Typical Reformed Teaching
Posted by Vincent Cheung on September 18, 2006The following is a revised email correspondence.
In Godliness with Contentment (p. 33), you write, "Since the Bible teaches that everything has been foreordained by God, this means that all events, including human decisions, come under this category." I am unsure if typical Reformed teaching espouses this. If it does, then it would be inconsistent for them not to embrace active reprobation. On the other hand, when I mentioned that God foreordains everything, my friend expressed the concern of many Christians when he responded, "If God foreordains everything, does that mean that he also wills us to sin?" Of course, we have already discussed this issue and you have already addressed it, but it seems a very difficult concept to embrace.
(1) I am unsure if typical Reformed teaching espouses this. If it does, then it would be inconsistent for them not to embrace active reprobation.
Typical Reformed teaching, or what I call popular Calvinism or inconsistent Calvinism, disagrees with me on some points. It does teach that God is sovereign over human decisions, but it is inconsistent in saying that these human decisions are still somehow free. See what I say against "compatibilism" in The Author of Sin. Note chapters 4-10, 15, 18, and 19. Also see relevant sections in my Systematic Theology and Commentary on Ephesians.
A special section from Commentary on Ephesians has been released separately as Chosen in Christ. It has its own table of contents to aid comprehension. In it, I cite liberally from Luther's The Bondage of the Will, showing that popular Calvinism is in fact far weaker than Luther's view regarding God's sovereignty over all things, including sin and evil. In fact, several of the harsh rebukes that Luther unleashes against Erasmus can be directly applied to popular Calvinism without any modification. I also argue against passive reprobation in this section.
Yes, you are right in that they are inconsistent, and Arminians often correctly exploit this in debate. When inconsistent Calvinists are challenged on this, they often say that we must not judge God's word by "human reason" or to speculate beyond what God has revealed. But they use logic only when it is convenient for them, and it is not speculation just to state exactly what God has revealed, that he is the righteous direct ruler over all things, including sin and evil.
(2) On the other hand, when I mentioned that God foreordains everything, my fellowship leader expresses the concern of many Christians when he responded, "If God foreordains everything, does that mean that he also wills us to sin?"
Of course. There are many biblical passages that explicitly teach this, only some of which are included in "The Problem of Evil" and our other publications. Please review them as necessary.
(3) Of course, we have already discussed this issue and you have already addressed it, but it seems a very difficult concept to embrace.
It is definitely difficult — the sinful or unrenewed mind never naturally agrees with God. But logically speaking, and to the extent that the doctrine has been revealed in Scripture, it is one of the easiest to understand and defend. Mystery appears only beyond what God has revealed. But what he has revealed on this subject is clear, understandable, and undeniably true.
Here when you say that it is "a very difficult concept to embrace," you are referring to a subjective resistance that has little relevance to whether something is true. It has no bearing on the force of an argument or position. Some people find it hard to accept that God would create a hell and send people there. Some people find it hard to accept that there is a God in the first place. But both rationally and emotionally, I find it difficult to believe that anyone would resist these teachings, including the doctrine of hell. But Scripture tells me why they resist, and it is because of sin.
– Recommended –
From vincentcheung.com:
"Forced to Believe" (1) , (2) , (3) , (4)
The "Sincere Offer" of the Gospel, (1) , (2)
More than a Potter (1) , (2) , (3) , (4)
Freewill Offerings and Human Freedom
Creatures Cannot Initiate Motion
From rmiweb.org: