Vanhoozer writes,
“Virtue epistemology may be said to begin with the insight that we are responsible for what we believe.” (FT, 351)
“An agent must be prepared to give an account both for what he or she did and that he or she did it. Christian theologians must, of course, go even further. Answerability is ultimately a matter not merely of ethics but of covenantal responsibility, a matter of responding to God’s call and command. Human authors are answerable for what they do and say before God.” (RT, 318)
I have argued that Calvinism is a universal divine causal determinism. As such, it is incoherent with human responsibility and culpability. We simply have no intellectual or moral framework by which we can reconcile determinism with the concept of personal moral responsibility or the assertions Vanhoozer makes above that “we are responsible for what we believe” or that “an agent must be prepared to give an account both for what he or she did and that he or she did it” or concepts like “answerability: and “responsibility.”
Moral responsibility and culpability only make sense within a framework of libertarian freedom. The first statement above is especially problematic in light of the Calvinist insistence that faith is a result of regeneration and is granted by God only to the elect and cannot in any way be of the person themselves. How is one responsible for what they believe when what they believe has been predetermined by God who unconditionally and irresistibly effects belief only in those he has chosen to save? It was said above that “we are caught up in an encompassing action of the Spirit” and that “the Spirit renders us believers.” This must occur on some basis other than a person’s decision to exercise faith. Vanhoozer is clear that it involves an “effectual call” which implies an unconditional election. Therefore the non-elect cannot believe. How then can Vanhoozer coherently say that “we are responsible for what we believe” when it is an all-powerful God that either grants or denies the “irresistible grace” so that a person either believes or remains in unbelief? Obviously they are not responsible for what they could never do. They especially cannot be held responsible for what they were predestined to do. Most egregious is the Calvinist’s undermining the content of the gospel as “good news,” the call to faith and the truth of its proclamation which finds no correspondence in reality for the non-elect. Vanhoozer’s talk about response to God’s call and command, accountability, and answerability are incoherent with his Calvinist determinism and his doctrine of reprobation (i.e., referring to the non-elect).
The Truth of the Gospel 