I recently received a series of questions from a good friend dealing with some issues/objections she had with Calvinism/Reformed Theology. I truly appreciated the opportunity to share what I explicitly believe in the realm of the Doctrines of Grace with her, and humbled she came to me to know how a Calvinist deals with each of these questions. This is a continuation of this series.
Because these questions are quite common inquires into Reformed Theology, I figured it would be profitable to the body of Christ for me to post my answers here as well. Perhaps I will continue on beyond her questions in writing on/replying to other objections common to Calvinism. Again, I hope this is useful to all who read this.
Question #4:
Who would be more loving – someone who chooses to be with you because that person loves you, or someone who is forced to be with you?
I am fairly familiar with this question, though in a different way: the “divine rapist” argument. I would state this is far from a genuine description of the Calvinist argument. I say “divine rapist” because famed apologist Norman Geisler says Calvinism turns God into a “divine rapist,” forcing himself upon people who did not choose him of their own free will. It would seem, from this argument, that the one who chooses to love and serve the lover “of their own free will” is happier than the one who is forced by a kind of rape into the relationship. I kindly reject this notion.
I pose another, perhaps more biblical question.
A blind man is walking toward the edge of a cliff. You plead with him to stop… to turn around… to REPENT, as it were. He refuses. He continues walking. Is it then LOVING for the man who sees the danger to say “Okay… you made your choice of your own free will… I offered love, but you didn’t take it. Enjoy”?? Would the person, falling to his death from the edge of the cliff, say of the one who just let him make the choice to fall “well, surely THAT was the LOVING thing to do, rather than actually save me”??
Or would Pastor Mark Driscoll have been loving if he had allowed his infant daughter to exercise her will over and above his? Please please watch.
This video concludes my main “point” of my example.
As to the notion of “free will” of the blind man… I offer this up.
<><
Driscoll has it completely wrong! Jesus calls everyone, but some people through FREE WILL accept Jesus and others through FREE WILL reject Jesus.
pardon me sir, but you are very incorrect. you assume that man has autonomous free will – he does not. he can only choose what is in accordance with his nature. his nature is bound to sin – enslaved to sin. can a slave use his free will to just will himself no longer as a slave? certainly not. the will of sinful man is always to sin – never to repent. Genesis 8:21, Romans 3:10-13. So I guess yes… people use their “free will” to reject Jesus. but none can use it to “accept him.” And… Jesus isn’t the one who needs acceptance… we wretches need HIS acceptance.