Hey, yeah yeah, lazy poster and all that. I'm not going to confession over it so get over it. I was rummaging through many of my old computer files, subconsciously trying to avoid writing the two papers that are due tomorrow morning, and I stumbled over my last year's annotated bibliography, which interestingly enough was on Calvinism. I really enjoyed reading it. It's funny how your writing reads after you've given it a year or so to breath. There are a lot of issues I didn't bring up and some I didn't expound upon enough. I must say my views have shifted slightly and I probably would word a few things differently now, but overall, I thought it was surprisingly good, if I do say so myself. That said, of course if anyone finds this worth anything, it's not any of my doing. Please, by all means, feel free to comment and let me know what you disagreed with or agreed with, what I could have done better. Criticism is a wonderful thing, even when it's not constructive in my opinion, but it always is in all honesty. It's also an option to remain mute and leave my comment section a barren waste land. If that's your choice I won't complain. It can handle it. It's fairly hardy. I mean, have you seen it lately? Without further ado, and as you well know, I have plenty ado: Hope you enjoy this as much as I did.

Tobias Humphrey

9 April 2009

Research Paper

Calvinism

Before the term Calvinism had even been coined, the concepts behind it were disputed issues. It has always been a topic viewed as controversial and avoided by many, and though there seems to be evidence for both sides--those who call themselves Calvinists and those who are opposed to the teachings of Calvinism, often referred to as Arminian--the views are so entirely contrary that both cannot be claimed as correct. The doctrines of Calvinism fail to accept the concept of free will as it is presented in the Bible, and also misrepresent doctrines such as atonement and grace. After taking a look at what Calvinism really is at heart and what evidence there is to back it up, one might find it to be a dangerously flawed view of who God is and how He operates.

To understand truly what the beliefs of Calvinism consist of, a good place to go would be back to the man who was most prominent in holding to those beliefs, John Calvin. Many on either side of the issue would agree with Philip S. Gorski, author of The Disciplinary Revolution, when he claimed that “the theological precept most frequently associated with Calvin's name is predestination” (20), but what exactly does the doctrine of predestination consist of? In The History and Character of Calvinism, John T. McNeill speaks on the subject; he claims Calvin believed that predestination was the “eternal decree of God by which He has determined with Himself what He would have to become of every man,” and goes on to explain “eternal life is foreordained for some and eternal damnation for others. Every man therefore, being formed for one or the other of these ends, we say that he is predestinated to life or to death” (210).

Calvinists typically hold to five main points that can be summed by the acronym TULIP. These points are: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saint, but only the first four of these doctrines are relevant here. John Piper, renowned theologian, author, and devout Calvinist put together a summary of what these four doctrines consist of on his church website:

...total depravity means that our rebellion against God is total...our inability to submit to God or reform ourselves is total, and we are therefore totally deserving of eternal punishment...[Man] cannot make himself new, or create new life in himself. He must be born of God...God begets us anew and the first glimmer of life in the new-born child is faith. Thus new birth is the effect of irresistible grace, because it is an act of sovereign creation—"not of the will of man but of God."...Christ died for all the sins of some men. He foreknows, i.e. elects a people for himself before the foundation of the world.

This means that before God created the world, He chose who He would save and allow into heaven and also who He wouldn’t. This is why the teachings of Calvinism are seen by so many Christian circles today as controversial; following this logic leads Calvinists to the conclusion stated in the introduction to Institutes of the Christian Religion which claims that “What is to become of everyman in the hereafter has been determined by God's eternal decree; and some are ordained to everlasting woe.” This is known as the doctrine of double predestination, because God predestinates people both to Heaven and Hell.

Why is this such a problem? There are those who believe that these views paint God out to be a monster. The introduction to Institutes of the Christian Religion goes on to talk about whether John Calvin understood the implications of the doctrine of predestination. It claims “Calvin shudders at this conclusion even while expounding and defending it, and he knows well the moral difficulty it involves.” The thought that God created some souls for the distinct purpose to destroy them is a chilling one to say the least. It means that if someone is predestinated to an eternity of death, there is nothing they can do about it. They are already given over to a reprobate mind and have no chance to change their hearts or their fate. These souls exist for the purpose of being destroyed for the pleasure of the God who made it possible for them to live.

Another reason the doctrine seems problematic is because it eliminates all responsibility from the human being. If who we are, what we become, or where we go is all up to God and we have nothing to say about the matter, then why should we try to do right? Can we not do whatever we will without worrying about the consequences if God is the one, in the end, who makes the decision for us? This is where it fails to address the concept of free will, an idea clearly held to by the Bible.

There have also been stories of Christians who, after accepting the doctrine of Calvinism, have stumbled in their faith. Accepting that one’s God is a God who created souls for the purpose of destroying them seems to, at times, be enough to bring the faith of some crumbling down. In his book What Love is This? Dave Hunt reiterates one of these many stories of those falling in their Christian walk after succumbing to such doctrines. He writes of a couple who had had a happy and fruitful ministry until the husband became interested in a new truth. The pastor’s studying of this new truth led into an obsession, and he began to preach it from his pulpit. After being warned to desist, he was removed from his position as pastorate. Hunt claimed that “Eventually, [he] began to worry whether he was really one of the elect. The nagging questions grew into full blown doubts” (17). He goes on to quote the wife as saying “I kept trying to tell my husband that the God he was now believing in...was not the God I knew and loved”(17).

As stated above, Calvinists believe in the doctrine of total depravity, which is a doctrine that has been agreed upon by both on either side of these issues. Neither would deny that the Bible clearly teaches that man’s heart is evil. “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Holy Bible Jer. 17.9). And more than this, it is something that can be noticed in the world, whether by observing society today, or by looking back at the atrocities of men through history. After all, even when someone does something good, is it not often motivated out of selfish reasons? The Calvinists claim that because humanity is evil and incapable of doing anything truly good, if people were presented with the choice of accepting the gift of the gospel, they would always reject it; therefore, if they are saved, it is because God has chosen for them and changed there hearts through His grace.

Dave Hunt makes an interesting argument against this later on in his book on the subject:

The Bible makes it clear that salvation is the gift of God...It must be received as a free gift. What ability of any kind is required to receive a gift? None, of course. Then how can any sinner suffer from an inability to receive the free gift of eternal life? Unquestionably, to receive the gift of salvation one must believe the gospel. Never does the Bible declare this to be impossible for the natural man. The very command, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15) implies the ability of every person to believe the gospel...[Man’s] moral responsibility to God...is stated repeatedly in Scripture. (96-97)

Calvinists claim to acquire doctrines of unconditional election, limited atonement, and irresistible grace solely from scripture, and the verses that they base their beliefs on are certainly compelling if not convincing to some. One of the most popular passages Calvinists bring up as support is Romans 9. They use verses like “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated” (Holy Bible Rom. 9:13) to prove limited atonement and then claim that the following verses address any rebuttal some might have against it. “What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy” (Holy Bible Rom. 9:14-15). They also take a frightening position on some much disputed verses later on: “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction” (Holy Bible Rom. 9:21-22). They use verses like these to compare God to a potter who creates pieces of pottery to destroy so that he may show his wrath.

If one were to take these verses at face value it is conceivable that they could come to such a conclusion. But stringing verses together without looking at the complete picture is something Calvinists are sometimes criticized for. If one were to follow the traditional, historical, contextual method of exegeting scripture and harmonize it with the rest of the Bible, he or she would end up with quite a different interpretation. Throughout Romans Paul is speaking to the Jews about how faith is what saves them and not their lineage or works. Though complicated, many theologians believe that rather than the destinations of men’s eternal souls, this chapter is showing the Jews that God’s treatment of them is not contingent on their lineage. The theologians holding to this view base their judgment on the many references back to the Old Testament that are made in the chapter and throughout the book of Romans. Paul goes on to explain that God, in his sovereignty, has the right to choose himself the method of salvation and is not subject to the will of men. This interpretation also harmonizes with the other teachings of the Bible rather than contradicting them.

The main stand taken by Christians who oppose the doctrines of Calvinism is that man has been given a free will by God. This can be supported by endless examples in the Bible where God offers people choices and ultimatums. The biggest ultimatum in the Bible is the call of the gospel which gives men the option to repent. Repenting is the changing of mind; this requires an exercising of the will.

Calvinists argue that claiming free will for humankind is equal to raising humans above God, which Kuyper explains in Lectures on Calvinism. “The sovereign God is dethroned and man with his free will is placed on the vacant seat. It is the will of man which determines all things. All power, all authority proceeds from man” (87). They also claim that if one believes that God is in control, then free will makes no sense. Notice the logic used in the book Theological Incorrectness by D. Jason Sloan:

Try this. Stand up and look down at your feet...Now sit back down. What caused you to do this? Did God?...Most likely, your instinctive answer is that you did it on your own. On reflection you might postulate that it was all a part of "God's plan." Your instinctive...answer is that you did it. Yet, if you believe that God is in control, then you might...change your mind: God made me do it. (88)

Following this logic through leads one to believe that everything that is done is done so by the will of God and not the will of man.

As stated before, another one of the reasons there is resistance to Calvinism is that, if it’s reasoning is followed through, it eliminates all responsibility of man. Many believe in the responsibility written about in Rex Burns’ book Success in America: “man, like everything else in the universe, belongs to God; God has given him duties and just enough free will to make him individually responsible to honor those duties” (4). This has been a ideology carried out by Christians through the ages.

Some Calvinists do believe that man is responsible for most everything save their eternal destination, so this belief cannot be laid on all of them. The one’s who do believe it, however, don’t seem to be overly worried about the implications of it. They claim that God can receive glory by having some men sin as a part of His grand plan, and then by sending them to eternal damnation.

A central argument against Calvinism is that God offers grace to all in His word. If this is true, the doctrine of limited atonement and the view Calvinists take on predestination is flawed. The scriptures clearly express that the sacrifice of Christ was for all men and that God calls all men to repentance. Why would He do this if He only intended to send many into everlasting torment without giving them an option? Many Calvinists claim that when the Bible says “all men” it is referring to every race and nationality and that one cannot apply these verses to individuals.

There are various forms of Calvinism and many deep controversies that cannot be covered at length here, for instance: the exegesis of passages that take hours of studying to interpret properly, the claims of calvinists that decisional regeneration is no different than works for salvation, and more. However, most of the points have been brought out, if only briefly brushed over. Among those are the matter of man’s ability to repent, free will, responsibility, and the gospel call to “every creature”. The doctrines that Calvinism holds up have also been brought out and compared to the Scriptures.

Now is the time for all Christians to decide which side of the line it is they stand on. There are two conflicting views of God, and if one of those ideas is false, then those for it are not depicting the true God. If Calvinism is not denounced and continues on it could very well--and has to some extent--reek havoc in the circles of American Christianity. Such a view of God can bring the faith of many crumbling down and leave them weak and confused. Those who hold to free will and a righteous God must not be afraid to confront the doctrines of Calvinism and must be equipped to provide reason for their opposition.

Annotated Bibliography

Burns, Rex. Success in America: The Yeoman Dream and the Industrial Revolution. United States of America: Rex Sehler Burns, 1976.

Calvin, Jean, John T. McNeill, and Ford Lewis Battles. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Vol. 1. Lewisville, Kuntucky: The Westminster P, 2006.

Gorski, Philip S. The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the Rise of the State in Early Modern Europe. United States of America: University of Chicago P, 2003.

Holy Bible. KJV ed. Michigan: Zondervan, 2002.

Hunt, David. What Love is This?. United States of America: Multnomah Books, 2002.

Kuyper, Abraham. Lectures on Calvinism. United States of America: Wm. B. Eerdmans Company, 1931.

McNeill, John T. The History and Character of Calvinism. London: Oxford UP, 1954.

Piper, John. "What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism." Desireing God. 1 Mar. 1985. Bethlehem Baptist Church. 26 Mar. 2009 <http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibrary/Articles/ByDate/1985/1487_What_We_Believe_About_the_Five_Points_of_Calvinism/>.

Slone, D. Jason. Theological Incorrectness. New York: Oxford UP, 2004.