Calvinism and Other Such Systems

               (This is a day late, but I hope it’s not a dollar short.) With the resurgence of Calvinism in recent years, it is important to have an understanding of the issues and arguments involved in this long-standing and contentious debate. The Calvinism-Arminianism debate has gone on for about 500 years, and will probably continue for as long as this earth lasts, for there are many Bible passages that seem to support either side. By the way, in many people’s minds, Calvinism or Arminianism are the only two options, but I would beg to differ. A third option is to be simply a Christian and let the Bible speak for itself, and just leave off all the “isms.” In other words, our goal ought to be to shun any human-devised doctrinal systems that are meant to try to answer all questions and seal all loose ends. The Bible is a complex, multi-dimensional work that does not lend itself to simplistic, one-answer-fits-all sort of systems.

                To illustrate this, let me consider a few passages that at least seem on the surface to affirm some basic tenets of Calvinism. There are in fact many such passages, and some are not so easily explained away. For example, there is no doubt that the Bible teaches foreknowledge, election, and predestination (Rom 8.29; 9. 6-26; 11.7-8; Eh 1.4f; 2 Thes 2.13, etc.). On a cursory reading of these passages at least, one cannot deny that God elects, God chooses, God foreordains; and God hardens, God gives a spirit of stupor, God rejects. Consider also Jn 6.65: “And He was saying, ‘For this reason I said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.’”  The context of this statement is connected to Jesus knowing that Judas would betray him (vs.64). Was Judas unable to come to Jesus in faith because it had not been granted by the Father? Or consider Jn 15.16: “You did not choose me, but I chose you.”  Admittedly, as indicated by the rest of the verse, this passage is speaking of the apostles in regard to their apostolic mission. Yet on the other hand, 2 These 2.13, speaking of Christians in general, similarly says, “God chose you from the beginning,” and this is  for salvation. Or consider Acts 13.48: “…and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”  Does this not seem to suggest that only those who were already ordained (appointed) to do so believed? Based on this, Calvinists argue that we believe because we have been appointed, rather than being appointed because we believe. Mt 11.27 likewise sounds like Calvinistic election, for there Jesus says that no one can know the Father except those “to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.”  Compare also Mt 13.11.

                Before you go thinking that I’m arguing more for  Calvinism than against, let me say that I’m simply trying to suggest that we be fair with the Scriptures and with Calvinistic arguments. I also want to begin this series by considering their point of view. I’ll try to deal with such passages later. Let me finish this morning, however, by coming back to my earlier point about simplistic systems designed to answer all questions. Such “systems” generally emphasize those passages that support the system, while ignoring other passages that might offer different perspective. I believe Calvinists are guilty of this. But maybe we non-Calvinists are as well. Do non-Calvinists tend to ignore those statements of Scripture that make God the both the initiator or completer of salvation? If so, they might be as guilty as Calvinists who negate or ignore man’s free will and personal responsibility. Either way, let us be suspicious of “doctrinal systems,” and of thinking that we have all the answers and therefore fully comprehend God’s ways.

© 2007 Randy Hohf