Calvinism, Molinism, Arminianism poll

[Christianbookworm]

I'm just curious what everyone's views are in this. Please do not turn a secondary issue into a flame war. Jesus probably wouldn't want us to do that. So, please pick the option that best fits your view or explain if it somehow fits none of them.

[KingsGambit]

I wouldn't be surprised if none of the three views are actually accurate as they're attempts to understand divine mysteries, but Arminianism is definitely closest to what I believe.

(I also think that if we're just talking about views on election, Calvinism should have been called Augustinianism, since Calvin's views were broader, and Augustine really first came up with the idea, but that's not how it ended up getting labeled, and that's the word we're stuck with).

[Christianbookworm]

Yeah, hopefully God will bother to correct our silly misunderstandings someday.

[Sparko]

I am kind of halfway between Arminianism and Molinism. Maybe slightly more on the Molinism side. Both Arminianism and Calvinism have support in the bible and I think Molinism is a way to explain why both views can be found in the bible and both be true.

[Christianbookworm]

No Calvinist siblings yet? I know there on tweb..... to all my siblings in Christ!

[mossrose]

I am mostly Calvinist. And, no, I can't describe what I mean. I don't even know what a TULIP is.

[NorrinRadd]

I am mostly Calvinist. And, no, I can't describe what I mean. I don't even know what a TULIP is.

IIRC, "TULIP" is an acronym for the specific points of dispute between "Calvinists" and "Arminians" --

Total Depravity
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints

[NorrinRadd]

I don't know enough about Molinism -- nor sufficiently understand the little I've read about it -- to choose it.

I chose "Arminianism." It's not a perfect fit. Picirilli's "Reformation Arminianism" is fairly close, but so is Geisler's "Moderate Calvinism," which some claim is really just relabeled Arminianism.

[tabibito]

IIRC, "TULIP" is an acronym for the specific points of dispute between "Calvinists" and "Arminians" --

Total Depravity
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints

It is that.

Calvinist Points	Calvinism	Arminian Counter point
Total Depravity	Salvation solely through God’s decision and action. Unregenerate Man is absolutely unable to respond to God. Man cannot believe unless God first intervenes.	Salvation dependent on man’s exercise of free will to reject or accept Christ.
Unconditional Election	God’s foreknowledge determines who will be chosen. God freely decides, in accordance with his plan, those who will be chosen	Election is conditional. God’s Foreknowledge is based on the condition established by the man. God knows in advance who will commit to him. Foreknowledge therefore is a result, not a cause, of man’s choice.
Limited Atonement	The benefits of Christ’s atonement are made available only to those whom God had chosen beforehand. Christ died to save specific persons.	Unlimited Atonement. The benefits of Christ’s atonement are made available to all, but appropriated only by accepting Christ. Christ died to save no-one in particular, but anyone who would choose him.
Irresistible Grace	The man who is dead in spirit is irresistibly drawn to Satan, the man who is alive in spirit is irresistibly drawn to God. God grants life to the spirits of whom he will.	Resistible grace. Man is able to exercise free will to reject Christ.
Perseverance	Salvation is permanent. The saints cannot cease from persevering.	Salvation is dependent upon a continuing commitment to God. Salvation can be lost.

[NorrinRadd]

It is that.

Calvinist Points	Calvinism	Arminian Counter point
Total Depravity	Salvation solely through God’s decision and action. Unregenerate Man is absolutely unable to respond to God. Man cannot believe unless God first intervenes.	Salvation dependent on man’s exercise of free will to reject or accept Christ.
Unconditional Election	God’s foreknowledge determines who will be chosen. God freely decides, in accordance with his plan, those who will be chosen	Election is conditional. God’s Foreknowledge is based on the condition established by the man. God knows in advance who will commit to him. Foreknowledge therefore is a result, not a cause, of man’s choice.
Limited Atonement	The benefits of Christ’s atonement are made available only to those whom God had chosen beforehand. Christ died to save specific persons.	Unlimited Atonement. The benefits of Christ’s atonement are made available to all, but appropriated only by accepting Christ. Christ died to save no-one in particular, but anyone who would choose him.
Irresistible Grace	The man who is dead in spirit is irresistibly drawn to Satan, the man who is alive in spirit is irresistibly drawn to God. God grants life to the spirits of whom he will.	Resistible grace. Man is able to exercise free will to reject Christ.
Perseverance	Salvation is permanent. The saints cannot cease from persevering.	Salvation is dependent upon a continuing commitment to God. Salvation can be lost.

Of course, not everyone who identifies as "Arminian" would agree with the phrasing of the "counterpoints."

[tabibito]

Of course, not everyone who identifies as "Arminian" would agree with the phrasing of the "counterpoints."

That would come as no surprise. Are there any in particular that you have in mind?

[NorrinRadd]

That would come as no surprise. Are there any in particular that you have in mind?

I get the impression they were written by a Calvinist. They may not be blatantly incorrect, but they are phrased in keeping with Calvinist perceptions of, and complaints about, Arminianism.

I'll freely note at the outset that the objections I make are my own. Positions within Arminianism are diverse, and some of mine might be considered problematic even by the majority of Arminians.

-- On "Total Depravity" on the Calvinist side -- I do not agree with the "total inability" view of Total Depravity. Most Arminians do, and rely on universal provision of not-quite-regenerating "prevenient grace" to remedy it. I see some Scriptural basis for prevenient grace that convicts and illuminates, but I don't see any sort of partial regenerating. But IMO that chart fairly represents the basic Calvinist position, and I don't think most Calvinists would be troubled by it.

On the Arminian side, the phrasing is man-centered, which is probably the most common Calvinist mischaracterization of Arminianism. We believe God sovereignly chose to allow all humans who hear the Gospel the genuine free choice to accept and commit to it or to reject it. Grace is persuasive but resistible.


-- On "Election," I am inclined to the belief that we are chosen in THE "Chosen," Christ. God's foreknowledge is irrelevant to the issue.


-- On the extent of the Atonement, the phrasing, "Christ died to save no-one in particular" seems deliberately and unnecessarily pejorative. He died for all, and His will was to save *everyone* "in particular," but since His will was also to give everyone "in particular" a genuine choice, not everyone actually gets saved.


-- On Grace -- Yes, I believe it is resistible. I do not agree with the Calvinist view that unsaved man is completely unable to respond to God. Ligonier ministry says, "If there's one phrase that captures the essence of reformed theology, it is the little phrase, regeneration precedes faith." Twenty years or so ago, when I was first learning about soteriology, hard-nosed Calvie apologists used to bark, "RPF!" as their favorite slogan and unbeatable magic word. All the petals of the TULIP link together, but especially Irresistible Grace and Total-inability Depravity, through RPF. It's always the first place my mind goes when thinking of the problems of Calvinism, because it gives such a cruel meaning to Jesus or any preacher proclaiming, "You must be born again!"


-- On Perseverance -- The phrasing of the Arminian view suggests we believe we must continually strive to "stay" saved, and that any slip might potentially cause us to lose our grip on salvation. I *have* heard one or two Wesleyans say, "Saved by grace, kept by works," but that is not a well-informed view. My view is that salvation cannot be accidentally "lost," but that one does have the freedom to willfully discard it, and that such an act may be irrevocable.-- On Perseverance -- The phrasing of the Arminian view suggests we believe we must continually strive to "stay" saved, and that any slip might potentially cause us to lose our grip on salvation. I *have* heard one or two Wesleyans say, "Saved by grace, kept by works," but that is not a well-informed view. My view is that salvation cannot be accidentally "lost," but that one does have the freedom to willfully discard it, and that such an act may be irrevocable.

[tabibito]

I get the impression they were written by a Calvinist. They may not be blatantly incorrect, but they are phrased in keeping with Calvinist perceptions of, and complaints about, Arminianism.

Correct.

-- On "Total Depravity" on the Calvinist side -- I do not agree with the "total inability" view of Total Depravity. Most Arminians do, and rely on universal provision of not-quite-regenerating "prevenient grace" to remedy it. I see some Scriptural basis for prevenient grace that convicts and illuminates, but I don't see any sort of partial regenerating. But IMO that chart fairly represents the basic Calvinist position, and I don't think most Calvinists would be troubled by it.

There are a number of verses underscoring each of two relevant points. 1/ Christ acknowledged that even the evil know how to do good. (Luke 11:11-13) 2/ God accepts all who fear him and do what is right. (Acts 10:34-35) {Keeping in mind that "fear" has a broader range in Koine Greek than it does in English}. According to Christ, the unregenerate man is capable of doing good on occasion, a circumstance which anyone can observe in the real world. Even without God's intervention, no-one is irredeemably corrupt.

On the Arminian side, the phrasing is man-centered, which is probably the most common Calvinist mischaracterization of Arminianism. We believe God sovereignly chose to allow all humans who hear the Gospel the genuine free choice to accept and commit to it or to reject it. Grace is persuasive but resistible.

I don't see a problem with a man being in charge of his own salvation - God puts him in that position.

On "Election," I am inclined to the belief that we are chosen in THE "Chosen," Christ. God's foreknowledge is irrelevant to the issue.

Ah yes - "Whom he foreknew ..." Interesting that Paul says that certain people foreknew him, which kind of calls into question the whole interpretation of "foreknew" as referring to God's knowing a person before the person existed. It would seem that the people whom God foreknew are those in past that God knew (as loyal to him). What did God do for the people he knew in the past? it seems that he started predestining them after he knew them. Likewise, Jesus gave people the authority to become sons of God after they accepted him.

-- On the extent of the Atonement, the phrasing, "Christ died to save no-one in particular" seems deliberately and unnecessarily pejorative. He died for all, and His will was to save *everyone* "in particular," but since His will was also to give everyone "in particular" a genuine choice, not everyone actually gets saved.

I did a double take on that one - but after consideration, decided that it is as accurate as it is provocative. Christ saves anyone who is included in the class of those who accept him (John 1:11-12), but the person who accepts him is not pre-selected - the individual decides for himself whether to become a member of the elect.

On Grace -- Yes, I believe it is resistible. I do not agree with the Calvinist view that unsaved man is completely unable to respond to God. Ligonier ministry says, "If there's one phrase that captures the essence of reformed theology, it is the little phrase, regeneration precedes faith." Twenty years or so ago, when I was first learning about soteriology, hard-nosed Calvie apologists used to bark, "RPF!" as their favorite slogan and unbeatable magic word. All the petals of the TULIP link together, but especially Irresistible Grace and Total-inability Depravity, through RPF. It's always the first place my mind goes when thinking of the problems of Calvinism, because it gives such a cruel meaning to Jesus or any preacher proclaiming, "You must be born again!"

Yes - the first clue: Paul said that people obeyed the gospel even while they were still slaves to sin (Romans 6:17).

On Perseverance -- The phrasing of the Arminian view suggests we believe we must continually strive to "stay" saved, and that any slip might potentially cause us to lose our grip on salvation. I *have* heard one or two Wesleyans say, "Saved by grace, kept by works," but that is not a well-informed view. My view is that salvation cannot be accidentally "lost," but that one does have the freedom to willfully discard it, and that such an act may be irrevocable.-- On Perseverance -- The phrasing of the Arminian view suggests we believe we must continually strive to "stay" saved, and that any slip might potentially cause us to lose our grip on salvation. I *have* heard one or two Wesleyans say, "Saved by grace, kept by works," but that is not a well-informed view. My view is that salvation cannot be accidentally "lost," but that one does have the freedom to willfully discard it, and that such an act may be irrevocable.

Or, salvation is the free gift of God; maintenance is the responsibility of the recipient. The number of texts attesting to the concept is considerable. To the best of my knowledge, off the top of my head, near as I can tell: the claim can be found in every non Paulian book of the New Testament, and in at least two of Paul's epistles.

[Thoughtful Monk]

Wasn't sure what Molinism was so I had to go read up a little first. I still come out closest to Arminianism. Not fully comfortable with any of the 3 choices though. I'll admit this isn't an issue I've thought deeply on.

[Littlejoe]

I've been an Open Theist for many years now so, Arminianism is the closest to my views in the poll. I'm an extreme free will advocate...Love requires free will, not coercion. Irresistible Grace makes that impossible.