For context, Im coming at this as an agnostic whos very interested in religion. Growing up, I went to a conservative evangelical church that taught the sort of modified Arminianism thats common in America (free will with, paradoxically, eternal security). Im intrigued that the Reformed view has been making a real comeback in recent years. I have two interconnected questions for any Calvinists reading this -
1. I want to make sure that I fully grasp the Reformed position. Ive heard it articulated in two rather different ways:
A. Man is every bit as free as is in Arminianism with one major exception: he has no way whatsoever of accepting Gods gift of salvation. Man is so fallen that he is only capable of freely choosing damnation and corruption. Just as a dogs nature inevitably compels him to choose a poisoned steak over a plate of vegetables, man will choose hell over heaven every time. If a person is saved, therefore, it is because God unilaterally steps in and compels belief.
Thus, humanity is like a group of wheelchair-bound paraplegics tasked with climbing a mile-high mountain. No one deterministically directs their movements around the mountain; they are free as far as it goes. But they are physically incapable of climbing the mountain.
According to Calvinism, God snatches up certain paraplegics with a giant crane and drops them atop the mountain, whether or not these paraplegics want to go. These people are the elect. The unelect are out of luck since the crane is the only way to the top, and God has chosen not grab them.
Arminianism, in contrast, teaches that God lowers a massive elevator and invites everyone to the top. Its up to the individual paraplegics whether or not they want to go.
So in short, when referring to the absolute Sovereignty of God, Calvinists mean that God alone determines who will and will not accept His plan of salvation.
B. Every last detail of the universe is predetermined down to and beyond the subatomic level. Every word that I am presently typing originates from God, and He has willed for me to type these particular words at this particular Starbucks in Atlanta, GA at this particular point in history, 9:06 PM on Friday January 11, 2013 A.D. In film geek parlance, God is the ultimate auteur: the screenwriter/director/cinematographer/producer/editor/marketer etc. etc. etc. of the uber-budgeted epic of the universe.
Obviously, then, God alone decides who will accept His plan of salvation just like He alone controls absolutely everything else that goes on.
So in short, when referring to the absolute Sovereignty of God, Calvinists mean that God controls absolutely everything that happens in the universe down to the smallest detail, including whether or not individuals accept his plan of salvation.
These strike me as fairly different views, but Ive heard Calvinism described both ways. It would seem possible to characterize a A as single predestination (since God foreordains who will be saved but does not foreordain sin) and B as double predestination (since God, indeed, foreordains everything). But Ive actually heard A described as double predestination, which seemed odd. I could also envision various intermediate positions between the two extremes.
Also, I recognize that B is not technically pantheism, but it strikes me as vaguely pantheistic, as if everything down to the tiniest molecule is an extension of Gods consciousness. I understand that in B Calvinism God is a separate being set over and above creation, and that creation reflects Gods will down to the tiniest detail but is nevertheless set apart God, whereas in pantheism creator and creation are interconnected and are in fact the same. But thinking that God is author of our thoughts, in particular, evokes a kind of eastern/pantheistic interconnectedness. I am sure that you all feel very differently.
2. I suppose this is sort of a compound question - What theological propositions must a person accept, at absolute minimum, to be considered a saved Christian. How do you justify these requirements Biblically? Must one have perfect theological beliefs to be saved? If not, why would God elect someone but then imbue them with imperfect beliefs? Are Arminians saved? Are Roman Catholics? If Arminians are saved but not Roman Catholics, how do you justify this position since both parties believe that works are necessary for salvation (even if the Arminians dont realize that they believe this).
Thanks for listening, and I look forward to any answers.
1. I want to make sure that I fully grasp the Reformed position. Ive heard it articulated in two rather different ways:
A. Man is every bit as free as is in Arminianism with one major exception: he has no way whatsoever of accepting Gods gift of salvation. Man is so fallen that he is only capable of freely choosing damnation and corruption. Just as a dogs nature inevitably compels him to choose a poisoned steak over a plate of vegetables, man will choose hell over heaven every time. If a person is saved, therefore, it is because God unilaterally steps in and compels belief.
Thus, humanity is like a group of wheelchair-bound paraplegics tasked with climbing a mile-high mountain. No one deterministically directs their movements around the mountain; they are free as far as it goes. But they are physically incapable of climbing the mountain.
According to Calvinism, God snatches up certain paraplegics with a giant crane and drops them atop the mountain, whether or not these paraplegics want to go. These people are the elect. The unelect are out of luck since the crane is the only way to the top, and God has chosen not grab them.
Arminianism, in contrast, teaches that God lowers a massive elevator and invites everyone to the top. Its up to the individual paraplegics whether or not they want to go.
So in short, when referring to the absolute Sovereignty of God, Calvinists mean that God alone determines who will and will not accept His plan of salvation.
B. Every last detail of the universe is predetermined down to and beyond the subatomic level. Every word that I am presently typing originates from God, and He has willed for me to type these particular words at this particular Starbucks in Atlanta, GA at this particular point in history, 9:06 PM on Friday January 11, 2013 A.D. In film geek parlance, God is the ultimate auteur: the screenwriter/director/cinematographer/producer/editor/marketer etc. etc. etc. of the uber-budgeted epic of the universe.
Obviously, then, God alone decides who will accept His plan of salvation just like He alone controls absolutely everything else that goes on.
So in short, when referring to the absolute Sovereignty of God, Calvinists mean that God controls absolutely everything that happens in the universe down to the smallest detail, including whether or not individuals accept his plan of salvation.
These strike me as fairly different views, but Ive heard Calvinism described both ways. It would seem possible to characterize a A as single predestination (since God foreordains who will be saved but does not foreordain sin) and B as double predestination (since God, indeed, foreordains everything). But Ive actually heard A described as double predestination, which seemed odd. I could also envision various intermediate positions between the two extremes.
Also, I recognize that B is not technically pantheism, but it strikes me as vaguely pantheistic, as if everything down to the tiniest molecule is an extension of Gods consciousness. I understand that in B Calvinism God is a separate being set over and above creation, and that creation reflects Gods will down to the tiniest detail but is nevertheless set apart God, whereas in pantheism creator and creation are interconnected and are in fact the same. But thinking that God is author of our thoughts, in particular, evokes a kind of eastern/pantheistic interconnectedness. I am sure that you all feel very differently.
2. I suppose this is sort of a compound question - What theological propositions must a person accept, at absolute minimum, to be considered a saved Christian. How do you justify these requirements Biblically? Must one have perfect theological beliefs to be saved? If not, why would God elect someone but then imbue them with imperfect beliefs? Are Arminians saved? Are Roman Catholics? If Arminians are saved but not Roman Catholics, how do you justify this position since both parties believe that works are necessary for salvation (even if the Arminians dont realize that they believe this).
Thanks for listening, and I look forward to any answers.