What follows is an email I sent to a friend of mine who grew up Methodist but is currently attending a Baptist church. They had a question about the concept of unconditional election, so I wrote this essay on TULIP Calvinism to try to explain it. They said it helped, so I figured I'd post it here in case anyone gets bored.
The concept of "unconditional election" is based on the idea that humans are incapable of choosing God or doing any degree of good. If you've heard the Caedmon's Call song "Thankful," it's a pretty good summary of this doctrine. Election is unconditional because you really don't even have the option of turning it down - God has decreed that you are elected, therefore you are. Unconditional election is one of the five points of traditional Calvinism, often abbreviated TULIP (for Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited Atonement, Irresistable grace, and Perseverance of the saints). In looking on the internet I found a site that summarized the five points of TULIP Calvinism, and compared them to some of John Wesley's ideas -
http://www.crivoice.org/tulip.htmlAs best as I can summarize it, the basic question distinguishing Calvinism and Methodism comes down to free will - do we have any or not? TULIP Calvinism argues that we do not, that grace comes from God and we can take absolutely no credit for it. Armenianism (the name often used for the pro-free will camp, who count among its members John Wesley) argues that although we are corrupted and sinful, we are never completely without God and have been granted choice by God to choose the good or to choose the evil. Grace is still a gift, as is free will, but we are coparticipants in justification for Armenians. For Calvinists, we're just along for the ride.
The debate about whether us having free will invades God's sovereignty and whether God can choose to limit God's own power has been going on for centuries and will probably continue for centuries. From an intellectual standpoint, I can see how God being outside of time and beyond our realm already knows what we're going to do, and knew before we were even born. God said that "I am the God of Jacob, the God of Isaac, etc." because God is in the present while also being in the past (and also being in the future). Because I have this understanding of God being outside our understanding of time, I don't really have a problem with saying that we have free will because as far as we can understand, we are given the opportunity to choose. God might already know what we're going to choose, and I could spend all day second guessing any choice I make (did God know I'd choose that? I'll do that instead. But did God know I'd do that instead? I'll go back to the first one.) Does the fact that God knows what I'll choose make my choice any less real?
On issues like that, I tend to say "God is God, and I'm never going to fully understand God." With that understanding, I look at what I can see from my human perspective, as well as what will make me a more faithful Christian. As far as I can see, I do have the ability to choose, although often my choices are tainted by sinful desires and misguided thoughts, they're still
my choices and every once in a while they're good ones. Furthermore, focusing on the fact that God's already made God's decisions will make me lazy, losing the desire to evangelize, to work for justice, and to live out the calling of Christ. There are amazing Christians who hold firmly to the TULIP ideology, but frankly it just doesn't work for me. I'd imagine on some level we're both right, and both wrong. I would imagine that most Baptist churches tend to have a bit of a smatterring of different philosophical traditions, so there are probably some people in your church that would be described as more Armenian and some who would be described as more Calvinist.
A 6th grader asked me a few months ago "what's the difference between a Baptist and a Christian?" I explained that Christian was a broad term for all people believing in Christ and Baptists are a denomination that hold very strongly to each church making its own decisions. He followed that one up with "Which is better?" I said "I choose to be Methodist because I agree
with its approach to theology, its structure, and its way of making decisions, but the important thing to remember is that we're all on the same team, and all of us are working to be better Christians." That's probably the best summary I can give of how I deal with issues like that when I'm kind of befuddled at how some groups believe something I don't.