Calvinist or Arminian?

Scripture clearly teaches that we are called upon to choose God, as for example in Deuteronomy 30:19, where the people of Israel are called to choose between life and death, blessing and curse. Yet Scripture also teaches, for example, that God ‘chose us in [Christ]before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him’ (Eph. 1:4). The question therefore is, which causes the other, which is ultimate? There are two main answers to this question, often called Calvinism and Arminianism. These names are somewhat misleading in that both views go back to the early church, over a thousand years before the time of either Calvin or Arminius.

The issue here is the same as in the previous chapter, but viewed from a different angle. Does God give sufficient grace to ‘all’ (as with Arminius and Wesley), which means that the ultimate choice lies with us? Or does God give efficacious grace to some only whom he has chosen (as with Calvin), which means that the ultimate choice is God’s?

Both views were found at the time of the eighteenth-century Evangelical Revival. The Wesleys and others were Arminians; George Whitefield and others were Calvinists. This caused Wesley and Whitefield to go their separate ways, but the division was not acrimonious. John Wesley preached at Whitefield’s funeral, at the latter’s request. The Calvinists mostly stayed within the Church of England; the Arminians mostly became Methodists. Since then evangelic-alism has always embraced both Calvinists and Arminians, though the relative proportions have varied from time to time. In the 1960s there was a strong revival of Calvinism in the UK, though today it would not be so popular. In the last ten years there has been a revival of Calvinism in the USA. 

It would be wrong to suggest that all evangelicals are either Calvinists or Arminians. While there are significant numbers who openly subscribe to one or another of these views, there are also significant numbers who do not come down on either side, either regarding this as a secondary issue or claiming to hold a middle position. Charles Simeon (1759–1836) commented that Calvinists and Arminians alike wish that Paul had phrased himself dif-ferently in places and that the truth lies not at one extreme or the other but at both extremes. There are churches where Calvinism or Arminianism is very explicitly taught from the pulpit. There are other churches where neither is explicitly taught and where one can attend for years without hearing a clear answer to the question posed at the head of this section.

The Calvinist view is perceived by many as offending against the principles of modern Western culture, a culture that favours a democratic inclusive egalitarianism and stresses the rights of the individual. Arminianism sits more happily with these principles. This in itself does not prove it right or wrong, but it is worth noting why ideas become more or less popular at different times. Anthony Kenny, a Roman Catholic theologian who left the Roman Church, described his theological training in Rome. He recalls how disgusted many of his American fellow students were to discover how inegalitarian was Roman Catholic teaching on grace, as taught at the Council of Trent (1545–63).3 We must not allow our cultural prejudices to decide the issue for us, but should examine the teaching of Scripture and see how we can hold the various strands together.

We hope you enjoyed this snippet from Tony's new book. Sin and Grace published on the 19th of November, and is one of our November 2020 Releases.