Predestined by Love Pt 1

Excrepts from Predestined for love Pt. 1

Why I don’t like the idea of double predestination
Essays on the subject of choice, election and predestination

The Culprit: John’ Calvin’s Infamous Statement

By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death. (Calvin's Institutes, CH. 21, John Calvin P.568)

Election, Choice and Predestination

As far as Calvinists are concerned being elect, which is a final condition of a soul is solely a result of being predestined for that very outcome. The same group, which is predestined, is chosen in Christ and will be part of the elect who will live eternally.
The problems of Calvinism begin to become evident as we take the signet doctrines and begin to fit them into the whole council of God, which is His Word. If they don’t fit in perfectly then those who espouse these doctrines are in danger of only partly representing God and the unfathomable depth of His Word. Yes in Calvin the scriptures have been concisely and precisely organized into palatable doctrines but do they command the full range of God’s revelation? That is the test of Calvinism or any other theology that purports to have a full grasp of complex theological concepts and ideas. Perhaps the cohesive whole can only be found in God and not in any human system of theology. The question is whether such a Theological systems can reflect the whole truth of the bible. Is Calvinism such a system, which is blessed by God to serve his purposes? If not then where are its failings?

It is dully noted that Calvin wrote one of the greatest and best organization of God’s word into various theological and doctrinal statements most of which encapsulate the eternal truths of scriptures. The one exception from such an orderly treatment and organization in Calvin’s Institutes will have to be the controversial doctrine of predestination of the saved as well as the lost. Of course, I am saying this from the point of view of a protagonist. Calvinistic evangelical believers speak much of the beauty of his dissertations concerning God’s sovereignty, His unconditional election and His irresistible grace. They speak how biblical truths are preserved and stated so well in Calvin’s work.

Even Joseph Armenius who also got hung up on predestination spoke profusely of the greatness of the work Calvin had accomplished in his commentaries on scriptures. It should be noted that both believe in justification by faith alone and echoed the cry of the reformation ‘sola scriptura’ (scripture alone) to be the authority concerning issues of faith and life. Neither had problems with the orthodox creedal statements that the church has been able to establish so far. But when it came to how one’s salvation is determined they were in a sharp disagreement. One sees it as predetermined phenomena that manifests in time and the other as something decided during our lifetime here on earth dependent on our response to the gospel.



My Journey with this Issue

Unable to see eye to eye with my doctrinally sound friends, I wanted to find points of reconciliation. I knew my position sounded intuitively right, as I didn’t have to defend God as someone who would foreordain people to hell. I began to formulate some baby thoughts on the matter, which can be found scattered throughout this treatise. But from the struggle that ensued with the ideas concerned, gems of thought began to emerge. I was able to hone a much stronger argument to what I will term here as general election or the predestination of all of mankind (The first Adam) to salvation through Jesus (The second Adam). This will not contradict the statements of Paul in Ephesians concerning predestination, as the saints are a subset of all of mankind. A general election precludes no one but includes all as possible recipients of salvation if they would only believe. The word ‘Believe’ mentioned here should be understood in its strongest possible definition and not just as an intellectual accent to a truth. ‘To believe’ from the Greek word ‘Pisteuo’ is that which means to hold fast as true, to cling to and to trust with one’s whole heart.

My Calvinist Friends

They are more convinced of unconditional election and predestination than I am of my own Armenian theology. They feel that it preserves God’ sovereignty and foreknowledge and is therefore the better position. “It’s a wholly biblical doctrine” they say, that fits as a spoke in Calvin’s ingenious theological wheel coined as ‘Tulip’. This of course refers to The total depravity of man, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of his saints. It should be noted “while the five points of Calvinism bear his name and are a reflection of his thinking, they were not articulated by him, and were actually a product of the Synod of Dort, which issued its judgments in response to five specific objections that arose after Calvin'stime.” (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Calvin). Calvinists consider themselves blessed to be among the chosen few and believe they cannot do any wrong that could change their destination, which is a wonderful and peaceful life in heaven with the lord Jesus (I also bet that it comes with an additional angel pair fanning the suites up there. I say this to them in jest. This discussion needs humor as it often involves the sharpest of exchanges with people who are one’s brothers).

Some of these conversations have been with Christians with superior learning making me wonder if I have missed something or if I am suffering from deficient or even misguided Christian teachings. But no matter how humbly I listened, I couldn’t get over the fact that they were not bothered by their stipulations concerning the predestination of the damned. They seem to have no problem with the fact that some are said to come into the world with their fate pre-determined to go to the hot place. Between gulps of spaghetti or using some other amenities they seemed to be nonchalantly damning scores of people into an eternity without God without having a tinge of conscience about it.

However, I don’t believe they are no less concerned for souls than me. I often try to cajole them with my opposing argument. This often does not deter them and does not avail much in making them change their theological position. They jealously and admirably defend God’s grace and sovereignty in saving man. However, scriptures does not just say, “You are saved by grace” only, but at different places also says “You are saved by grace through faith.” Based on this idea, Armenians mount a rebuttal that credits faith as a human impetus necessary for salvation.

An Impetus

Even if initially given from God, and even if it’s a negligible amount compared to God’s infusion, there is still an impetus that needs to come from man in order to secure his salvation. The inflection point where God’s grace meets this impetus will determine the path to the destiny of a soul, either leading upwards to faith and glory or downward towards hell and damnation. Man’s impetus has to meet God’s ever ready and all sufficient grace positively (willingly) in order for him to be on the path to his soul’s salvation. But this is blasphemy to a Calvinist who thinks man is too depraved to seek out God or to choose Him. This is also the crux of the matter! Whichever side is able to prove its point will have leverage. Why is each group so determined that they are in the right, even as their opponents also believe themselves to be? This is because the issue has been a conundrum even for the greatest of theologians, dating all the way back to the church fathers and perhaps even going back much earlier into the old testament times of Solomon or even Job (Proverbs 16:4, Job 1). The book of Job especially gives a vivid picture of the dynamic struggle that must happen in every life before our eternal destinies are set.

What does the Bible say? What does Jesus say?

So the question in the final analysis becomes, “What does the Bible say?” How are the scriptures related to this issue to be understood and organized in order to have a cohesive non-contradictory whole? The strict double predestination of Calvinism will run into a stumbling block called ‘God’s love’, a doctrine well established through the cross. Man’s will and choice in the Armenian gospel that supposedly aids God as He saves a soul, runs into a perturbing doctrine to its thrust called grace, the unmerited favor bestowed upon an undeserving sinner having all sufficiency.

The compromise

The solution might be to say that, “God is love! Therefore, He bestows grace on all for salvation. However, He only requires a minute effortless show of cooperation called faith in order to carry out this sacred work of salvation to its fulfillment.” The subtleties of this complex picture will be transparent only to the all seeing eye of God. Who are thou, oh man, that thou thinks that thou can comprehend all things wrought in mystery” In this case it actually turns out to be a mystery because the area of activity for salvation is the human heart and the agent of this activity is God’s Spirit.

Those of us who are saved, all we know is that at some point we believed and now we live in the hope of a wonderful redemption. That God has been seeking us out from the beginning is now evident to us. That we are wretched before is evident. Why He loves us we don’t quite understand but that he loves us is also evident. Whether he loves some more in saving them will be pure speculation. To assume he seeks to save all affirms his fairness in giving mercy to all. To say that some will make themselves deserving of his eternal wrath can be supported well from scripture. To say these were brought into the world unredeemable is to place a big question mark on His character of being a loving father. Saying so in front of the opposing camp might be considered to be blasphemous or in the least endangers one of being though of as having a (huge) misunderstanding of God’s Word.

Saved by Grace Through Faith

Scriptures does not just say, “You are saved by grace” only, but at different places adds “You are saved by grace through faith.” If it had only said the latter then we would not need to preach The Word and the effects of atonement would take effect silently and invisibly as they do after belief has been born.



Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, Romans 4:16 (KJV)


For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Ephes. 2:8 (KJV)


Based on this idea, Armenians mount a rebuttal that credits faith as a human impetus necessary for salvation. The mercy and the graciousness of God has to be met with a trust and belief in man to spark his salvation. Isn’t that what it means to be born again? God fosters all of these things and being the gentleman leaves man’s gatekeeper, his will to make the final judgment as to their entrance and activation. Man is already fitted with this gatekeeper called ‘will’ along with his conscience for reasons of making good choices but in his shortsightedness he can use it negatively to choose to remain in sin and even to reject his own maker (Die in your sins). No one can deny this gatekeeper called ‘our will’ exists but one can completely deny, limit or magnify its role in salvation. All things are known to God beforehand and are foregone conclusions except for the fates of certain men who might use this gatekeeper negatively which results in them not appropriating the work of the atonement and frustrating God’s attempt to save them. Man has the choice to shrivel into his old nature and reject the gracious offer of salvation but God does all to convince him otherwise, including by reminding him of a dire destination called hell. He will not sovereignty override man’s will in order to save him. He is a gentle God (Gentle savior, gentle spirit like a dove). Therefore, He comes in gently to dissuade man from the calamities of his selfishness and his sin.

Even if initially given from God, and even if it’s a negligible amount compared to God’s part, there is still an impetus that needs to come from man in order to secure his salvation. A negative impetus against God’s graciousness will result in forfeiture of all of those benefits that come from it. This is the claim of Armenians. Why is each side so determined that they are in the right even as their opponents also believe themselves to be? This is because the issue is a conundrum even for the greatest of theologians. The above discussion on grace, faith and free will is the crux where the debate goes back and forth like children madly galloping a stationary seesaw. This is the place where each tries to leverage arguments for their side against the other. When it is oversimplified it leads to antagonistic division. Each side sees these ideas in a divergent manner by oversimplifying them. Seen in their true complexity they must fit into one true and cohesive whole whose subtlety can only be seen by God. Some things will therefore remain a mystery to us.