Defining Calvinism, Arminianism, and Hyper-Calvinism - By Bryan Lewis

Before I can give an honest explanation of what I believe about Calvinism, hyper-Calvinism, and Arminianism; I think it is important to define historically and theologically; the terms. Often these words are thrown around and used in any way one seems fit, which often leads to making them void and useless in real conversation. I think that it is important to look historically at Calvinism, hyper-Calvinism, and Arminianism. First, I would like to say, I do not believe John Calvin invented the system know as Calvinism; in fact, this discussion existed long before he was born. Calvinism was systematized by those that came after John Calvin. I do not believe John Calvin was the greatest systematizer of the teachings that came to be known as t.u.l.i.p (Calvinism).


Calvinism was systematized, as a result of the controversy surrounding the Synod of Dort in 1618 and 1619. The Synod of Dort was a National Synod held by the Dutch Reformed Church, in order to settle a serious controversy in the churches that came about because of the rise of Arminianism. First, I think it is important to note, that contrary to popular belief, when Calvin died in 1564; Jacob Arminius was only four years old. So they idea that Calvin and Arminius fought over these things is wrong and those who say such things often do not have the proper historical context. Jacob Arminius grew up to become a student of Theodore Beza who was the successor of John Calvin in Geneva. Jacob Arminius was given the responsible of preparing a defense of his teachers view on “Predestination” and in the process of preparing that defense; he became convinced of the opposite position. He went on to reject “unconditional election” and “predestination” and instead began to teach that God elects on the basis of his foreknowledge that people will exercise faith in Christ. By the time Arminius died in 1609 his views had been spread widely through out the Netherlands and after his death the debate began to intensify largely due to a group of Jacob Arminius followers known as the Remonstrants. The Remonstrants formed a series of statements that were their objections to Calvinism which became known as Arminianism.

Here is a quick summary of their statements:

1. God elects on the basis of foreseen faith (i.e. what he knows will happen).

2. Believes that Christ died for every man; though only believers will be saved.

3. Man is not so corrupted by sin that he cannot believe the gospel when in is put before him. (i.e. a denial of Total Depravity) . They believe man has the natural ability to believe the gospel when he hears it.

4. Believe that God’s saving grace can be resisted.

5. Believe that those in Christ can fall away from the truth.



After seven months of sessions, the Synod of Dort rejected the Remonstrant Articles and published their own views which became known as the five points of Calvinism.

Here is a quick summary of those:

1. Unconditional Election - Election is the unchangeable purpose of God whereby before the foundation of the world, by his mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of his will, he chose in Christ to salvation a definite number of particular people out of the entire human race.

2. Limited Atonement - The death of Christ is of infinite worth and value abundantly sufficient for the sins of the whole world, but it extends only to the elect chosen from eternity.

3. Total Depravity - Man was originally created upright, but because of the fall all men are conceived in sin and by nature are children of wrath; thus, totally incapable of any saving good, prone to evil, dead in sin, and in bondage thereto, and without the regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit they are neither able or willing to return to God on their own.

4. Irresistible Grace - Those whom God chose from eternity in Christ, he calls effectually in time and confers upon them the gifts of faith and repentance, rescues them from the powers of darkness and translates them into the kingdom of His own dear son. And this effectual call can not be resisted.

5. Perseverance of the Saints - Those whom God effectually calls do not fall from grace and though they might temporarily fall into backslidings they the will persevere until they end.


Recently, in my school forum the question was asked, “What is Calvinism for me?” I agree 100% with the published views from the synod of Dort and I reject the Remonstrant Articles. Yes I believe in Tulip; however, I think it is important to realize that the acronym and order of tulip was developed sometime long after the Synod of Dort’s final published views. That is the correct historical definition.

Concerning Hyper-Calvinism: A great evil is taking place in our day, many are confusing Calvinism with hyper-Calvinism. Personally, I have observed that most Arminians do not know the difference between Calvinism and hyper-Calvinism. As a result, those who do not understand Calvinism often mumble it together with hyper-Calvinism, thus they "generalize" in thinking that every Calvinist is like the one Hyper-Calvinist they met at sometime in their pass; they then presuppose that “all” Calvinist are like him. This is a great example of "generalizing"; I believe when this happens it often exposes just how unknowledgeable and un-focused they are about the subject. There is a danger of being so unfocused as to never get to the text of Scripture itself, or, worse, to only cite it in a surface level manner; this is normal these days.

What is Hyper-Calvinism? It is a perversion of true Calvinism. It starts at the same false presupposition basically as Arminianism. In that they believe that mans responsibility is not required. The Arminian will say we think that you believe; and I quote, “well since you’re going to be saved anyway you can live how you want”. Likewise the hyper-Calvinist really believes this rubbish. On the other hand, a true Calvinist believes God is sovereign and yet man is responsible. You will never see a hyper-Calvinist witnessing to or preaching on the duty of men to repent and calling men to Christ. In fact, the really extreme hyper-Calvinist will call you an unbeliever if you dare say "good morning" to an Arminian. (I.e., they ask you a simple question: "Can an Arminian be saved? Are Arminians Christians?") If you say, "Yes, Arminians can be saved" they will tell you, "then you are not saved, either." I believe this is also a perversion of true Calvinism. I do not know who the elect are and I do not know if one is regenerated or not, since regeneration is an invisible work of God.

However, I do believe that ones view of salvation is dependant upon proper teaching concerning it; if one is teaching from a free will or Armininian perspective then he is teaching an improper way of salvation which I believe ultimately leads to a false repentance and no understanding of ones depraved sinful state; many people today have nothing more than a false since of security because of this heresy. However, I do not know who the elect are and there are probably many elect in those free will churches which God will still bring to Himself; regeneration is an invisible work of God and tomorrow more men will repent and be converted.

So I reject the hyper-Calvinistic heresy, but, at the same time I reject the idea that those who hold false doctrines should be considered "Christians" based just on their profession. If a man goes to his grave trusting in some form of decisionalism that he made one night at an alter to save him and never came to sincere repentance because he never was able to see his depraved and sinful state; then I would be surprised to see him in eternity. God throughout eternity has made his prophets and preachers preach the truth, but now day’s men get to die after preaching false doctrine for 50+ years and still make it into heaven; interesting.