Back to Chapter 5 – The Nature and Scope of the Calvinist Difficulties
1. The universal divine causal determinism of Calvinism negatively affects the most important issues and questions of life.
The matters before us are not inconsequential. They involve the most important questions and issues people grapple with in their lives. They are not matters simply to be bandied about in the “ivory towers” of philosophers and theologians, but rather have practical implications for the mental, physical, spiritual, and psychological well-being of every person.
The popular superficial dismissals of these issues will not do, as in, “We’ll never figure out these questions this side of heaven,” or “You cannot know the mind of God,” or “Be warned of the pride that claims ‘This is the answer to…’” These are shallow denials of all that can and needs to be said about these matters.
For what is at stake is the most important thing in a person’s whole existence, that is, the nature of their relationship to God. More particularly, that they can be assured that God loves them personally and individually, which entails that God has made provision for their salvation, has not excluded them from his presence and eternal life, that he desires they receive the saving gift of God in Christ by faith, and that they indeed can actually be saved.
Salvation and the gospel are at the core of biblical revelation because they are central to the heart of God and of human need. The story of our creation, fall, and redemption by God’s grace in the person and work of Christ is the grand story of our existence, and this message of redemption is essential to our very being as creatures made in the image of God.
Now, as the Calvinists’ deterministic doctrines are imposed on this history, they cast doubt on God’s love and salvation for each person. They raise a foundational epistemological question, which is, “Am I included?” By dividing mankind into two ontological realities – the included and the excluded – the Calvinist soteriological doctrines insert doubt, which is the epistemological problem, into an otherwise clear message of “good news” for each and every sinner. Therefore, the truth of the biblical gospel is at stake in this controversy. The existential and epistemological[28] problem is that, given the Calvinist’s interpretations of divine sovereignty as deterministic and election as unconditional, any assurance that God loves me or you, such that he positively intends our salvation and that we can actually be saved, is put beyond our knowledge. Having been divinely preordained to salvation or damnation, and the elect’s salvation is unconditional, we cannot know which salvific ontological reality or category we fall into – the elect or the non-elect. It must be one or the other. But we do not know into which category we have been preordained.
Yet, one’s purpose, meaning, and value in life, along with our hope for eternity, require that we know for sure that God loves us, desires our salvation, and that we can be saved. If it turns out that God does not love me and you – and that is a real possibility given Calvinism – there is no hope for either of us in this life or in death. God has assigned us either to heaven or hell.
Hence, the simple children’s song “Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so” is as profound a theological, existential, ontological, and epistemological statement as any that can be made. It presents a very different paradigm, as does Scripture, from what Calvinism offers regarding the knowledge and assurance of God’s love and the possibility of salvation. So, does the Bible really tell us that “Jesus loves me…?” And if so, what does that entail? What are the personal and psychological ramifications for each of us? What are the personal and psychological ramifications of Calvinism? “Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.” Can everyone know and be assured here and now that God loves them, that he desires that they be saved, and has made a way for them to be saved? If they can, then Calvinism is false. We certainly can know of God’s love and salvation for ourselves. The Bible tells us so. That is what is at stake in this controversy – the ‘good news’ and the assurance that this gospel applies to us. As such, it is a debate worth having and one that must continue so it can be brought to a resolution and the evangelical church can once again confidently proclaim the powerful message of truly “good news.”
If indeed “the Bible tells me so,” yet Calvinism fails to provide such assurance, as I submit is the case, then the ultimate issue here is an interpretive one. How does the Calvinist end up with an interpretation in which the Bible does not “tell me so” regarding the love God and Jesus have for me, you, and every person? How is it that the Calvinist interprets Scripture in a way that has God and Jesus loving only certain persons predestined for salvation? This involves us in biblical interpretation and, therefore, the question of what constitutes a proper, biblical hermeneutic. That is, what are the hermeneutical principles by which we can discern a valid interpretation of the biblical text? We are ultimately asking what the Bible really tells us regarding the content of the gospel and the nature of salvation.
2. We cannot respond to God in love and trust if we cannot be assured that he loves each of us and is kindly and graciously disposed towards us for our eternal good.
A moment’s reflection will reveal this to be true. How are we to respond lovingly to God if it is a real possibility that he does not love us and has even predestined us to an eternity in hell?
To state that God has a fixed number of elect persons he has unconditionally predestined to save is vacuous as to its relevance to us personally and as far as the “good news” is concerned. Calvinists merely presume their unconditional election and move on. But C. S. Lewis grasped the importance of “how God thinks of us.” He argues that this is the basis for us to reciprocate in a response of love for God. We can love God because we can know with assurance what God actually thinks about each of us personally and individually. Lewis writes,
“In the end that Face which is the delight or the terror of the universe must be turned upon each of us either with one expression or with the other, either conferring glory inexpressible or inflicting shame that can never be cured or disguised. I read in a periodical the other day that the fundamental thing is how we think of God. By God Himself, it is not! How God thinks of us is not only more important, but infinitely more important. Indeed, how we think of Him is of no importance except in so far as it is related to how he thinks of us. It is written that we shall “stand before” Him, shall appear, shall be inspected. The promise of glory is the promise, almost incredible and only possible by the work of Christ, that some of us, that any of us who really chooses, shall actually survive the examination, shall find approval, shall please God. To please God…to be a real ingredient in the divine happiness…to be loved by God, not merely pitied, but delighted in as an artist delights in his work or a father in a son – it seems impossible, a weight or burden of glory which our thoughts can hardly sustain. But so it is.”[29]
We sense both the joy and dread in these alternatives that Lewis describes. But he places the realization of one or the other not on God’s predetermination of some to that joy and all others to that dread, but holds forth “the promise of glory…only possible by the work of Christ” that can be had by “any of us who really chooses.” Those who believe in this work of Christ “shall actually survive the examination, shall find approval, shall please God.” God wants us to be able to please him. “To be a real ingredient in the divine happiness…to be loved by God, not merely pitied, but delighted in as an artist delights in his work or a father in a son.” In Christ, we are “loved by God.” Calvinism places that love in doubt. Therefore, one’s personal relationship to God and ability to positively respond to God are at stake here. We need to know that God does not merely pity us, but again, that “by the work of Christ, that some of us, that any of us who really chooses, shall actually survive the examination, shall find approval, shall please God.” We need to know that God genuinely loves us to respond to Him in love. The very ontological[30], epistemological, and psychological grounds, motivation, and potential to respond to God in love are undermined by Calvinist determinism.
Sure, you can dutifully “love” God as if that pleases God and somehow earns his favor. Some Calvinists even boast that they will love God even though he has predestined them to hell. But those who make this boast that they would love God even if he has assigned them to eternity in hell have an ill-conceived understanding of God, love, and themselves. They are claiming that their love is both qualitatively different than, and indeed quantitatively greater than God’s love. It is hard to see how they would not consider the nature of this kind of reciprocal relationship to be dysfunctional and unloving in any other circumstance. Indeed, I submit they would consider it abnormal. God is the only one who can love initially with an agape type of love. We, in turn, love him because he first loved us (1 Jn. 4:7ff.).
3. The only coherent basis for us to obey the command to love our neighbor and our enemies is if God loves them too.
How is it that God commands me to love my neighbor or my enemy, yet it is a real possibility that God himself does not love them? That is, that they may not be among the elect. God would be saying, “Do as I say, not as I do.” God’s disposition and command to love would be incoherent and hypocritical with respect to the non-elect. (See 1 Jn. 3:16-18; 4:7ff.)
4. In actual, practical living, no Calvinist lives consistently with their doctrinal theistic determinism.
When it comes to practical living and speaking, Calvinists live based on a non-Calvinist worldview of libertarian freedom and human responsibility. Despite Calvinism’s eternal decree, which determines all things, along with its doctrine of unconditional election, Calvinists live their Christian lives on the same exhortation to continuance in faith and trust in God’s provision of salvation in Christ as found in non-Calvinist theologies. The Calvinist deterministic doctrines introduce no practical differences and have no practical effects in living the Christian life and believing that one is saved. Hence, other than being interested in Calvinism as a theological matter, most believers give little attention to the Calvinist doctrines and their implications. Theistic determinism is unlivable, and an unlivable theology is a sign of a flawed theology.
5. The common man’s common sense reactions to the Calvinist doctrines should not be ignored.
The common reactions and observations of most people when they learn about the Calvinist doctrines are telling as to the implausibility of those doctrines. Most people conclude, “That simply doesn’t make sense” or “God can’t be like that!” People intuitively know something is amiss here, and these “common sense” observations should not be ignored. The words of Calvinist Kelly M. Kapic are fitting here.
“Theologians with advanced academic degrees must beware of a pompousness that would dismiss their brothers and sisters in the pew. More than others, we are required to listen to, learn from and incorporate their faithful reflections into our living theology. This does not mean uncritical acceptance, but it does mean genuinely treating those who walk with God as our fellow pilgrims. These saints often see what we have missed or neglected. They can instinctively detect errors missed by those sometimes isolated in their studies.”[31]
Note that these common sense reactions to Calvinism of these “brothers and sisters” in the pew who “can instinctively detect errors missed by those sometimes isolated in their studies” are ultimately ignored by Calvinists. They are not considered important, persuasive, or hermeneutically significant for the Calvinist.
Go to the next section: Ministry Concerns
Back to Chapter 5 – The Nature and Scope of the Calvinist Difficulties
The Truth of the Gospel 