On his website, Arminian Perspectives, Ben Henshaw has a questions page at which he answers questions about Arminianism and Calvinism that visitors to his site pose in the comment section of the page. Here is a question from a man named Ralph followed by Ben’s answer:
Question: Sadly, our fellowship has of late been under the pump from a number of vocal and rather aggressive young Reformed folks. I was hoping you might be able to perhaps offer some counsel and help.
My main query is simply: How does one respond to these young Calvinist who claims predestination and election (as interpreted through the lens of TULIP) are central to the gospel?
Please don’t get me wrong, I love their passion for Jesus, along with their enthusiasm for careful theological thought. It’s their insistence on making their Calvinist position THE Biblical point of view and central to the Gospel which grieves me and compels me to try and respond in a gracious fashion.
Am I missing something? Do the doctrines of grace as expressed by TULIP really define the gospel? To be honest I do not see why it cannot be a secondary doctrinal issue much akin to credo versus paedobaptism given we affirm so many central truths.
Answer: I am sad to hear what is happening to your church. It is especially troubling when Calvinists try to make Calvinism the gospel. Unfortunately, this is nothing new. Charles Spurgeon said that Calvinism was just a “nickname” for the gospel. Obviously, Calvinists believe that Calvinism is the fullest expression of the gospel, just as I believe that Arminianism is the fullest expression of the gospel. But as you point out, whether or not election is conditional or unconditional is a side issue. Calvinism and Arminianism are more concerned about the nuts and bolts of salvation, how salvation works.
The main issue should be that both camps agree that it is by grace through faith in Christ that anyone is saved. Calvinists say this happens irresistibly and unconditionally (even faith, the “condition for salvation” is given unconditionally to the elect), while Arminians say this happens resistibly and conditionally (God works faith in us in a resistible manner, and salvation is truly conditional on our free response to gracious working, etc.).
When Calvinists make such claims, they are implying that one cannot be saved if they are not a Calvinist. That is a mark of hyper-Calvinism. The Reformed solas say it is through grace, faith, and Christ alone that we are saved. So when Calvinists call Calvinism the gospel, they are adding to the solas of their own movement.
I would remind such Calvinists that many wonderful Christians throughout the ages were not Calvinists. Nobody prior to Calvin was a Calvinist in the fullest sense expressed today (while Augustine held to much of what would later be called Calvinism, he did not hold to inevitable perseverance of the regenerate, a teaching that cannot be found prior to Calvin in the church–though it can be found among the gnostic sects).
So in making such claims they are saying that all the ante-Nicene believers, great men like John Wesley and other Wesleyan preachers, nearly all Pentecostals, nearly all holiness movements (Nazarenes, Methodists), many great Baptists, and so many more either did not know the gospel, or, depending on how far they take it, were not even saved. That is outlandish (and arrogant) to say the least.
If you explore my site and look at the articles and posts available at SEA (the Society of Evangelical Arminians, http://evangelicalarminians.org/), you will find much to help you combat this claim.
May God Bless you and give you the grace to rightly respond to such claims in love. Here are a few posts here to get you started (part of a series I have yet to finish). The link will take you to 4 posts. Just click on them to read them in full.
https://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/category/the-five-dilemmas-of-calvinism/
