the truth shall set you free

I recently came across the blog of Joshua Duncan, and noticed a rant he posted about Calvinism vs. Arminianism. He expresses frustration with those who claim to be neither Calvinists nor Arminians, but “Biblicists.” In other words, those who claim they do not subscribe to a supra-scriptural “theology.” This piqued my interest because – though, I have never used the term “Biblicist” – that is essentially what I claim to be.

Duncan begins by saying that ”…you can either be monergistic of synergistic with no third option available”, and for the sake of proving a point, I contacted a Christian friend of mine:

Me: Hey, I’ve got a question.
Friend: shoot
Me: Would you classify your beliefs as monergistic or synergistic?
Friend: What does that mean?

Case in point. Now, you may be asking yourself, “What do these terms mean?” or “Where do my views fit into this?” Therein lies my concern with Duncan’s claim. The importance he places on theological systems implies that ignorance of such systems is in some sense wrong.

To say that ignorance (or avoidance) of such issues is unacceptable is to argue against the all-sufficiency of the Scriptures. For example, 2 Peter 1:3 says:

His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence…

This is not to claim that the Bible accomplishes everything for us, but it certainly claims to be all-sufficient with regard to the information it provides. Given that God’s word is all-sufficient, supra-scriptural theologies are irrelevant to our salvation. Therefore, faulting someone for not subscribing to a man-made system is, itself, wrong.

That said, let’s examine the problems with Duncan’s claims more closely. He says:

In essence, the non-Calvinist is saying, “You’re following the teachings of some man.” Are we supposed to ignore the exegetical work that has been done? Do they think that we venerate Calvin so much that we do not question his teaching? We are Calvinists because we believe in the Bible. Third, it drips of pseudo-humble arrogance. “You can have your fancy theological systems. I’ll stick with the Bible.” Friend, this “fancy theological system” is derived from the Bible. Please tell me how you’ve transcended the debate such that neither label applies to you.

Once again, all of this stems from the assumption that one must be a part of the debate, and I am not convinced that this is so. Joshua, if you are willing to question Calvin’s teaching, then why call yourself a Calvinist? By his name you have either (1) studied any and all of John Calvin’s doctrines and found them to be inerrant, or (2) have not studied all of Calvin’s doctrines but have faith that they are inerrant. Those are the only two options, and both are dangerous. I call myself a Christian – and a Christian only – because I do not question Biblical teaching. Do you consider that claim “pseudo-humble arrogance”? I should hope not, because that is the view the Bible takes. The issue is not who has “transcended the debate” or who is “above labels.” The fact is, theological systems are an attempt to “transcend” the teaching of the Bible as it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Simply, the term “Calvinism” would be unnecessary if it did not go beyond what the Scriptures teach. This concept is illuminated by the very existence of denominational Christianity; differing doctrines are denoted by various “brand names.”

Paul writes in 1 Corintians 1:10-14:

I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

Could we say that this passage “drips of psuedo-humble arrogance”? I don’t believe that describes the apostle Paul or the Holy Spirit which inspired this epistle. It seems to me that he is exhorting Christians to be “above labels.”

Let’s look again at 1 Corinthians, restated in our terms:

I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Calvin,” or “I follow Arminius,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Calvin crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Calvin?

It is impossible to read this passage with any honesty or humility and still be angered by those who claim to “stick with just the Bible.” After all, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says that the Sciptures are inspired that “the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

Is this passage true, since it doesn’t refer it’s readers to Calvin?

UPDATE: Joshua Duncan has responded to this article. I’ll most likely be responding to him, again. I guess this is a good time to ask: Joshua, would you like to have a formal, written debate on the topic? If you affirm that Calvinism is entirely Biblical in nature, I will deny. Send me or post a proposition if you are interested. Thanks for responding!