![arminius arminius](https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/barbarians/images/3/37/Barbarians-Promo-S1E04-A-New-Reik-03-Arminius.jpg)
The terms of the article, however, he accepted. It is the article on “eternal election,” which affirms that God delivers and preserves “all whom he, in his eternal and unchangeable council, of mere goodness hath elected in Jesus Christ our Lord.” His scruple was this: Does the “all” refer to believers, or is it an arbitrary decree to bestow faith? He accepted the first interpretation and rejected the latter. He reiterated his assent to the Confession and Catechism, offering only one scruple-over the interpretation but not the words of the sixteenth article of the Belgic Confession. On Romans 9, according to Bangs, 1 Arminius acknowledged that he had taken a different interpretation from the standard Reformed one, but he insisted that he agreed with the Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechism. In his sermons on Romans 9, he rejected the standard Reformed uses of this text to support unconditional election. In his sermons on Romans 7, he rejected the standard Reformed interpretation that originated with Calvin and argued instead that Paul’s presentation of internal struggles reflects the problems of an unregenerate person rather than a regenerate Christian. He found himself in trouble for his preaching on Romans 7 in 1591 and on Romans 9 in 1593. His preaching was a very detailed study of the text. Robert Godfrey examines Jacob Arminius and the Calvinists who opposed his teaching.Įarly in his ministerial work in Amsterdam, Arminius decided to preach on Romans and Malachi, pursuing interests he had had at least since his time in Basel. In this excerpt from Saving the Reformation, Dr.