Help me understand: is the conflict between Calvinism and Arminianism of significance in the American protestant/evangelical church today? (cc)

[Little Nyssa]

Also called predestination vs free will.

I've been in on some discussions recently among evangelical Christian friends lately, and this issue has come up and people have stated which side of the debate they fall on.  

 

Those of you who belong to protestant/evangelical/nondenominational churches, do you find that much teaching is devoted to this subject?  Which denominations tend to be on which side?  Or is it a personal preference?  Is it a strongly held belief, or more like you just go along with whatever the teaching in the church you like is?  Would a difference cause you to want to go to another church?

 

I am not really interested in starting a debate about these two schools of theology-- I think I understand where both sides are coming from both Biblically and theologically.

What I would like to know is:  Is this a frequent topic of conversation, teaching, or conflict?  I had thought that this was an older, more historical kind of controversy. 

 

Thanks!

 

[Guest]

I think modern churches with "contemporary" styling avoid this topic. I didn't hear about it in any church in the past 20 years.  With that said, I still think anybody who knows about the two views involved tends to hold strongly to their viewpoint.  The Calvinist view is not acceptable to me...and that's putting it as mildly as I possibly can. 

 

I am in the Mid-Atlantic. It may vary by region. 

[TechWife]

I most closely identify as an Arminian,  and I don't hear a lot of teaching on the subject. Free will is a "given" in our church's culture. New member candidates go through a class where they learn about our church doctrine (including this one), among other things. I suspect that if a person didn't agree with it to the point that they were uncomfortable, that they wouldn't join the church. 

 

We do occasionally have  Sunday School classes that study systematic theology as a group and they touch on it more there, but those classes are voluntary. 

 

 

[Seasider]

It is huge.

 

Below are some links to the current struggles in TH Baptist denomination. You may also find lots of info by googling "young, restless and reformed."

 

http://www.sbctakeover.com

 

http://www.abpnews.com/opinion/commentaries/item/8622-the-new-calvinism-in-the-sbc#.Uovjp5m9Kc0

[8circles]

I don't find it to be in any way pertinent to my faith life IRL. the only people I know IRL who consider it crucial are those who go to churches which are overtly Reformed in their teaching, which makes sense.

[Heather in Neverland]

It is significant in its importance but for me, it is not a point of division. While I would not attend an arminian church if I had another choice, I would if I had no reformed choice.

 

I also do not believe it to be a salvation issue as long as they believe in saved by grace and not by works. There are other issues that I would leave a church over but Arminianism isn't one of them (unless it was rabid, anti-Calvinist Arminianism).

 

Does that make sense? I don't feel like I am explaining it properly.

[GSOchristie]

We are Reformed, but our last church change was the only one that has ever been affected by this.  My son came home worried that if he didn't get out there and "save the world" everyone he didn't save was going to hell.  That was the tipping point for us.  We've never seen it as a big issue, and even though our current church is Reformed (Presbyterian), several of our friends who attend there are not.  We both grew up Southern Baptist, which is traditionally Armenian, but when dh attended the Southern Baptist Seminary nearly everyone we knew there was reformed.  

[Shamzanne]

The biggest significance is that your beliefs on free will vs. predestination inform your beliefs about sin. Many churches today don't talk about sin much, if at all. If that were the case, I could see that the Calvinism/Arminianism debate would seem out of date or unnecessary. I couldn't be part of a church like that. Don't get me wrong, I'm not some "sinners in the hands of an angry God" Christian. But the modern approach of only focusing on the lovely things about God and not getting real about what life as a Christian is has no appeal to me.

 

I come from a Wesleyan background and attended a Bible college that was vehemently Wesleyan/Arminian. My current church does not place great emphasis on this issue (we lean Anabaptist) but would come down against the Calvinist TULIP concepts.

 

To answer some of your questions: Methodists, Nazarenes, and Wesleyans are a few of the denominations who fall on the Arminianism side. Most Anabaptists would align this way as well. Reformed and Presbyterian are generally Calvinist.

 

About five years ago I was searching for a church. All of the non-denominational churches I attended I quickly discovered were Calvinist. I knew I couldn't find a home in these churches. It is not that I couldn't enjoy great Christian fellowship with them. But even words used in worship (sin, grace, redeemed) have different meaning or at least nuance when you look at human relationship with God in these different lights.

[milovany]

Our protestant days are not so very far removed, and while I was aware that a difference existed, it had never been broached as a subject in the churches we attended (contemporary, charismatic, non-denominational for the most part).  I think the leaning was definitely more toward free will because I know I have a strong reaction now to reformed theology and I don't recall ever being conscious of that before.  I didn't even know what reformed was until we started converting to Orthodoxy. 

 

I think now there are definitely places where the beliefs are strongly expounded.  I have picked up on that both in my reading and through interactions on this board.  I think those of the reformed persuasion probably hear about it more often and more strongly. 

[VaKim]

Calvinists here. We will not attend an Arminian church, thus, we currently have no church, since the nearest reformed church is 2 hours away. We watch sermons online. It is a divisive issue to us. We believe that God is in complete control of every single thing that happens. That He planned it all, including the bad things, which all are for His glory, whether we can see how or not. It is important to us because we believe this is what the Bible teaches. Also, practically speaking, if we believed that there was anything that happens that wasn't planned, then that means there are things God either doesn't know about, or cannot do anything about. Just the fact that He knows something will happen means that it must happen. Therefore, there is no getting around it, in our view. 

[DawnM]

Some churches find it more important than others.  

 

I grew up staunch Armenian and am still more Armenian than Calvinistic, but I attend a Baptist church.  The church I go to does not make a huge deal over anything but eternal security.  

 

The church I grew up in talked about doctrine all the time.  That same church today doesn't make as big of an issue about it anymore.

 

Dawn

[Alice]

We are Presbyterian and I’d say it’s essential. Really it’s just woven into everything. I’ve never understood the “it’s just doctrine viewpointâ€. If I’m going to believe in something it’s important to me to understand exactly what that is and why I believe it to be true. So, doctrine is woven into every sermon, into every discussion, into the worship service (what hymns we sing) and into the Sunday School curriculum. Not in the sense that the five points of TULIP are discussed each week but that views on sin and salvation and our relationship with God really develop from the doctrine so any sermon or discussion or teaching is going to have that as a foundation even if it isn’t explicitly discussed. 

 

We are firm believers that there is very little we would leave a church for. We’ve been at our current church for 25 (dh) and 18 (me) years. We’ve stayed through rough times. I can’t imagine the teaching become less Reformed, just because it’s so integral to the church, so it’s hard to say whether we’d leave if that was the case. If we moved, I would definitely look for a church with similar beliefs and doctrine. If we couldn’t find one, I would attend another denomination. 

[Freckles]

It is significant in its importance but for me, it is not a point of division. While I would not attend an arminian church if I had another choice, I would if I had no reformed choice.

 

I also do not believe it to be a salvation issue as long as they believe in saved by grace and not by works. There are other issues that I would leave a church over but Arminianism isn't one of them (unless it was rabid, anti-Calvinist Arminianism).

 

Does that make sense? I don't feel like I am explaining it properly.

 

:iagree:

 

[texasmama]

Those of you who belong to protestant/evangelical/nondenominational churches, do you find that much teaching is devoted to this subject?  Which denominations tend to be on which side?  Or is it a personal preference?  Is it a strongly held belief, or more like you just go along with whatever the teaching in the church you like is?  Would a difference cause you to want to go to another church?

 

I am not really interested in starting a debate about these two schools of theology-- I think I understand where both sides are coming from both Biblically and theologically.

What I would like to know is:  Is this a frequent topic of conversation, teaching, or conflict?  I had thought that this was an older, more historical kind of controversy. 

 

Thanks!

In the two churches we have belonged to in the past 15 or so years, no teaching has been devoted to this that I recall.  That is because these churches were not Calvinistic ones.  I do find that this is a denominational issue.  I have attended a Calvinistic Presbyterian church in the past.  In the Presbyterian church I belonged to, it was a deeply held belief and discussed quite a lot.  I will not belong to a Calvinistic church in the future.

 

As a side note, I think many life-long Protestants are completely unaware of Calvinism/Armenianism.  I was unaware of this until I joined the Presbyterian church in my 20's.  I grew up Southern Baptist.  A coworker who is the wife of a Methodist minister was not even familiar with the terms when I asked her about the Methodist church's position.  She is a life-long Methodist in her 60's.  She told me what she believed, and I told her that she was Armenianist.  It was news to her.

[Woodhaven]

I have joyfully worshiped with fellow Christians who are not Reformed in their theology.  Still, theology is important to my understanding of God; who He is and whether or not He is truly omnipotent.

 

That said, I think that there is a belief among the non-reformed Christians that those of us who are (reformed) don't evangelize or aren't concerned about reaching the lost with the gospel.  That is very far from the truth, but has led to tensions between my sister (who is not Reformed) and myself.

[GSOchristie]

I have joyfully worshiped with fellow Christians who are not Reformed in their theology.  Still, theology is important to my understanding of God; who He is and whether or not He is truly omnipotent.

 

That said, I think that there is a belief among the non-reformed Christians that those of us who are (reformed) don't evangelize or aren't concerned about reaching the lost with the gospel.  That is very far from the truth, but has led to tensions between my sister (who is not Reformed) and myself.

 

Yep, my mom is always trying to pick a fight about this.  

[creekland]

We're Arminian in beliefs, but attend a Calvinist church.  The "Calvinist" teaching part is minimal, so doesn't bug us much and I don't believe the pastor believes the "L" part of TULIP anyway.  When there is a difference of belief in the sermon we discuss it and how we believe differently in the car on the way home.  Of course, we also generally discuss the sermon in the car on the way home anyway.

 

My oldest chose a Calvinist college.  He has not changed his beliefs and they haven't stoned him, so I think all is well.  ;)

 

And... just because I'm Arminian in beliefs doesn't mean that I don't believe in predestination at all.  I just don't think that's the "complete" answer as most Calvinists teach.  I'm definitely Free Will when it comes to salvation.  One chooses it and one can give it up if they so choose.

[sbgrace]

Our church is Free Methodist, which branched from the Methodist Church/John Wesley. Any denomination that comes off Methodisim and/or comes from a Holiness perspective (Methodist, Free Methodist, Wesleyan, Nazarene, Holiness, Church of God Anderson) will have an Free Will perspective. Pentecostal churches will come from a Free Will perspective. Anabaptists (Mennonite, Amish, etc.) are older denominations without as much as of the Western/Augustine influence. They will hold a free will perspective to some extent but the teaching is more nuanced/different (I think more correct....). They are closer to Eastern Orthodox in view. Baptists...it seems like you might not know what you're getting for sure. I want to say American Baptist anyway would be Armenian. But I'm a bit unclear because of a friend's experience.

 

I don't hear this taught, outside of membership classes or similar, in the churches I've been a part of (Free Methodist and Nazarene). It's sort of just inherent in the whole understanding of God. I find the Calvinist view is not compatible with my understanding of God and his love. I think the Armenian is a bit incorrect too! But I have no problems belonging to an Armenian church, and I don't feel the same about a Calvinist church. I have a friend whose family left their Baptist church when it became apparent the pastor was coming from a strong Calvinist perspective. They had no clue there was such a thing up to the point the sermons starting feeling very off and they investigated. So I think it can/does matter to some. I'm sure that goes both ways! I have Calvinist leaning Christian friends I respect and who show God's love every day. For me this is about a perspective of God I want communicated to my kids rather than about individual people of God.  

[sassenach]

I think it plays out not in the direct teaching so much as the undergirding of all teaching.  How you view the sovereignty of God (and when you boil down the predestination issue, it does come down to God's sovereignty) will influence many, many things, including one's theology of suffering and evangelism, which will definitely effect the teaching from the pulpit.

 

So while my dh pastor isn't breaking down predestination every week, you better bet that God's sovereignty is a huge and repeated theme.

 

(We're reformed, though dh somewhat rejects the Calvinist title because it's so totally misused.  Most of Calvin's writing was on the theology of worship, not salvation.  Salvation seems to be the bone that no one's dog will let go of.)

[ThisIsTheDay]

 

What I would like to know is:  Is this a frequent topic of conversation, teaching, or conflict?  I had thought that this was an older, more historical kind of controversy. 

 

 

 

It is an occasional topic of conversation with my friends, some of whom are reformed and some of whom are not.  I would be very reluctant to attend a reformed church, although we did for awhile (knowingly, haha). It has been my experience that the differences may not be specifically taught, but as as Sassenach said, it plays out with a much broader, subtle influence. 

 

There are a good many of Christians who are unfamiliar with these terms, I think for a variety of reasons. The specific words may not be used in their church, they didn't know another possibility existed, etc.  However, it continues to be very relevant today.

 

[vonfirmath]

I studied the subject in one of my theology classes and had to write a paper.  Where I came down on it? It does not matter.  It might be predestination and just looks like free will to us. The scriptures are not, to my understanding, that clear on either side. There is some element of choice on our side required.  In the end, it does not matter if you follow Arminius or Calvin. It matters if you follow Christ and do His will.

 

As well, I certainly do NOT believe one can lose their salvation. So I don't even fall neatly into either "camp" in any case.  ("For I am persuaded that neither life, nor death, nor principalities, nor powers, ..., nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" -- No creature. not even myself and my own fallen nature, once it has been covered by blood of Christ.)

[Little Nyssa]

Thank you all for these posts and links. This was very helpful to me!

[6packofun]

I think it's not something that is discussed among most lay people.  Congregations are many times clueless about this issue because they don't delve into theology as deeply as they should.  They trust that their leaders and pastor are giving them the truth and that's good enough.  Our former Baptist church hired new staff that was reformed and I would guess that most of the congregation doesn't even know what that means, sadly.  They certainly didn't ask about it and reformed leadership tends, IMO, to downplay discussing those deeper issues because they know it would cause waves.

 

Dh and I are not reformed, but it's actually not why we left the church.  A Calvinist can talk about God's sovereignty and grace, etc. all day long and a non-Calvinist would agree because they also believe that God is sovereign.  HOW He is sovereign?  That is a different, deeper topic and one that most people don't get into and assume they agree on!  LOL  There is also a false dichotomy that you're either Calvinist/Reformed or Arminian/Wesleyan.  There is overlap in TULIP and ROSES.  lol  Both sides do not properly represent the beliefs of the other very well, either, IMO, so that is another difficulty.  All orthodox Christians (not Orthodox church, just "orthodox") believe God is sovereign and believe in God's saving grace.  Dig deeper and that is where the differences can be found.  (With atonement as well.)

 

I find the joining or claiming of one camp or the other personally distasteful and it reminds me of 1 Corinthians where Paul scolds those who are claiming they are of Apollos or Cephas rather than CHRIST.  On one hand, I really do like to know where my pastors and elders and other leadership stand, BUT unless they are going to be preaching TULIP on a regular basis and/or make it part of a statement of faith that members need to agree on, I wouldn't automatically cross that church off my list.  :)  (For example, I do not believe in infant baptism or covenant children, etc. but I would LOVE to visit Redeemer Presbyterian in NY to hear Tim Keller preach!  *Edited to add that those are *Presbyterian* traditions/doctrine; reformed folks are split on the baptism issue, too.

[BigMamaBird]

I got to a non-denominational protestant church with Baptist leanings.  We studied this topic a few years ago and read in depth the verses commonly used to argue both sides.  It was very interesting.  I hold the rather convoluted opinion that they are both true.  (stay with me here)  I believe that God is outside of time and saw/sees everything that ever happened all at once.  It's us humans who live in a linear understanding of time.  So yes, we get free will to choose our individual actions but God knew at Creation all the choices we were going to make and created us knowing that we were going to make those choices.  Now, I'm sure someone with more of a theological background could poke holes all over my belief in this, and that's okay with me.  If I'm 100% absolutely wrong, I don't think it effects my salvation and I don't think it's something to split a church or relationship over.  I'm just an imperfect human with an imperfect understanding.  That's just how I wrap my head around it.

[Paige]

I have been a member or long time attender of many different protestant denominations. Since we move frequently, sometimes the best choice for a church isn't our preferred denomination. IMO, the issue has become much more frequently debated recently than it was 15 years ago. I'm not sure why, but I think it may have to do with less church education for young people- when people join a church, they don't often know what they are really joining. I think in the past there may have been more people in Sunday School and more new members classes so that if you disagreed on a key point, you wouldn't have joined in the first place. If everyone believes the same thing, there's no need to debate what others believe, kwim? I think it also has to do with some popular Christian books that introduce people to ideas that they would not have gotten in their home church. I've seen this in my church- a topic comes up and somebody not familiar with the official denominational position on a subject, will say they read a book and discuss how great it was. It turns out that the book advocates the position opposite of our particular church but most members don't know that. They just think it is really meaningful. The teacher then has to carefully explain why our church does not support that view.

 

IMO- I don't think the two views are contradictory and it is just semantics. I know most people disagree, but I have no trouble with this issue. For me, it's part of the mystery of God and not something that makes a difference in my behavior or belief.

[Seasider]

In my earlier reply, I stated this issue is huge. I said that with regard to church polity. A particular position undergirds how salvation is taught, how missions are pursued, what programs the church offers, which curriculum authors are accepted.... So if one is going to join a church and be fully committed in fellowship and service within the body, it's important to know the explicit doctrine of those in leadership.

 

It's also important for being able to recognize changes in leadership. Pastor retiring? Got a search committee going? That search committee needs to tease out all the doctrinal details. Too many churches these days are finding themselves victims of "stealth takeovers." Lots around the web on that if you google. It is very sad to see the church you've invested years in change gears right under your nose.

 

Personally, having been on both sides of the fence, I agree with many above who have said it's not a black and white choice. There are scripture passages to support both sides. I see it not as an either-or, but as a both-and. This, plus years of experience in both types of church, results in my being much more comfortable in a free-will leaning church body than an expressly reformed church body.

 

Interesting, the only Christian doctrine the first believers had was the word of Jesus himself or one of His direct apostles. We see the centurion in Matthew 8 declared a faithful man. So many others demonstrated their faith in response to Christ, with no further "doctrine." At Pentecost thousands were brought into the church by the testimony of Peter and a work of the Holy Spirit. What systematic theology taught there? None. It is sad that it has become such a dividing thing among believers.

 

Just wanted to chime in a bit more since I gave such a short answer before.

[Onceuponatime]

I got to a non-denominational protestant church with Baptist leanings.  We studied this topic a few years ago and read in depth the verses commonly used to argue both sides.  It was very interesting.  I hold the rather convoluted opinion that they are both true.  (stay with me here)  I believe that God is outside of time and saw/sees everything that ever happened all at once.  It's us humans who live in a linear understanding of time.  So yes, we get free will to choose our individual actions but God knew at Creation all the choices we were going to make and created us knowing that we were going to make those choices.  Now, I'm sure someone with more of a theological background could poke holes all over my belief in this, and that's okay with me.  If I'm 100% absolutely wrong, I don't think it effects my salvation and I don't think it's something to split a church or relationship over.  I'm just an imperfect human with an imperfect understanding.  That's just how I wrap my head around it.

 

This is very similar to what is taught in churches of Christ: We have free will, we either choose God or don't, God knows who will choose him, those who choose him and persevere are predestined to be saved. This is supposed to cover all the scriptures on the topic. However, the passages in Romans where God chooses to harden Pharoahs heart, or chooses to hide information from the Jews lest they turn and be saved,  are pretty sticky to me.

 

Very little history of Calvinism or Arminianism is taught if ever. The subject of predestination is mostly avoided. Emphasis is on the possibility of losing your salvation if you don't persevere, and having free will to choose.