Contradictions Revisited

Some time ago I wrote a sort of challenge for my readers to compare two views and see if they were actually contradictory. No one actually took up the challenge, and I'd like to claim that this is why I never followed it up, but the truth is I simply forgot. So ... are the claims of Arminians versus Calvinists actually contradictory or are they not necessarily so?

Here's how I'm going to do this. Since I am tagged a "standard Calvinist", I will respond to the "Classical Arminian" view. You understand, of course, that there are lots of variations in both "Calvinist" and "Arminian" views, so I can only offer my own perspective. But since I too often see Calvinism misrepresented, I think it is incumbent on me to respond from my own perspective to the Classical Arminian view. Are we in contradiction? More to the point ... am I in contradiction?

1. Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation.

Agreed. Yes, perfectly agreed. Oddly, when I examine the majority view of the standard Arminians, it seems that they disagree with their own view, but I'm in full agreement. Billy Graham expressed the classical perspective: "God has done 99.9% of what needs to happen for you to be saved. Now you have to do that last 0.1%." But ... didn't you just say that humans cannot make "any effort" towards salvation? Further, if that 99.9% does not actually accomplish salvation, but that final 0.1% is the key that makes it effective, isn't that a really big something? I don't get it. But I agree fully with their Point 1.

2. Salvation is possible by grace alone.

Agreed. No question at all. Again, though, do they actually believe this? I only ask because I don't see the contradiction. We understand grace to be "unmerited favor". Standard Calvinism says that salvation occurs by unmerited favor alone. Classical Arminianism says that God puts together the sequence of events that will lead a person to faith (called "Middle Knowledge"). It seems to me that there is some merit when a person comes to faith, isn't there? Again, I'm confused, but I agree with Point 2.

3. Works of human effort cannot cause or contribute to salvation.

Agreed, again! But ... again, if my faith causes or contributes to my salvation, isn't there some human effort involved? In other words, do they believe this? I generally do.

4. God's election is conditional on faith in Jesus.

Ah, now, see? Here's where we find a genuine contradiction. Isn't it interesting that this is the first? Some would paint us as so far apart, but it's not true. I would say that if God's choice of me is conditional on my choice of Him, then we're in direct contradiction to points 1-3 of Classical Arminianism. I am able to make an effort toward salvation. It isn't "grace alone". I do contribute a large effort to my salvation. (Consider this. If I am naturally unable to make any effort toward salvation, but I am able to contribute the faith required for God to choose me, that is a huge effort -- overcoming the impossible.)

5. Jesus' atonement was for all people.

Okay, this is a little ... questionable. If by "atonement" we mean "the price is paid", then there is no need to preach the Gospel. All people are atoned. End of problem. Whew! Glad we're okay now. Of course, no classical Arminian would agree with that, so that can't be it. So the "atonement" that is "for all people" is only potential. Nothing was actually paid. Payment only occurs when we initiate that final 0.1%, that final step of faith, that one thing that we who are unable to do anything actually do. In this case, it can only be said that "Jesus' potential atonement was for all people" (or affirm universalism). But the standard Calvinism doesn't dispute that. Standard Calvinism simply says that Jesus actually accomplished the payment for sin of those who would be saved. So the question isn't the extent of the atonement. The question is the intent. When Christ died, did He intend to save everyone and fail, or did He intend to save some and succeed?

6. God allows His grace to be resisted by those unwilling to believe.

Agreed. Yes, agreed. Grace can be resisted. Indeed, it is the Calvinist position (and the Arminian position -- Point 1) that all humans are unwilling to believe. Therefore, all humans resist grace. Of course, given Point 1, Point 2, and Point 3, the Arminians have a problem. If humans can always resist His grace, then how could anyone ever be saved? The Calvinist would say that people can resist God's grace, sure, but there comes a point where God is capable of overcoming their natural inclination to only sin, their natural hostility toward God, their spiritually dead condition, and enables them to be willing to believe.

7. Salvation can be lost, as continued salvation is conditional upon continued faith.

Agreed. ("What?? Can you say that??") Yes, I agree. As I said, I'm offering my "standard Calvinist" perspective, but I agree with Point 7. Salvation can be lost. "Oh," you say, "then you agree that there are folks who have lost their salvation?" Oh, no, that's not what I agreed with. I agreed that it can be lost, not that it has been lost. I believe that God is able to keep His own from straying. I regard the warnings of Scripture about losing salvation as largely the means that God uses to keep His own from straying too far. I believe that we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling, but I believe that this happens because God is at work in us making us both willing and able to do that (Phil 2:12-13). So I agree with Point 7's premise, but disagree with the conclusion that it has ever happened.

As it turns out, we end up with agreement all the way through ... at least mostly. Point 4 is a real contradiction, but as far as I can tell it's not merely a contradiction of Calvinism -- it's a contradiction of Arminianism. And that Point 5 gets a little dicey, but not just for me. It's tough for Arminians to maintain as well. So it turns out that there isn't much in the way of genuine contradiction here between the two stated views. The question is do Arminians actually believe what they claim to believe? That might produce some contradictions.