Calvinism Isn't Crazy!

Truth Unites is a mixture of apologetics and theology, with an irenic focus.

Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai.

SUPPORT:

FOLLOW:

MY BOOKS:

PODCAST:

00:00 - Introduction
04:11 - 1) Compatibilism: It's a "Both-And"
12:01 - 2) Augustine and Aquinas on Unconditional Election
18:01 - 3) The Other Options Are Also Difficult
23:50 - A Final Image

[wonderingpilgrim]

This is a preliminary comment, but I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks of Calvin and Hobbes everytime I hear about Calvinism! XD Love that illustration!

[chrisa-]

While I am not persuaded by Calvinism nor its compatibilism (I’m currently somewhere between Molinism and Reformed Arminianism at the moment), I just want to say how much I appreciate your humble charity towards non-Calvinist positions in this video. As a non-Calvinist myself, I am often frustrated with popular pastors and theologians I listen to (and learn from and enjoy I might add) as they strawman other positions and paint them in the worst light. Worse, many speak of non-Calvinists as though they are beneath them in intelligence/biblical literacy or “just hate God’s sovereignty” - which as you know is totally unfair. And trust me, I know Calvinists get painted uncharitably as well - I hate when both sides do this. Thank you so much for modeling the respect and humility that is required for doing theology and promoting unity in the church! Especially on an issue like this one!

Edit: additionally, a good book on this topic is Dr. Kenneth Keathley’s ‘Salvation and Sovereignty’. That book gets the closest to where I am at currently in my thinking and I highly recommend it to others!

(Unfortunately by editing this comment by recommending the book - YouTube removed Dr. Ortlund’s ❤️ on my comment. Shoot! That was a badge of honor. Lol)

[TheOtherCaleb]

I already knew you were a Calvinist… I may disagree, but I still highly respect you. You are a man of God and a theologian worth your dollar!

[ann.marie.b]

I so appreciate your candor and humility in presenting this topic. As a non Calvinist I agree so much that we are all on the same team and it's an honor to be sharpened by and link arms with those of different views. Would love to see you and Leighton Flowers discuss this topic sometime! I think both of your kind spirits would make for a very productive conversation. Thank you for what you do!

[hobbes]

One of the difficulties I have with Calvinism is that it seems to depart from the mainstream of patristic thought (outside of Augustine). For example, I came across this quote from John of Damascus On The Orthodox Faith ch. 44, "One needs to know that although God has foreknowledge of all things, he does not predetermine all things, for he has foreknowledge of what what depends upon us, but he did not predetermine it."
John is then quick to assert the necessity for God's grace in human virtue. But is this not more in line with what we conceive today as classic arminianism? What role should church history play in helping us come to theological conclusions on these issues.
Many Calvinists present the logic for calvinism as a logical conclusion of reading Romans 9 or Ephesians 1. But is that is true, why is this not the mainstream view much earlier in church history?

[jr]

I'm not a big fan of debates, but it would be interesting to see a dialogue between you and Soteriology 101 on the channel! Excellent video as always

[Eloign]

I love your channel and your heart but can't help it brother, here are some thoughts on what you said...
1. If Calvinism is true your assurance rests on your own assessment of your internal feelings. There's no objective assurance that Christ died for you since He didn't die for the whole world.

2. Calvin taught Evanescent Grace which means God would allow some people to receive assurance and then later take it away and doubly damn them. He did this to explain apostasy.

3. There is no "human responsibility" side of the equation because humans cannot respond to God in that system. They reduce human nature to animal nature even in their analogies ie. "A lion always wants to eat meat because that's his nature" etc. It's literally dehumanizing. People do what God decreed that they should infallibly do. God decides if they have a nature that cannot respond or if He would grant them regeneration (before faith!) so that they can have faith, repent and believe.

4. The word "mystery" is used here as a synonym for contradiction. The Bible never uses mystery in this sense. Look it up.

5. Physical phenomenon and moral choices are not equivalent. That's materialism.

6. Romans 9 has nothing to do with individual salvation. I have no idea how it's even possible to interpret it that way without ignoring all the references Paul is making and the summary he gives of his entire point at the end of the chapter.

7. God is not "working through sinful activities of human beings" He is redeeming them or to put it in plainer terms, outsmarting them.

8. Lewis was emphatically not a Calvinist and wrote against it, so using his statement in Perelandra as an example is specious. His point is surrender to God feels inevitable not that it is.

9. Augustine is wrenching Jesus choice of the Apostles for their jobs out of context to mean He chooses individuals for salvation or damnation. Election is God's choice of a person for a purpose which they may accept or reject. Paul said " I was not disobedient to the Heavenly vision" Guess what? Nebuchadnezzar did disobey the Heavenly vision given him.

10. The problem is Calvinism makes God the author of sin, it just does. At least the other views make man truly responsible for his damnation.

11. The book analogy fails because the characters in the book are NOT made in the image of the author. They do not posses any of His communicable attributes at all. They are not real. Not even to themselves.

12. I totally agree you can disagree with a doctrine and even find it's implications horrible and yet LOVE your friends and brothers that believe those things. We are not saved by theological perfection but by the Person of Christ.

[Polarbeardueck]

My pastor quoted what Whitefield said about Wesley probably about 12 years ago, that quote has stuck with me. I never remembered where the quote originated, thanks for bring my pastors memorable sermon into my memory and thanks for the great content

[anglicanaesthetics]

love this. Solid brother! I love how you bring in the historic definitions of freedom as non external coercion. Thats the mystery! As a Reformed
Anglican (I feel like we're a dying breed), I give this a hearty amen!

[jacobroel]

Soteriology 101 dialogue plz make it happen!

[nathancjarrett]

I recently heard Pastor Orton describe the goal of all believers is to try to learn what the original teachings of Jesus and the Apostles were, and to eliminate historical accretions. I think this is a good reason to affirm Protestantism. But as a former Calvinist, I would say that Calvinistic theology is an historical accretion found within Protestantism. It's roots only go back to Augustine of Hippo. Prior to the 4th century the distinct ways that Calvinists handle scripture were not found in any of the writings of the Church fathers, including those who were contemporaries of the Apostles. There are a few alternatives that better handle the 'both-and' verses Pastor Ortlund listed here other that the non-free free will of compatibilism. Whether you appeal to Molinism, Provisionism, or classical Arminianism you can read those verses without endorsing exhaustive divine determinism. And I would assert that any of these approaches does a better job at getting us closer to what the earliest Christians believed.

[Particularly_John_Gill]

Ohh boy. A lot of people do not like Calvinism and will definitely be upset to see you are a Calvinist. I’m excited for more videos on Calvinism though.

[Jeremy.Mathetes]

First comment on a Gavin Ortlund video. My claim to fame!! 😁 But seriously, thank you Dr. Ortlund for the consistent, clear, and gracious content. You’re an inspiration to me as a Christian and student of history. Thank you for all the time you spend on these videos!

Edit: I guess I was the second comment… dang it! I’ll be first next time 😂

[SCOTTISHSOULFOOD]

I appreciate the well argued, coherent defence of Calvinism. As a Wesleyan/ Arminian I appreciate the presentation but am not convinced by it.

however it would be good if both sides of the argument follow your example and we don't attack strawmen presentations of the other side or make overly forthright and strident presentations of our own side

[khumbomunsaka]

For me I attend a reformed baptist church.
But they lost me at limited atonement.
That I reject 100%

But I have learned to live in peace and respect with them.

[ben.s.harper]

If Calvinism were true, specifically unconditional election could you do a video on why evangelism is important?

[dominusalicorn]

Glad to see you do a brief overview on the topic. I'm not a Calvinist myself, but I'm looking forward to your longer video... If/when you get to it, of course!

[MS-pwjx]

Great video pastor Ortlund.

I’m currently attending a Lutheran congregation as I explore my theological understanding, and I really do appreciate your advice to strive for peaceful and respectful dialogue.

My ability to genuinely and humbly look into what every denomination believes has been made so much easier by accepting that these other Christians simply DO believe strongly what they believe. This way, I’m able to say “alright, I get you believe that, I’m not sure I do, can you tell me WHY”

God bless, hope you and your family have a blessed Easter

[coolmuso]

Although I’m not 100% sure where I stand on these issues yet, it’s interesting how many people start to froth at the mouth whenever Calvinism is mentioned.

[brentonstanfield]

Love the video and your heart. The Whitfield quote at the end was perfect. As a Calvinist I have learned from and grown under the teaching of some great non-Calvinists. God’s Spirit is at work in both.

Although, I think think it is also good to point out that there are both Calvinists and non-Calvinists who hold to their views for purposes of self-justification. The Calvinist feeling self-approved because of their self perceived intellectual superiority. Meanwhile, the non-Calvinist feeling that what separates them from the lost is their own libertarian free will and not the grace of God. My disdain is for the heart with which many hold to their views.