Why would you call that Arminianism?

In my discussions with those friends who are persuaded by Calvinism and especially by the doctrine of predestination, I find they often do misunderstand or display a healthy ignorance of what true Arminianism really is.  I cringe when I hear Arminians accused of believing that they must earn their salvation through good works.  It is eye-popping and heart-stopping to hear that Arminians believe that they have an equal part with God in the salvation of their souls.  Here is their misconception in a nutshell:  that Armininians must initiate their own salvation and then maintain it through the accumulation of good works. 

 

Classical Arminianism has always given God all the glory for salvation and reserved no credit whatsoever for human endeavor in the work of salvation.  All true classical Arminians will declare that the human soul is completely and entirely dead in trespasses and sins and every man would  be hopelessly lost without the prevenient grace (that grace which prepares the way) extended by the Holy Spirit of God.  This prevenient grace is taught throughout scripture, although, like the word ‘trinity’, ‘prevenient grace’ is never found in the Bible. 

In spite of the opinions of uninformed Calvinists, Jacob Arminius had a passionate commitment to the grace of God.  Arminius’ theology was clearly sola gratia.  To interpret the theology of Arminius by the beliefs of those who followed is an error committed by many who have never studied the original works of the man.  Thus, Arminians get a bum rap by being compared to Pelagians, semi-Pelagians or devotees of the Remonstrants who successfully twisted the original doctrines of Arminianism so as to make them at least unbiblical and at most heretical.

Arminius didn’t deny the work of God’s grace in the salvation of man.  He did question whether that grace was irresistible.   The Calvinist would argue that if grace is resistible then salvation cannot be all of grace.  The Arminian wonders why the Calvinist believes that resistance to the gift causes the gift to be sullied or diminished.  Why, asks the Arminian, is the gift not worthy of reception if it is accepted willingly?  It is only worthy of reception if we are forced to receive it.

Simon Episcopius and Arminius, unlike Philip Limborch and later Remonstrants, believed that prevenient grace is the grace that goes before to prepare the soul to respond freely to the calling of the Spirit of God to salvation.  Through the ages true classical Arminians have lamented the fact that Limborch’s theology has been labeled ‘Arminian’.  Limborch believed that the fallen human will needs only assistance, mainly through access of knowledge, not renewal, in order to acquire salvation.  Arminius would say that man is totally depraved and it is impossible to do or think any good without prevening grace.   Limborch would counter by saying that man is not totally depraved, he is only weakened by his lack of knowledge and limited capabilities.

John Wesley redirected Arminianism back toward its original form.  Although he has been falsely accused of being a Pelagian for several hundred years now.  A careful reading of Wesley’s sermon “On Working Out Our Own Salvation” should remove all doubt as to his position on the grace of God.  “Whatsoever good is in man, or is done by man, God is the author and doer of it,” Wesley proclaimed.  Wesley taught that we can only respond to God because he did first extend his grace to us.

Prevenient grace does not remove the free will of man so that he can be forced to salvation by an arbitrary God.  Prevenient grace simply prepares the heart of man so that he can choose to not resist the grace of God.  Having received prevenient grace he can choose not to reject it or he can choose to resist it but not without consequences.  Thus, the only role of the human in his own salvation is the nonresistance to the grace of God.

Adam Clarke summed up the Arminian position by saying, “God gives the power (to believe).  Man uses the power thus given, and brings glory to God:  Without the power no man can believe; with it, any man can.”  (quoted in H. Orten Wiley’s Christian Theology, pp. 369-70)  Faith is an expression of man’s free will only after it is recognized as a work of God.

Free Will Baptist theologian Leroy Forelines summed Arminian’s interpretation of grace by saying: “The Holy Spirit must work before there can be a successful communication of the gospel to the sinner and before there will be conviction and response from the sinner.”    

Arminians believe salvation is impossible without the effectual preparatory grace of God.  The application of this grace to the human soul does not eliminate or diminish the soul’s freedom.  It simply enables the soul to no longer resist the grace of God.  Arminianism promotes the scriptural teaching of salvation by grace through faith alone.  God makes this possible without diminishing the responsibility of man to practice non-resistance toward his grace.

Kevin teaches Bible and Apologetics to high school students at Lafayette Christian School in LaGrange, Georgia. He loves writing about theology, apologetics and politics.

Three Little Frogs

 

Kameron, my eight year old son, has a healthy fascination for all living creatures.  I have heard his mother’s alarm go off many times in years past as Kameron dragged another living discovery into our home.  These have included spiders, roly polys, centipedes, baby birds and box turtles. 

 

I came home the other day to find three small frogs in a plastic container just inside the garage door.  They had grass, water and several sticks and stones to jump about on.  All three of them were jumping like Mexican jumping beans, trying to escape their plastic prison.

 

I called for Kameron and we had a long conversation about how wild creatures don’t do well in captivity and it might be wise and merciful to release the three frogs.  This idea was met with strong resistance.  I decided to let the matter rest and address it later.

 

Another conversation regarding the release of the frogs was unnecessary.  Several hours later I saw Kameron talking to his new friends and walking them to separate areas of our property.  I assumed he was releasing them and I was pleased that he had decided to do the right thing without further persuasion from his father.

 

Later that evening I asked him about his frogs.  His answer was surprising and disturbing.  “I took the first frog to the end of the lot where I had decided to throw him into the burn barrel.  I set the second frog in the garden where he has plenty to eat and much to make him happy.  When I returned to get the third frog he had decided to hop away on his own.”   Needless to say I was speechless.

 

While I was trying to compose a response I began to wonder why Kameron thought he had the right to take the lives of two innocent frogs.  It was obvious that any compassion he might have felt for the frogs was overcome by his intoxication with the power he had over them.  Because my mind tends to lean toward theology I found myself following another train of thought. 

 

Three people come to the end of their days and are called to face their judge.  They are anxious as they approach one whom they have been told is powerful and sovereign yet loving and compassionate.  The first one approaches the bench to plead his cause but the judge cuts him short by making a stunning declaration,

 “I conducted a lottery before I created the earth and your destiny was determined before you were even born.  Your lot is to perish eternally in hell,” the judge declared.

“But if you predetermined that my destiny would be hell, then how am I responsible or accountable?” the first one asked.

“No answer to your question is forthcoming because the things you ask me of are a secret matter and will remain secret,” the Judge sternly answered.

 

A second person approached the bench in fear and trembling having heard the preceding interaction.   But, much to his relief he was ushered into heaven by the same God who had so coldly cast off the previous person.

 

Finally, the third person approached the bench with strong reservations about whether he wanted to go to hell and live in eternal misery or go to heaven and live with a god who seemed to be so arbitrary, even capricious.  Had he been deceived by those who had taught him about the love of God?  Was the goodness of this God totally dwarfed by his greatness?  He was told over and over again that “God is love.”  This may be true but observing what had just happened caused the third man to believe this God not very loving.  Would a loving God desiring true fellowship and relationship with his creatures not gift them with the ability to choose or reject that relationship? 

 

The third man looked closely into the eyes of the judge in search of evidence to back the claim that “God is love”.  He decided there was no love to be found or if there was any love it was so miniscule it could not be detected.  The fear peeled away as he realized he was seeing an imposter.  He turned around and walked away determined to search until he found the one and true God who gave his Son for ALL those who would choose Him.

 

It is unthinkable that “God is love” would predetermine evil.  The Calvinist would believe that the love of God is defined by his greatness.  The classical Arminian would believe that the power of God is clearly defined by his great love.  We can do no justice to the sovereignty of God by diminishing his love.  God created man to have relationship with him and to derive glory from him.  Relationship is always a two way street.  No relationship can exist if only one party makes all the decisions.

 

“God is love” indeed!  He loved us so much he was willing to limit his own power to grant to us free will.  Our freedom to choose is a gift from God.  Why did he do this?  Obviously he wanted to lay the foundation for a relationship with us.  Why did he send his Son to the cross?   Was it not because he wanted the relationship to last forever?

Kevin teaches Bible and Apologetics to high school students at Lafayette Christian School in LaGrange, Georgia. He loves writing about theology, apologetics and politics.

Does God Choose Us Or Do We Choose God

Predestination or Free Will?

The question so often debated among Christians, especially those who call themselves Calvinists and those who identify as Arminians, is this:  Does a man have free will or is a man’s free will submerged under the flood waters of God’s sovereignty?  God woos us, he pursues us and he draws us to himself, but does he override our ability to “choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve.” (Joshua 24:15)

Norman Geisler, author of Chosen But Free, reminds us that “With the exception of the later writings of Augustine, virtually all the great thinkers up to the reformation affirmed that human beings possess the power of free choice, even in a fallen state.”  John Calvin had a voracious appetite for all things Augustinian and is credited with creating the great emphasis on predestination.  Though Calvin was certainly a proponent of this doctrine, he didn’t emphasize it nearly as much as his successors. Calvin quotes Augustine more than any other in his Institutes of Christian Religion along with Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther.

Among the early church fathers, Augustine’s opinions seem to have been in the minority.   Calvin was strongly drawn to Augustine while ignoring majority opinions.  Whereas Calvin and Augustine would argue that man is so utterly depraved that he cannot possibly make a choice for anything good, other church fathers argued that because man was created in the very image of God, he retained limited freedom of will as a result of God’s image within his nature.  Man’s will was certainly corrupted by the invasion of evil within his heart, but the image of God within man prevented the complete obliteration of his will.  In other words, a corrupt man is still capable of willing to do some good. 

Among those early church fathers proposing the freedom of man’s will:

     

Iraneous, (130-200, Against Heresies), “God made man a free agent from the beginning, possessing his own soul to obey the behests of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God.  For there is no coercion with God.”

      

Tertullian, (155-225, Against Marcion), “I find, then, that man was by God constituted free ,master of his own will and power; indicating the presence of God’s image and likeness in him.”    

Gregory of Nyssa, (335-395, On Virginity), “Being in the image and the likeness of the Power which rules all things, man kept also in the matter of a free will this likeness to Him whose will is over all.”

What most Christians believe about free will can be traced to the teachings and interpretations of three men; Pelagius, Jacob Arminius and John Calvin.  Pelagius denied that men had need of any assistance from God when seeking salvation.  Jacob Arminius believed that God freed the will of man so he could choose to obey and be saved.  John Calvin believed that man is so totally depraved that he cannot possibly make a decision to follow Christ and God must decide for him (predestination). 

A summary of these positions follows:

1.  Palagian:  We are free to choose God or not.  The fall of mankind into sin had no adverse affect on his ability to make a choice.   God makes his offer and we simply say ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

2.  Semi-Palagian:  This is a softening of Palagian’s limitations on God’s part in the salvation of man.  Men can make a decision for God but only with the help of god.  Sin has had devastating effects on the will of man and God must bring healing to the will before the will can respond to his call.

 

3.  Arminian: God is not willing that any should perish so he extends his invitation to all men.  Man, in is depraved state, cannot seek God, therefore, God extends to all men a pre-emptive grace, a prevenient grace, that affectively prepares the heart for the indwelling of God.  Men may will to receive this grace or reject it.

4.  Calvinism (Augustinianism):  Man is so entirely depraved (dead) in his state of sin that it is impossible for him to make a choice for God.  Therefore, God must make the choice for him.  Man’s salvation is monergistic, meaning that God’s will works independently and alone for the salvation of man.  God may decide to save someone or he may very well walk on by, in that case, he declares the person one of the unelected.

The first three preserve man’s free will in some form and fashion.  Only the last, Calvinism, eliminates man’s freedom to choose.

  

Moses came off the mountain and presented his people with the Ten Commandments from God.  The assumption is that if God formulated these ten rules and identified them as ‘commandments’ then he fully expected them to obey and live by them.  When Jesus preached his Sermon on the Mount, was He setting a standard too high for his followers?  Would it not be a cruel thing to expect the impossible?  Jesus said, “Be perfect, therefore, even as your heavenly Father is perfect.”  (Matthew 5:48) This sounds like an impossible command but Jesus is not calling us to absolute perfection, he is calling us to completion.  Much of our ‘perfection’ is measured by our motive, not a flawless performance.  Our completion is finalized when we leave this life and enter a glorified state with Christ.    

The elimination of man’s free will makes a pure and holy God responsible for the sin in the world.  Norman Geisler points out in chapter four of his book, Chosen But Free, a chapter he entitled “Why Blame Me?” that the common statement ‘The devil made me do it’ leads to another question, “Who made the devil do it?”  The answer must be God.  When we make attempts to eliminate our own free will we eventually cast the blame for sin on a pure and holy God incapable of authoring sin. 

What are God’s expectations of those who call themselves ‘followers’?  Geisler teaches that ‘ought implies can’.  If God gives us Ten Commandments and expects that we ought to keep them then he will provide us with the necessary grace and power to do just that.  "..God never prescribes anything without providing the way to accomplish it. If we are morally bound, then we must be morally free." Geisler says. 

Free will is a gift of God to mankind.  We messed up when we began to make poor choices.  Therefore, the responsibility for sin and suffering in this world rests squarely on our shoulders and God has no accountability for the evil we created with our own choice to resist God and refuse his favor.

Calvin and Augustine would refute Arminius’ idea that the image of God in us has profound meaning and provides us with the ability to practice freedom of our will.  Therefore, we can ‘choose this day whom we will serve’.  If ‘ought’ implies ‘can’, then the verse found in Deuteronomy 30:19 is not meaningless when it clearly states that we ‘ought’ to “choose life”. 

How might we answer the question ‘does God choose us or do we choose God?’  God first chooses us.  “For God so love the world that he sent his only begotten son,” and then he enables us to choose him “that whosoever believes in him”.  This cooperative (synergistic) effort does not in any way limit the sovereignty of God.  It preserves his sovereignty and accentuates his love and the result is a voluntary, non coercive eternal relationship… “shall not perish but have eternal life.”  (John 3:16)

Kevin Probst - Teaches History, Government and Apologetics at the high school level in Columbus Georgia.

Once Saved Always Saved–Can We ‘Lose’ Our Salvation?

One of the most difficult questions to answer in apologetics and Christian theology is, “Can a person lose his salvation?” For some it’s an issue of semantics. The word ‘lose’ indicates having misplaced something. It is not unusual for me to misplace my keys or the remote control but it is utterly ridiculous to entertain the idea that one might lose (misplace) their salvation. Can you imagine going into work one day and hearing a colleague say, “I’ve misplace my salvation, will you help me find it.” In that sense, of course, salvation cannot be ‘lost’.

We tend to emphasize salvation, or being born again, as a one time, crisis event. There is a sort of “cheap grace” idea that all that is necessary to assure eternity with God is to mentally assent to the idea that Christ is the Messiah and he did die on the cross and was resurrected for the salvation of mankind. If you ‘believe’ this you are in. Those who promote this shallow idea seem to be ignorant of the fact that how one behaves is determined by what one believes. Cheap grace is mental assent without any radical change in behavior. Genuine belief would change behavior. Those who follow this deception love to say, “Christ saved me for all the sins I committed, am committing and will commit. Therefore, it doesn’t really matter what I do, I’m saved.” The Apostle Paul condemned such heresy with strong words, “Shall we continue to sin that grace may abound? God forbid!” (Romans 6:1-2)

Most Christians would agree that God has given man a gift of free will. Our salvation is determined by what God wills (sovereignty) and what man chooses (free will). God’s plan is simple to understand: He wants to save sinners, make them into saints and then populate a new world. It is a sort of reverse creation. The first time he made the world and populated it with people. This time he is making the people to populate a new world. God doesn’t make a saint instantaneously, it is a process. A person can step on the road to salvation in an instant but then he is granted many opportunities to progress along the way.

Many look at salvation as an arbitrary experience God forces upon certain pre-destined souls. Others believe men cooperate with God for salvation by choosing to answer his call. If we are free to enter into salvation why are we not free to leave? This isn’t like Hotel California:

Last thing I remember, I was
Running for the door
I had to find the passage back
To the place I was before
’relax,’ said the night man,
We are programmed to receive.
You can check out any time you like,
But you can never leave!

It seems contrary to the nature of God to slam and lock the door once we enter. It may be possible for man to retain the ability to leave but it doesn’t seem probable. Why would anyone choose to leave heaven to live in hell? Why would anyone choose death rather than life, misery rather than serenity?

There are three stages of salvation: Justification is when the soul is set free from the penalty of sin. Sanctification is when the soul is set free from the power of sin and glorification is when the soul is set free from the possibility of sin. Justification is available to any who will confess their sins and abandon a sinful lifestyle. “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9) We enter the door of sanctification the moment we willingly consecrate our lives to Christ and we submit ourselves to a long, and sometimes tedious, process of becoming more and more like Jesus. “For this is the will of God, even your sanctification.” (John 17:17) Justification and sanctification are pre-requisites for the final stage of salvation called glorification when our salvation is finally complete. This stage comes after the death of the body when the soul is transported beyond the reach of temptation and sin for all of eternity. “Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him…” (1 John 1:3)

Salvation is not complete until we have been glorified. When one boldly declares he cannot lose his salvation must we not ask, “How can you declare you cannot lose something you have not yet attained?” I am not yet ready to declare “Once saved, always saved” but when I cross the bar or when Christ appears to whisk away his own, in that day I will shout it to from the mountain at the top of my lungs, “I am once saved, always saved.”

I believe that “he who has started a good work in you will carry it on to completion” (Philippians 1:6) But God, through an act of love, seems to have tempered his own sovereignty by gifting man with free will. Christians are certainly eternally secure but this security is conditional. It could be disrupted by the sovereignty of God or the free will God has given man. Can a man lose his salvation? I don’t think so “for I am convinced that nothing can ever separate us from God's love.” (Romans 8:38) Paul goes on to list all the things that are incapable of separating us from God’s love. But, Paul does not include ourselves in that list. Can a man choose to become an apostate? The Bible seems to indicate that a man can choose to walk away from God. There are at least 80 passages of scripture in the New Testament that teach that the process of salvation can be interrupted, delayed or stopped altogether.

Jude 21 says, “Keep yourselves in God’s love” and verse 24 says, “He is able to keep you”. Doesn’t this indicate a conditional relationship? He will keep us if we will determine to be kept.

Jesus declared himself to be the true vine. The dead (unfruitful) branches are cut away and destroyed. The fruitful branches are pruned so they will produce even more fruit. “Remain in me and I will remain in you.” (John 15:4)

Christ warns against the prevalent teaching of ‘cheap grace’. “If we deliberately keep on sinning after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins. But a fearful expectation of judgment.” (Hebrews 10:26-17) There is a terrifying judgment for those who received knowledge of the way but broke away and chose to live in continuous, deliberate sin.

Peter says, “It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them” (1 Peter 2:20) He is saying that they are worse off who have entered the way and then departed from it. This is contradictory for those who argue that we might continue to live a sinful lifestyle and still be rewarded eternal life. If they received eternal life how are they worse off?

In conclusion, I would question the idea that we cannot walk away from God because it seems to make God inconsistent. Either he has gifted us with free will or he has not. But I would argue strongly that it is very unlikely that a man would choose to walk away from God if he were truly, genuinely saved. Maybe a more accurate statement would be not so much, “Once Saved Always Saved” but “If Saved Always Saved.”

  Kevin Probst

Ten Questions For My Calvinist Friends

 

Ten Questions for my Calvinist Friends

John Calvin’s theological system was centered around five points constructed in the acrostic: TULIP. His theology is most often mirrored with Jacob Arminius’ interpretations. Both Calvinists and Arminians often get a bad rap because of those who have taken either theological system to extremes. But the basic system of John Calvin can be summarized in this way:

Total Depravity – Man are so utterly infected with sin that he is rendered completely helpless. He is deeply infected in heart, mind and body. Man is so saturated by sin and his heart is so depraved that it is not possible for such a sinful heart to seek a holy God. Therefore, men have no part in their own salvation. They are completely at the mercy of God. If God chooses to save them they will be saved. If God chooses to damn them they will be damned.

Unconditional Election – There is nothing within any individual that merits salvation. A man’s salvation is arbitrarily decided by an all sovereign God. Man’s will has nothing to do with his salvation. He may want to be saved but still be lost or he may want to choose the way of sin and yet be saved against his own will. Nothing man wants or decides can overcome the sovereign will of God.

Limited Atonement – Jesus didn’t die for all men, he only died for those who have been predestined for eternal life by the will of the Father. When Christ hung on the cross he was saving only the sheep and not the goats. He bore the sins of many but not the sins of all.

Irresistible Grace – God’s sovereignty overwhelms the will of men so that they cannot resist when he calls. There is a general, external call to all men but the internal call to the elect can never be rejected. It may be compared to a law officer coming to your door to arrest you. You may not want to go with him but he has chosen that you go so you shall whether you agree or not.

Perseverance of the Saints – You cannot lose your salvation. If you have been chosen by the Father and purchased by the shed blood of the Son and called out by the voice of the Holy Spirit you are saved and made eternally secure. Nothing can take away your salvation. If you experienced saving grace but returned to your old sinful ways you were not really saved in the first place. You experienced a false conversion. It can be likened to ‘Motel California’, once you’ve checked in you can’t check out?

My Calvinist friends come in at all different levels. Some are 3-point Calvinists, some 4-points Calvinists. Most are 5-point Calvinists. I can probably claim to be a 1-point Calvinist. I believe strongly that the heart of man is totally depraved and cannot in and of itself respond to the call of God. I believe no man comes to God lest the Spirit of God first call him. It’s like sitting in the doctor’s office. You don’t walk in to see the doctor until he calls you in. I believe this is prevenient grace, the Spirit of God preparing the heart to receive salvation as a farmer prepares the earth for planting in the spring. Men cannot determine the time and manner in which they come to Christ. I believe not so much that men have free will as I believe that God frees their will through prevenient grace.

I agree with Jacob Arminius when considering the Perseverance of the Saints. I have trouble balancing the sovereignty of God with the free will of man. I know God will finish the good work he has started in us. I know that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ. I know that we are granted eternal life, not when we die, but when we confess our sins and accept salvation. But I resist the idea that when we are saved we become prisoners and we are locked behind bars. I don’t think it’s so much a matter of whether we can or cannot decide to walk away from Christ. I think rather it is more a matter of whether we will or will not. I can’t imagine arriving at heaven, spending a day and then deciding I’d rather go to hell. If we experience true genuine salvation and enter into a personal relationship with Christ, who in their right mind would decide they didn’t want that?

My heart leans heavily toward Arminianism because I cannot seem to reconcile the middle three points of Calvinism. I may yet be convinced if perhaps one of my Calvinist friends would give me convincing answers to the following questions:

1. If God has already determined who is and who is not to be saved, why do Calvinists witness to and pray for others? If man cannot be saved by any of his own effort why would we think he could be saved by our efforts of witnessing and praying? His salvation is unaffected by our effort because he was chosen before the foundations of the world. Is it not a waste of energy and time?

2. I have three sons. Suppose all three are drowning and I have an opportunity to save them. But, I arbitrarily decide to save two and let the third die. Would my love for my sons be considered somewhat deficient? Isn’t the love of God perfect? If so, how can he demonstrate love by arbitrarily determining some of his children will perish while others will not?

3. The good news isn’t so good for some. When Paul and Barnabas preached to the pagans they were told that there was good news (Acts 14). Christ had died for their sins. This is problematic because Christ actually didn’t die for all pagans, he only died for some pagans and the good news is actually bad news for some.

4. If some are predetermined to damnation before they were even born how are they accountable for the punishment they will receive? If a man is penitent and falls to his knees, sincerely seeking repentance, shall we say to him, “You may or may not be saved. God alone knows if you are of the elect?”

5. Is God a loving God? Is he just and is he good? Does God love the elect unconditionally but despise the non-elect? Is God’s system of justice inferior to man’s system of justice? In the American system all men are declared deserving of a fair trial. Is God fair and just when he unconditionally chooses some for heaven and some for hell? If God is good how is it that he can create some to go to heaven and purposely create others to send to hell? What is the predetermined quota God has determined for heaven and hell? If that number is already set, why does the Bible indicate that God decided to send more to hell than to heaven “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” (Matt. 7:14)

6. Why did Jesus teach about blasphemy of the Holy Spirit? There is a sin for which there is no forgiveness but if the non-elect can never be forgiven anyway what is the point?

7. What is the explanation for the evil and suffering that men experience in this life? Is suffering not the instrument that draws men toward God? Did he not say, “Take up your cross?” But if you are of the non-elect, for what purpose do you suffer? Does God delight in torture?

8. Historically, the Calvinist view seemed to have its roots in Augustine approximately 380 A.D. Are there any church fathers before Augustine who taught the tenets of Calvinism? Did Jesus teach Calvinism to his disciples? The words of Jesus are capsulated in John 3:16 "For God so loved the world (not just the elect)that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever (not just the elect) believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” It is blatantly obvious that Jesus is not willing that anyone should perish. Jesus never taught election.

9. Is it possible that God predestines us for salvation based on his foreknowledge? He knows who will and who will not commit to become Christ followers? Therefore, he arranges for the ‘elect’ certain circumstances conducive to their own salvation. He knows that given the right opportunities these ‘elect’ will make a decision for Christ. (Molinism)

10. If men are deprived of free will to accept Christ (hyper-Calvinism) then why are they granted free will to reject him? Why does God, in his goodness and love, not predestine all men to eternal salvation rather than just some men?

Jacob Arminius did not oppose Calvinism to defend the free will of man, he opposed Calvinism to defend the love and goodness of a holy God.