Okay, here are the two basic views that get debated so often among Christians:
Classical Wesleyan Arminianism:
1. Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation
2. Salvation is possible by grace alone
3. Works of human effort cannot cause or contribute to salvation
4. God's election is conditional on faith in Jesus
5. Jesus' atonement was for all people
6. God allows his grace to be resisted by those unwilling to believe
7. Salvation can be lost, as continued salvation is conditional upon continued faith
Standard Calvinism:
1. Total Depravity - After the Fall, human will was given over to sin and is as if it were dead, so that without being "awakened" by the Holy Spirit (the initiator) a human is unable to choose to be saved.
2. Unconditional Election - God's choice was not determined by anything ever done or to be done by a human; it is a free gift not earned by merit. Under this view, God is the initiator of salvation.
3. Particular Redemption (AKA Limited Atonement) - The blood of Christ was a substitution for the penalty of sin, and was effectual for the forgiveness of sins. Therefore, it not only secures but guarantees salvation.
4. The Efficacious Call of the Holy Spirit (AKA Irresistible Grace) - The outward call to salvation is made to all, but the Holy Spirit also places an inward call in the hearts of those who are elected for salvation. The outward call can (and often is) resisted, but the inward call is more powerful than human willpower. The Holy Spirit causes the sinner to respond in faith.
5. Perseverance of the Saints - The Holy Spirit will keep the believer secured in faith in Christ to the end.
Here's the test. Are these views contradictory? Are there components that do not contradict? How closely can you make these two views actually agree with each other without genuine contradiction? (I think, if you're willing, you'll find a lot more than can fit than won't.)
3 comments:
Thank you for taking on these tough theological issues! I've been afraid to even get into it on my blog, but I love thinking through Calvinism. I've been a Calvinist for less than a year, but already it's revolutionized my walk with the Lord. It was like, "Now everything makes sense!" Before I was troubled by all the contradictions in the theology I was taught.
You are describing exactly what happened with me. I had a lot of training in my life and I kind of sat around with things that were ... fine, but not settled. Then I started seeing this stuff in Scripture and, like a scrambled jigsaw puzzle, all the pieces started fitting together. The cogs in the machine started meshing perfectly. It was almost a physical relief to see all this stuff fall into place ... you know, like Scripture was always supposed to make sense.
And thanks for pointing out what is so often missed. "It's revolutionized my walk with the Lord." Lots of people tell me, "Doctrine isn't what's important; it's how you live." And I've found the opposite -- that right doctrine produces right living.
Linkback from Wintery Knight Blog:
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/what-are-the-differences-between-wesleyan-arminianism-and-calvinism/
Post a Comment