In the marketplace in Athens, once he appeals to the altar to the unknown God (Acts 17:22-23), Paul summarizes several basic aspects of Christian metaphysics, such as how God is not dependent on people or their worship in order to exist, but rather he is the ultimate source of all contingent things (17:24-28). Contrasting God and humanity, made in his image, with mere idols of metal or stone (17:29), the apostle says near the end of his recorded speech to the Athenians that God "commands all people everywhere to repent" (17:30). As secondary as this story and the content of Paul's words are to the matter, it is relevant to the unbiblicality of Calvinism, the stance holding that people have no free will at all in turning to salvation.
He does not say that God calls only an elect subset of humanity to repent (or that he forces their wills to repent without their true volition). He does not proclaim that it is impossible for all people to repent or that it is actually willed by God that people are condemned for choices that do not even belong to them, being instead made on their behalf by God ahead of time—this is fatalism instead of foreknowledge. No, Paul says God commands all people everywhere to repent, which would mean that, if this is really what God wants and people are obligated to do, all people are capable of doing this and every sinner should. Salvation is not beyond anyone's reach until unless they no longer live.
Now, the account of Paul interacting with the people of Athens is a narrative where he, as a figure in the story, is simply stating something, which is not always representative of the Bible's actual philosophical doctrines. For instance, the repentant thief on the cross says he deserves to be crucified in Luke 23:41 during the crucifixion story, when such a torture/execution method is an absolute moral abomination by the Biblical standards of Mosaic Law [1]. Joshua says in the book with his name that his family chooses to serve Yahweh (Joshua 24:15), but this too is just a narrative that would not by necessity require each character's statements are theologically accurate.
Therefore, does Acts 17:30 reflect what is taught outside of mere narrative? What Paul says about a universal obligation and therefore ability to repent does perfectly match what the Bible says in other contexts about how God wants everyone to be saved (2 Peter 3:8-9, 1 Timothy 2:3-6). God would in fact be the sole cause of human sin on Calvinism, unrepentance included, because his will overrides that of each person, which contradicts the concept of a righteous deity. Then there is the fact that the Bible teaches moral responsibility, which could only be possible if humans have the choice to act or not act as they should. It would be possible for a text to affirm moral responsibility but then put forth the contradictory notion of divine determinism, so that only one of these tenets could be true at once. The Bible does not do this.
Acts 17:30 is not the most direct confirmation that free will and its moral and soteriological ramifications are indeed Biblically taught. It is still in favor of free will over the immense heresy of Calvinism, which is logically contradictory and thus impossible independent of what the Bible says because it entails human moral culpability and divine righteousness in spite of theological determinism. Either of these pairings with divine determinism is logically impossible in itself without the other also being present. Together, they make for a double contradiction. All of this is alongside the facts that my own free will is known with absolute certainty [2] and that the Bible repeatedly says things contrary to the tenets of Calvinism. What a pathetic philosophy it is!
[1]. https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2016/12/we-are-getting-what-our-deeds-deserve.html
No comments:
Post a Comment