ryan.the.calvinist

"And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting for that time until his enemies should be made a footstool under his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified." - Hebrews 10:11-14 This is probably one of my favorite verses in all of Hebrews. It is important to note that it is a ONE TIME sacrifice... not one repeated every day when a host is lifted up. There was no chair in the Temple b/c the priest's job was NEVER DONE. sins were constantly committed and constantly having to be sacrificed for. Not so with Christ's finished work.  He lived out his perfect obedience, took our sins upon himself at the cross, and clothes us perfectly - imputes - his righteousness to us, so that WE are counted as justified apart fro...

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… Lewis’ Liberty Over Election Turning now to the famed Oxford and Cambridge scholar, what exactly were Lewis’ positions on these highly controversial topics of predestination and free will, Calvinism and Arminianism? While no professional theologian, [1] Lewis was most decidedly an Arminian, though he asserted he held to Anglican theology. [2] In writing Mere Christianity , arguably his most theological work, it was Lewis’ goal to bring out the essentials of the Christian faith – essentials which spanned geographical and denominational boundaries, creating a kind of Christianity 101 . Yet rather than keeping the hallway of his mere Christianity wide enough to include both Calvinistic and Arminian understandings of free will and predestination, the hallway seems to not be big enough for both perspectives. In Book 2: What Christians Believe , specifically Ch. 3: The Shocking Alternative, Lewis begi...

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… Consulting the New Testament The New Testament is by no means silent on such matters, either. Though the command had repeatedly gone out, to everyone, to repent of sin and believe the gospel, [1] individuals do not, of their own decision, have the ability to obey this command. Jesus had claimed to be that which truly gives life and satisfaction – the bread of life from Heaven. The Jews then began to grumble about this – as they understood him to be the child of Joseph and an earthly mother. Jesus, however, assures them it is not worth grumbling about, because it is impossible for any person to come to Jesus, by repentance and faith, unless the Father draws him, and that person will be raised up on the last day. [2] This drawing is not a kind wooing or enticing attraction, but rather a dragging by the Father. [3] Furthermore, Jesus does not say, “No one may come to me unless the Father who sent...

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… Consulting the Old Testament A discussion of any Christian theology necessarily requires consultation with an authoritative text: the Bible. Throughout the biblical narrative, there are numerous examples of God sovereignly electing individuals for his purposes. An early example, found in Genesis 6, is that of God showing grace to Noah. God’s choice to spare Noah and his family from his righteous judgment was not the result of any first action on Noah’s part. God did not save Noah because he was a righteous man who kept God’s commands. While the text records “Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God” [1] , it does so only after first declaring that God had given grace to Noah. [2] Several other examples are prevalent throughout the Hebrew Bible – from Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, to Joseph. Having been sold into slavery by his older brothers, Joseph was truly on the r...

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… The Arminian and Calvinist Positions Compared Having defined terms relevant to the discussion of Reformed Theology and Arminianism, one may now be able to approach how these two very distinct theologies contrast with one another on five major parts of contention between the two camps: human ability to obey God, the cause of an individual’s election, the scope and  intent of Christ’s atoning work, the efficacy of the grace of God, and whether or not a Christian can lose his salvation. These five areas of theology and soteriology [1] are the major reasons there is disagreement between the monergists and synergists. While the details of Calvinist and Arminian positions are greater than this paper allows for discussion, the following chart [2] offers a brief comparison between the major differences and the emphasis held by each position. Arminian Position Calvinist Position Human Abil...

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will… The History of the Discussion – Pelagius & Augustine While obviously connected to the Protestant Reformation, much of the framework for the Calvinist-Arminian debate, in terms of the freedom and nature of the will, had been laid by St. Augustine of Hippo in his dealings with the teachings of Pelagius – who was later condemned by the Church as a heretic for his teachings. Pelagius had taken great exception to a prayer in Augustine’s Confessions, which read: “Give what you command, command what you will.” [1] His objection was that God would never command something if man was utterly unable to accomplish that command. [2] What stemmed from this debate was a view that came to be known as Pelagianism . This position holds that man’s ability to obey God, indeed his very nature, was unaffected by the Fall of Adam. [3] An appropriate analogy for Pelagianism would be that human beings are all bor...

“ My toaster doesn’t have a love button! ” “No! And neither does a robot!” [1] This exchange, neither written nor uttered by C.S. Lewis, certainly represents his theology concerning the notions of God’s sovereign decree in election and of man’s autonomous will to freely choose God. Discussions concerning the freedom of the will, and by contrast divine election, are visible throughout Lewis’ writings - from his fictional works to his BBC broadcast-inspired theological Mere Christianity. In his unpublished paper To Choose or Be Chosen: C.S. Lewis’ Contribution to Free Will and Predestination , Georgian pastor John Alexander attempted “to reconcile predestination and free will through Lewis’ works and examine Lewis’ impact on modern Christianity through this reconciliation.” [2] Such “reconciliation,” however, is not necessary to understand the impacts of both Reformed Theology and C.S. Lewis’ theology on Christendom as a whole. Lewis’ relevant writings clearly point to a synerg...