“Thou art an offence unto Me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.”

Matt 16:23

“Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?”

Isa. 2:22

“And the serpent said unto the woman… ye shall be as gods.”

Gen. 3:4-5



Order of Contents

Articles  5
Books  4+
Quotes  2

Whether Arminians may be Saved, Whether they should be Allowed to be
.       Church Members, & Whether they ought to be Disciplined?  1
Latin  1





Davenant, John – Question 49, ‘Sufficient Assistance is Not Given to Every One for Salvation’  in The Determinations, or Resolutions of Certain Theological Questions, Publicly Discussed in the University of Cambridge  trans. Josiah Allport  (1634; 1846), pp. 501-508  bound at the end of John Davenant, A Treatise on Justification, or the Disputatio de Justitia...  trans. Josiah Allport  (1631; London, 1846), vol. 2

Rutherford, Samuel –  ‘The Doctrine of Universal Atonement Proven False & Unscriptural’  from his Christ Dying & Drawing Sinners to Himself, no date, 88 paragraphs



Cunningham, William

‘The Arminian Controversy’  from his Historical Theology, vol. 2, ch. 25, pp. 383-525

‘Calvinism & Arminianism’, p. 418 ff.  52 pp.  from his Reformers & the Theology of the Reformation

Hodge, Charles

‘Arminianism & Grace’  (1881)  31 pp.

‘Finney’s Lectures on Theology’  from the Princeton Review (April, 1847) and subsequently printed in Hodge’s collection of articles, Essays & Reviews  (1857), pp. 245-84

Charles Finney was a strongly semi-pelagian, man-oriented revivalist whose Lectures on Theology have had a strong and detrimental influence on the American church.





Featley, Daniel

A Parallel: of New-Old Pelgiarminian Error  (1626)

Featley was a Westminster divine.  These two works are significantly the same.

Pelagius Redivivus. Or Pelagius Raked Out of the Ashes by Arminius & his Scholars  (London, 1626)

Du Moulin, Peter – The Anatomy of Arminianism…  (1619; London, 1635)  420 pp.

Moulin (1568-1658) was a reformed Huguenot minister in France who also resided in England for some years.  For background on Moulin and this work, see Donald Sinnema, ch. 4, ‘The French Reformed Churches, Arminianism and the Synod of Dort (1618-1619)’ in ed. Klauber, The Theology of the French Reformed Churches…  (RHB, 2014).

Rutherford, Samuel – Rutherford’s Examination of Arminianism: the Tables of Contents with Excerpts from Every Chapter  trans. Charles Johnson & Travis Fentiman  (1639-42; 1668 / 2019)  135 pp.

The closest thing Rutherford wrote to systematic theology was his Examination of Arminianism.  As Arminians erred on nearly every point of theology, refuting their rising, popular system gave Rutherford the opportunity to survey the gamut of theology.  Rutherford addresses topics here nowhere addressed in his books written in English.

For the first time, a substantial portion of this work has been translated into English.  Learn theology from the greatest Scottish theologian in Church history.

Baillie, Robert – A Scotch Antidote Against the English Infection of Arminianism, which little book may be (through God’s blessing) very useful to preserve those that are yet found in the faith, from the Infection of Mr. John Goodwin’s Great Book  (1652)

Taylor, Francis – God’s Glory in Man’s Happiness, with the Freeness of his Grace in Electing Us, Together with Many Arminian Objections Answered  Buy  (London, 1654)  227 pp.

Taylor was a Westminste divine.



Scott, Thomas – The Articles of the Synod of Dort, Translated from the Latin, with Notes…  (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1856)  with an Introductory Essay by Samuel Miller

Daniel Tilenus (1563-1633), once a German-born, reformed, French professor of theology, became an Arminian (c. 1613) and was deposed from his professorship in Sedan in the winter of 1619-20, due to the outworkings of the Synod of Dort (1618-19).  In 1623 he wrote a tract critical of the Synod of Dort and included in it a highly distorted, five point summary of the doctrines of Dort which made the Synod’s canons out to be hyper-calvinistic.  This was translated into English, whereas the canons of Dort were not.

“By the early nineteenth century it was sometimes simply assumed in English circles that the Tilenus abbreviation truly represented the teachings of the canons.” (Theology of the French Reformed Churches, p. 133)

In 1811, Scott (1747–1821), an evangelical Anglican minister, sought to defend Calvinism in a book entitled, Remarks on the Refutation of Calvinism by George Tomline.  Tomline had provided the summary by Tilenus; Scott assumed it was an accurate representation of the canons of the Synod of Dort, though he argued that it did not represent true Calvinism.

Once Scott realized his mistake, he desired to make a reparation for his contributing to a gross misrepresentation.  In the 2nd edition of the work in 1817, Scott included his translation into English of the genuine canons of the Synod of Dort, with a comparison and censure of the abbreviation by Tilenus.  In 1818 Scott published the translation of the canons separately in The Articles of the Synod of Dort.

For more background to the work, see The Theology of the French Reformed Churches...  (RHB, 2014), especially pp. 133-4.

The historical introduction to the Synod of Dort by Samuel Miller, the second professor at Old Princeton Seminary, is excellent.

Girardeau, John – Calvinism & Evangelical Arminianism  Buy  (1890)  584 pp.

Evangelical Arminianism is the popular teaching of the church at large today.  It is often hard to pin down in order to analyze carefully.  Here Girardeau carefully articulates it and contrasts it to the Biblical truths of Election, Reprobation and Justification, which fully exposes the inadequacies of Evangelical Arminianism.  An easy to read book, but in-depth with much meat.




John ‘Rabbi’ Duncan

“Hyper-Calvinism is all house and no door: Arminianism is all door and no house.”

“Calvinism and Pelagianism are the only consistent systems.  Arminianism is utterly inconsistent and irrational.”



Whether Arminians may be Saved, Whether they should be Allowed to be Church Members & Whether they ought to be Disciplined?

Whether Arminians may be Saved & Whether they Should be Allowed to be Church Members?


Of Fundamental, Secondary & Tertiary Matters of Christianity, & of Communion & Discipline Therein


Whether Arminians ought to come under the Discipline of the Church?


The French Reformed Churches  1623

The National Synod of Charenton, ch. 18, in John Quick, Synodicon in Gallia Reformata…  (London, 1692), p. 109

“10.  The Province of the Isle of France demanded what course should be taken with professed Arminians, and such as spread abroad in discourse their dogmas and tenets.  This Synod decrees that all dogmatizers be prosecuted with Church-censures; And as for such as are known Arminians, but do not disperse their opinions, our pastors and consistories shall deal with them for three months time in order to reclaim them unto sound doctrine: But in case they continue obstinate after that time, they shall be debarred communion with us at the Lord’s Table.”





Rutherford, Samuel – The Examination of Arminianism  (1639-43; Utrecht, 1668)  850 pp.  Extended ToC




Related Pages

The Doctrines of Grace

The Decrees of God