Thursday, February 17, 2011

Common Grace and Prevenient Grace

We don't have to rigidly follow the TULIP pattern if you think that would be unfair.  I only suggested it as a springboard for much deeper discussion.  It's interesting that you are not a five-pointer, Oscar.  What points do you accept or reject?

Thanks for your insight, Oscar, on Calvin's understanding of common grace.  That's all very interesting about common grace because as it was explained to me, common grace held in check human sinfulness enough to make it possible for us to live together in (at least somewhat) civil society.  It was almost a political aspect of Calvin's theology, but I see now that it is much more comprehensive.

As for your discussion of "will," I am wondering how "free" will really is a will at all if all we can ever do is choose the evil?  Doesn't that simply destroy the meaning of "will" entirely?  Doesn't having a will entail that there is at least a choice between two options.  Think of Adam and Eve in the garden (even if you read these stories as myth which I do).  I think the point from this narrative must be that from the very beginning God has given us a choice to obey or disobey.  Or would you say we are under a different "dispensation" now that we are living after the Fall?

Just so we're clear, Wesleyans also believe that salvation is a pure gift of God.  And we also believe that, were in not for the prevenient grace of God already at work in our hearts, we could not choose to accept his gift of salvation.  So perhaps the distinction between what you call common grace and what I call prevenient grace is really infinitesimal.  However, I do believe that God's gift of salvation is not something forced upon us.  We have a genuine choice to receive or reject that gift.  And I think that is one area we might disagree (if I am reading you correctly).

Another matter we certainly agree on is that of "social sin."  In fact, John Wesley took this so far as to picture a worldwide revival of all people and institutions which would sweep the globe and which would usher in God's kingdom at the eschaton.  We, too, believe in fallen systems which keep people in oppression and that these systems bear the mark of the Fall just as individuals do.  The redemption spoken of in Scripture is cosmic is scope -- and I know you agree with this from our previous talks.  Sadly, many evangelicals have so individualized salvation that we've lost sight of this very biblical vision (see the OT prophets, Romans 8, or the entire book of Revelation, for example).

The issue of disagreement does seem to be this:  "Where does human fallenness still have sway and where does God's grace (common or prevenient) UNDO or trump the effects of this corruption?"  In general, it seems that those of the Reformed perspective have a much darker view of what it mean to be human than do Wesleyans simply because we Wesleyans see God's grace in more places, in more systems, and in more people (as my friend Rick is suggesting very eloquently).  As a result, we are most optimistic about human nature, about God's presence in other religions, and about the ability of human systems to accomplish great good -- all the result of God's prevenient grace.

I certainly appreciate your admonition for us to unitedly oppose all sin and systemic evil despite our theological differences.  And I believe that is precisely what we are trying to do together here in Indianapolis.

Blessings,
Greg the Arminian

P.S.  Rick, I really loved your argument for a greater appreciation and emphasis on the goodness within humanity.  I think we can agree that we are mixtures.  Perhaps you are right that the doctrine of the fall has overshadowed the doctrine of "original goodness" and I do agree that this has had many negative impacts on evangelical spirituality.  I suppose we are all impacted by our context (I know that you're postmodern enough to agree with that) and as one who has been living in the inner city for almost three years now, I must say I am overwhelmed at times by the extend of original sin and how it has infiltrated every person and every structure in our community.  But, of course, even here the good is among us.

6 comments:

  1. I have to congratulate both of you on articulating your points of view so well. As a person who has been raised in mostly Armenian churches, but also went to a Presbyterian Church for a while, I have wrestled with these issues. I somehow always come back to two thoughts:
    1: God/scripture are rarely one or the other, and are, in fact, almost always Both/And. What I mean by this is that most of our great theological debates are simply a matter of putting more emphasis on one part of scripture over the other, but the truth is that scripture itself argues both sides. Maybe this is because the Truth is beyond our ability to put into human language. Maybe this is because scripture is God inspired and not God dictated. Maybe there is something else going on that I don't understand. (This last statement is certainly true.)
    2: God, for whatever reason, values freedom more than perfection. I have come to this conclusion because of the fact that God chose to allow Adam and Eve, (and continues to allow ALL of us) to chose evil. I believe that as an all powerful God, he had and has the ability to force us to do and be only good. But for reasons that are beyond me, he allows us to chose good or evil. We as humans are created in the image of God. Therefore, we have an innate ability to love, to do extraordinary good. I think that Calvinists would argue that this is not US doing the good, that it is only the Grace of God that allows any good to come from us. And I would agree. But I would also argue that this Grace is extended not just to believers, and "the elect", but to every human being as an image of God. This same argument goes the other way. We have the freedom to do extraordinary evil. This does not exclude believers or "the elect." I think we can all say with certainty that even though we are believers we have done evil. We can also agree that as a group, believers have committed many and great social evils. But non-believers have committed many and great social goods as well. I believe that this is because of the innate good that comes from God and is given to each of us as a birthright because human beings are made in the image of God. Maybe the reason God values freedom so much is that He himself has it, and he would not create something in his image without it. After all, I think most parents would chose freedom for their children even though that freedom comes with innumerable risks. The earth is full of bodies that chose to abandon life rather than abandon the dream of freedom. Maybe our seemingly irrational love of freedom comes from God too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. One of the questions I'd like to see addressed throughout your discussion is: How do we keep our religions/traditions from becoming (as one author put it) "self-serving, God-management systems"? I know that we align ourselves with a certain denomination or faith because we believe the human-divine relationship is articulated more fully by one or the other. But there seems to be a fine line between trying to understand God and trying to "own" God. I always find myself resonating with Paul's conclusion to the mystery of the salvation of "all Israel" at the end of Romans 11: "O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and how inscrutable his ways! 'For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?' 'Or who has given a gift to him in the hope of being repaid?' For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory for ever. Amen."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Christopher,

    That's a great question and one that I wrestle with. It bothers me that some people's religion seems to be essentially selfish. I recall one day when this dawned on me and it was as if the Holy Spirit was saying, "Will you please stop thinking and praying about yourself for once?!? Stop worrying about getting yourself into heaven! And start devoting yourself to my redemptive mission!" I think capturing a healthy theology of the Missio Dei (mission of God) is the key to moving us beyond self and toward others-centeredness. I'm working with my church on this too since many churches can be basically about themselves. I hope this helps a little.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mandy,

    I love they way you put it: we need a "both/and" theology rather than an "either/or." I think that is exactly what Oscar and I are wanting to come from this blog. We both see truth in each other's traditions and realize we need to learn from them. Sometimes I joke that what I really need is a healthy dose of Calvinism to cure my spiritual OCD. Really, the issues we're talking about are simply matters of emphasis. Both of us believe in freedom AND God's sovereignty -- we just emphasize one side more than the other. I know for a fact that last Sunday Oscar preached on holiness! And perhaps when we no longer see through a glass darkly, we will see how these two perspectives synthesize beautifully.

    By the way, tell your husband to contact me. I miss him.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi guys -

    Reluctantly allowing myself to get sucked into reading your blog. I say reluctantly because there is so much to learn about these traditions and frankly, it's much easier to just ignore it and pretend it isn't there :-)

    But I'm a stranger in a strange land - Wesleyan from Indiana attending Reformed Baptist church in the South.

    To strengthen my own understanding of Wesleyan-Arminian theology, I found this book helpful: http://www.amazon.com/Foundations-Wesleyan-Arminian-Theology-Mildred-Wynkoop/dp/0834102544/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1298327731&sr=8-1

    However, the Reformed Baptists I know wouldn't allow themselves to be instructed by a woman (not sure if that's a reformed or a Baptist decision), so I just quietly let the book sit on my coffee table :-)

    So I'm reading patiently for now, and once you've hashed out the basics of each theological viewpoint, I'm looking forward to seeing a discussion on practical implications of living as a W-A or Calvinist.
    -Adam

    ReplyDelete
  6. Adam,

    I'm so glad to have you on the journey with us! May we all learn to live more faithfully through this conversation!

    - Greg the Arminian

    ReplyDelete

Please remember that this is a CIVIL and RESPECTFUL blog. No incendiary comments allowed!