This post is part of my series Blogging Calvinism in which I blog my thoughts and reaction to Chosen for Life: The Case for Divine Election by Sam Storms.

Many resources exist for studying Calvinist and non-Calvinist arguments. I’ve read a number of things coming from both sides, and at different times I’ve been on each side of the issue. I was raised in a Presbyterian church and could argue for Calvinism since I was a wee lad. In college I switched to the Southern Baptist denomination but continued to be in the Calvinist camp. Somewhere along the way I changed my mind and joined the non-Calvinist camp. Eventually I even grew quite hostile to Calvinism. Now I am back in a confused position, wrestling with the issue. John Piper is mostly to blame, I have really appreciated his ministry and he has nudged me back to re-consider Calvinism. This book, Chosen for Life: The Case for Divine Election by Sam Storms is one of the sources I am using for study.

(Note: Piper and Bethlehem Baptist Church have put together a helpful pamphlet on Calvinism, available free or for purchase.)

As I read the book I plan to blog my reactions, chapter by chapter. I hope that this will be an honest look at the book and at my response to arguments in favor of Calvinism. I also hope that this will help me to make up my mind once and for all, one way or another. Hopefully I will blog the whole book. I do have a nasty habit of starting a series of entries and never quite finishing it (my never ending but finally halted series on the Evangelical Manifesto, anyone?) Either way, I will work through the book and I can guarantee that I will at least post comments on chapter one.

Enough of that, now on with it!

Chapter one is quite brief. In the chapter Storms sets up what the discussion is all about and what are the sides in the debate. He articulates well the two basic biblical positions, though his labels could use a little work.

On the one side there is Calvinism, the system of theology that teaches “God has elected some who are bad who, because of their being bad, are not of themselves able to exercise faith in Christ. It is on the basis of his own sovereign good pleasure that God elects them. (22) On the other side are the non-Calvinists. This is how I would label them – Storms refers only to Calvinism and Arminianism. It always puzzles me why many Calvinists will not recognize that a wide range exists between the two. There are a lot of non-Calvinists who are also not Arminians. (Storms hints at a third option toward the end of the chapter when he asks whether there might be a mediating option between Calvinism and Arminianism. I will be interested to see his thoughts about this middle ground.) Storms’ definition of Arminians applies to all non-Calvinists, it is general enough that it does not touch on the areas where people like me disagree with Arminians. Non-Calvinists, then, are people who believe “God has elected some who are bad who, notwithstanding their being bad, chose to exercise faith in Jesus Christ. It is on the basis of this foreseen faith that God elects them.” (22, emphasis in original)

Storms also gives a one sentence summary of the debate: “The question reduces to this: Does God elect people because they believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, or does God elect people in order that they shall believe in Christ?” (22, emphasis in original)

Although I will quibble with Storms about referring only to Calvinists and Arminians, so far it looks like this will be a fair book. He acknowledges that some people on each side of the issue have had the tendency to mischaracterize the views held by the other side. Both sides have people who have displayed unhelpful, unbiblical hostility to those on the other side. So far it looks as though Storms will avoid repeating this mistake. (One example, Storms makes a point of noting that Pelagianism is rarely found in the church. Calvinists will at times accuse non-Calvinists of being Pelagians; Storms would disagree. We will see whether or not semi-Pelagianism enters the discussion later on.) 

I look forward to continuing my reading of this book. Either way, it will be a good study.