Historical Background
Augustine's late anti-Pelagian writings taught predestination as God's gratuitous choice, and Gottschalk's ninth-century teaching of double predestination was condemned and revived in turn. Aquinas held predestination certain and unmerited while guarding human freedom. Calvin confessed a double decree and called it a dreadful decree even as he taught it. The Synod of Dort (1618-19) defined unconditional election against the Remonstrants, who taught election conditioned on foreseen faith. Karl Barth recast the doctrine in the twentieth century as the election of Jesus Christ, in whom God chooses rejection for himself and election for humanity. Molinism, from Luis de Molina (1588), explains election through God's middle knowledge of what free creatures would do.
Scripture References
- Romans 8:28-30
- Romans 9
- Ephesians 1:3-14
- John 6:37-44
- 1 Peter 1:1-2
The Questions
- Is election unconditional, or conditioned on foreseen faith? Work on this question in the Workshop
- Is election individual, corporate, or individual in the corporate head? Work on this question in the Workshop
- Does God decree reprobation in the same way he decrees election? Work on this question in the Workshop
- What comes first in the order of decrees: election, or the fall and the sending of Christ? Work on this question in the Workshop
The Positions on This Subject
Classical Calvinism
God elects individuals to salvation unconditionally, not on the basis of foreseen faith or merit, so that the decisive difference between the saved and the lost lies in God's eternal purpose.
Classical Arminianism
God elects to salvation those whom he foreknows will believe in Christ and persevere, so election is conditioned on foreseen faith that grace makes possible but does not coerce.
Lutheran
Christ died for all people and God earnestly wills the salvation of all, yet only some are saved; the difference is not a hidden decree of reprobation but the mystery of grace resisted, a paradox the tradition refuses to resolve by reason.
Methods Brought to This Subject
The methods of theological discovery demonstrably worked on this subject, each with the reason it belongs here and the evidence of its use.
Literal-Historical Interpretation (Reformation)
Every position on this subject argues from the same small set of passages, and what divides them is first of all a question of reading: what the words meant, in their grammar and their setting, before they are arranged into a doctrine. The literal-historical method is the shared ground on which the argument takes place.
Evidence of use: Jacob Arminius's Declaration of Sentiments (1608) answers the same passages in the same grammatical terms, arguing that the election Romans 9 describes is of believers in Christ; the two readings meet on this method's ground.
Objections
Unconditional double predestination is objected to as making God the author of damnation and emptying the universal call of sincerity. Conditional election is objected to as resting God's eternal purpose on a human act and turning grace into foresight of merit. Barth's recasting is objected to from both camps: as universalism by implication to the Reformed, and as an evasion of the exegetical questions to its critics generally.
Sources
Primary: Augustine of Hippo, On the Predestination of the Saints (428-429); Canons of Dort, First Head of Doctrine (1619); Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics II/2, The Doctrine of God (German original 1942; English 1957).
Secondary: Richard A. Muller, Christ and the Decree: Christology and Predestination in Reformed Theology from Calvin to Perkins (Baker Academic, 2008); Roger E. Olson, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities (IVP Academic, 2006).