Monday, October 21, 2013
Two Views of Election and Redemption
ARMINIANISM (FREE WILL) VS CALVINISM (SOVEREIGN GRACE)
(I believe the Calvinist/Reformed theology is biblically correct).
From In My Place Condemned He Stood:
Celebrating the Atonement, by J.I. Packer
ELECTION
Arminianism
"God's act of election was defined by the Arminians (free will)
as a resolve to receive to sonship and glory a duly qualified class of people:
believers in Christ.
This becomes a resolve to receive individual persons only in virtue
of God's forseeing the contingent fact that they will of their own accord believe.
There is nothing in the decree of election to ensure that the class of believers will
ever have any members; God does not determine to make any man believe.
Calvinism
Calvinists define election as a choice of particular undeserving
persons to be saved from sin and brought to glory, and to that end to be redeemed
by the death of Christ and given faith by the Spirit's effectual calling.
Conclusion
Where the Arminian says: 'I owe my election to my faith,'
the Calvinist says: 'I owe my faith to my election.' Clearly, these two concepts
of election are very far apart."
REDEMPTION
Arminianism
"Christ's work of redemption was defined by the Arminians as the
removing of an obstacle (the unsatisfied claims of justice) that stood in the way
of God's offering pardon to sinners, as he desired to do, on condition that they
believe.
Redemption, according to Arminianism, secured for God a right to
make this offer but did not of itself ensure that anyone would ever accept it;
for faith, being a work of man's own, is not a gift that comes to him from Calvary.
Christ's death created an opportunity for the exercise of saving faith,
but that is all it did.
Calvinism
Calvinists, however, define redemption as Christ's actual substitutionary
endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners, through which
God was reconciled to them, their liability to punishment was for ever destroyed,
and a title to eternal life was secured for them.
In consequence of this, they now have in God's sight a right to the gift
of faith, as the means of entry into the enjoyment of their inheritance.
Calvary, in other words, not merely made possible the salvation of those
for whom Christ died; it ensured that they would be brought to faith and their salvation
made actual. The cross saves.
Conclusion
Where the Arminian will say only: 'I could not have gained my
salvation without Calvary,' the Calvinist will say: 'Christ gained my salvation
for me at Calvary.'
The former makes the cross the sine qua non (something indispensable
or essential) of salvation; the latter sees it as the actual procuring cause of salvation,
and traces the source of every spiritual blessing, faith included, back to the great
transaction between God and his Son carried through on Calvary's hill.
Clearly, these two concepts of redemption are quite at variance."
***************
(The main point is that Arminianism insists that salvation is a joint, cooperative
effort between God and man, while Calvinism believes that salvation is a miracle
wrought by God's grace that requires no cooperation on man's part.
In fact, man is unable to respond positively to God without being born again first).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment