I feel that it is a trait of wisdom to know what is and is not worth fighting over, or for the purposes of this article, what’s worth arguing over. As such I really try to weigh out issues and make the wiser choice of whether or not to use my energy debating things. A couple of nights ago my friend Andrea (who, like me, is a Calvinist and who unlike me is a baller) asked me a question I’ve often wrestled with: is Calvinism worth debating? The Calvinist/Arminian debate has been raging for a long time. Is this debate profitable to our walks with God? Or is it fruitless argument? There are those who want to do nothing BUT debate it, while others scoff at such conversation, calling it juvenile and worthless. Some refuse to discuss it at all.

The best way I can answer this question is to point out what I like to call the Non-Negotiables of Biblical Predestination. Non-Negotiable #1 is this: there IS predestination. You absolutely can’t say “I don’t believe in predestination” and maintain that you hold Scripture to be God’s infallible, inerrant, perfect Word. Paul talks about it. He teaches it. It’s in there, so the question is not “Does it exist?” but rather “What does it mean?” (See Romans 8 and Ephesians 1).

Non-Negotiable #2: Predestination occured before God created the world (Ephesians 1:4).

Non-Negotiable #3: The elect (predestined), and they alone will receive salvation.

If we are to be strict adherents to the Word of God, we must concede these. The question is not “Does God predestine some to heaven and pass over some?” but rather “On what basis does God do this?”

The Arminian Response: Before time began, God foresaw who would accept his universally-offered gift of salvation by their own free-will and chose/predestined/elected those people. We chose God.

The Calvinist Response: Before time began, God chose certain individuals on no other basis than his own pleasure and purpose, and elected those people to salvation. God chose us.

So is it worth debating? Well, let me ask this: are these responses similar enough to be considered virtually the same thing? These are two vastly different interpretations! It would be ridiculous to say that there’s no real difference between us choosing God in our free-will and God choosing us based on nothing we’ve done. But that’s exactly what people are saying when they say that it’s not worth the hassle. I am convinced that my salvation has nothing to do with anything I’ve done. I believe that ultimately it does not depend on my will but on God’s pleasure (Romans 9:16, John 1:12-13, Ephesians 1:6,11,12,14, James 1:18). He rescued me and found me, a man who was not searching for him (Romans 10:20). The only reason I was able to even come to God was because it was granted me to do so (John 6:44, 65; Philippians 1:29). And the only possible way I can even desire or will to do God’s pleasure is because he is causing me to will it (Philippians 2:13). I agree with the beautiful words of the Council of Orange: “It is wholly a gift of God to love God.”

God himself chose me, reached down and saved me. This is entirely NOT the same thing as saying that God paved the way to salvation but waits eagerly on the sidelines hoping, hoping, hoping that I’ll choose that way myself.  This discussion is so full of fruit since it helps us to understand God’s basis for his election, which in turn helps us to understand God himself more fully.