Charge: Arminianism inevitably leads to Universalism
Calvinist Complaints: Arminianism inevitably leads to Universalism
Calvinist, James White, writes: “There is a reason Arminianism has lead to Universalism. ...because when you really boil it down to it’s essence, you’ve either gotta just abandon biblical teachings and reach for Universalism or recognize that this system gives you absolutely no grounds for hope. Because when you really think through what they’re saying ‘who will separate us from the love of Christ?,’ well who’s us? Well it’s not me individually. It’s me ‘if’ I do this, if I do that, if I remain faithful. And since you can’t have a divine faith, you can’t have a will of God that is being accomplished and bring a certain people to salvation, then it’s you, you, you. God’s already tried His best, God’s put out a hundred percent, the deciding factor is you.” (Arminianism: It Robs the Gospel of its Personal Nature, emphasis mine)
It’s me “if” I believe in Jesus Christ. Why is that not a “grounds for hope”? The Calvinist will then apply Calvinist ideology, in order to render the Arminian without hope, but the Arminian doesn’t apply Calvinist ideology. The Arminian sincerely believes that he has security in trusting in Christ. On the other hand, what security could a Calvinist really ever have, in trusting in a secret election?
Calvinist, D. James Kennedy, writes: “Do you know that you are elect of God, chosen of God, predestined to adoption as a child of God before the beginning of time? You can know for certain.” (Solving Bible Mysteries, p.27, emphasis mine)
Can you? If you are a Calvinist, how can you have any assurance of that? The following quote explains the problem:
Calvinist, Mark Talbot, explains: “Now of course, nothing, that I, nor anyone else, can say can guarantee that anyone will continue to believe. Faith is a gift of God that we cannot produce.” (Sin and Suffering in Calvin’s World, emphasis mine)
So there is no assurance for the Calvinist. There is no guarantee. It could just be a temporary faith.
Walls and Dongell comment: “This dreadful possibility is what haunts Calvinists who struggle with the assurance and certainty of salvation. Times of moral failure and depression can easily be construed as evidence that one is not chosen after all and that God is hardening one’s heart for not responding more faithfully to his grace.” (Why I Am Not A Calvinist, p.202, emphasis mine)
Thus, the Calvinist actually has less security than the Modern Arminian who teaches Conditional Security, since the Arminian would at least be trusting in Christ for security, rather than trusting in an election.
One member of The Society of Evangelical Arminians writes: “If we were to weigh which system (Calvinism or Arminianism) would be more amenable to Universalism, I would think that Calvinism would work better with it. If someone were a Calvinist who was deeply disgruntled over God’s gleeful damnation of those who are predetermined to be objects of wrath, it wouldn’t be too great of a stretch to just say, ‘Well, if God saves only who He wants, I just choose to believe that He wants to save EVERYBODY!’ From my readings of universalist thought and my conversations with them, most Universalists root their beliefs in the eventual salvation of everyone in the notion that God will save folks IN SPITE OF THEIR FREE WILL, NOT THROUGH THEIR FREE WILL. For Universalists, it’s compulsory heaven (or some equivalent thereof) for everyone! Universalists usually don’t know how to deal the fact that some folks DON’T WANT TO BE SAVED. In other words, Universalists have a massive problem with their promotion of God’s pre-determined salvation of all people in light of the fact that some people freely choose to remain unsaved. White is merely playing a bizarre numbers game in his lame attempt to link Arminianism and Universalism. Here’s how he is REALLY THINKING: ‘Calvinism guards against Universalism because there are a necessarily limited number of folks who will be saved. Arminian beliefs in libertarian free will fling the door open wide for ANYONE to be saved should they choose to believe in Jesus. Because Calvinism puts a divinely-ordained cap on the number of saved folks, and Arminianism promotes the notion that the number of the saved depends upon who places faith in Christ Arminianism MUST promote Universalism simply because it holds out the possibility that a great number of folks will be saved.’ This is how White’s brain works with regards to this issue. It’s about numbers. The greater the restriction, the less the possibility for Universalism. But he fails to note that if you just point God’s exhaustive determinism in the direction of the many as opposed to the few, you end up with a nice, heaping mess of Universalism.” (SEA, emphasis mine)
