Rebutting Calvinism (Pt. 2)
Unconditional Versus Conditional Election
The Doctrine of TULIP: “U”
Unconditional Election
This doctrine affirms that God chooses “some” people on the basis of His choice to inherit eternal life, rather than their choice. This doctrine makes certain men to be part of God’s Kingdom apart from a conscious choice.
Why this view is very distorted?
The unconditional election takes certain verses out-of-context which is their basis. Yes, it is true God elects people, but not apart from faith or consent. The unconditional election (theistic determinism) negates the point of faith, because the only entity or force that is in operation would be grace. They base their argument from John 15:16, which says, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you” (KJV). When we successfully choose God, it is not on the sheerness of our willpower, but on God’s power working with our choice. But when we reject or struggle in choosing God, it is on the sheer basis of our will. God empowers our willpower to choose God, but it is not some compelling force. Even Jesus says in the same chapter, “You are My friends if you do whatever I command you” (John 15:14). If we are the elect, we are also His friends. Jesus bases our election (aka our friendship) on our compliance or faith. Why did Jesus not say, “You are My friends no matter what because God has chosen you.” The “if” statements imply condition, or they imply free agency in a world of possibilities. Calvinistic Jesus should have been consistent for the proponents of T.U.L.I.P.
Theistic determinism negates the intimate aspect of faith. A compelling force forming a relationship is no longer genuine, but quite manipulative by reason of imprisoning the powers of the mind. Or the same force deprives the mind from autonomy; thus, the mind loses personhood and accountability. They assert that having faith being partially responsible for salvation leads to boasting of pride; however, one can boast of their unconditional election against the non-chosen. It is also because they mistake our view of faith as our own works; meanwhile, grace is only God’s work. But faith (and wisdom) is given by God, so we can’t boast for having it or wisely applying it to God. And without God, we cannot have faith because faith requires two distinct entities in harmony. So grace is a work of God alone, but faith is trust between God and man. God not only gives us faith, but also partners with us by faith. This cooperation displays faith as intimate; in contrast to, puppeteering or programming an entity. Our faith working with God’s will is a byproduct of God’s grace. Because willpower apart from God’s grace cannot produce faith. And the works that seek self-justification is moral/spiritual independence from God, but faith is codependency with God (Ephesians 2:8). As you can tell, Paul dealt with the mentality of faith versus of works, but James addressed the practicality of faith.
The next verse they use to justify their nonsense is Acts 13:48 which states, “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed” (ESV). However, this depends how the Greek text is read and translated. It actually says, “…and as many as those who believed [the message] were appointed to eternal life.” They were appointed to aiōnion life because they believed the gospel of Christ. They weren’t believing only because they were appointed. Remember, God’s election depends on our divinely empowered wills, which is a result of God’s grace. This is a matter of partial perception, because though God is responsible for our faith, we also exerted that faith given by God’s grace. The Gentiles were prepared to life by God on the basis of their faith. Also, Jesus says that eternal life is to know God by personal experience, which requires synergy in faith (John 17:3). Before close intimacy can occur, there must be trust on both parties. We choose God because God empowered our choice, which gave us the possibility to be elected as children of God. We temporally deny God because though God empowered our choice, we do not make use of it (that’s why I said “possibility” instead of a total probability). Because God will give us many opportunities, we will eventually believe. But if the probability were 100% then everyone would respond to the first invitation. Some will respond to God in this life, but others, unfortunately by their stubbornness, will respond in the remedial chastisement of fire (1 Corinthians 3:15; 1 Peter 3:19, 20). In the Old Testament scriptures, even this verse implies that faith is the cause for justification, not the unconditional and bias election of God (Habakkuk 2:4). And an early Christian apologist stated this about Jesus’ invitation of grace:
“As a king sends his son, who is also a king, so sent He Him; as God He sent Him; as to men He sent Him; as a Saviour He sent Him, and as seeking to persuade, not to compel us; for violence has no place in the character of God”
(Mathetes Epistle to Diognetus).
My next rebuttal will be on Limited Atonement.
