I am fairly certain this has been discussed before; but after a search I couldn't find what I was looking for.

I have heard Reformed Theologians say that for practical purposes there are three categories of importance when it comes to theology.
1. Essential
2. Important but essential such as baptism
3. Peripherial, such eschatology

This is not to say that all Reformed Christians would agree on what belongs in each category.

My question is when it comes to TULIP, where would you put these doctrines and why?

I have found that some Reformed believers think TULIP belongs in category 1. Yet, they also say that there are Arminians such as John Wesley, who are/were true Christians.
If this is true, wouldn't it be placing TULIP in category 2?

I am starting this thread basically because this is a question that was asked me (not framed this way) by someone I am mentoring and I want to give him a well thought out answer.

Thank you


Tom

1. I agree with the unanimous decision of the Synod of Dordt... Arminianism is a damnable heresy. Those who embrace it in their hearts are unsaved.

2. The vast majority of professing Christians today are NOT Arminians but semi-Pelagians which is even more damnable, if that is possible.

3. I'll leave the math to you.

4. Good article here that is most applicable: Pelagian Captivity of the Church. Another article which highlights the crux of the matter; that salvation is by grace ALONE and not by grace + works can be found here: By Grace Alone?.

5. If Arminianism is relegated to the category of "important" but not "essential"; #2, then if one was consistent, then ALL aberrant doctrines, including those that deal specifically with salvation should be included, e.g., Federal Vision, neo-Orthodoxy, Catholicism, etc. Personally, I reject any such notion.