Theology Unplugged: Invitation to Calvinism – Part 14

Listening to this audio, I stopped it at 16:26. It does not surprise me that your suggestions to answer the question posed by the student regarding prayer you (a) question the questioners motives; (b) deflect the answer by points that do not at all answer the question.

First, let me ask, why assume that the question is an “implicit rejection of Calvinism”? Can’t it be an honest question by someone seeking to understand these “doctrines of grace”. As such, you are already poised to answer the question in passive hostility.

Second, why answer the question by introducing an alternative view, specifically Arminianism? That’s tantamount to someone asking me how can God be triune and I answer by showing them the implications of what the WatchTower Society believes. Whatever the WTS believes, it does not answer the question.

Third, your comments regarding Arminianism betray an ignorance of or, at least, a misunderstanding of how it views Biblical revelation. Furthermore, your objection of how Arminianism views prayer is based on Calvinistic presuppositions, which will necessarily lead to misguided conclusions.

Fourth, I think the problem is that if you had given a straightforward answer to the question, you would find yourselves in a mire of inconsistency and double-think.

Let me give one example Calvinism poses to the subject of prayer. According to Calvinism, and please correct me if I am wrong, God saves ultimately by decree and not on the basis of prayer. He may use prayer as a means but it is not the ultimate determinative for salvation; God’s decree to elect particular persons is the ultimate determinative.

Now, according to Calvinism, no one can know which unregenerate persons are those of the elect. Therefore, you pray for Harry. Well and good. But what happens if Harry is not one of the elect?

Again, you don’t pray for Jane. Let’s say, no one prays for Jane. Kind of a bummer that no one cares enough to pray for Jane. However, she is of the elect. What then?

Further listening to the audio poses no straightforward answer to the question. The discussion past 16:26 merely uses Arminianism as a whipping boy, apparently, because you guys have no other answer to the question.

The students query, whether or not they rejected Calvinism is quite irrelevant, remains unanswered.

Your whole defense of Calvinism here is a mere repudiation of Arminianism; and refusing Arminianism, even if it is in fact not Biblical, does not necessarily mean Calvinism is Biblical.