Common Objections to the Doctrine of Election
“Calvinism makes the author of sin and does not bring glory to Him.”
This is another recurring accusation but those who use this as an argument have the same if not a greater problem. If God merely created man and chose them based on their foreseen acts of faith, as their position holds, and God knew some of these would choose hell, then why did God go ahead and create them to begin with? In other words, their eternal destiny is fixed by some kind of impersonal fate since the future cannot be changed if God already knows it. If whether or not someone chooses God is already known by God then the future is certain, correct? But the biblical view is that the future is certain because of the eternal plan of a merciful and loving personal God. The foreseen faith view is based on an impersonal determinism. Something is determining their future choice, in that scheme, but not God. So what is it? If God already knows the outcome, meaning the future cannot be changed, then the future is fixed and there is no real freedom. Their choice is determined. So why did God, then, go ahead and create them? The biblical and philosophical problems with the foreseen faith position, then, are much, much greater than with the biblical one. They appear to be trying to get God off the hook rather than taking a hard look at the Scriptures.
Furthermore, I would answer your question by saying that God is not the author of sin. Ordaining something like sin to take place is not the same as being the author of it. For example, God ordained the crucifixion to take place yet God cannot be blamed for the secondary causes which made it happen – the evil acts of men which carried it out. God ordained the evil of the most unjust act in history to take place…See the following verse:
“…this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death.” Acts 2:23
So God, although ordaining it, cannot be blamed for it. As humans, we always choose what we desire most. God does not compel us to make any decision, and does not compel us to disobey. We do so willingly. All God needs to do to harden us is remove His grace and leave us to our free will.
It takes time and grace to empty hearts of church tradition and to fill it with the Scripture. People can be looking right at a verse which is plain but because of their preconceived notions and presuppositions, they think it can’t really mean what it says.
Wayne Grudem, in his Systematic Theology, also has some excellent points to add regarding this question which I believe will help us get a better understanding of this issue. The points he makes are basically as follows:
1. In the Arminian view, how can we know if God will ultimately triumph over evil? The Arminian assertion that evil is not according to the will of God creates a bit of a problem.
2. If the evil now in the world got here even though God did not want it, how can we be sure He will ultimately triumph over it in the end? The Scripture says He will but if He was not powerful enough to keep it out of the universe in the first place, since it came against his will (according to the Arminian scheme), and if He cannot predict the outcome of future events that involve free human choices and angelic/demonic beings then what makes us so sure that his declaration that He will triumph is actually true? The Calvinist position is preferable, not only because it is biblical but also because there is great freedom from anxiety about the future, since God “works all things for good to those who love Him.” The Arminian position appears to leave us in a state of anxiety. While all positions are hard to understand, the Reformed view of evil as ordained by God and under His sovereign control, while God not being the author of it, is a plain reading of the Scriptures in its portrayal of our God. The Arminian view of evil as not ordained or willed by God also means it is not under His control. Nowhere in the Scriptures is God portrayed in such a way.
3. Another point Grudem makes is this: Although we will always have unanswered questions about these matters, the questions Calvinists and Arminians leave unanswered are very different.
a. The Calvinist must say (1) that he really does not ultimately know how God can ordain that we do evil willingly and how God cannot be blamed for that evil. We can speculate but the Bible does not explicitly explain how this is. (2) Calvinists must also say that ultimately they do not know how God can cause us to choose something willingly. Again we can speculate but the Bible does not explain this. However, the Calvinist ultimately answers these hard questions by saying that God is infinitely great and can do far more than we can fathom. So the unanswered questions really serve to increase our appreciation of God’s greatness.
b. The Arminians, on the other hand, must leave unanswered, questions regarding God’s knowledge of the future, why He could allow evil even when it is against His will and whether He will actually triumph over evil. The failure of Arminians to resolve these questions tends to diminish God’s greatness, omnipotence, omniscience and reliability. So these unanswered questions tend to exalt the greatness of man – his freedom to do what God does not want, and the power of evil since it exists in the universe even though God does not want it.
By Jeff Spry (www.monergism.com)
***This is part of a blog series on the Sovereignty of God. This topic has been highly mis-understood throughout much of evangelicalism. Some will say they believe that God is sovereign, yet deny its many implications. Others will completely deny God’s Sovereignty because of it’s implications. We hope that you will stick with this extensive study on the Sovereignty of God. We will be including resources from a variety of Theologians and Authors, that will hopefully be able to answer many of the misnomers and questions that you may have***
Leave a comment