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 Jakob Hermanszoon) (1560 - 1609) felt that Calvin, in his effort to protect salvation by faith, had gone too far. He argued that, yes, sin did put the descendants of Adam in a situation of total depravity or total inability, but Christ's death on the cross affords "prevenient grace" to every human being ("I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed." Gen. 3:15). This means that through grace everyone is granted the free choice to choose Christ or to reject Him.
It followed that Christ’s sacrifice was not limited but potentially available to everyone. And through prevenient grace, human beings, despite our fallen condition, have free will to accept Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf. Finally, God’s grace in election to salvation is resistible, and we may choose to resist it and be lost.
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 general atonement or “free will” element.
Adventists follow the Arminian tradition through Methodism. As far as I am aware, there was no discussion of this issue in early Adventism. It simply was not an issue, and remains a largely unexamined issue within the church today. But with Ellen White being 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.