Friday, September 18, 2009

Paul was a Calvinist

I thought I would throw out an intentionally inflammatory title just to spice things up. I am tired and cranky this morning while I am writing this so I am feeling blogo-cheeky. I also haven’t had a good old fashioned Calvinist rant in a while, so here goes.

I know that title seems silly on its face since Paul lived and died almost fifteen centuries before Calvin was even born. What I meant is that I am asserting that Paul would in essence affirm the doctrines we call Calvinism.

What do I base that assertion on?

First, Paul’s doctrinal statements in Ephesians and Romans especially are unmistakable in their presentation of a God who predestines, elects, effectually calls, regenerate and preserves a select remnant of lost mankind and Paul is equally clear on the lostness and utter inability and complete lack of desire on the part of unregenerate man to even look for Christ, much less make a decision for or “ask Jesus into your heart”. Paul would affirm Calvinism because Calvinism draws as its foundation the teachings of Christ as well as the writings of Paul.

Second and perhaps even more importantly is the account of Saul’s conversion in Acts 9:

But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank. (Acts 9:1-9)

What is on display here? God’s sovereign grace or man’s free will? Paul is an especially delicious example because he assumed that he already was doing God’s will. He was a highly educated and fervent Jew. He was not “making a decision for Christ”, just the opposite he was persecuting Christ (Note that Christ said Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting ME?). As anyone who was leading an atheistic life or following a false religion knows, the intrusion of Christ into your life is the sweetest, most wonderful thing that can happen to you but it is also jarring and unexpected. If you are a kid in a Christian home, it is kind of expected that at some point you will come to Christ. You are surrounded by “God-talk”, grow up in church, hear the Bible read. Christ is comfortable because He is at least academically familiar to you. For the radical unbeliever, finding Christ inserting Himself into your life is a world altering event. I am not saying that it is not for a “church kid” but it is doubly so for those who rejected God or followed a false god.

So my point? Just that those who have a problem with Calvinism have a problem with Paul and with Christ Himself. Not the various traditions that have grown up around the Reformed movement but the actual doctrines of Calvinism itself. It is easy to confuse the baggage of Reformed denominational traditions with the doctrines of grace known as Calvinism. There is a small but vocal minority of people in the church who use Calvinism as a straw man to conquer and who decry both Calvinism as heresy and its adherents as heretics. What Paul experienced and what he wrote are far more in line with what Calvin wrote and what Calvinists believe than the man centered doctrines of Arminianism and decisional regeneration popular in the church today. If I have to choose between the followers of Jacob Arminius and the apostle Paul, I am picking Paul 100 times out of 100.



Bookmark and Share

11 comments:

Steve said...

Talk about cranky.

Read this.

http://amillennialist.blogspot.com/2008/10/calvinism-blasphemes-living-god.html

As a Lutheran, I do see much truth here.

Whether you agree, or not, at least you'll have a better understanding of why we (Lutherans - some of us anyway) believe that paul was a Lutheran - or would b if he were around today.

Steve said...

http://aliengoodnews.wordpress.com/2009/09/09/calvin%e2%80%99s-arminius%e2%80%99s-stairway-to-heaven/

That one is not so cranky. But he makes some good points.

I like your take on it, Arthur, if you get any time.

Again, not so much to convince you, but rather that you would better undersatnd why we believe as we do.

Debbie said...

On the other hand, Acts 8:26-38 tells about a person who was reading scripture and seeking God. God sent Phillip to him to tell him about how Jesus fulfilled Isaiah's prophecies.

I have a hard time fitting this example with your oft-repeated statement that unregenerate man can never seek God. And this is straight from Scripture, too, and just as valid as Paul's conversion....

Arthur Sido said...

Debbie, is that what Acts 8: 26-28 says, that he was seeking God? I don't think that reading scripture=seeking God. Mormons read the Bible, Jehovah's Witnesses read the Bible, atheists read the Bible. But they all read for their own reasons. Lots of people seek religion for their own purposes, but I maintain that none seek after God through Christ of their own volition.

What would you make of Paul's statement here?

as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." (Rom 3:10-12, emp added)

Arthur Sido said...

Steve, I will check those out later today.

Arthur Sido said...

Steve, I read the first one "Calvinism blasphemes the living God". What a hoot!

Steve said...

I thought you'd get a kick out of it.

The Bible passages he quotes are right on, though.

We (Lutherans certainly do have a different take than Calvin did.

But we believe scripture is on our side. (who doesn't?)

Debbie said...

Arthur,

According to my Bible, these "as it is written" verses refer to statements that are taken from the Psalms, etc., which often use figurative language. If I'm to take these verses literally, I would ask if I'm to take the next verses literally, too: "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips." Personally, I've never met anyone who has a throat which can be used to throw a body into, or any people walking around with asps' venom in their mouth. Have you? On the other hand, I have seen non-Christians who do good. Good enough to earn their way into heaven? - of course not, because our righteousness can't earn that. And that's the point of this passage - that the law shows our shortcomings.

Yes, people read scripture for many reasons. And many people read scripture with closed minds. But not all. The man in Acts 8 wanted the scripture explained to him. He was seeking the truth.

I keep coming back to things Jesus said, things like "Come to me, all who are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" and "seek, and you will find." Was He telling people to do things they can't do, or in saying to do it did He also give the power to obey Him? (As you may recall, I asked you about this stuff in a rather long email over a year ago, and am still waiting for your response....) This is where we differ.

Arthur Sido said...

Debbie,

There is a clear distinction between the principal being taught (there is none that seeks after God) and the descriptive language being used (like asps). There is also the myriad of passages that speaks of the deadness of man in sin, the utter depravity and lostness of man. I don’t think we should reject the teachings of the Psalms because they use figurative language. Psalm 51 speaks of the forgiveness of sins, even grievous ones, but it also speaks of being “purged with hyssop” and becoming “whiter than snow” . Do we really get purged with hyssop? Does our coloration change? No. Is the principal still the same, that God is able to forgive to the uttermost? Absolutely.

Christ calls us to be perfect, as our Father in heaven is perfect (Matt 5:48). That is clearly impossible. Is that unjust on the part of Christ to call us to do something that we are unable to do? Later in Matthew, in 19: 21-22 Jesus tells the rich young ruler to give away all that he had, and he would be perfect. The point is not that giving away everything justifies you. In Matthew 19” 25 the disciples despair “Who then can be saved?” Christ responds that with men it is impossible, but with God all things are impossible. God commands and God provides the way, the question is who initiates salvation and why. Man choosing God or God choosing man?

The call for repentance is universal. All men are called to repent. God does call men to do things outside of themselves and God does grant them the ability to obey. The question is whether that is given universally or specifically. I would hold that it is given specifically to those predestined to salvation. The ability to repent is not given to all men. Lots of people hear the Gospel and very few respond. Why do some respond and not others? As I am a perfect example of, God’s effectual calling is not based on personal holiness. God saves whosoever He sees fit. Those who are His sheep hear His voice and follow Him (John 10). For example, look at Acts 13: 44-48:

The next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord. But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began to contradict what was spoken by Paul, reviling him. And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, saying, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. For so the Lord has commanded us, saying,
“‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’”
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed. (Acts 13: 44-48, emphasis added)


Who believed? Those who were appointed to eternal life. The elect, at the time and place of God’s choosing, hear the Gospel and respond because their hearts are changed and become fertile ground for the Word of God (See the parable of the sower in Matthew 13 and reference Ezekiel 36: 26-27). God has mercy on whomever He chooses (Romans 9: 18), it is not that God has mercy on whomever chooses Him. None of this is random, none of this is left to chance. All men are sinners and stand condemned. All men have the responsibility to repent. No man in and of himself has the ability or even the desire to do so until and unless acted upon by the Spirit. God saves those predestined from before the foundation of the world to believe and be adopted (Eph 1: 3-6, Eph 1: 1-14).

Arthur Sido said...

Steve,

I would suggest that if Luther was around today, even he wouldn't be a Lutheran!

Arthur Sido said...

Debbie,

One other thing. I think you are ascribing a motive to the Ethiopian eunuch that we can determine from the text. You said:

The man in Acts 8 wanted the scripture explained to him. He was seeking the truth.

Where do we see that? I think you are reading an assumption into the text. He was reading, sure, but wasn’t getting it at all.

Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Rise and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” This is a desert place. And he rose and went. And there was an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a court official of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was in charge of all her treasure. He had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning, seated in his chariot, and he was reading the prophet Isaiah. And the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over and join this chariot.” So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. (Acts 8: 26-31)

We don’t get his motivation in the text do we?

My response would be that the eunuch was clearly one of the elect because God placed Phillip in his path and regenerated his heart to hear and believe the Gospel. There is nothing inconsistent with Calvinism in that account, in fact I think that the events point quite strongly to the sovereignty of God in salvation.