For some time, I have been fascinated by the historical figure of Jacobus Arminius. Anybody who has attempted to keep up with the issue of Calvinism will be familiar with the term. “Arminianism” is usually pitted against “Calvinism” as an antithetical system, no matter how accurate or inaccurate that pitting might be.

There was a time when I read relatively deeply on these issues. Along the way, I have been consistently intrigued by the character and theology of Arminius. Reading Carl Bangs’ magisterial biography only heightened my interest in the man.  In short, I remain amazed at the phenomenon of a man’s name being used so frequently by so many who have never read any of his works or anything about him.  To be sure, Arminius’ writings are often difficult, but they are always available.

Arminius himself was a complex, fascinating thinker who, I dare say, does not match the caricatures of him that one often hears. My point is not to say that Arminius was right or wrong. Personally, I feel that he was right in some areas and wrong in others…which is to say that he was human.

Regardless, he is a figure who needs to be more widely known and understood, especially by people who continue to evoke his name. To that end, I think those interested in the issues surrounding Calvinism and Arminianism will benefit from this helpful series of lectures, delivered earlier this year by the authors of a new Arminius biography: Keith Stanglin (who I interviewed here) and Thomas McCall.