men during my time (I chose the Latinzed name Arminius after the first-century Germanic chieftain remembered for his resistance of the Romans).

My birth name was Jakob Harmenszoon, named after my father Herman Jacobszoon (thus Hermannson ~ Herman's son) who died before I was born, leaving my mother, Angelica, a young widow with many children for which to care.

I was born October 10, 1559 in a small Holland village called Oudewater (pronounced Ooo-de-vah-ter). I realize there is confusion over the exact date of my birth due to a lack of records, and for that there is good reason.

In 1559 Oudewater was under Spanish control and dominated still by Roman Catholocism. After the death of my father a local holy and pious priest named Theodore Aemilius, sympathetic towards Protestants, acted in loco parentis, taking me into his care. He fed and clothed me, and gave me an outstanding education in Utrecht. Though studies were long, from early morning until seven in the evening, Latin and Greek being taught to young boys during my time, I was so grateful to God for His providence in my life by using His servant Aemilius.

In 1575 I enrolled to study at the University of Marburg, founded by Philip of Hese in 1527 by the guidance of Melanchthon (Martin Luther's successor). I had barely settled in when I received news, in August of that same year, that the Spanish had ransacked my hometown of Oudewater, killing nearly everyone, including my entire family. After about two weeks of non-stop weeping and sobbing I returned to my hometown for one last glimpse, though it would be in ruins, or I would die in the attempt.

Distraught and perplexed, I bade farewell to my little hometown and my family massacred by the Spaniards, making my return trip on foot, some 250 miles. I continued living in Marburg for another year before matriculating at the University of Leiden (founded by none other than John Calvin himself).

While at Leiden I was mentored by Calvin's successor Theodore Beza. I had nothing but the utmost respect for both Beza and the writings of Calvin. As a matter of fact, I once noted that, Next to the study of the Scriptures which I earnestly inculcate, I exhort my pupils to peruse Calvin's Commentaries, which I extol in loftier terms than Helmich himself; for I affirm that he excels beyond comparison in the interpretation of Scripture, and that his commentaries ought to be more highly valued than all that is handed down to us by the library of the fathers . . . but with discrimination, like the writings of all men. [1]

I was the first graduate of the University of Leiden, educated in theology, Latin, Greek, the Church fathers, and the logic both of Aristotle and Ramus. My Thesis, which can be found here and here, was that in Romans 7:14-25 Paul was speaking of an unregenerate man, and not of the regenerate child of God, as was supposed by many Reformed theologians during my time.

It was not, however, until I began preaching through Romans 9 that I found myself at odds with a few of my Calvinist colleagues. There were many professors, pastors, and laymen who agreed with my sentiments, that God had not predestined some to eternal torment based merely on an eternal decree. After all, did Paul not also teach that God had chosen to save those who would believe (1 Corinthians 1:21)? You may read my interpretation of Romans 9 here; however, I did not get the privilege of completing my exegesis.

The year 1609 would lend itself to both sadness and joy. I would sadly leave my wife, Elizabeth, and nine children to the Provider of us all, and joyously join my Lord and Savior, along with the three children born to me and Lizzy which died in infancy shortly after their baptism. Tuberculosis is an infectious disease caused by bacteria. It most commonly affects the lungs and causes one to waste away. On October 19, 1609 I met the Son of God, bowed at His feet in adoration, and praised the God of Justice for saving a sinner such as I.

Grateful thanks to Carl O. Bangs for his invalubale book Arminius: A Study in the Dutch Reformation (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 1971).

1 Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 8 vols. (1907-10; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952-53), 8:280.

Arminius did not Found the Arminian System

I was by no means the first to teach what has now, in your modern time, come to be known as Arminianism. Whether the matters of Unconditional or Conditional Election and Predestination, General or Limited Atonement, or Resistible or Irresistible Grace, these were being debated before my time. I was not the founder, per se, the originator of Arminianism proper. My conclusions were held by other men before my time. Also see: My Influences.

Scholar F. Stuart Clarke gets at the heart of what I am saying by noting, "There are, however, a few biographical points which have not, in my opinion, been given full weight in earlier works, of which two should be mentioned at the outset.

"The first influence of Johannes Drusius, whom Arminius came to know when Drusius arrived in Leiden as Professor of Hebrew in 1577. Arminius himself left Leiden in 1581, and the two may not even have met personally afterwards, yet Arminius kept up occasional correspondence with Drusius at least between 1595 and 1608, and we have more of his letters to Drusius than to any other correspondent with the exception of Uitenbogaert.

"In view of this it seems surprising that [Calvinist Richard A.] Muller never mentions Drusius, and that Dekker, though he lists all Arminius' letters to him, only mentions Drusius briefly and occasionally. But one of Arminius' last letters is evidence for a particularly deep and lasting impression made by the older man on the younger:

"'You have two qualities, above all others, which I cannot but extol; The FIRST is, that you openly declare that you are still in doubt and suspend your judgment, where, after the arguments have been produced, you are afraid of giving a full assent. The SECOND is, that you do not refuse at this period of your life to change your opinions, even after you have been for many years so well versed in these matters.

"'I love these two properties so much the more, because they are very close to my own intentions . . . All religious doctrines are not equally necessary. For this (belief) . . . I am calumniated by many persons, who carry the knowledge of all things enclosed within the casket of their own breast, from which, whenever they are interrogated on any subject, they suppose that they utter nothing less than oracles which must be received with open hearts and ears. Nor am I ashamed to have occasionally forsaken some sentiments instilled by my masters, since it appears to me that I can prove by the most forcible arguments that such a change has been made for the better.'

"Drusius was at this time (6 April 1608) Professor at Franeker, and an opponent of Arminius' opponent Lubbertus, who was also teaching at Franeker. We see that even before Arminius went to Geneva, he had learned from Drusius not to accept blindly everything he was told, but to examine it, suspend judgment if necessary, and not to fear to change his opinions if he must. It is likely that he stuck to this approach during his university career and after.

"The second point is that when he [Arminius] signed the agreement in 1581 to devote his life to the service of the Amsterdam church on completion of his studies, he had no expectation of doing anything else, and when he finally took up his duties in 1588 nothing had changed, in that respect at least.

"Unlike some theologians who then as now spent little or no time in pastoral work in churches, Arminius spent over two-thirds of his ministry in them. This cannot have failed to influence his views. He wanted to give all he could to preaching and pastoral work, and at the same time not to neglect philosophical and theological studies, but to keep abreast of contemporary developments and to let ministerial work and academic studies cross-fertilise [sic].

"There is plenty of general evidence for this in his letters and writings, but it is harder to pinpoint the precise effect of his pastoral experience on his theology. The clearest, longest and most interesting evidence unfortunately comes from almost the end of his pastoral career, during the plague of 1602. The subject matter is the nature of justifying faith, and we know that he had been concerned about the nature of faith and its relation to salvation at least since his letter to Uitenbogaert of 8 September 1592." [1]

"In 1605 the battle became intense [for Arminius]," writes Carl Bangs. "In early February Arminius was chosen Rector Magnificus, chief officer of the university, elected annually. The election reflected the esteem of a majority of his colleagues, but the attacks on him continued.

"Casper Brandt reports that all his words and deeds were subjected to minute scrutiny by his enemies, who were searching for a basis for accusations. If he so much as duplicated an argument used by a Catholic, Lutheran, or any other outside the Reformed churches, it was said that he had gone over to the enemy.

"When he followed the practice of the late Franciscus Junius and handed to his students written theses for their examination, it was charged against him as a crime. Although his public statements were frank enough, his opponents took to alleging that he taught privately things other than he spoke publicly.

"Reports spread throughout the country that new doctrines were being taught at Leiden. The Leiden pastor Hommius led the pack, and finally Arminius challenged him. In the presence of Uitenbogaert and Hommius' colleague Borrius, Arminius answered Hommius' charges. Hommius was silenced for the moment and agreed 'to institute an inquiry after truth.' He told his friends later, however, that upon returning home, he had prayed to God for light and it had been revealed to him to continue in his opinion.

"Arminius wrote to Uitenbogaert: 'Well done, worthy investigator of the truth! As if God, forsooth, grants His Holy Spirit at one prayer in such large bestowals as to impart the ability to judge, in matters so great, without any liability of error!'" [2]

In keeping with what modern day Arminians believe the bible teaches concerning election, they maintain that election unto salvation is conditioned upon faith in Christ Jesus, because that is what the Bible actually teaches (1 Cor. 1:21), and I agree wholeheartedly.

Forlines writes, "In conditional efficacious decrees, God efficaciously decreed that certain things would take place when certain conditions were met. These decrees were made because God, on the basis of His foreknowledge, knew that these conditions would be met.

"An example of this kind of decree would be the justification and regeneration of a person when he believes. It is for this reason that I can say that a believer's justification and regeneration were efficaciously decreed. Justification and regeneration are monergistic. They are solely the work of God." [3]

Calvinists may be unaware that Arminians believe in monergism in any fashion whatsoever. Justification and regeneration, however, must be monergistic (the sole work of God), because people cannot justify, nor regenerate, themselves ~ God is the One who justifies and regenerates, and He does so after a person believes/trusts/ places one's faith in Christ Jesus (Col. 2:13).

We affirm, then, that the entire act of salvation is both monergistic (God's part in justifying, forgiving, regenerating upon one's faith, sanctifying, etc.) and synergistic (since God frees a sinner from his or her bondage to sin in order to freely choose ~ or reject ~ Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior; for God does not believe for the sinner ~ sinners must actually believe for themselves).

"God was well-pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe" (1 Cor. 1:21, TNIV, emphasis mine).

"When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave [lit. having forgiven] us all our sins, having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross" (Col. 2:13 TNIV, emphasis mine).

Thus God justifies and forgives us by His grace through our faith in Christ Jesus; and then God regenerates the believer. Faith, therefore, precedes regeneration, according to the Bible. And election unto salvation is conditioned upon one's union with Christ.

1 F. Stuart Clarke, The Ground of Election: Jacobus Arminus' Doctrine of the Work and Person of Christ (Waynesboro: Paternoster, 2006), 11-12.

2 Carl Bangs, Arminius: A Study in the Dutch Reformation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1971), 265.

3 F. Leroy Forlines, The Quest for Truth (Nashville: Randall House, 2001), 342.

The Five Pillars of Arminianism

Nearly a decade after my departure into the presence of Christ Jesus, those colleagues of mine who followed after my theology, called the Remonstrants (pronounced re-`mon-strunts), drew up five main articles of the faith which we found wanting in the present Calvinistic framework of Beza's Calvinism.

What follows is what has come to be known as the Five Pillars of Arminianism; which they wrote, in an effort to appeal to the States General, being much persecuted by the supralapsarian Calvinists of their day. These pillar foundations of biblical truths would ultimately lead to the Synod of Dort, which would also culminate in the infamous acronym TULIP.

Article I.

That God, by an eternal, unchangeable purpose in Jesus Christ His Son, before the foundation of the world, has determined, out of the fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ's sake, and through Christ, those who, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, shall believe on this His Son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end.

And, on the other hand, to leave the incorrigible and unbelieving in sin and under wrath, and to condemn them as alienate from Christ, according to the word of the gospel in John 3:36: "He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that believes not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on him," and according to other passages of Scripture also.

Article II.

That, agreeably thereunto, Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, died for all men and for every man, so that He has obtained for them all, by His death on the cross, redemption and the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins except the believer, according to the word of the gospel of John 3:16: "God so [or thus] loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." And in the First Epistle of John 2:2: "And He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

Article III.

That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, in as much as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving faith eminently is); but that it is needful that he be born again of God in Christ, through His Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, or will, and all his powers, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the Word of Christ, John 15:5: "Without Me you all [plural] can do nothing."

Article IV.

That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of all good, even to this extent, that the regenerate man himself, without prevenient or assisting, awakening, following and co-operative grace, can neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements, that can be conceived, must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ.

But as respects the mode of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible, in as much as it is written concerning many, that they have resisted the Holy Spirit, Acts 7:51, and elsewhere in many places.

Article V.

That those who are incorporated into Christ by a true faith, and have thereby become partakers of His life-giving Spirit, have thereby full power to strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own flesh, and to win the victory; it being well understood that it is ever through the assisting grace of the Holy Spirit; and that Jesus Christ assists them through His Spirit in all temptations, extends to them His hand, and if only they are ready for the conflict, and desire His help, and are not inactive, keeps them from falling, so that they, by no craft or power of Satan, can be mislead nor plucked out of Christ's hands, according to the Word of Christ, John 10:28: "Neither shall any man pluck them out of My hand."

But whether they are capable, through negligence, of forsaking again the first beginnings of their life in Christ, of again returning to this present evil world (2 Tim. 4:10), of turning away from the holy doctrine which was delivered unto them (2 Tim. 4:4; Titus 1:14; Heb. 12:25; 2 Peter 2:21), of losing a good conscience (1 Tim. 4:2), of becoming devoid of grace (2 Cor. 6:1; Gal. 1:16; 2:21; 5:4); that must be more particularly determined out of the Holy Scripture, before we ourselves can teach it with the full persuasion of our minds.

Adapted from what is presented in Laurence M. Vance, The Other Side of Calvinism (Pensacola, Florida: Vance Publications, 1999), 597, 598, 601-606.