The two ministers of Delft, who had debated the point with him, had, the better to turn his arguments, descended from the supralapsarian to the infralapsarian position, i.e.
He had as colleague Franz Gomarus, a strong supralapsarian, perfervid, irrepressible; and their collisions, personal, official, political, tended to develop and define their respective positions.
In these they reacted against both the supralapsarian and the infralapsarian developments of the doctrine of predestination and combated the irresistibility of grace; they held that Christ died for all men and not only for the elect, and were not sure that the elect might not fall from grace.
He held the sublapsarian view that the fall was decreed, but not the supralapsarian view that it "was decreed as a means towards carrying out a previous decree to save some and leave others to perish."
The Synod of Dort (1618-1619) which affirmed the sublapsarian without excluding the supralapsarian form of Calvinism, condemned the views of Arminius and his followers, who were known as Remonstrants from the remonstrance "which in four articles repudiates supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism (which regarded the Fall as foreseen, but not decreed), and the doctrines of irresistibility of grace, and of the impossibility of the elect finally falling away from it, and boldly asserts the universality of grace."