Edwards on Arminianism

A few years ago I decided that I needed to mature in my spiritual life and began to take a great interest in reading and understanding doctrine. One of my first areas of consideration was the doctrine of Predestination (being the wonderfully volatile subject it is) and was introduced to a wonderful book called Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented by Steele, Thomas and Quinn. After reading the book, and the relevant scripture that is found in abundance within, I became a fully convinced, badge wearing Five Pointer (although more of a TUPIP than a TULIP). University then held many interesting conversations amongst my Christian peers and I tried my hardest to defend Calvinism.

However, I have always struggled with the challenge of knowing how firm to hold onto the set of doctrine known as Calvinism. Should it be something that I refuse no ground to? Or should I be willing to sacrifice it in the face of Arminianistic brothers and sisters in the name of unity? Iain Murray shares some helpful thoughts from Jonathan Edwards:

"...he saw, as Owen before him, that Christianity itself could not long be upheld if concessions were made to accommodate objections to Calvinism. The danger from Arminianism lay not simply in a few particular errors but in its whole tendency. While it claimed to be based upon Scripture the popular strength of its arguments depended on the contention that Calvinistic belief is not reconcilable with human reason... This mode off argument by-passed two facts; first, that reason is 'impaired, depraved and corrupted', and second, that 'the gospel requires men to believe things above reason merely on the authority of Divine revelation.' If all the doctrines 'which have anything of spiritual mystery in them and so not absolutely reconcilable unto reason as corrupt and carnal' were judged as Arminianism judges the doctrine of sovereign grace, how much Christianity would remain?" Jonathan Edwards: A New Biography by Iain Murray (published by Banner of Truth)