In any case, semi-Calvinism happens when Christians believe that because God is omniscient and sovereign over everything, they don't need to evangelize the lost. "Hyper" is an inappropriate prefix because it implies that the doctrine has been overly embraced; "semi" is an appropriate prefix because anybody who embraces semi-Calvinism only partially understands the doctrines of God's omniscience and sovereignty.
First we'll clear up the confusion, and then we'll explain where it comes from.
I've been saying for years that a coherent Calvinist lives just like the most heretical semi-Pelagian*. However, this sounds like a terrible clashing of theory and practice, so I was very pleased on Sunday to come up with the following two points as a better explanation:
- The doctrines of God's omniscience and sovereignty**, rightly understood, tell you nothing about how to make any practical decision.
This leaves us begging for an answer to the practical question, however: if the doctrines of God's omniscience and sovereignty utterly fail to inform our life choices, what else could possibly tell us how to live?
- The Bible is sufficient for faith and practice; all practical decisions should be made in light of its teachings.
Now you see the connection to my previous explanation -- even Pelagius thought that Christ was a great moral teacher, so if coherent Calvinists and all stripes of Arminians and semi-Pelagians strive to live by biblical teachings, then it is clear that a coherent Calvinist lives just like the most heretical semi-Pelagian, as odd as that may sound.
But how can the above conclusion be correct? "If God is absolutely omniscient and sovereign," the semi-Calvinist says, "then He's already predestined some people to Heaven and the rest to Hell, and nothing I can do will change that...so I needn't bother to evangelize the lost." While our confused Christian has rightly concluded that God's omniscience and sovereignty imply final predestination, she has failed to recognize the implications of God's omniscience and sovereignty throughout all time, including the entire duration of His creation. So of course the semi-Calvinists are predestined to disregard the Great Commission, just as they are predestined to be doctrinally confused.
God is sovereign, but He works his will through his creation, so also through his saints. He commanded us to "go into all the world and preach the Gospel", and fulfilling this mandate clearly works his will on Earth. "Ah-ha!", the semi-Pelagian might now say. "But failing to fulfill this mandate also works God's will, because if God is sovereign then everything that happens must be his will!"
This sounds quite convincing, but it rests squarely on an equivocation of the concept of "God's will". In just the same way, a semi-Pelagian may argue, 2 Peter 3:9 clearly states that "...the Lord is...not willing that any should perish." As Sproul explains in Chosen By God*** there are three different senses of God's will discussed in the Bible.
- sovereign efficacious will
- preceptive will (commandments, etc.)
- reference to God's disposition, or what pleases Him
God's sovereign efficacious will is by definition inviolate, so 2 Peter 3:9 clearly cannot be referring to this sense of God's will; it is in this sense alone that a semi-Calvinist "fulfills God's will" by refusing to evangelize the lost.
God's preceptive will is clearly violated continually (just look around), but if this is the meaning of "God's will" as it is discussed in 2 Peter 3:9, this passage would then be commanding everyone not to perish. So those who violate this understanding of 2 Peter 3:9 and perish anyway would need to stand under God's judgment and be punished by...more perishing. This is clearly not what 2 Peter 3:9 could mean. A semi-Calvinist violates this sense of God's will when she refuses to evangelize the lost.
We know that God is not pleased when people perish (He is also not pleased when semi-Calvinists refuse to evangelize the lost). The third sense of "God's will" seems to be the appropriate sense in which to understand 2 Peter 3:9****, and we find that along the way to this discovery we've rooted out the semi-Calvinist's equivocation as well.
The semi-Calvinist also misunderstands the relationship between sovereignty and omniscience. The semi-Calvinist is not omniscient; she is inescapably part of creation, living within its time and standing under God's sovereignty. Knowing that the future is predestined cannot possibly impact her decision-making given that our semi-Calvinist doesn't know how the future is predestined to be. Because we are ignorant of the future and part of the system of God's sovereignty, we can do nothing other than make the best decisions we can based on what we know of the past and present and in the light of scripture. Only a confused understanding of God's omniscience and sovereignty could lead us to believe otherwise.
* Protestants who aren't Calvinists frequently identify themselves as "Arminians", but given the way they talk about prayer and free will they are much more in line with the fifth-century heretic Pelagius (see also). Taking my cue from R.C. Sproul's Chosen By God, I will refer to non-Calvinists as "semi-Pelagians".
** The way I understand God's sovereignty is called "theistic determinism". This entire discussion actually holds for all forms of determinism, theistic, agnostic, and atheistic.
*** Chosen By God. R.C. Sproul, 1986. Thomas Nelson, Inc. p 195-197.
**** Sproul goes on to mention that the antecedent of "any" in 2 Peter 3:9 is likely the Lord's Elect, in which case (by definition) none of them will perish, "God's will" in the passage refers to His sovereign efficacious will, and the verse is a strong affirmation of Calvinism.
4 comments:
So does that mean you draw no connection between what a person thinks and how a person acts? If I see God as the one who granted me my faith, who himself ensures that if I have come to him, I have already bee drawn by him, then my works are rooted in peace of mind, not a frenetic effort to prove my worth. My works are expressions of reverent gratitude and love, not fear of ultimate failure. If the living of one's life is nothing but a series of mere external acts, then I do not understand the Scriptural emphasis on the content of our inner life. Remember the servant who buried his talent for fear of failing his master? His accurate knowledge of his master's expectations was commendable, but it was his fear that drove him to the wrong act. We do fear God as to reverence and respect, but perfect love casts out fear. It changes our motivational core. It changes the way we think about people, and therefore the way we interact with them, and much of the palpable good and evil deeds of mankind flow from the works of our tongue. As a man thinks in his heart, so is he. If God has humbled someone to see his own profound sin and helplessness, and to see with what humility and sacrifice Christ has washed away his fatal stain, will that not result in less stone-throwing? In more love and gentleness in the world? Calvinism, coherently presented, teaches this. To the extent it has been believed and practiced consistently, it has done much good in the world.
I never knew what Calvinism was until after having read my entire Bible 7 times. For years I was studying doctrine. Then one day I stumbled across Calvinism. I was somewhat irritated that so many had a problem with T-U-L-I-P. I mean these people take sound doctrine and dismiss the Bible entirely because they say "it's Calvinism and Calvinism isn't Biblical". Where do they get that from? I know they diden't get that Idea from actually reading the entire Bible. There hasen't been one person in the Bible who God has given a "choice" of justification. God diden't give Abraham a choice to be justified. God diden't give Moses a choice to be justified. God diden't give Saul a choice to be justified. God diden't give David a choice to be justified. God diden't give solomon a choice to be justified. God diden't give any of his prophets a choice to be justified. God diden't give the 12 apostles a choice to be justified. God diden't give Paul a choice to be justified. The only choice God ever gave to people God justified is a choice of sanctification. Moses and Joshua said to the Israelites to choose to be obedient. They diden't tell the Israelites to choose to become God's chosen people. God already chose them through Abraham. The Israelites were given a choice to be obedient. They weren't given a choice to be justified.
Another matter is free will. Man's free will is limited. When people claim "If I don't have free will then God's a tyrant and I'm a robot" they'er making a relativist claim that lacks any context. That claim implys the person could possibly think they have unlimited free will. For free will to be unlimited it has to be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. That means people make the ideology of free will into a deity, and that's idolotry. That makse sense since those people claiming that are being greedy for soverignty, and greed is idolotry. Not to mention the pride and jealousy of the person who makes such an absurd claim.
Another point is that Calvinism is a driving factor in the reformation. To be anti-Calvinist is to be counter-reformation. You might as well be a catholic if you're anti-Calvinist. Also, to deny calvinism is only a demonstration of your inability to reason. If a person was truly interested in finding the truth they woulden't reject Calvinism. They woulden't lie and decieve every time they'er confronted with strong Biblical doctrine against their heresy. They woulden't twist and turn to dodge the truth(the light). They woulden't take pleasure in trying to qurrel based on such a shakey foundation they place themself on. They woulden't be showing such bad fruit. Anti-Calvinist, counter-reformation claims only lead people into the pit of despair.
I have seen many false teachers claiming T-U-L-I-P points. Such as this guy in florida claiming to be the second coming of Jesus Christ. This guy claims God is soverign and predestined people, etc... This is where temperance and discernment comes into play. Instead of following the words of some pastor blindly people need to open their Bible, read it, meditate on it, read it again, meditate on it some more, pray for wisdom, pray for temperance, pray for patience, discuss the issue with a sincere desire for truth, meditate more. Then if in error God will grant repentance to those who humble themself and hunger for righteousness, are poor in spirit, gentle.
lynchburger -- I was defending Calvinism, so you won't find me disagreeing as far as that goes. Sorry if my post wasn't clear.
thomas4881 -- As I understand things (and I think I'm getting this from Chosen By God, but I'm not going to look it up right now) Calvin and Edwards both taught that we do have entirely free will, because that can't mean anything other than "having the ability to choose what you desire". Unfortunately, humans are fallen and so are their natural desires. But the Holy Spirit regenerates the saints to desire Christ, and that's how conversion happens. So I believe that all people have had the choice of whether or not to follow God/Christ, but few have had the desire.
Post a Comment