There is a debate within the Church that has been going on since at least the fourth century. The early church considered arguments from a British monk named Pelagius and Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo, and in 418 finally denounced Pelagius' view and upheld Augustine's. Very briefly, the argument centered around the act of the human will in salvation. Pelagius believed that humans were capable of seeking God in their fallen state. Augustine taught total depravity, meaning that it is not possible for humans to seek God of their own will.
The issue made theological waves again in the 16th century when John Calvin and a former student, Jacob Arminius, became embroiled in it. Their names are most frequently associated with the debate today as Calvinism v. Arminianism. Arminius resurfaced most of Pelagius' argument with the modification that the human will was aided in seeking God by something that has come to be called "prevenient grace." In other words, humans are totally depraved, but everyone has the benefit of God's grace to come to salvation, not only those chosen by God before time.
An important corollary of this issue is referred to theologically as perseverance. Calvinists believe that people chosen by God for salvation are eternally secure in that state. Arminians teach that because humans play a part in their salvation, it is possible for them choose to reject salvation after having embraced it. The sovereignty of God is also understood differently by the two camps: Calvinists believe that God is totally sovereign in all his purposes and has ordained all that is and all that will be. Arminians believe that God's sovereignty is limited somewhat by the will of humans, but that his purposes are secured by his foreknowledge of what every human will do in every situation.
Each position has certain key Scriptures which are quoted as support. Likewise, there are Bible passages which vex each side, creating difficulties in maintaining a consistent interpretative position. One of the most sensitive sticking points is the Calvinist doctrine of election. I am going to treat two of the most frequently disputed passages as a demonstration of how the sides differ. I Timothy 2:1-4 has Paul exhorting prayers for all men because this is pleasing to God, "who desires all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth." Arminians think this proves that all humans may potentially be saved, not just the ones chosen by God as the Calvinists assert. Calvinists believe this presents God's loving heart toward his creation but not an aspect of his divine will.
The second passage often quoted by Arminians as closing the case against divine election is 2 Peter 3:9. Peter says that God is, "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." Like the passage in Timothy, this one suggests to Arminians that God doesn't want any human to go to hell, therefore implying that he makes salvation available to all. The Calvinist sees this verse as parallel to the one in Timothy. The Greek word "willing" is different in this passage from the word "desires" in Timothy, although they both carry the same connotation. Here in Peter, it would be easily translated "wishing."
In both passages the Arminians try to make God's attitude an action. But if God willed all men to be saved, they would in fact all be saved because God's will is omnipotent: nothing can resist the express will of God; it will be done. The statement that God desires something does not equate with its being a fact. Again, even if God wishes none would have to suffer punishment in hell, he nonetheless knows that hell will not be empty. Unless one chooses to side with the likes of Rob Bell and eliminate hell from the equation, one cannot avoid the sad fact that some humans are going to end up there. God may wish that it were otherwise, but he knows the future; he knows hell will be populated.
One imagines that when God created the earth and set Adam and Eve in the Garden, he "wished" that they would remain obediently dependent on him. He doubtless "desired" that they would not eat of the forbidden fruit. Yet the Bible clearly teaches that God's plan always included a Redeemer; the plan predates creation; he knew Adam and Eve would fall. The answer to why he did this is in Ephesians third chapter. Paul tells the Ephesians that God's mysterious plan is now revealed: he wants the angels in heaven to see how much he loves even fallen creatures. Man had to fall so that God could demonstrate his love in a most dramatic way.
The reason Arminian teaching is attractive, in my opinion, is because it takes back from God a small amount of control. The Calvinist sees God as the Sovereign of the universe and humans as subject to his irresistible divine will. In the Garden, the Serpent asked Eve, "Has God said..." He then challenged her to take some initiative and write her own rules. She did; Adam joined her, and we suffer the consequences. Yet even believers long for a degree of control over their lives; it is still difficult for some people to let go and let God.
I was raised Arminian; I "converted" to Calvinism after years of study and personal anguish. I have become quite comfortable letting God be God. This position does not make me a puppet as some may suggest. My finite little mind behaves practically as if it were totally free: I have free will as far as I can tell. When presented with options, I must choose black or white, salt or pepper. It matters not one whit that God has preordained my choice; it is still a real choice to me.
I had breakfast with a man last week who was raised Calvinist but has come to an Arminian view. I commented on the irony of our having passed one another in our theological journey going opposite directions. I look forward to the day when in heaven we can both approach John Calvin and Jacob Arminius and have a good laugh about the sign over the gate. On the outside it says, "Whosoever will may come," while on the inside it says, "Only the elect may enter." We'll all sit down over Dutch crullers and coffee and spend a thousand years pondering how that works.
No comments:
Post a Comment