Monergism vs Synergism

[Skala]

The Basics of Monergism and Synergism
03/25/2012 - Alan Kurschner
(from Aomin.org)

The "Calvinist vs. Arminian" debate is substantially a debate between what is called "synergism" and "monergism." There is no third option (unless one is willing to affirm Pelagianism). For those who are new to the Calvinist-Arminian debate, the following is a primer on the two perennial branches of theological systems in Christianity. Or to put it another way, there are two very different ways for believers to view how their salvation was brought about.

In general, the first type (the Arminian-Synergist) affirms what is called "synergism." Synergists believe that two forces in the universe are necessary to bring about regeneration in the life of the sinner. In specifics, the two forces at work (cooperation) that are necessary to bring about regeneration, or spiritual life, is the will of man and the Holy Spirit (grace).

To put it another way, the work of the Holy Spirit is dependent on the creature’s will, hence, “synergism” (working together). Synergists will sincerely say, “I believe in grace alone.” But in reality, they believe that grace is not alone (sufficient), but that man’s will is necessary for regeneration to be effective.

(for sufficiency vs mere necessity, see this thread: http://www.christianforums.com/t7629212/)

It could be said that synergists are “functional” Arminians because even though some will deny the label, their theology functions synergistically (thus, how they identify themselves is inconsistent with what they teach and believe).

The second group of believers (the Calvinist-Monergist) affirm what is called “monergism.” Monergists believe that there is only one force in the universe (grace alone) that brings about regeneration in the life of the sinner. In specifics, because of the deadness of man’s spiritual state, his moral inability, the Holy Spirit performs the miracle of spiritual resurrection (regeneration) in that person, hence, “monergism” (one work). Grace is sufficient to be effective, and does not depend on some action of man.

In other words, the Holy Spirit does not merely whisper in the hardened sinner’s ear, hoping that the rebel sinner will “cooperate”; rather, while the sinner is in a state of hardness and rebellion, the Holy Spirit penetrates in the will of man and performs the miracle of spiritual life (regeneration). That is grace alone. Faith does not precede regeneration, regeneration precedes faith.

But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions– it is by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.” John 1:12-13

He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” John 8:47

Arminians cannot affirm monergism (grace alone); they must always have the creature’s will as the final determiner of their destiny, not God.

Inconsistently, Arminians pray (without knowingly) Calvinisticly, “God, change my unbelieving relative’s heart.” I have never heard them pray, “God, only whisper in my relative’s ear, but don’t change their heart unless you’ve been given permission.”

In contrast, the Calvinist prays and affirms biblical truth consistently.

 

[billybtennessee]

Wow, what a shock. more gospel according to 'ism' and 'ist'. But there is no free-will to choose, it must be predestined this way. Do have at it.

 

[Hammster]

Wow, what a shock. more gospel according to 'ism' and 'ist'. But there is no free-will to choose, it must be predestined this way. Do have at it.

Careful. Your "ism" is shining brightly.

 

[Christos Anesti]

Synergism in the Orthodox meaning of the term doesn't refute the idea that everything we have right down to our "natural gifts" like the ability to think, reason, make free choices, etc... is a gift or grace from God. We can use God's gifts to our salvation or misues them to our damnation.

We do reject the idea that Christ saves through coercion as if we were billiard balls or objects rather than actual persons though. If the use of coercion or irresistible force in the defication and salvation of man was morally acceptable to God then whats the whole point of the fall and why doesn't God simply force everyone into a state of salvation? The whole drama of history would be a pointless tragedy that never needed to occur.

 

[Hammster]

Synergism in the Orthodox meaning of the term doesn't refute the idea that everything we have right down to our "natural gifts" like the ability to think, reason, make free choices, etc... is a gift or grace from God. We can use God's gifts to our salvation or misues them to our damnation.

We do reject the idea that Christ saves through coercion as if we were billiard balls or objects rather than actual persons though. If the use of coercion or irresistible force in the defication and salvation of man was morally acceptable then whats the whole point of the fall and why doesn't God simply force everyone into a state of salvation?

The monergistic view isn't salvation through force or corrosion. Maybe you have some other view in mind, like Islam.

 

[Christos Anesti]

It might be possible to accept monoergism and still reject "irresistible grace" I guess. How does it work without that presupposition though?

 

[Christos Anesti]

I have seen Lutherans who support Monergism and who also reject irresistible grace but it seems they just sneak synergism in through the back door in the explanation they give of why they don't accept it though. At least as it's been explained to me. Maybe I'm just not getting it ? They claim you can say no but you can't say yes. Of course then you would have to refrain from saying no which would be exactly equivalent to saying yes! Human will would still come into play.

 

[Hammster]

It might be possible to accept monoergism and still reject "irresistible grace" I guess. How does it work without that presupposition though?

What part of irresistible grace do you think is coercion? Keep in mind, it's not a teem coined by reformers.

 

[Skala]

When a person resurrects a dead corpse, does he need the corpse's assistance or cooperation?

No, obviously, the corpse is simply the recipient of being effectively resurrected.

Salvation, or monergism, or irresistible grace is the same way.

When God regenerates us, he spiritually resurrects us, and he doesn't fail to do so. He doesn't need our cooperation or assistance to do it.

When we are spiritually dead (unregenerate), our natural choice is to reject God and the gospel.

But when God regenerates us, changes our hearts from stone to flesh, etc, our natural response is to respond to the gospel, and see Christ's beauty, no longer being unwilling, but now willing.

That's Calvinism or Monergism in a nutshell.

 

[billybtennessee]

Careful. Your "ism" is shining brightly.

Hope so. My bapt'ism' into JESUS CHRIST, that is. Is yours? God Bless ya' dear brother in Christ.

 

[Skala]

Wow, what a shock. more gospel according to 'ism' and 'ist'. But there is no free-will to choose, it must be predestined this way. Do have at it.

Got anything meaningful to add to the discussion? Or do you enjoy playing the anti-intellectualism card. Uh oh, that's an "ism".

 

[Christos Anesti]

The fact that its irresistible. The way it's been described to me makes it sound very deterministic. As if the person is being remote controlled into conformity with God.

 

[Hammster]

Hope so. My bapt'ism' into JESUS CHRIST, that is. Is yours? God Bless ya' dear brother in Christ.

That's right. Your a Baptist. Oops.

 

[Hammster]

The fact that its irresistible. The way it's been described to me makes it sound very deterministic. As if the person is being remote controlled into conformity with God.

Then maybe you should go to primary sources. Read the Canons of Dort. They don't take long to read.

 

[Skala]

The fact that its irresistible. The way it's been described to me makes it sound very deterministic. As if the person is being remote controlled into conformity with God.

The label "irresistible grace" is sort of misleading. The only reason it's called that is because the letter "i" in "irresistible" fits into the acrostic TULIP

A better description of the doctrine is effectual grace or effectual calling, for which there is many scriptures.

It means when God is ready to call us unto salvation, he does not fail, but the calling is effectual, it results in what God intends it to result in. When he spiritually resurrects us (Eph 2), he succeeds. "You were dead, and God made you alive...by grace you have been saved"

For example:

"Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. "

In this case, everyone called is also justified. Nobody who is "called" does not end up justified, because it says "those whom he called he also justified"

It's an effectual calling. It results in justification (salvation) every single time


Praise God that when He called you unto salvation, He did not fail. Or else you would end up in hell.

 

[Christos Anesti]

The label "irresistible grace" is sort of misleading. The only reason it's called that is because the letter "i" in "irresistible" fits into the acrostic TULIP

I see what your saying. Problems often come in when we reduce complex subjects into simple catch phrases. If it was chosen specifically to make a good acronym it might even be more problematic.

If monoergism were correct why isn't everyone saved though ? If salvation had nothing to do with the human response why would God pass anyone over for salvation? Doesn't He care about people? This is one of my main concerns about the theory. The fact that I've received some pretty frightening answers in response to these questions before also bugs me. People say things like " God doesn't want everyone to be saved because people suffering in hell brings God glory". Glory in relation to whom? Man? Himself? Saving everyone wouldn't be glorious apparently?

 

[Christos Anesti]

Then maybe you should go to primary sources. Read the Canons of Dort. They don't take long to read.

I'll do that. Thanks for the suggestion. It might clear up some of the questions I have.

I would suggest that people read the Church Fathers especially St John Chrysostom, St Gregory of Nyssa, St Basil, and St Gregory the Theologian on soteriology because they teach the doctrine of synergism properly. Often the attacks against it are appear more like attacks against a straw man conception of what it implies. The synergism of certain Protestant denominations doesn't seem to be exactly the same as the synergism of the Orthodox Church though so maybe some of the critiques are valid against a specific form of synergism I guess.

 

[Skala]

I see what your saying. Problems often come in when we reduce complex subjects into simple catch phrases. If it was chosen specifically to make a good acronym it might even be more problematic.

If monoergism were correct why isn't everyone saved though ? If salvation had nothing to do with the human response why would God pass anyone over for salvation? Doesn't He care about people? This is one of my main concerns about the theory. The fact that I've received some pretty frightening answers in response to these questions before also bugs me. People say things like " God doesn't want everyone to be saved because people suffering in hell brings God glory". Glory in relation to whom? Man? Himself? Saving everyone wouldn't be glorious apparently?

Hi Christos Anesti:

I think Romans 9 is the place you need to study:


Rom 9:6-24
(6) But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
(7) and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named."
(8) This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.
(9) For this is what the promise said: "About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son."
(10) And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac,
(11) though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad--in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls--
(12) she was told, "The older will serve the younger."
(13) As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
(14) What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means!
(15) For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
(16) So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
(17) For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."
(18) So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
(19) You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?"
(20) But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?"
(21) Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?
(22) What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,
(23) in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory--
(24) even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

Nobody knows why God didn't choose to save everyone. But we know that in God's infinite wisdom, He decided that it was the best display of His attributes to save some, but not others. Both his mercy and his justice are displayed through saving who He decided to save.

One analogy is that you wouldn't know what darkness was unless you had light to compare it to. Or sour vs sweet. Or joy vs suffering.

The saved saints wouldn't fully appreciate God's grace if there was nothing to compare it to. His grace wouldn't be fully magnified and worshiped if there was no contrast.

So, knowing God is perfectly just, and that He created the universe for His own glory and pleasure, we just have to trust that what he decides is right and correct. Which is why Paul reminds us that we are merely clay in the Potter's hands and we cannot demand anything of our Creator.

 

[Christos Anesti]

I was studying the book of Romans a few months ago. Using St Theodorets commentary on Romans and the "Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Romans" (which has commentary from a variety of the Church Fathers of both the East and West) to help me work through it.

 

[JM]

Monergism and Synergism - YouTube