Heron 1999, p.128. Heron, Alasdair I. C. (1999). "Arminianism". In Fahlbusch, Erwin (ed.). Encyclopedia of Christianity. Vol.1. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans. pp.128–129.
Tyacke 1990, p.245: "Of the various terms which can be used to describe the thrust of religions change at the time Arminian is the least misleading. It does not mean that the Dutch theologian Jacobus Arminius was normally the source of the ideas so labelled. Rather Arminian denotes a coherent body of anti-Calvinist religious thought, which was gaining ground in various regions of early seventeenth-century Europe." Tyacke, Nicholas (1990). Anti-Calvinists: the rise of English Arminianism, c. 1590–1640. Oxford: Clarendon. ISBN978-0-19-820184-7.
Arminius 1853a, p.526. "In this [fallen] state, the free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost. And its powers are not only debilitated and useless unless they be assisted by grace, but it has no powers whatever except such as are excited by Divine grace." Arminius, Jacobus (1853a). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.1. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby, Miller & Orton.
Arminius 1853c, p.311. "Election is the decree of God by which, of Himself, from eternity, He decreed to justify in Christ, believers, and to accept them unto eternal life". Arminius, Jacobus (1853c). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.3. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby & Miller.
Barth 1974, p.108: "Election in Christ must be understood as the election of God's people. Only as members of that community do individuals share in the benefits of God's gracious choice." Barth, Markus (1974). Ephesians. Garden City, New Jersey: Doubleday. ISBN978-0-385-08037-8.
Arminius 1853a, p.316. Arminius, Jacobus (1853a). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.1. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby, Miller & Orton.
Arminius 1853c, p.454. "Justification, when used for the act of a Judge, is either purely the imputation of righteousness through mercy [...] or that man is justified before God [...] according to the rigor of justice without any forgiveness." Arminius, Jacobus (1853c). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.3. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby & Miller.
Arminius 1853c, p.376: "First, you say, and truly, that hell-fire is the punishment ordained for sin and the transgression of the law." Arminius, Jacobus (1853c). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.3. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby & Miller.
Arminius 1853b, pp.219–220. "My sentiments respecting the perseverance of the saints are, that those persons who have been grafted into Christ by true faith, and have thus been made partakers of his life-giving Spirit, possess sufficient powers [or strength] to fight against Satan, sin, the world and their own flesh, and to gain the victory over these enemies". Arminius, Jacobus (1853b). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.2. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby & Miller.
Arminius 1853c, pp.412, 413: "[God] wills that they, who believe and persevere in faith, shall be saved, but that those, who are unbelieving and impenitent, shall remain under condemnation". Arminius, Jacobus (1853c). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.3. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby & Miller.
Arminius 1853a, p.665: "William Nichols notes: 'Arminius spoke nearly the same modest words when interrogated on this subject in the last Conference which he had with Gomarus [a Calvinist], before the states of Holland, on the 12th of Aug. 1609, only two months prior to his decease'". Arminius, Jacobus (1853a). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.1. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby, Miller & Orton.
Arminius 1853a, p.667, Disputation 25, on Magistracy, [1602] Arminius, Jacobus (1853a). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.1. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby, Miller & Orton.
Arminius 1853b, p.192. Arminius, Jacobus (1853b). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.2. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby & Miller.
Arminius 1853b, p.219. The entire treatise occupies pp. 196–452 Arminius, Jacobus (1853b). The Works of James Arminius. Vol.2. Translated by Nichols, James; Bagnall, W. R. Auburn, New York: Derby & Miller.
McClintock & Strong 1880. McClintock, John; Strong, James (1880). "Arminianism". The Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature. New York: Harper and Brothers.
Stanglin & McCall 2012, p.190 "These points [of Remonstrance] are consistent with the views of Arminius; indeed, some come verbatim from his Declaration of Sentiments." Stanglin, Keith D.; McCall, Thomas H. (15 November 2012). Jacob Arminius: Theologian of Grace. New York: Oxford University Press USA. ISBN978-0-19-975567-7.
Ridderbos 1997, p.351: "[The certainty of salvation] does not rest on the fact that the church belongs to a certain 'number', but that it belongs to Christ, from before the foundation of the world. Fixity does not lie in a hidden decree, therefore, but in corporate unity of the Church with Christ, whom it has come to know in the gospel and has learned to embrace in faith." Ridderbos, Herman (1997). Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Wm. B. Eerdmans. ISBN978-0-8028-4469-9.
Forlines 2011, Introduction. "In Christ’s oblation, Arminius argues, Christ as priest and sacrifice suffers the divine punishment that is due for human sin. This suffering constitutes the satisfaction or payment to the divine justice for redemption of humans from sin, guilt, and divine wrath. Thus Arminius presents an understanding of atonement, in the context of his view of the priestly office of Jesus Christ, that is consistent with the penal-substitution motifs regnant in sixteenth-and early seventeenth-century Reformed theology." Forlines, F. Leroy (2011). Pinson, J. Matthew (ed.). Classical Arminianism: A Theology of Salvation. Randall House. ISBN978-0-89265-607-3.
Forlines 2011, Introduction. "How different Arminius was, Forlines concluded, from “Arminian” authors such as Charles Finney or John Miley or Orton Wiley. They had taught a governmental view of atonement similar to that of Hugo Grotius. That theory held that God could freely pardon sinners without any satisfaction for the violation of divine law, because such a pardon was within God’s discretion as governor or sovereign. Thus the sacrifice of Christ is accepted by God as governor or ruler rather than as judge. The death of Christ, in this view, is a symbol of the punishment sin may induce. God uses this symbol as a deterrent. The penalty for sin is therefore set aside rather than paid. So, upon faith, the believer is pardoned as a governor would pardon a guilty criminal, and all past sins are forgotten." Forlines, F. Leroy (2011). Pinson, J. Matthew (ed.). Classical Arminianism: A Theology of Salvation. Randall House. ISBN978-0-89265-607-3.
Wesley 1827, p.66, "A Plain Account of Christian Perfection". "[Entire sanctification is] purity of intention." Wesley, John (1827). The Works of the Rev. John Wesley. Vol.8. New York: J.& J. Harper.
Wesley 1827, p.66, "A Plain Account of Christian Perfection". "[Entire sanctification is] loving God with all our heart, and our neighbor as ourselves." Wesley, John (1827). The Works of the Rev. John Wesley. Vol.8. New York: J.& J. Harper.
Schaff 1997, § 173. "In anthropology and soteriology [Lactantius] follows the synergism which, until Augustine, was almost universal." Schaff, Philip (1997). History of the Christian Church. Vol.3. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems.
Schaff 2007, p.897. "Methodism lays greater stress on the subjective experience of conversion and regeneration. Its preaching is essentially radical evangelistic revival preaching, which rouses the sinner to a sense of his danger, and the paramount necessity of an immediate, sudden, and radical change of heart and life." Schaff, Philip (2007). The Creeds of Christendom. Vol.3. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books. ISBN978-0-8010-8232-0.
Abraham 2018, pp.85–86. "In the history of the concept [...] atonement has been narrowed to mean such things as propitiation, satisfaction, expiation, and reparation. So, we have had a drastic decline of emphasis on the repair or reconciliation of a relationship and a steep rise of emphasis on the means of at-one-ment." Abraham, William J. (2018). "Atonement and the Work of Christ". Divine Agency and Divine Action, Volume III: Systematic Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp.84–97. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198786528.003.0007. ISBN978-0-19-878652-8.
Episcopius & Ellis 2005, p.8: "Episcopius was singularly responsible for the survival of the Remonstrant movement after the Synod of Dort. We may rightly regard him as the theological founder of Arminianism, since he both developed and systematized ideas which Arminius was tentatively exploring before his death and then perpetuated that theology through founding the Remonstrant seminary and teaching the next generation of pastors and teachers." Episcopius, Simon; Ellis, Mark A. (2005). "Introduction"(PDF). The Arminian confession of 1621. Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publications.
Episcopius & Ellis 2005, ch. 20, item 4. Episcopius, Simon; Ellis, Mark A. (2005). "Introduction"(PDF). The Arminian confession of 1621. Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publications.
De Jong 1968, pp.220 ff., art. 5, points 3–4: "True believers can fall from true faith and can fall into such sins as cannot be consistent with true and justifying faith; not only is it possible for this to happen, but it even happens frequently. True believers are able to fall through their own fault into shameful and atrocious deeds, to persevere and to die in them; and therefore finally to fall and to perish." De Jong, Peter (1968). "The Opinions of the Remonstrants (1618)". Crisis in the Reformed Churches: Essays in Commemoration of the Great Synod of Dordt, 1618–1619. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Reformed Fellowship.
De Jong 1968, pp.220 ff., ch. 5.5: "Nevertheless, we do not believe that true believers, though they may sometimes fall into grave sins which are vexing to their consciences, immediately fall out of every hope of repentance; but we acknowledge that it can happen that God, according to the multitude of His mercies, may recall them through His grace to repentance; in fact, we believe that this happens not infrequently, although we cannot be persuaded that this will certainly and indubitably happen." De Jong, Peter (1968). "The Opinions of the Remonstrants (1618)". Crisis in the Reformed Churches: Essays in Commemoration of the Great Synod of Dordt, 1618–1619. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Reformed Fellowship.
Akin 1993: "In Protestant circles there are two major camps when it comes to predestination: Calvinism and Arminianism. Calvinism is common in Presbyterian, Reformed, and a few Baptist churches. Arminianism is common in Methodist, Pentecostal, and most Baptist churches." Akin, James (1993). "A Tiptoe Through Tulip". EWTN. Retrieved 15 June 2019.
Bender 1953: "Mennonites have been historically Arminian in their theology whether they distinctly espoused the Arminian viewpoint or not. They never accepted Calvinism either in the Swiss-South German branch or in the Dutch-North German wing. Nor did any Mennonite confession of faith in any country teach any of the five points of Calvinism. However, in the 20th century, particularly in North America, some Mennonites, having come under the influence of certain Bible institutes and the literature produced by this movement and its schools, have adopted the Calvinist doctrine of the perseverance of the saints or "once in grace always in grace." In doing so, they have departed from the historic Arminianism of the Anabaptist-Mennonite movement." Bender, Harold S. (1953). "Arminianism". Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online.
Lehman 1956. "Eternal Security [...] as a special term was used by Walter Scott (Plymouth Brethren) as early as 1913 (Holness, 186). Under a section heading, "The Eternal Security of the Sheep," he writes, "Can my sins separate me from Christ or break the bond of eternal life? Impossible!" Lehman, Chester K. (1956). "Eternal Security". The Mennonite Encyclopedia: A Comprehensive Reference Work on the Anabaptist-Mennonite Movement. Vol.2. Scottsdale: Mennonite Publishing House.
Brümmer 1992, pp.448–449. "Sin is not primarily a state of corruption calling for a manipulative cure, nor guilt to be wiped out through punishment or satisfaction, but alienation from God requiring reconciliation. [...] The necessary and sufficient conditions for this kind of reconciliation are not punishment or satisfaction or condonation, but penitence and forgiveness." Brümmer, Vincent (December 1992). "Atonement and Reconciliation". Religious Studies. 28 (4). Cambridge University Press: 435–452. JSTOR20019569.
Dunning 2005, pp.163–165. "Since early in the 20th century, many Christian thinkers have been working in increasing interface with Scripture with the result that work on the Atonement has seen several helpful developments [...] In general there has been a burgeoning recognition of the inadequacy of a juridical or legalistic way of interpreting the Atonement, accompanied by a turn to the personal dimension as the decisive context within which the work of Christ can be best interpreted." Dunning, H. Ray (2005). "Toward a Personal Paradigm for the Atonement"(PDF). Wesleyan Theological Journal. 40 (2): 157–168.
Olson 2013b: "I am using 'Arminianism' as a handy[...] synonym for 'evangelical synergism' (a term I borrow from Donald Bloesch).[...] It's simply a Protestant perspective on salvation, God's role and ours, that is similar to, if not identical with, what was assumed by the Greek church fathers and taught by Hubmaier, Menno Simons, and even Philipp Melanchthon (after Luther died). It was also taught by Danish Lutheran theologian Niels Hemmingsen (d. 1600)—independently of Arminius. (Arminius mentions Hemmingsen as holding the basic view of soteriology he held and he may have been influenced by Hemmingsen.)" Olson, Roger E. (2013b). "Must One Agree with Arminius to be Arminian?". Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings. Patheos. Retrieved 7 December 2019.
Olson 2013a: "Basic to Arminianism is God's love. The fundamental conflict between Calvinism and Arminianism is not sovereignty but God's character. If Calvinism is true, God is the author of sin, evil, innocent suffering and hell.[...] Let me repeat. The most basic issue is not providence or predestination or the sovereignty of God. The most basic issue is God's character." Olson, Roger E. (2013a). "What's Wrong with Calvinism?". Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings. Patheos. Retrieved 27 September 2018.
Olson 2010: "Classical Arminianism does not say God never interferes with free will. It says God never foreordains or renders certain evil.[...] An Arminian could believe in divine dictation of Scripture and not do violence to his or her Arminian beliefs.[...] Arminianism is not in love with libertarian free will– as if that were central in and of itself. Classical Arminians have gone out of our way (beginning with Arminius himself) to make clear that our sole reasons for believe in free will as Arminians[...] are 1) to avoid making God the author of sin and evil, and 2) to make clear human responsibility for sin and evil." Olson, Roger E. (2010). "One more quick sidebar about clarifying Arminianism". Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings. Patheos. Retrieved 27 August 2019.
Olson 2018: "What is Arminianism? A) Belief that God limits himself to give human beings free will to go against his perfect will so that God did not design or ordain sin and evil (or their consequences such as innocent suffering); B) Belief that, although sinners cannot achieve salvation on their own, without 'prevenient grace' (enabling grace), God makes salvation possible for all through Jesus Christ and offers free salvation to all through the gospel. 'A' is called 'limited providence,' 'B' is called 'predestination by foreknowledge.'" Olson, Roger E. (2018). "Calvinism and Arminianism Compared". Roger E. Olson: My evangelical, Arminian theological musings. Patheos. Retrieved 27 August 2019.
Denzinger 1954, ch. Second Council of Orange, art. 199. "We not only do not believe that some have been truly predestined to evil by divine power, but also with every execration we pronounce anathema upon those, if there are [any such], who wish to believe so great an evil." Denzinger, Henricus (1954). Enchiridion Symbolorum et Definitionum (30thed.). Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder.
Olson 2014, pp.2–3: "Methodism, in all its forms (including ones that do not bear that name), tends to be Arminian. (Calvinist Methodist churches once existed. They were founded by followers of Wesley's co-evangelist George Whitefield. But, so far as I am able to tell, they have all died out or merged with traditionally Reformed-Calvinist denominations.) Officially Arminian denominations include ones in the so-called 'Holiness' tradition (e.g., Church of the Nazarene) and in the Pentecostal tradition (e.g., Assemblies of God). Arminianism is also the common belief of Free Will Baptists (also known as General Baptists). Many Brethren [anabaptists-pietist] churches are Arminian as well. But one can find Arminians in many denominations that are not historically officially Arminian, such as many Baptist conventions/conferences." Olson, Roger E. (2014). Arminianism FAQ: Everything You Always Wanted to Know. Franklin, Tennessee: Seebed. ISBN978-1-62824-162-4.
Olson 2014, p.8. "Arminianism includes no particular belief about whether or to what extent God manipulates the wills of men (human persons) with regard to bringing his plans (e.g., Scripture) to fruition." Olson, Roger E. (2014). Arminianism FAQ: Everything You Always Wanted to Know. Franklin, Tennessee: Seebed. ISBN978-1-62824-162-4.
Wiley 1941, pp.234–235. "Augustine, himself, distinctly advocated this [synergistic] position at first, but in his controversy with the Pelagians adopted a strictly monergistic system. He held to the total inability of man to exercise good works, and hence, until the individual was regenerated, there was no power to exercise faith. Grace, therefore, was bestowed solely upon the elect through effectual calling, and the atonement limited to those for whom it availed. Previous to this time, synergism had been the dominant theory, i.e., that the individual in his recovery from sin, works with God through grace universally bestowed as a free gift, in such a manner as to condition the result." Wiley, H. Orton (1941). Christian theology. Vol.2. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press.
Wiley 1941, pp.123–124. "Original sin is to be considered as privatio, or a privation of the image of God. [...] Arminius calls it 'a privation of the image of God,' but explains this privation as (1) a forfeiture of the gift of the Holy Spirit; and (2) in consequence of this, the loss of original righteousness. Depravity is therefore 'a depravation arising from deprivation.' Connected with this deprivation is a positive evil also, which arises as a consequence of the loss of the image of God." Wiley, H. Orton (1941). Christian theology. Vol.2. Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press.
Osborne, Trueman & Hammett 2015, p.134: "[...]Osborne Wesleyan-Arminian perspective". Osborne, Grant R.; Trueman, Carl R.; Hammett, John S. (2015). Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 views. Nashville, Tennessee: B & H Academic. ISBN9781433669712. OCLC881665298.
Keefer 1987, p.89: "What Wesley knew of Arminius came to him through two basic sources. First, he knew something of Arminius through Remonstrant spokesmen.[...] Wesley's second source of Arminian theology was the English Church in general, particularly the writers of the seventeenth century. This was by far his predominant source[...]." Keefer, Luke (1987). "Characteristics of Wesley's Arminianism"(PDF). Wesleyan Theological Journal. 22 (1): 87–99.
Grider 1982, pp.55–56, . "Arminius used an ingenious device to teach [the possibility of Apostasy], so as not to seem to oppose Calvinism's eternal security doctrine head on and recklessly He admitted that believers cannot lose saving grace; but then he would add, quickly, that Christians can freely cease to believe, and that then they will lose saving grace. So, in a sense, believers cannot backslide; but Christians can cease to believe, and then, as unbelievers (but only as unbelievers), they lose their salvation" Grider, J. Kenneth (1982). "The Nature of Wesleyan Theology"(PDF). Wesleyan Theological Journal. 17 (2): 43–57.
