# Arminians, Hell, and Damnable Heresy



## steven-nemes (Jun 1, 2009)

What exactly would constitute as damnable belief?



> Romans 10
> 
> 9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
> 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.
> ...



Paul teaches that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. What sorts of beliefs would conflict with this? Would Arminianism, which denies that God actively ordains and determines all happenings, be contrary to the idea that Jesus is Lord? On the surface I don't see why. 

The argument could be along the lines of "confessing Christ's lordship involves your confessing the Calvinistic understanding of divine sovereignty, etc." I don't see why that should be true. First of all, predestination and election and such are not clearly understood or implied by the text at all. They do fit nicely with the text, but you can't find those doctrines here. Plus, an Arminian can and often does confess that Jesus is Lord, God is in control of the happenings of the universe, and still hold that human beings have free will--although inconsistently and appeals to mystery. I see no reason to think that this inconsistency is enough to damn them, though; surely somewhere, at some point in all our noetic structures, there are beliefs that we hold that are contradictory and inconsistent, but are we to be damned for that? I should think not.

And clearly Arminians believe that God raised Jesus from the dead.

So why should they be damned, as some have said?

And what exactly is the line between damnable heresy and simply differences in theology?


----------



## moral necessity (Jun 1, 2009)

I think the line is to be drawn with the gospel. Any trust in a righteouness other than that of Christ's imputed unto us, is a false gospel; and, any addition of something to the righteousness of Christ, as if to say that his alone is insufficient for justification, is heresy as well. The rest of the doctrines will vary with the amount of enlightenment the Holy Spirit gives to each individual believer. These burdens should be bore by brothers in patience, humility, and prayer, trusting as Paul did that God would "make these things known to you as well." (Phil. 3:15)


----------



## steven-nemes (Jun 1, 2009)

I think you have a very good point. Now, Arminianism, for example, would very well be a doctrine that could be damnable if some sort of false gospel could be deduced from its premises, but I am doubtful of that, and so I think the claims that Arminians are not brethren are improper.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jun 2, 2009)

Arminians believe in salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone. The difference is in their understanding of the nature of grace, but they would readily agree that they are saved by grace through faith. There's no need to go into why their position is wrong (and the implications thereof), but at the most basic level their soteriology is correct. 

I agree with R. Scott Clark that true heresy is something contra to one of the major creeds - Apostles', Nicene, etc. Based on that definition, Arminianism isn't truly heretical. It is incorrect with significant problematic implications, but I would not called it a damnable heresy.


----------



## Joseph Scibbe (Jun 2, 2009)

I dont think that Arminians are heretics or are damned.A person who believes in salvation by grace alone through faith alone is saved. I have met Calvinists who I do not believe to be truly regenrate but have met many Arminians who I believe are.


----------

