My Biggest Problem with Calvin/Calvinism
Roger E. Olson
Professor of Theology
George W. Truett Theological Seminary
Baylor University
Above all I want to make clear that I admire and respect my Calvinist friends and colleagues. We disagree strongly about some points of theology, but I hold them in high esteem for their commitment to the authority of God’s Word and their obvious love for Jesus Christ and his church as well as for evangelism.
However, I do not admire or respect John Calvin. I have been told that he should not be held responsible for the burning of the heretic Servetus because, after all, he warned the Spanish doctor and theologian not to come to Geneva and he urged the city council to behead him rather than burn him. And, after all, Calvin was a child of his times and everyone was doing the same. Nevertheless, I still struggle with placing a man complicit in murder on a pedestal.
Furthermore, I find Calvin’s doctrine of God repulsive. It elevates God’s sovereignty over his love, leaving God’s reputation in question. What I mean is that Calvin’s all-determining, predestining deity is at best morally ambiguous and at worst morally repugnant.
Much to the chagrin of some contemporary Calvinists, Calvin clearly taught that God foreordained the fall and rendered it certain. (Institutes of the Christian Religion III:XXIII.8) He also affirmed double predestination (III:XXI.5) and displayed callous disregard for the reprobate who he admitted God compelled to obedience (disobedience). (I:XVIII.2) Calvin distinguished between two modes of God’s will—what later Calvinists have called God’s decretive and preceptive wills. (III:XXIV.17) God decrees that the sinner shall sin while at the same time commanding him not to sin and condemning him for doing what he was determined by God to do. To Calvin this all lies in the secret purposes of God into which we should not peer too deeply, but it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth of anyone who regards God as above all love.
John Wesley commented on the Calvinists’ claim that God loves even the reprobate in some way. As one contemporary Calvinist put it, “God loves all people in some ways but only some people in all ways.” Wesley said that this is a love such as makes the blood run cold.
Calvin’s successor in Geneva, Theodore Beza, commented that those who find themselves suffering in the flames of hell for eternity can at least take comfort in the fact that they are there for the greater glory of God. To paraphrase Wesley, that is a glory such as sends chills down the spine. God foreordains some of his own creatures, created in his own image, to eternal hell for his own glory? Calvin may not have put it quite that bluntly, but many Calvinists have and it is a necessary extrapolation of the inner logic of consistent Calvinism. (Institutes III:XXII.11)I have been heavily criticized by some of my Calvinist friends for saying that my biggest problem with Calvinism (by which I mean consistent divine determinism) is that it makes it difficult for me to tell the difference between God and the devil. (I am not saying Calvinists worship the devil!)
For me nothing about the Christian worldview is more important than regarding God and the devil as absolute competitors in this universe and its tragic history. God is good and desires the good of every creature. As church father Irenaeus said “The glory of God is man fully alive.” The devil is bad and desires harm for every creature. To view the devil as God’s instrument makes a mockery of the entire biblical narrative.
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Sunday, 19 July 2009
Roger Olson's Biggest Problem with Calvin/Calvinism
Dr Olson wrote this upon request of an evangelical publication. The assignment was to write a 600 word essay on "My Biggest Problem with Calvin/Calvinism", which is what he did but was rejected. Olson has now kindly made this essay available and this will also be appearing on SEA's official website.
Saturday, 30 May 2009
Setting the Record Straight
This short post is to set the record straight, to stop ignorant Calvinists accuse Arminianism of being semi-Pelagian, a straw man that is easier to knock down that Arminianism itself. Some of you might remember John MacAthur's misrepresentation of Arminianism where he said [1]"So that the sinner unaided by the Holy Spirit must make the first move. That is essentially Arminian theology. The sinner unaided must make the first move, and God will then respond when the sinner makes the first move." It can be found here (3rd Audio File down), and the quote occurs about 33 minutes into the Audio File.
It's no wonder that Calvinists often know so little about Arminian doctrine, with Calvinist leaders who are apparently ignorant themselves. I'll give John MacAthur the benefit of the doubt that he is just ignorant of Arminian theology, rather than purposefully misleading, though there is really no excuse for such ignorance for a man in his position. In addition to his ignorance of Arminian theology is apparently his ignorance of theologians (note that about 32 minutes into the Audio File he calls John Wesley a "messed up Calvinist", even though Wesley was Arminian through and through!)
Many Arminian blogs have already posted on this, but it is a straw man that keeps popping up. So together, let's set the record straight, and try to put an end to this straw man.
Pelagianism: Under Pelagianism man has the natural ability to do right including choosing God, and that human nature is unaffected by original sin. Pelagius taught that man is born into the same state that Adam was created, with an untainted will.
semi-Pelagianism: Under semi-Pelagianism, mans nature has been affected by original sin so that he is depraved, but not totally depraved. Under semi-Pelagianism, man has the ability to make the first move towards God, but God must finish the process.
Arminianism: affirms the doctrine of total depravity and original sin. Man is naturally unable to make any move towards God. As you likely already know, it is one of the 5 main points of Arminianism (the T in FACTS.) If MacArthur read Arminius himself or even took 2 minutes to look up Wikipedia, he would know that [2] "No system of Arminianism founded on Arminius or Wesley denies original sin or total depravity; both Arminius and Wesley strongly affirmed that man's basic condition is one in which he cannot be righteous, understand God, or seek God".
The Society of Evangelical Arminians Statement of Faith affirms [3]"We believe that humanity was created in the image of God but fell from its original sinless state through willful disobedience and Satan's deception, resulting in eternal condemnation and separation from God. In and of themselves and apart from the grace of God human beings can neither think, will, nor do anything good, including believe. But the prevenient grace of God prepares and enables sinners to receive the free gift of salvation offered in Christ and his gospel. Only through the grace of God can sinners believe and so be regenerated by the Holy Spirit unto salvation and spiritual life. It is also the grace of God that enables believers to continue in faith as well as good in thought, will, and deed, so that all good deeds or movements that can be conceived must be ascribed to the grace of God."
Arminius himself wrote [4] "This is my opinion concerning the free-will of man: In his primitive condition as he came out of the hands of his creator, man was endowed with such a portion of knowledge, holiness and power, as enabled him to understand, esteem, consider, will, and to perform the true good, according to the commandment delivered to him. Yet none of these acts could he do, except through the assistance of Divine Grace. But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by himself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good; but it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed in his intellect, affections or will, and in all his powers, by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit, that he may be qualified rightly to understand, esteem, consider, will, and perform whatever is truly good. When he is made a partaker of this regeneration or renovation, I consider that, since he is delivered from sin, he is capable of thinking, willing and doing that which is good, but yet not without the continued aids of Divine Grace."
Article III of the Remonstrants says [5] "That man does not posses saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as in his state of apostasy and sin he can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is); but that it is necessary that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, and will, and all his faculties, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the Word of Christ, John 15:5, “Without me you can do nothing.”"
Anyone who does not affirm original sin or total depravity is not a true Arminian. Perhaps more would be willing to accept the doctrines of Arminianism if they actually knew what the doctrines were.
Daniel Nebauer
Citation:
[1]http://www.t4g.org/conference/t4g-2008/#Audio
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminianism#Common_misconceptions
[3]http://www.evangelicalarminians.org/sof
[4]http://wesley.nnu.edu/arminianism/the-works-of-james-arminius/a-declaration-of-the-sentiments-of-arminius/
[5]http://www.crivoice.org/creedremonstrants.html
It's no wonder that Calvinists often know so little about Arminian doctrine, with Calvinist leaders who are apparently ignorant themselves. I'll give John MacAthur the benefit of the doubt that he is just ignorant of Arminian theology, rather than purposefully misleading, though there is really no excuse for such ignorance for a man in his position. In addition to his ignorance of Arminian theology is apparently his ignorance of theologians (note that about 32 minutes into the Audio File he calls John Wesley a "messed up Calvinist", even though Wesley was Arminian through and through!)
Many Arminian blogs have already posted on this, but it is a straw man that keeps popping up. So together, let's set the record straight, and try to put an end to this straw man.
Pelagianism: Under Pelagianism man has the natural ability to do right including choosing God, and that human nature is unaffected by original sin. Pelagius taught that man is born into the same state that Adam was created, with an untainted will.semi-Pelagianism: Under semi-Pelagianism, mans nature has been affected by original sin so that he is depraved, but not totally depraved. Under semi-Pelagianism, man has the ability to make the first move towards God, but God must finish the process.
Arminianism: affirms the doctrine of total depravity and original sin. Man is naturally unable to make any move towards God. As you likely already know, it is one of the 5 main points of Arminianism (the T in FACTS.) If MacArthur read Arminius himself or even took 2 minutes to look up Wikipedia, he would know that [2] "No system of Arminianism founded on Arminius or Wesley denies original sin or total depravity; both Arminius and Wesley strongly affirmed that man's basic condition is one in which he cannot be righteous, understand God, or seek God".
The Society of Evangelical Arminians Statement of Faith affirms [3]"We believe that humanity was created in the image of God but fell from its original sinless state through willful disobedience and Satan's deception, resulting in eternal condemnation and separation from God. In and of themselves and apart from the grace of God human beings can neither think, will, nor do anything good, including believe. But the prevenient grace of God prepares and enables sinners to receive the free gift of salvation offered in Christ and his gospel. Only through the grace of God can sinners believe and so be regenerated by the Holy Spirit unto salvation and spiritual life. It is also the grace of God that enables believers to continue in faith as well as good in thought, will, and deed, so that all good deeds or movements that can be conceived must be ascribed to the grace of God."
Arminius himself wrote [4] "This is my opinion concerning the free-will of man: In his primitive condition as he came out of the hands of his creator, man was endowed with such a portion of knowledge, holiness and power, as enabled him to understand, esteem, consider, will, and to perform the true good, according to the commandment delivered to him. Yet none of these acts could he do, except through the assistance of Divine Grace. But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by himself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good; but it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed in his intellect, affections or will, and in all his powers, by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit, that he may be qualified rightly to understand, esteem, consider, will, and perform whatever is truly good. When he is made a partaker of this regeneration or renovation, I consider that, since he is delivered from sin, he is capable of thinking, willing and doing that which is good, but yet not without the continued aids of Divine Grace."
Article III of the Remonstrants says [5] "That man does not posses saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as in his state of apostasy and sin he can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is); but that it is necessary that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, and will, and all his faculties, in order that he may rightly understand, think, will, and effect what is truly good, according to the Word of Christ, John 15:5, “Without me you can do nothing.”"
Anyone who does not affirm original sin or total depravity is not a true Arminian. Perhaps more would be willing to accept the doctrines of Arminianism if they actually knew what the doctrines were.
Daniel Nebauer
Citation:
[1]http://www.t4g.org/conference/t4g-2008/#Audio
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminianism#Common_misconceptions
[3]http://www.evangelicalarminians.org/sof
[4]http://wesley.nnu.edu/arminianism/the-works-of-james-arminius/a-declaration-of-the-sentiments-of-arminius/
[5]http://www.crivoice.org/creedremonstrants.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)