this is a paper I wrote for my Systematic Theology 2 using Benjamin Warfield’s Plan of Salvation as a main source)
A Track to Follow (Brief Summary)
Before we really understand the decree with regards to the salvation of man, we first have to settle ourselves on the right view of how God relates to His created human beings affected by the Fall. The late professor B.B. Warfield had a systematic presentation of this in the first chapter of his book The Plan of Salvation. For me, the first post in the track is to decide whether God truly exists or not. Although Warfield did not start this way, it was already his presupposition in writing. His opening tension was if this existing God is active in the universe or passive in a sense that He has created a world good enough to leave behind and allow it to be functioning on itself. To use theological terminologies, we are to choose between Deism and Theism[1] before we go on with the track. We are convinced that God is active in this world so we go on to the next post whether we believe that He has designed it to allow man to save themselves, known as Naturalism, or He has planned to intervene, known as Supernaturalism. To make the issue simple, “Does man save himself or does God save him?”[2] Mainstream Christians are confident of their salvation not because they are able to gain his own salvation apart from God but because they are convinced that there is no possible salvation without the intervention of the Divine. Thus, we continue on with the flow taking the stand as Supernaturalists. Another tension arises considering how God exerts His saving power to mankind. Is it by pure and immediate operations of His grace or there are mediums required as channels for his supernatural act? An example given was the Roman Church which claims that “where the church is, there is the Spirit; outside the church there is no salvation.” Here, the medium is the church. This is called Sacerdotalism. Whereas in Evangelicalism the claim is: “where the Spirit is, there is the church; outside the body of the saints there is no salvation.”[3] In this statement, we can see that the evangelical view is that there are no means for grace. It is directly from God, and not through anything else, that we are saved. We are therefore settled to go with the evangelical stream. However, trying to be consistent at its best while some seek to justify certain facts, even Evangelicals divide themselves. It is whether we are under Universalism or Particularism. This paper is committed to discuss points on which the latter tension is to be more elaborated rather than the first tensions.
The succeeding sections deal with Calvinism – its main points considering various developments of thought with the brief inclusions of three prominent theologians (Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther and John Calvin), the challenges it faced as it progressed and its definite positions established regarding God’s intervention to save the helpless human beings.
Calvinism: A Progression
Brief Description
In Protestant Christianity, Calvinism is a theology developed and advanced by John Calvin but the term is also used to identify the development of some of his doctrines that became the distinguishing characteristics of the Reformed and the Presbyterian churches.[4] It is as an editor puts it, not a “stereo-typed, narrow-termed collection of dry doctrines” but a “living, vital truth, as wide as the Bible itself, and no man has ever mastered these majestic doctrines, not even Calvin.”[5] For me, John Calvin just deserved the credit for he was able to have a glimpse of the plan of salvation by the mysterious God. He is therefore not as majestic as the doctrines he was allowed to grasp and will be grasped as the mystery of God manifests. Therefore, concerning the unfolding of the doctrine historically, the term Calvinism should be recognized as apart from Calvin’s own teachings in two senses: (1) doctrines formulated by 17th century Calvinist scholars, with a strong emphasis on the ‘five points of Calvinism’ affirmed by a synod due to Arminian controversy and (2) churches which were birthed during the vast influence of Calvin.[6]
Champion Highlights
Augustine of Hippo: The Forerunner
If there is something to put emphasis on the plan of salvation in Calvinism, it is the doctrine of grace that God in His sovereignty, and only by Him, willed to intervene for the salvation of the totally corrupt man unable to redeem himself. It is so opposed to Pelagianism that suggests that man by God-given virtue can fully comply with the requirements for his own entry to heaven, or even to Semi-Pelagianism that proposes that in the initiation of God, it is man’s responsibility to work things out to fully gain salvation. Certainly according to Warfield, these were the “first purely autosoteric schemes published in the Church,”[7] although Supernaturalistic in a sense but Naturalistic in procedure.
The preeminent man associated with Calvinism as its initiator was the Doctor Gratiae himself or “The Teacher of Grace,” Augustine of Hippo of the late 4th until the early 5th century. In fact, one thousand years hence, both Protestants and Catholics would consider him as the forerunner of both their efforts.[8] He battled with the said Pelagianism named after its prime mover, his contemporary British monk Pelagius. His experience as an immoral person who found favor in God’s sight and the theocentric principles of salvation he later developed during his Christian ministry as a bishop made him the most suitable person to battle the Pelagian heresy of his time. For him, “God is the absolute good, and all is either Himself or from Him; and only as God makes us good, are we able to do anything good.”[9] He emphasized that although human beings were created without any problem having our human free will, we are contaminated by sin as a result of the Fall. The influence of sin upon this will is like being torn between knowing what is good and evil yet non posse non peccare or not able not to sin. He noticed the same thing Paul recognized when he said, “For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing” (Rom. 7:19).[10] Man therefore by all his efforts cannot make a way for him to be saved. He needs someone outside humanity to deliver him and that is no other than God. An illustration is always very helpful.
Have you ever watched a truck get stuck in the mud? The more the driver accelerates, the more deeply the truck gets stuck. All the effort which is meant to get the truck out of the mud just makes the hole deeper instead, so that the situation gets worse rather than better. What is needed is for someone outside the situation, who isn’t trapped in the mud, to come and get it out.[11]
In the series of Augustine’s writings we would not just see his consistent teaching of grace that takes us out of the unredeemed state but also his teaching of election, predestination and eternal security in the faithfulness of God. Thus, the points of Calvinism that is later to be tackled in this paper was not just formulated by the reformers in their days but can be traced its roots back to the writings of the apostles in the Scriptures and of this faithful church father in his treatises against Pelagianism. The whole chapter 13 in his writing of A Treatise on Rebuke and Grace profoundly expresses these points.
Whosoever, then, are made to differ from that original condemnation (Total Depravity) by such bounty of divine grace (Irresistible Grace), there is no doubt but that for such it is provided that they should hear the gospel, and when they hear they believe, and in the faith which worketh by love they persevere unto the end (Perseverance of the Saints); and if, perchance, they deviate from the way, when they are rebuked they are amended and some of them, although they may not be rebuked by men, return into the path which they had left; and some who have received grace in any age whatever are withdrawn from the perils of this life by swiftness of death. For He worketh all these things in them who made them vessels of mercy, who also elected them in His Son before the foundation of the world by the election of grace (Unconditional Election): “And if by grace, then is it no more of works, otherwise grace is no more grace.” For they were not so called as not to be elected, in respect of which it is said, “For many are called but few are elected (Limited Atonement);” but because they were called according to the purpose, they are of a certainty also elected by the election, as it is said, of grace, not of any precedent merits of theirs, because to them grace is all merit.[12]
Martin Luther: The Reviver
Pelagianism was not completely eradicated. As centuries progressed the Church fell into an absurd doctrine of merit which enables one to attain salvation through good works. In fact there arose a “semi-semi-pelagianism which the Council of Orange betrayed the Church into, the genius of an Aquinas systematized for her”[13] although he, like Anselm, was more Augustinian with regards to predestination even willing to say that God despises some men.[14] Prominent men such as John Wyclif, John Huss and their likes prior to them were unsuccessful to kill the lie of this doctrine. It was only when Martin Luther entered after the medieval scene that the deception was challenged and Christians had an alternative through the Reformation.[15] He revived the Augustinian scheme as a result of his quest of finding a merciful God.
Considering the fact that Luther was the coercive influencer of the doctrine of justification by faith and in some way the echo of Augustine’s impartation of grace, some historians regarded his doctrine of justification as “an aberration from his major themes.”[16] It is possible for us to see why some came up with this judgment on his doctrine. How are we to reconcile that we are predestined and at the same time made right before God through justification by faith while faith is an act of human will? Some theologians even argued that in the volition of man, he could love God above everything else. Luther, in response, was able to point the dissimilarity between this will or “nature” (affected by the fall) and grace. “Grace puts God in the place of everything it sees, and prefers him to itself, but nature puts itself in the place of everything, even in the place of God, and seeks only its own and not what is God’s.”[17] It is quite obvious that his was a reiteration of the Paulinian and the Augustinian voices that it is impossible for man to voluntarily seek God apart from His grace and its only “infallible preparation …is the eternal election and the predestination of God.”[18] It leads to the truth that although God sent His Son to redeem the world purposely, or to be specific, “He desires all men to be saved” (1 Timothy 2:4); “Christ did not die for all” in an absolute sense.[19] Such claims other Christians could not accept, including Desiderius Erasmus who had his way of “Pelagianizing exaltation of human ability.”[20] Their intention was good. They just could not reconcile how a gracious God would not treat everyone in the world fairly just to show his greatness. Luther, however, considered these thoughts and arguments as also caused by the fallenness of man and the “prudence of the flesh” while it is evidently egocentric not theocentric. It says, “It is harsh and wretched that God should seek His glory in my misery. Note how the voice of the flesh is always saying ‘my,’ ‘my’; get rid of this ‘my’ and rather say: ‘Glory to Thee, O Lord!’ and you will be saved.”[21] Luther would not compromise the majesty of God to be judged in human standards in spite of the doctrine of justification by faith in Christ alone. “‘Let God be good,’ cried Erasmus the moralist. ‘Let God be God,’ replied Luther the theologian.”[22]
Although the Evangelical Lutherans turned out to be Universalists together with the Arminians who view God’s salvation is given not to individual men but for all without any distinctions[23], Luther, the father of the Great Reformation, certainly was a predestinarian. He was confident that it is in God and not in man to decide and judge His decrees. He is therefore, a consistent particularist.
John Calvin: The Organizer
The Reformation was lead by great men of such influence and charisma – Luther at Wittenberg (or Germany extensively) and Zwingli at Zurich (or Switzerland extensively), in which together with other reformers are not discussed in this paper. However, these leaders in spite of their enthusiastic Reformation causes in their writings, failed to prepare teachings systematic enough to give the newly born stream of Christianity a consolidation of their beliefs. Hence, the vision of the leaders somehow died with them taking for example the development of the Lutherans who inconsistently took Luther’s own view of predestination. If the Reformation was to survive, a need for an organizer of thoughts was necessary.[24] It was made possible by the rise of John Calvin to whom obviously where the word Calvinism originated.
Calvin’s works are voluminous to be dealt with. Nevertheless, he was certainly a strong particularist – a word that may inevitably be associated with being a Calvinist (which is to be later discussed in the subtopic Benjamin Warfield on Calvinism). On the doctrine of particular election, he affirms that “as far as concerns the elect, is founded on his gratuitous mercy, totally irrespective of human merit; but that to those whom he devotes to condemnation, the gate of life is closed by a just and irreprehensible, but incomprehensible, judgment.”[25] Of course there were arguments against these views and just like Luther, he answered it only with a more systematic way. He had these objections listed and countered in his Institutes of the Christian Religion specifically on its Book III, Chapter 23. The arguments against the Particularist view always lead to the anticipated question, “Were they not, by the decree of God, antecedently predestined to that corruption which is now stated as the cause of condemnation? …Is He not unjust, therefore, in treating His creatures with such cruel mockery?”[26] I actually had these questions before in my study of Calvinism and I found concrete answers from the writings of John Calvin itself. If my arguments eventually lead me to ask these questions, his defenses would surely lead me to one definite answer: it is what the Scripture says. “Whatever, therefore, is declared in the Scripture concerning predestination, we must be cautious not to withhold from believers, lest we appear either to defraud them of the favor of their God, …We should neither scrutinize those things which the Lord has concealed, nor neglect those which He has openly exhibited, lest we be condemned for excessive curiosity on the one hand, or for ingratitude on the other.”[27] I remember, just recently that I was beginning to understand the arguments of Calvin, I had a conversation with a pastor friend who’s not convinced on the doctrine of predestination even until now. I asked him, “What do you do when you encounter texts saying we have been chosen even before the foundations of the world?” He answered, “Then it is Deuteronomy 29:29.” His text was, “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.” Well, that for me is not taking the Bible wholly. Why don’t we take the predestination verses first (such as Rom. 8:29, Eph. 1:4, 2 Thess. 2:13 and others) before we conclude that “the secret things belong to the Lord” and not take Deut. 29:29, then disregard the others? That’s what Calvin was saying, we ought not to withhold this truth. As he organized the Christian teachings of the reformation, including the doctrine of election, he was so biblical and confident on the Spirit’s illumination. His caution was, “the Spirit is superior to all reason. For as God alone is sufficient witness of Himself in His word, so also the word will never gain credit in the hearts of men, till it be confirmed by the internal testimony of the Spirit.”[28]
Who could be more potential to be the organizer of these doctrines but Calvin himself when it was mostly needed? He was a person brilliant enough to organize and present the Reformation thoughts in his writings, especially the sovereignty of God and the corruption of man in every aspect – will, intellect etc.; yet honest enough not to take risks of expounding things he did not fully comprehend.[29]
Developments subsequent to John Calvin
There was a major development in Calvinism during the early 17th century when the Dutch followers of Jacobus Arminius, who studied under John Calvin’s adherent Theodore Beza, presented to the States General a Remonstrance rejecting the rigid Calvinist doctrines in 1610. Thus, the Dutch Arminians were called the Remonstrants. The action of the Reformed churches was a synod held at Dordrecht (in short Dort) from Nov. 13, 1618 – May 9, 1619. It was attended by delegates of Reformed churches from Germany, Switzerland, England, and of course the Netherlands. The synod studied the theology of the Remonstrants and declared that their points were not concretely supported by the Scriptures so they came up with the canons of Dort[30] and formulated what we now call the TULIP or the five points of Calvinism (later to be discussed in Major Positions and General Principles). These canons remain the theological basis of the Reformed churches in the Netherlands and of the Christian Reformed Church in North America, along with the Heidelberg Catechism and the Belgic Confession.[31]
There was also another development by scholars and theologians in the Calvinist stream. It was not however, a development on the main points of the belief but rather, on new divisions in the stream. These divisions deal much on the order of thought in the plan of God devised for the salvation of man. This is where the Infralapsarian, Supralapsarian and Amyraldian terms appear in the arguments (also to be discussed in Major Positions and General Principles).
Major Positions and General Principles
Benjamin Warfield on Calvinism
Considering predestination with its intrinsic principles as associated to Calvinism, it is therefore a stand in Particularism rather than Universalism. It is the mark of Calvinism that God in His decree does not deal with mankind at large but to particular individuals.[32] However, even the Particularists divide among themselves falling under the consistent Supralapsarian or Infralapsarian views and the inconsistent Amyraldian view.[33]
As mentioned the most inconsistent Particularism is the one by Moses Amyraut, also known as Amyraldus. Amyraldianism holds its Post-redemptionist view that in the order of thought, the redemption was for the purpose of God giving His own Son to die for all men, alike and equally, yet declare that in this redemption He fully intended that not all should avail for all men. It’s only for some which He would select.[34] Warfield considered this to be although Calvinistic but so inconsistent with a tendency of falling out from Particularism. It also appears that the order of election is placed after the atoning work of Christ.
Supralapsarian scheme is more consistent than Amyraldianism but may cause confusion in the placement of sin and of election in the decree of God. In this order of thought, election precedes the purpose to create and so afterwards permit the fall.[35] As I interact with Warfield and Hodge, I see that it is not theologically right to say that the election took place first before the fall because for one reason, there would be no category of election and condemnation if there was no sin.
So I proceed on to discuss briefly the Infralapsarian view which is regarded by most Reformed and Calvinists to be the most consistent and accurate in its chronology. Infralapsarian is to be identified with the Augustinian system. In the order of decrees of this scheme, it starts with the glory of God as the “highest and ultimate end of all things.” For that purpose He created the universe with its whole plan. Then he placed Adam as the first parent and representative of His dominion. The Fall happened and put Adam and all mankind in to a state of condemnation and misery. And from the mass of that fallen men God elected some to eternal life. It is therefore not the foresight of God on man’s deed that became the grounds of this election. In the fullness of time, God gave His Son for the salvation of the elect to eternal life. The efficacious grace of the Spirit is only exercised in behalf of the elect while it is not to neglect that He also restrains evil and operates goodness to His creation. This scheme is known in the Christian thought to be Pauline, Augustinian, or Calvinistic.[36]
Jesus on the Five Points of Calvinism
Taking a whole context, we may see that Jesus, our incarnate God, preached on the TULIP. It was the occasion that many turned back from and walked with Him no more. What happened? What did they hear that they walked out? It was when Jesus declared the sovereignty of God and the impotency of man in John 6. This paper is not enough to thoroughly discuss these points but let me briefly present Jesus’ own message. (How I wish to be intensive in this topic for it is necessary but I am time-constraint and still naïve in comprehension of things.)
Total Depravity[37]
“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day” – John 6:44, NIV. This text shows that man is absolutely impotent in coming to God.
Unconditional Election[38]
“All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away” – John 6:37, NIV. This is a statement that the good pleasure of God’s will in choosing is apart from any merited work on the people’s part, neither their act of following Him nor foreseen faith.
Limited Atonement[39]
“For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day – John 6:38-39, NIV. This text now shows the identification of His elect, to partake with His meritorious life and death.
Irresistible Grace[40]
“The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him.” – John 6:63-65, NIV. It is the working of the Holy Spirit that the people of His choice received the heart to know Him, a new heart instead of a dead and wicked one.
Preservation or Perseverance of the Saints[41]
“And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day” – John 6:39, NIV. It is God’s will that all those given to Christ for salvation shall be infallibly raised up and this is done by preservation of the saints in the holiness of life. Christ even preached on the perseverance by saying, “Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval” – John 6:27, NIV.
Brief Conclusion
With the little knowledge I have in theology and the history of Christian thought, I have tried my best to progressively present my study of Calvinism. In a way that deals with the preeminent people, major progressions and main themes of the doctrine, I was able to at least establish in myself the truths of this belief. With the primary message on predestination and election, the sovereignty of God was even more declared and recognized. God is not a respecter of persons by not basing our salvation on our foreseen deeds, or faith. In this decree, we are elected to be holy and blameless by the grace of the Holy Spirit, yet our assurance is not on our holiness but on God’s eternal election. Everything is not by our own works but by His call (Romans 9:11). A call and choosing that has been made before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4). “Our election, therefore, is not only unto the receiving of grace, but is in grace from the beginning.”[42] It is grace, so salvation is apart from works but never apart from Christ.
This teaching is really a ‘solid food’ to Christians. If there are inconsistencies with my statements, it is because of my limitations being so naïve in theology. I am still trying to chew it but it surely gives me nourishment as I do. Upon studying this doctrine, it’s as if Jesus is asking me, “You do not want to leave too, do you?” (John 6:67). And I’m just so happy I am not walking away. In fact, I have been so encouraged knowing that He chose me apart from who I am and what I did. I am not to question God why He shows His glory in the mockery of man. We are in condemned state anyway in the first place. His glory, I do not fully understand now but it is in gradual realization until such time of His full manifestation.
[1] Benjamin B. Warfield, The Plan of Salvation (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1973), 14-15.
[2] Ibid., 16.
[3] Ibid., 18-19.
[4] The New Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 2 (USA: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1995), 754.
[5] Jay Green, The Five Points of Calvinism (Ann Abhor, Michigan: Malloy Lithographing, Inc.), 4.
[6] J.T. McNeill, The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology, ed. Alan Richardson and John Bowden (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1983), 81.
[7] Warfield, The Plan of Salvation, 35-37.
[8] Timothy George, History of Christianity: Six-part video curriculum series, pdf10.
[9] Benjamin B. Warfield, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church: St, Augustin’s Anti-Pelagian Writings, ed. Philip Schaff (Edinburgh: T & T Clark Ltd.), 70.
[10] Alister McGrath, A Cloud of Witnesses (Grand Rapids Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990), 28-29.
[11] Ibid., 31-32.
[12] Augustine, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church: St, Augustin’s Anti-Pelagian Writings, ed. Philip Schaff (Edinburgh: T & T Clark Ltd.), 775. Italics in parentheses mine to somehow highlight Augustine’s pre-compliment to the five points of Calvinism.
[13] Warfield, The Plan of Salvation, 36.
[14] Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 3, ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982), 948.
[15] Ibid., 38.
[16] Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers (Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1988), 75.
[17] As quoted by Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers, 75. Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation, Gordon Rupp and Philip Watson, eds. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1969), 220.
[18] As quoted by Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers, 77. Luther: Early Theological Works, (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962), 268.
[19] Martin Luther, Lectures on Romans, Hilton C. Oswald, ed. (Saint Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House, 1972), 376.
[20] Warfield, The Plan of Salvation, 39.
[21] Luther, Lectures on Romans, 376.
[22] Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers (Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1988), 77. I actually followed Dr. George’s chain of thoughts in his article of Luther on predestination which compliments much to Calvinism. Therefore, the flow of the statements is original but so much influenced by this author.
[23] Warfield, The Plan of Salvation, 69-70.
[24] McGrath, A Cloud of Witnesses, 90.
[25] John Calvin, A Compend of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, Hugh Thomson Kerr, ed. (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Christian Education, 1939), 129. (Inst. III.xxi.7).
[26] Ibid., 133. (Inst. III.xxiii.4)
[27] Ibid., 128. (Inst. III.xxi.3,4).
[28] Ibid., 16. (Inst. I.vii.4).
[29] Dr. Daniel Tappeiner always mentions Calvin’s amazing energy to write, being able to write commentaries on all the books of the Bible except Daniel and Revelation because he lacked understanding on the apocalypses.
[30] The New Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 4 (USA: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1995), 189.
[31] Ibid.
[32] Warfield, The Plan of Salvation, 87.
[33] Ibid., 31. A Diagram by Warfield is beneficial to be used in understanding the tracks we headed in this paper.
[34] Ibid., 94.
[35] Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology abridged edition, ed. Edward Gross (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books House, 1988), 326.
[36] Ibid., 329-330.
[37] Jay Green, The Five Points of Calvinism.
[38] Ibid.
[39] Ibid.
[40] Ibid.
[41] Ibid.
[42] L.B. Smedes, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 2, ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1982), 551.
