Roger Olson, on defining who is an Arminian:

I consider anyone a fellow Arminian who is an orthodox Protestant Christian (justification by grace alone through faith alone) who believes in human inability to initiate a saving relationship with God apart from prevenient grace (whatever they might call that), corporate election, prevenient grace (again, whatever they might call it), universal atonement, and resistible grace and does not believe God “designed, ordained, or rendered certain” the fall of humanity and all of its consequences. Yes, that’s a large tent and I invite anyone who fits that profile into/under it—whether they agree with Arminius about other matters or not and whether they call themselves Arminian or not.

"I definitely agree ambition, pride, and power can lie behind some men’s mistreatment of women. ..."

What Women Want (Leslie Leyland Fields)
"Patrick,I have no problem with the idea that the Biblical flood story, like others in ..."

It is Hyperbole. (RJS)
"I would say the same thing to the Israeli citizens as well. If you take ..."

Rich Mouw, Israel, The Palestinians, The ..."
"AHH, Check out "Noah's Flood". They have pretty excellent data the ANE was flooded ..."

It is Hyperbole. (RJS)

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • David Robinson

    I have to think that tent is anything but “large” in comparison with the tent called “evangelicals” or “Christians”. Those terms are certainly hallmarks of Arminianism. But how many evangelicals would ever use them to describe their theology without already self-identifying as an Arminian?

  • I like that!

  • James Young C. Kim

    Considering the first part of that definition, many people I’ve talked to who consider themselves Arminians are most probably Pelagians then.

  • Does an Arminian have to hold to corporate election?

    What about individual election based on foreseen faith?