The debate between Arminians and Calvinists has been going on for over 400 years and has caused numerous divisions in churches, friend groups, and even families. At the center of this topic is the Calvinist doctrine of Total Depravity, the initial letter of the famous acronym TULIP. According to the Arminians, this doctrine has limited the grace of God and has led many believers to a misunderstood vision of God's intentions. This boiling debate, however, should not be addressed as it has been in the past, with anger and hostility, but must be managed with love and grace, so as to imitate the love and grace of the same God we speak of. . Although this speech is a statement written by a fallen man and therefore, like all human works, will be partial, we must not forget that we remain on the same team and serve the same loving God. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay As in any debate, both sides will always bring their own assumptions to the table, which take part in the formation of their current position. Everyone is already biased before entering a debate, so it's important to establish these positions before things get heated. It's possible that both sides agree on more than they think. There are many assumptions held by Arminian that are important to their understanding of free will, grace and their refutation of TULIP which plays an important role in their doctrine of salvation. These assumptions are not linked exclusively to Armenian doctrine but are those in which validity was placed during theological development. The first of many is that of God's infinite grace. No one with an orthodox theology will refute this statement, but for Arminians this phrase is a picture of God's character that seems to suggest that God's grace is willing to be extended as far as it is necessary to reach all those who proclaim their need and their desire. Just as was stated in the previous paragraph, the debate is not a disagreement with the assumptions but rather with what they mean for the respective parties. Those in Calvinist circles could easily say, "yes, God's grace is infinite, but for those whom He has predestined and chosen according to His will and grace." While on the other hand the Arminian might say: "The infinite grace of God is offered for all mankind and whoever hears and believes can hold on to this grace." Neither of these statements is inherently unbiblical, and both make their points effectively. Even though this is a debate about a particular doctrine of salvation, it is not a question of salvation, both groups are still saved and the opinion they have does not determine whether or not they are. While personally the Arminian position is more compelling, that does not mean there is no validity to each position. It is quite obvious that Calvinists seem to have stronger evidence for their understanding of salvation and election, while the evidence for the Arminian one is all in their understanding. of God's character. The number one argument from the Arminian perspective is that it is God's will for all humanity to be saved, however, due to free will that same humanity is able to resist His call and unfortunately live eternity separated from Him, if they wish. The Calvinist side begins with that of predestination, almost a dirty word in some circles, and with the election of God's elect. “He has predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will” ( Eph 1,5). At first glance, this word has a very Calvinist connotation and it seemsstrongly affirm that God previously chose those who would be saved and appointed them as His elect. Strong's Concordance also translates it to mean "to preordain, predetermine, or delimit in advance" (from Strong's Greek), so it seems to be a strong place to start. Turning then to Romans, Paul says, “Therefore it does not depend on human will or effort, but on God, who has mercy” (Romans 9:16). With this we enter the Calvinist view of irresistible grace, the belief that once the Holy Spirit helps you you cannot resist him. Using the passage from the Letter to the Romans seems to be a simple way to support this view, but it could just as easily be translated to mean that man cannot save himself and therefore must rely on God to do so. Moving on to the biblical evidence of Arminianism, we turn to the book of 2 Peter which states: "The Lord is not slow in his promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wanting anyone to perish." but let all come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). This seems to be the stronghold of the Arminians, the belief that God does not want anyone to perish and therefore would not predestine some to go to Hell. This would seem to contradict the will that He has already made known. Other verses seem to suggest the same thing in different words, "he who wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4). The word “desires” suggests that even though God wants all to be saved, He knows that some will not turn to Him. Finally, we have a passage from John that says: “and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all to me ” (Jn 12:32). This verse seems to propose that Jesus will attract all humanity to Himself and it will be up to them in their free will to choose to run after Him or not. There is much biblical evidence on both sides of the debate and thus gives validity to both as acceptable options. According to our textbook, speaking about the doctrine of salvation during the patristic era, "No ecumenical council dealt with controversies regarding salvation until the 5th century, so the patristic era shows a notable lack of clarity or consensus on the subject” (K. Keathley, p.551). Although there is this lack of clarity, we are aware of some problems that emerged during this period. One of the problems was that of sacramentalism, the belief in receiving grace by participating in the supper of Lord and being baptized. Specifically in the area of ​​predestination in the patristic period we look to Origen who believed that God's foreknowledge was based on the merit of the person, knowing how it would turn out and then making a decision based on that knowledge. The medieval era was not much different, except that they took this idea of ​​sacramentalism to its extreme consequences. They “were seen as concrete and visible means through which internal grace is received, further sanctifying the practicing believer” (K). . Keathley, p.552). Also around this time the idea of ​​double predestination arose with the monk Gottschalk of Orbais stating that God had chosen both people to be saved and to go to Hell. In the Reformation, belief in salvation through grace alone returned to the forefront of the Church with advocates such as Luther and Calvin. It was during this period that Calvin described the difference between Sanctification and Justification, most likely the foundational discovery of the Reformation. It was also during this period that Calvinism began and took hold as an Orthodox doctrine. The modern era has been a great debate regarding the Doctrine of Salvation; supporters of both sides developed arguments.