You know what really surprises people? When I tell them Arminians and Calvinists actually agree on more than they fight about. I remember sitting in a seminary coffee shop years ago, watching two guys nearly come to blows over limited atonement. Later that week, I noticed those same two working together at a soup kitchen. Makes you wonder what foundational beliefs keep them serving the same God despite doctrinal wars.
It's easy to get lost in the TULIP vs. free will debates. But strip away the heated arguments, and you'll find bedrock truths both sides lean on. These assumptions shared by Arminians and Calvinists aren't just academic footnotes – they shape how millions live their faith daily. Let's cut through the noise and examine what really unites these theological rivals.
The Battle Lines We All Know
Before digging into common ground, let's quickly map the trenches. Calvinism (Reformed theology) centers on God's absolute sovereignty, summarized in TULIP: Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, Perseverance of saints. Arminianism emphasizes human free will and conditional election, countering with unlimited atonement and resistible grace. Whole denominations have split over these differences. But honestly? The shouting matches often miss the shared foundation underneath.
| Theological Point | Calvinist Position | Arminian Position |
|---|---|---|
| Divine Sovereignty | God controls all events | God permits human freedom |
| Human Will | Bound by sin without grace | Free to accept/reject grace |
| Atonement Scope | Limited to the elect | Unlimited for all |
| Election Basis | God's unconditional choice | God's foreknowledge of faith |
See how they clash? Yet when I've moderated debates, both sides quote the same Bible verses before diverging. That's our first clue to deeper unity.
Core Assumptions Hidden in Plain Sight
Beneath the fireworks lie eight critical assumptions shared by Arminians and Calvinists. These aren't minor agreements – they're the load-bearing walls of Christian theology.
Scripture as Supreme Authority
Both camps treat the Bible as God's inspired, authoritative Word. Whether debating predestination or free will, they wrestle with the same texts. Romans 8-9? Ephesians 1? John 6? They've all spilled ink on these. I've seen Calvinists and Arminians jointly defend biblical inerrancy against liberal theology. That shared scripture-first approach fundamentally shapes how they develop doctrines.
Funny story: My Arminian friend and I (leaning Calvinist) once spent a flight comparing study Bibles. We agreed on 95% of the notes despite our famous disagreement on Romans 9. Goes to show how much common ground exists in the text itself.
Human Brokenness and God's Rescue
Total depravity gets nuanced treatment, but both affirm humanity's radical need for salvation. Calvinists emphasize humanity's inability to choose God without regeneration. Arminians stress that while spiritually sick, people retain the capacity to respond to God's prevenient grace. Either way, they agree: left to ourselves, we're toast. Salvation starts with God's initiative.
| Shared Concept | Calvinist Expression | Arminian Expression |
|---|---|---|
| Human Condition | Dead in sin (Eph 2:1) | Spiritually incapacitated |
| Salvation Initiator | God regenerates first | God enables response first |
| Grace Necessity | Absolutely essential | Absolutely essential |
This shared anthropology explains why both reject Pelagianism. I wish they'd emphasize this agreement more often.
The Non-Negotiable Trinity
You'll find identical Trinitarian theology in Westminster Confession (Calvinist) and Remonstrant articles (Arminian). Both affirm:
- One God in three persons
- Co-equal and co-eternal
- Distinct roles in creation and redemption
Jesus as the Only Rescue Route
Calvinists and Arminians stand shoulder-to-shoulder on exclusivity. Both insist:
- Salvation comes solely through Christ's atoning work
- No other names or paths bring redemption (Acts 4:12)
- The cross is central to God's saving plan
Faith as the Hand Receiving Grace
Here's where it gets interesting. Both reject works-righteousness vehemently. They agree faith is:
- The instrument of justification
- Not meritorious in itself
- Rooted in God's grace alone
God's Unlimited Knowledge and Power
Open theism gets rejected by both camps. They affirm classical attributes:
- God knows all actual and potential events
- Nothing occurs outside divine permission
- God can sovereignly override human choices
Let's be real: Some theologians exaggerate differences for tribal loyalty. But when pressed, most admit these assumptions shared by Arminians and Calvinists form Christianity's structural skeleton. Lose these, and you're outside historical orthodoxy.
Why These Shared Beliefs Matter Practically
These aren't abstract concepts. They shape real-life faith:
- Worship music: Both sing "Amazing Grace" and "In Christ Alone" without theological edits
- Evangelism: Both preach Christ crucified and call for repentance
- Prayer patterns: Both appeal to God's sovereignty in suffering
- Sacraments: Both practice baptism and communion as means of grace
I've worshiped in both traditions. The liturgical similarities outweigh the differences. The Lord's Prayer? Same words. Communion elements? Same meaning. That shared spiritual DNA matters more than we admit.
Frequently Overlooked Common Ground
Beyond core doctrines, these shared convictions often fly under the radar:
Revelation Through Creation
Both affirm general revelation (Romans 1:20). Nature declares God's glory. Conscience reflects divine law. This shared assumption fuels Christian engagement with science and art.
Eschatological Hope
However they chart end times, both agree on:
- Christ's physical return
- Bodily resurrection
- Final judgment
- Eternal destiny (heaven/hell)
Satan as Real Adversary
Both reject demythologizing the devil. Spiritual warfare language appears in John Piper (Calvinist) and Charles Stanley (Arminian) alike. This shared assumption undergirds prayer for protection and deliverance ministries.
Why Do These Assumptions Shared by Arminians and Calvinists Get Ignored?
In my observation, three factors overshadow common ground:
- Tribal branding: Denominations market distinctives
- Academic specialization: Scholars probe disagreements more than agreements
- Confirmation bias: We notice differences that confirm our tribe
Frankly, I think internet forums amplify conflicts. Real-world ministry reveals more cooperation.
I used to avoid my Arminian uncle at family gatherings. Then we served together after Hurricane Katrina. Building houses for survivors, our theological debates faded. What remained? Shared dependence on Christ. That experience changed how I view these discussions.
Common Questions About Shared Assumptions
Do these shared assumptions mean Arminians and Calvinists can share communion?
Absolutely. Major denominations (like Anglicans) host both at the same table. The mutual recognition of Christ's real presence and saving work transcends the election debate. Excluding someone over this would violate their shared belief in the body of Christ.
How do these assumptions affect missionary partnerships?
They enable remarkable cooperation. Groups like the Lausanne Movement unite Calvinists (John Piper) and Arminians (Billy Graham) in global evangelism. Why? Because assumptions shared by Arminians and Calvinists about Scripture, human lostness, and Christ's uniqueness create common purpose. I've seen this firsthand in Romania where Reformed and Wesleyan planters share resources.
Would a focus on shared assumptions weaken doctrinal convictions?
Not necessarily. You can acknowledge shared foundations while maintaining distinct positions. In fact, clarifying common ground often leads to more constructive debates. It's like chess players agreeing on the board and rules before competing.
Which shared assumption is most surprising to newcomers?
God's sovereignty over salvation. Both affirm God must initiate redemption – they just describe the mechanics differently. Even Arminius insisted salvation originates with God, not human will. This surprises many who think Arminianism equals human-centered theology.
Practical Implications for Everyday Believers
Why should ordinary Christians care about these assumptions shared by Arminians and Calvinists?
| Situation | How Shared Beliefs Help |
|---|---|
| Choosing a church | Focus on core assumptions rather than secondary debates |
| Interpreting suffering | Both affirm God's sovereignty and goodness amid pain |
| Sharing faith | Common ground provides gospel-sharing confidence |
| Navigating doubt | Shared scripture authority offers stable foundation |
When my daughter asked why different churches teach different things, we explored these shared foundations first. It gave her theological anchors amid diversity.
A Critical Look at the Debate Culture
Let's be honest: Some theologians exploit differences for book sales. I've cringed at conference debates becoming performance art. One famous debater actually told me, "Controversy moves merch." That's not just unfortunate – it betrays the shared values they claim to uphold.
And some online forums? Toxic. They magnify disagreements until common assumptions shared by Arminians and Calvinists vanish from view. I've watched good people leave the faith over caricatures created in comment sections. We must do better.
Moving Forward Together
Recognizing these shared assumptions changes how we engage. It allows:
- Calvinists to appreciate Arminian passion for evangelism
- Arminians to value Reformed emphasis on God's glory
- Both to collaborate on social justice initiatives
Ultimately, these assumptions shared by Arminians and Calvinists form a theological trellis. The vines may grow in different directions, but they're rooted in the same soil. Water that common ground, and the whole garden thrives.
Leave a Comments