A Doctrinal Battle: Calvinism Vs Baxterianism Vs. Arminianism
(Remonstrance)
Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI
Biblical Authority Ministries, March 4, 2026 (Donate)
Introduction
John Calvin and Jacob Arminius (and their followers) agree
with one another about a great many things. For instance, John Calvin and Jacob
Arminius agreed that the age
of the earth was about
6000 years ago (by today’s reckoning).
But…there were five things they disagreed on. And it split
churches all over Europe. Throughout the Western World, churches still battle
over these five points.
There is a large fracture in protestant churches around the
world. And yet, it was just a “handful” of doctrinal positions that have literally
caused churches to split. This brings me to the gigantic battle over Calvinism and
Arminianism (and their daughter Baxterianism).
That battle still rages today and often times consumes the internet.
Some churches are dogmatically Calvinistic or dogmatically Arminian and usually
they very well-versed in Scripture to tackle this debate. Then, every once in a
while, you’ll find a church, theologian, or layman that affectionally call themselves
“Calminians” by putting the two names—Calvinism and Arminianism together—they are
stuck in between! Interestingly, I’ve been in churches that hold to each of these
various beliefs.
A reimagined Council of Dort where much of this debate too place; Image requested by Bodie Hodge (ChatGPT)
Now before I go any further, and after studying this for
many years, I lean strongly in one direction. But for the sake of education, I’m
going to try to avoid letting my personal beliefs through in this discussion.
My goal is to define the positions accurately, give the history
to this debate, and then give the talking points. From this foundational
information, you should be able to understand the basics of this debate and
build on it.
From here, I want to encourage you to speak with your local
pastor, elders, and family to go to that next step of what your church and family
believes and why biblically. So, consider this like an introduction and laying
the reformational foundation to the doctrinal battle, but not the final word on
it.
The History Of The Debate
After the Reformation was in full swing, the debate between
the Remonstrance (Arminians) and Calvinists arose within the Dutch Reformed
Church. The controversy began after the teachings of the Dutch theologian
Jacobus Arminius (1560–1609), who questioned certain interpretations of
predestination commonly held in Reformed theology—Reformed theology is what
the Reformed Puritans held to as they studied Scripture after the Protestant slit
with Rome.
Baptists, Reformed, and Presbyterians all came out of the
Puritan line. Arminius did not reject grace or the necessity of faith, but he
argued that God’s election was based on God’s foreknowledge of those who
would believe and that Christ died for all people.
After Arminius died, his followers summarized his views in a
document presented to the States of Holland in 1610 called the Remonstrance. Though
some suggest that Arminius wouldn’t have held to all of these points but
perhaps 3-4 of them—this is why many Arminians of that day preferred to be
called Remonstrance instead of Arminians. But the name Arminians
stuck.
Nevertheless, this document listed five theological points:
·
Conditional election
·
Universal atonement
·
Human depravity requiring grace
·
Resistible grace
·
The possibility that believers could fall from
salvation
Because they protested the prevailing teaching, these
supporters became known as the Remonstrance. It comes from the word remonstrance
which literally means earnest reasons for opposing or grievance.
Opponents of the Remonstrance believed these teachings
weakened the Reformation doctrines of grace and were not biblically sound. To
address the controversy, the Dutch government called the Synod of Dort,
which met from 1618 to 1619. Delegates from several Reformed churches across
Europe participated. The synod rejected the five points of the Remonstrance and
produced what became known as the Canons of Dort.
These canons affirmed doctrines that later were summarized
with the acronym TULIP:
·
Total depravity
·
Unconditional election
·
Limited atonement
·
Irresistible grace
·
Perseverance of the saints
Although the acronym came later (first letter of each of
these, bolded), it reflects the theological conclusions reached at Dort
in response to the Remonstrant challenge.
What Is The Arminian Position (In Brief)?
Arminianism is a theological system based primarily on the
teachings of Jacobus Arminius and later developed by his followers—more-so his
followers. Arminian theology teaches that God genuinely desires the salvation
of all people and that Christ died for the sins of the entire world.
Jacob Arminius; Public Domain
Arminianism, as a theology, agrees that humanity is deeply
affected by sin, but it teaches that God grants prevenient grace to all
people. This prevenient grace restores the ability to respond to the
gospel. As a result, individuals can either accept or resist God’s call to
salvation.
In this system, election is conditional rather than
unconditional. God chooses those whom He foreknows will believe in Christ.
Salvation therefore depends on a genuine human response to God’s grace. Faith
is not viewed as something irresistibly produced by God but as a response that
individuals can freely give or reject.
Arminian theologians also generally teaches that believers
must continue in faith. Some Arminians hold that true believers can fall away
from salvation if they abandon faith in Christ (i.e., lose their salvation).
Arminianism differs from Calvinism by affirming conditional
election, universal atonement, resistible grace, and the possibility of falling
from grace. It differs from Baxterianism because it does not redefine
justification as part of a covenant law of grace (more on this in a moment).
Instead, it typically maintains justification by faith but that faith is a free
human response made possible by prevenient grace.
In pointed form, Arminians believe (Articles of Remonstrance):
The Five Points of the Arminian Remonstrance (1610)
- Conditional
Election
God chooses individuals for salvation based on His foreknowledge of
who will believe in Jesus Christ. Election is therefore conditioned on
faith rather than being an unconditional decree.
- Universal
Atonement
Jesus Christ died for all people and made salvation possible for everyone.
His atoning sacrifice is sufficient for all, but it is only effective for
those who believe.
- Human
Depravity with Prevenient Grace
Humanity is fallen and cannot save itself, but God grants prevenient grace
to all people. This grace restores the ability to respond freely to the
gospel.
- Resistible
Grace
The grace of God that calls people to salvation can be resisted.
Individuals have the ability to reject the work of the Holy Spirit and
refuse salvation.
- Possibility
of Falling from Grace
True believers must continue in faith. Some Arminians teach that a genuine
believer can fall away from salvation if they abandon their faith in
Christ.
What Is The Calvinist Position (In Brief)?
In short, Calvinism is a theological system that teaches the
sovereignty of God—even in salvation. It goes back to the teachings of John
Calvin (AD 1509-1564) and later summarized in the Reformed confessions; it
teaches that fallen humanity is completely unable to save itself because sin
has corrupted every aspect of human nature.
John Calvin; Public Domain
This condition is often described as total depravity.
Because humans cannot initiate salvation, God sovereignly chooses certain
individuals to be saved. This is known as unconditional election.
According to Calvinism, Christ’s atoning death was intended
specifically and effectively for those whom God has chosen, often called the
elect. This doctrine is commonly referred to as “particular” redemption (or
limited atonement). Some you may have heard of this term in the name of
churches—for instance there are Particular Baptists and General
Baptists. Particular Baptists are the Calvinistic Baptists and the General
Baptists are the Arminian Baptists.
The Holy Spirit then applies Christ’s work to the elect
through irresistible grace, meaning that when God calls someone to salvation,
that call ultimately brings them to faith. Those whom God saves will
continue in faith until the end, a doctrine known as perseverance of the
saints (e.g., once saved, always saved).
Calvinism holds that salvation is entirely by God’s grace—from
beginning to end. Faith itself is seen as a gift granted by God rather
than a human contribution to salvation. Human responsibility still exists, but
the decisive cause of salvation lies entirely in God’s sovereign will rather
than human choice.
In bulleted form, here is what Calvinists believe:
The Five Points of Calvinism (TULIP)
- Total
Depravity
Because of the Fall, every part of human nature is corrupted by sin.
People are spiritually dead and unable to come to God for salvation apart
from divine grace.
- Unconditional
Election
God chose certain individuals for salvation before the foundation of the
world, not based on foreseen faith or merit but solely according to His
sovereign will.
- Limited
Atonement (Particular Redemption)
Christ’s atoning death was specifically intended to save the elect. His
sacrifice effectively secured salvation for those whom God chose.
- Irresistible
Grace
When God calls the elect to salvation through the Holy Spirit, that call
effectively brings them to faith. God’s saving grace ultimately cannot be
resisted by those He intends to save.
- Perseverance
of the Saints
Those whom God truly saves will continue in faith until the end. Believers
are preserved by God’s power and will not ultimately fall away from
salvation.
So What Is Baxterianism?
Baxterianism, is basically a form of what modern people call
“Calminianism”—though today, there are indeed more variations of it. Baxterianism
is the classical form of it.
It is associated with the English Puritan theologian Richard
Baxter (AD 1615-1691). Baxter sought a middle position between strict Calvinism
and Arminianism, attempting to preserve God’s sovereignty while still retaining
human responsibility in the process of salvation. So naturally, Baxterian
theology tries to mediate a course between strict Calvinism and Arminianism.
Richard Baxter; Public Domain
Baxter taught that Christ’s death was made for all people
and made salvation possible for everyone, but it only becomes effective for
those who believe. In this sense, he affirmed a universal provision of the
atonement.
However, he also suggested that the new covenant contains
conditions that humans must meet, especially faith and sincere obedience. In
Baxter’s view, justification is not granted solely on the basis of Christ’s
righteousness imputed to believers.
Instead, he taught that God established a new covenant law
of grace in which faith and evangelical obedience are accepted by God as the
condition for justification. While salvation still depends on grace, human responsibility
plays a significant role in meeting the covenant conditions.
Because of this emphasis, Baxterian theology has sometimes
been described as neonomianism, meaning a “new law.” Critics, especially
within the Reformed tradition, argued that this framework weakened the doctrine
of justification by faith alone by making human obedience part of the ground or
condition of justification.
Baxterianism differs from Calvinism by rejecting limited
atonement and by redefining justification as dependent on covenant conditions
rather than solely on Christ’s imputed righteousness. It differs from
Arminianism because Baxter still affirmed a stronger role for divine grace and
did not fully adopt the Arminian concept of Arminian style free will.
Baxter agreed with parts of both systems but also rejected
elements of each. His view is also sometimes called Amyraldian, moderate
Calvinist, or neonomian by critics. Below is how Baxterians
typically relate to the five areas debated between Calvinists and Arminians.
·
Depravity—Baxterians affirmed that humanity is
deeply fallen and unable to save itself apart from God's grace. They generally
rejected the idea that humans possess natural ability to believe without divine
help. However, they tended to speak less in terms of absolute inability and
more in terms of moral corruption that requires grace for restoration. In this
sense they stood closer to Calvinists than to Arminians, though often with
softer language about human incapacity.
·
Election—Baxterians rejected strict
unconditional election as taught in Calvinism. At the same time, they did not
fully embrace the Arminian idea that election is purely based on foreseen
faith. Baxter often described election as connected with God's gracious
covenant, in which God decrees to save those who believe in Christ under the
terms of the gospel. Thus, election is tied to the covenant conditions of faith
and repentance rather than (1) an unconditional decree or (2) mere
foreknowledge.
·
Atonement—Baxterians held that Christ died for
all people in some sense. The death of Christ provided a universal basis for
offering salvation to the whole world. However, the benefits of Christ's
atonement are only applied to those who believe (i.e., the elect). This
position differs from strict Calvinism's limited atonement but also avoids the
Arminian claim that Christ equally intended to save every individual.
·
Grace—Baxterians believed that grace is
necessary for salvation and that God must enable sinners to believe. However,
they rejected the Calvinist doctrine of irresistible grace. People can resist
the gospel call and fail to meet the conditions of the new covenant. In this
respect Baxterians were closer to Arminian thought, though they often point out
that God’s grace still precedes and enables human response.
·
Perseverance—Baxterians typically rejected the
strict Calvinist doctrine of the absolute perseverance of the saints. They
taught that believers must continue in faith and sincere obedience under the
new covenant. A person who abandons faith may fall from salvation. This view
resembles the Arminian position, though Baxter framed perseverance in terms of
continuing within the covenant conditions.
As you can tell, Baxterian theology attempted to moderate
the extremes of both Calvinism and Arminianism. It retained strong views on God’s
sovereign grace and human sinfulness from the Reformed tradition while siding
with a universal provision of the atonement and conditional aspects of
salvation similar to Arminianism. The key distinctive is Baxter's concept of
the "new covenant law of grace," where faith and sincere obedience
function as the conditions under which God grants justification and
salvation.
Conclusion
As most people know, when I discuss topics like doctrines, I
use immense numbers of Scriptural references. I intentionally did not do that
this time—not that the Bible is not of importance here—it is of utmost
importance.
But I did this because so many Bible verses are the focal
point of debate on this subject. If I inserted them, I would have to discuss
the various interpretations of these verses contextually while dealing with the
debate points in the different camps. If I did, this article would be the length
of a book itself!
Furthermore, as I mentioned before, my goal was to hit the history
of the debate, the basic debate points, and define the positions. It wasn’t to
give you the biblical data. But my hope is that you will dive into the biblical
debate over the verses with your local church and family for these positions.
I encourage you study them in their biblical context and grow
and develop your understanding of the debate points in the Calvinism vs Arminian
debate (and Baxterianism). I want you to know what you believe on the subject
from a biblical perspective. And I want you to search the Scriptures
diligently like the Bereans and I’ll leave you with this one verse:
Then the brethren immediately sent
Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the
synagogue of the Jews. These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures
daily to find out whether these things were so. (Acts 17:10-11, NKJV)
□
Bodie Hodge, Ken
Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various
churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers
in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding
news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight
Council.
Bodie
launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal
website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken
on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and
universities. He is married with four children.
Mr. Hodge earned a
Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at
Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a
Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and
running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic
materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a
grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar,
Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.
His love of science
was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one
year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and
scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over
25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields.
