A discussion of Arminianism sprang up on another thread, because one of our regular commenters is an enthusiast of the sub-cult of 1888, or the “1888 message.” Somehow, don’t ask me how, Arminianism has become the bette noir of the 1888 people.
For the rest of the world, Arminianism is a reaction against, and a corrective to, the predestination and closed theology of John Calvin, in which God is sovereign and humans play no role in their own salvation. Calvin’s theology has been summarized by the acronym TULIP: 1) total inability, meaning that, in our depraved post-Fall natures, we have no ability to choose God and salvation, 2) unconditional election, meaning that God’s sovereign choice as to who will be saved does not depend upon anything human beings do or don’t do, 3) limited atonement, meaning that Christ died only for those whom God predestined to be saved, not for the whole world, 4) irresistible grace, meaning that whoever God elects to salvation has no say in the matter but will be saved, and 5) perseverance of the saints, meaning that whoever is elect to salvation will persevere to the end and be saved.
Dutch theologian Jacobus Arminius (Latinized from the Dutch, Jakob Hermanszoon) (1560 - 1609) felt that Calvin, in his effort to protect the core Reformation principle of salvation by grace alone through faith alone, had gone too far. Arminius argued that, yes, sin did put the descendants of Adam in a situation of total depravity or total inability (1 Cor. 2:14), but Christ's death on the cross affords "prevenient grace" to every human being, which means that God puts enmity against evil into our naturally sin-loving hearts (Gen. 3:15), including a natural sense of justice, an innate sense of right and wrong (Rom. 2:14-15) and an appreciation of truth and beauty (Psalm 19:1; 2 Peter 1:3), which allows us to be drawn to Jesus Christ despite our fallen condition. (John 12:32).
The result of this prevenient grace is that everyone is granted the free choice to choose Christ or to reject Him (Joshua 24:15). It follows then that Christ’s sacrifice was not limited but is available to everyone (Isa. 53:5-6; John 1:29; 1 John 2:2). Finally, God’s grace in election to salvation is resistible, and we may choose to resist it and be lost, even after having initially been converted to Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 2:20-21; Mat. 12:43-45)
The below video briefly discusses Calvin and Arminius, but is mainly focused on the American religious scene. It discusses how the Methodist Church, long the largest Protestant denomination in America, was wholly Arminian in its theology, whereas the Baptist church in America began as “general atonement” and “free will” but now is majority Calvinist, while still retaining a robust “free will” element.
Adventists follow the Arminian tradition, which we inherited through Methodism. As far as I am aware, there was no discussion of this issue in early Adventism. It was and remains a largely unexamined issue within the church today. But with Ellen White coming from the Methodism tradition, and being decidedly Arminian in her voluminous writings, and with the SDA Church’s focus on theodicy, particularly the “Great Controversy” theme of vindicating the character of God, there is no chance Adventists will ever promote a God who predestines men to be eternally lost before they are even born.
