Calvinism vs. Arminianism — Worth Debating?
December 5th, 2005 | Posted in » Baptist Issues
A couple interesting threads over in the Baptist forum at christianforums.com, both basically centering on the debate over Calvinism vs. Arminianism:
http://www.christianforums.com/t2365854-you-have-a-destiny.html
http://www.christianforums.com/t2294654-is-god-sovereign.html
Both of these threads were closed because of the intense debate and rhetoric they generated….
So, what do you think? Is such debate really necessary or worthwhile?
What are your thoughts on the doctrine of election? Are we truly pre-destined to salvation or damnation? What is the role of free-will in the matter? Was Christ’s sacrifice just for the elect, or for everyone?
(BTW, in case you’re not familiar with Calvinism and Arminianism, here’s a rather detailed page about both:
http://www.bible-truth.org/election.htm
I haven’t reviewed this fully, so as with any web link, be cautious what you accept as truth.)
5 Responses to “Calvinism vs. Arminianism — Worth Debating?”
Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.
By micah on Dec 5, 2005
John-
Good question. I’ve been part of this debate for years now both in college and seminary and I’ve finally decided that the debate is fun, can be vigorous, and if you’re both mature can even be beneficial. Having said that, I don’t know that it’s all that beneficial in the long run. I guess I could argue both sides of the fence. In reality, it is just a theological argument because if I’m faithful to scripture I’m still going to evangelize, I’m still going to trust God and God is still going to do the work.
Having said that, I could be pigeonholed as leaning heavily towards the reformed side. I don’t like to use the word calvinist because I’m not a John Calvin disciple. I’d love to talk to you more about it in detail sometime when we can get the chance.
By John on Dec 6, 2005
Well said, Micah. I’m probably not as well versed as many on this (I have no formal theological education), but from what I’ve read, it seems you can argue both sides from a Biblical perspective on this one (just as you can so many things, dependent on your interpretation of Biblical text, of course).
Example: pre-destination. Calvinism generally teaches that all of us basically have our eternal destination decided for us… that God has already decided who will be saved and who will not, and that because of that decision, we will either respond with faith in Christ or rejection of Him. Arminianism generally teaches that we all have equal opportunity, based on our own free-will, to respond with faith or rejection and thus be saved. Both seem well-grounded, Biblically:
These verses seem to indicate that some are chosen for salvation from the beginning.
These verses seem to indicate that salvation is available to all.
Personally? It seems to me as if both sides have some good, Biblically-grounded views, but I think that the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. To me, Calvinism seems to mess with free-will a bit too much… Arminianism seems to place too much credit for salvation on our own efforts.
Anyway, I would certainly enjoy talking with you about this sometime, Micah.
By Judah on Dec 6, 2005
Well, I’m in neither camp – a fence-sitter if you like!
If there is as much argument on either side, and I don’t experience myself being drawn to one more than the other, then I will simply trust to God and get on with what He seems to want me to do anyway.
For me, I simply don’t know the answer. End of story.
Mind you, that doesn’t mean that I am not interested and am teased either way…
By Stephen Pruet on Jan 20, 2006
I like John’s take on this issue. I am drawn to the Calvinist reverence for God’s sovereignty, but not to the extent that it leaves us no choice in the matter. In fact, I cannot see how that would be consistent with God’s nature. If, “He is not willing that any should perish” and He is omnipotent, why would He choose some but not all for salvation? In addition, it seems to me easier to reconcile a type of predestination within a free choice model (that is, predestination = preknowledge) that to accommodate all the passages that indicate free choice within a strict predetermined type of predestination. One thing that is sure is that Christians have been arguing about this for a long time, and it has done some harm. For example, I would recommend reading the diaries of John Adams (2nd U.S. President). He lost faith in the organized church because of the behavior he saw from people disagreeing on this issue. So, we need to be careful how we approach the discussions.
A larger question and one that is even more interesting to me is why God crafted the Bible such that there is room to disagree on this and other matters. My theory is that He wants to remind us that we will never understand everything on this side of heaven and that we can only rely on faith. Otherwise, salvation and service would depend on intellect and the ability to best understand everything. The lesson I take from this is that it is critically important to delineate that which is essential in the Christian faith and that which is non-essential. The non-essential should not, as a general rule, be the basis for withdrawing fellowship or excluding anyone from a church or church-based organization. I think this is the major point Wade Burleson is trying to make in his blog.
By John on Jan 21, 2006
Excellent points, Stephen. I’ve often thought about that issue (why there is so much room for disagreement in Biblical interpretation) as well, and had come to the same conclusion.