Post 91 - Calvinism and Contradiction

First, I want to make clear that, although I vehemently disagree with many of their propositions, I have never doubted the sincerity or the noble intent of any of the respected expositors of Calvinism. I’m convinced that they sincerely believe that their viewpoint is the most true-to-the-Bible exposition of some of the most misunderstood and perplexing concepts presented in Scripture.

In last month's post, I presented the five basic tenets of Calvinism, often referred to as the "doctrines of grace", as represented by the T-U-L-I-P acrostic. To ensure unbiased accuracy, I quoted from a number of respected, Reformed/Calvinistic sources (Westminster Confession, Piper, Packer, et.al.). Here is a link to that post: Post 90 - Calvinism: a Primer.

Today, before we begin to look at each of the five points one by one, I wanted to respond to some push-back I received regarding my claim in the previous post that the doctrines proposed by Calvinism actually cause unresolvable contradictions in Scripture--contradictions that many Calvinistic scholars simply chalk up to "mystery", "tension", or "paradox".

Contradiction

Yesterday upon the stair,

I met a man who wasn’t there

He wasn’t there again today

I wish, I wish he’d go away ...

 - William Hughes Mearns

Colorless green ideas sleep furiously – Noam Chomsky

The law of non-contradiction states that something cannot be true and untrue at the same time, in the same sense. An idea cannot be colorless and green. We cannot meet a man who doesn’t exist. A person cannot have the freedom to choose if God has "ordained all things that come to pass", and a deity who "ordains all things that come to pass" cannot be absolved of responsibility for the evil that he ordained to occur in the world.

These challenges regarding the sovereignty and goodness of God are just some of the difficulties caused by the Calvinistic doctrines. While all serious Christian Bible scholars will agree that the Bible cannot contradict itself, the question is what to do when a man-made doctrinal overlay on the scriptures creates apparent contradictions. 

It is unfortunate that many Calvinists, unable to untangle obvious contradictions created by their beliefs, will simply shrug their shoulders and tell us that we're just going to have to accept that almighty God can resolve them... somehow. We see a typical example of this intellectual shoulder-shrug in the following quotes from John MacArthur.

“I’m happy to concede that God can resolve things that I can’t.”

“In every major doctrine of the Bible you have an apparent paradox that you can’t resolve. I know that I’m kept eternally secured by God, but I also know I’m commanded to persevere in faith. I know I can’t be saved unless I’m chosen and called. And I know I can’t be saved unless I’m willing to repent and believe. I don’t have to harmonize it. But nor can I deny those things. You rest in the fact that you don’t need to grasp the mysteries that are clear in the mind of the eternal God.” [i]

Note that MacArthur pairs true, biblical statements with false, unbiblical presuppositions, each beginning with the words, "I know... " which assumes that both propositions are inspired and true. They are not. One is biblical, the other is the result of a corruption of the inspired texts, causing the unresolvable contradiction.

Also note the appeal to "paradox" and "mystery". In other words, John MacArthur, like many of the Reformers, disagrees with C. S. Lewis who once said, “Nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.”[ii]. In Reformed theology, we're told that we must simply accept that God is able to do nonsense.

"The Subtle Art of Redefinition"

"I don't know what you mean by 'glory'," Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't- till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!'"

"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less."

--Through the Looking Glass, Lewis Carroll

One method of trying to resolve the contradictions created by Calvinism is what Walter Martin called "the subtle art of redefinition", an unfortunate, but common practice in Calvinistic scholarship.

Words don't get to mean whatever we choose them to mean. It's true that an idea cannot be colorless and green... that is, unless we redefine the terms. Then, of course, it can mean exactly what we choose it to mean--neither more nor less.

• If we choose to believe that Jesus' death only atoned for a small, predetermined group of people, then Jesus cannot be "the propitiation for the whole world" (1 John 2:2)... that is, unless we redefine "the whole world" to mean, "only a select few--the elect".

  
  

• And if we choose to define "divine sovereignty" as the meticulous predetermination and control of "whatsoever comes to pass" (Westminster Confession of Faith), then God could not give man "dominion over all the earth" (Gen 1:26)... that is, unless we redefine the term "dominion"... or the term "all"... or the term "earth"... or all three.

That's it. That's the subtle, yet sinister art of redefinition.

In the posts that follow, we'll see that in Calvinism the meaning of words like "love" and "justice" and "goodness" become unrecognizable, and that our intuitive sense that we have "free will" is only an illusion because, in his "sovereignty", God has predetermined all of our thoughts and actions.

Freedom

"... the truth will set you free." (John 8:32)

John Piper, a leading advocate of Calvinism, once said, "there’s a glorious freedom in taking the Bible for what it says."[iii] 

Of course, Dr. Piper completely misses the irony that he and other Calvinists have to redefine much of what the Bible says in order to make problematic texts conform to their unbiblical, man-made systematic. By so doing, they plunder many biblical texts of their truth and confine many lost souls to the bondage of hopelessness.

Jesus issues a stark warning against such mishandling of God's word. "in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the [ideas] of men" (Mat 15:9).

Final Thoughts

It is unfortunate that when a contradiction can’t be manipulated into plausibility by redefinition or linguistic contortions, rather than reexamine the doctrine, many Calvinist scholars resort to intellectual resignation and an appeal to “mystery”, tension”, or “paradox”.

In the posts that follow, we'll see that the doctrines proposed by Calvinism are quite implausible without a corruption of God's word, a corruption of God's nature, and/or a corruption of the gospel of Christ.

[i] John MacArthur, quote taken from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEH-X2rP0WM, date April 11, 2018

[ii] C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain, (The Century Press, 1940), 18

[iii] John Piper, “What is Your Capacity for Mystery? Exploring the Tension Between Calvinists and Arminians”, Desiring God website, 2015

Next Post: Total Depravity: What Sayeth the Scriptures?