The Remonstrants<\/strong> were followers of the Dutch theologian Jacobus Arminius (1560\u20131609)<\/strong>. After Arminius died, about 44 of his supporters presented a document called the Remonstrance<\/strong> to the government of the Netherlands in 1610<\/strong>. Because they submitted this “remonstrance” (a formal protest or petition), they became known as Remonstrants<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Their goal was not to leave the Reformed churches<\/strong>, but to reform them by challenging certain teachings about predestination and salvation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the time, the Dutch Reformed Church was strongly Calvinistic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Remonstrants believed that some Calvinist teachings had gone beyond what Scripture taught<\/strong>. Their views created such controversy that an international church council was called:<\/p>\n\n\n\n These became the classic summary of early Arminian theology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n God chooses people for salvation based on His foreknowledge of who will believe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remonstrants:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n God elects believers.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Calvinists:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n God elects people before they believe.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Christ died for everyone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n His death is sufficient for all people, although only believers receive its benefits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remonstrants:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Christ died for every person.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Calvinists (Dort):<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Christ’s death was intended specifically to save the elect (often called definite or particular atonement).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n This surprises many people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Remonstrants did not<\/strong> believe people could save themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They agreed that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Where they differed was that they believed God’s grace can be resisted<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n God genuinely calls people to salvation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, people can resist or reject His grace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Calvinists responded that God’s saving grace is effectual<\/strong>\u2014it certainly brings the elect to faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Originally, the Remonstrants were cautious.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They said Scripture should be studied further regarding whether a true believer could finally fall away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Later Remonstrant theologians generally concluded that a believer could<\/strong> fall from grace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Synod of Dort answered each Remonstrant article point by point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although the acronym TULIP<\/strong> was created centuries later, it summarizes Dort’s responses:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Notice something interesting:<\/p>\n\n\n\n TULIP was a response to the Remonstrants\u2014not the other way around.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n No.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is an important distinction, especially since we’ve discussed Pelagianism before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Remonstrants believed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Pelagius taught that people could obey God without special grace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Remonstrants rejected that idea completely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Calvinists often accused them of leaning toward Semi-Pelagianism<\/strong>, but the Remonstrants themselves denied that charge and insisted that grace is necessary for every step toward salvation. Historians generally distinguish classical Arminianism from Pelagianism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many Traditional Southern Baptists<\/strong> today would agree with the Remonstrants on several points:<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, many Traditional Baptists would not<\/strong> agree with the later Remonstrant position that a true believer can lose salvation. Most hold to eternal security<\/strong> (“once saved, always saved”), distinguishing them from classical Arminianism on that point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nearly every modern discussion of Calvinism vs. Arminianism<\/strong> traces back to this debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The sequence is:<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, whenever someone today discusses unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, or perseverance of the saints, they are often revisiting issues first formally debated between the Remonstrants<\/strong> and the Counter-Remonstrants<\/strong> in the early 1600s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWhy were they important?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\nThe Five Articles of Remonstrance<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
1. Conditional Election<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n2. Universal Atonement<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n\n\n\n3. Human Inability<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n4. Resistible Grace<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n5. Perseverance<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nHow did Calvinists respond?<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
Remonstrants<\/th> Canons of Dort<\/th><\/tr><\/thead> Conditional election<\/td> Unconditional election<\/td><\/tr> Universal atonement<\/td> Definite (particular) atonement<\/td><\/tr> Grace can be resisted<\/td> Irresistible (effectual) grace<\/td><\/tr> Election based on foreseen faith<\/td> Election based solely on God’s sovereign purpose<\/td><\/tr> Believers may fall away<\/td> Perseverance of the saints<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWere the Remonstrants Pelagians?<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\nWhere would many Southern Baptists fit?<\/h1>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\nWhy the Remonstrants still matter<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n