The Canons of Dort, First Head of Doctrine, Rejection of Errors, Paragraph Five
Thursday, May 15, 2008 at 09:09AM 
Synod condemns the errors of those . . .
V. Who teach that the incomplete and nonperemptory election of particular persons to salvation occurred on the basis of a foreseen faith, repentance, holiness, and godliness, which has just begun or continued for some time; but that complete and peremptory election occurred on the basis of a foreseen perseverance to the end in faith, repentance, holiness, and godliness. And that this is the gracious and evangelical worthiness, on account of which the one who is chosen is more worthy than the one who is not chosen. And therefore that faith, the obedience of faith, holiness, godliness, and perseverance are not fruits or effects of an unchangeable election to glory, but indispensable conditions and causes, which are prerequisite in those who are to be chosen in the complete election, and which are foreseen as achieved in them.
This runs counter to the entire Scripture, which throughout impresses upon our ears and hearts these sayings among others: Election is not by works, but by him who calls (Rom. 9:11-12); All who were appointed for eternal life believed (Acts 13:48); He chose us in himself so that we should be holy (Eph. 1:4); You did not choose me, but I chose you (John 15:16); If by grace, not by works (Rom. 11:6); In this is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son (1 John 4:10).
_________________________________________
At this point, the authors of the Canons are responding to one of the more technical forms of Arminianism, then prevalent in Holland. Here again, the primary error to be refuted is the attempt to locate the ground, or basis, for God’s election in a free action of the creature. In this particular species of Arminianism, it was argued that God elected to save those who will believe the gospel and who will persevere. God’s decree is therefore a general decree to save those who do, in fact, believe, repent, and live in holiness before God.
This general decree, supposedly, accounts for the “whosoever will” language found in Scripture. In other words, God decrees to save “whosoever” comes to Christ. In this scheme, no specific individuals are chosen, rather the means are chosen by which those who believe (and who become elect) will be saved. A subsequent decree is then set forth, in which, it is argued that God absolutely elects those who do come. This supposedly, accounts for the language in Scripture which declares that “all that the father gives to me, will come to me.” This is a very clever formulation, and at first glance may appear to offer a solution to the problem of human responsibility and divine sovereignty.
Once again, however, the Arminian ignores what the Scriptures teach about the fundamental human condition–“no seeks God, no not one” (Romans 3:10-11) and that no man can come, unless the father draw them (cf. John 6:44). The Arminian position also puts the cart before the horse, so to speak. Scripture never speaks of a conditional, indefinite election, but an unconditional, particular election, in which God chooses to save specific individuals that he has chosen from before the foundation of the world. The elect come to faith in Christ because God has chosen them. They do not come to faith to be numbered among the elect. To state the critical matter yet again, the ground for election lies in the mysterious eternal counsel of God, not in anything good in the creature.
The best refutation of the Arminian argument is to simply summarize (as the Canons do) what the Scriptures so clearly teach about this very point: “Election is not by works, but by him who calls (Rom. 9:11-12); All who were appointed for eternal life believed (Acts 13:48); He chose us in himself so that we should be holy (Eph. 1:4); You did not choose me, but I chose you (John 15:16); If by grace, not by works (Rom. 11:6); In this is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son (1 John 4:10).”
Reader Comments (1)
Therefore, I think the best refutation to the Arminian argument is to pound the table with the "T" of "TULIP" which is "Total Depravity".
If we can convince the Arminian of the truth of Total Depravity, then the Arminian will know that man can not provide any condition which would motivate God to elect and save him.
The Arminian would understand that in order for one to be saved, God must handle and provide all the points of salvation.
“Salvation belongs to the LORD; ...” Psalm 3:8.