John Calvin's Argument Analysis

LEE UNIVERSITY

AN ANALYSIS OF CALVIN'S ARGUMENT FOR PROVIDENCE

PRESENTED TO TERRY CROSS, PhD

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THEO-250: SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY I

THE SCHOOL OF RELIGION

BY

QUENTIN MURRAY

CLEVELAND, TENNESSEE

24 NOVEMBER 2015

AN ANALYSIS OF CALVIN’S ARGUMEN FOR PROVIDENCE

In I.17.1 of John Calvin’s work, Calvin argues that people do not need to worry about anything they do not understand because God takes care of everything. It is important to understand that this is not the beginning of Calvin’s Institutes of Christian Religion, because his points in chapter sixteen set the basis for his argument in this next section. Chapter sixteen on providence gives the foundation of

Calvin’s theology that nothing happens outside the control of God and everything has its divine intervention. The entire sixteenth chapter focuses on this doctrine and how it is a useful tool for the Christian life.
Near the beginning of this section, Calvin states that it creeps in people’s minds that affairs are due to some fortune or misfortune. Calvin says this is drawn from the fact that our flesh or carnal nature sees “As if God were making sport of men by throwing them about like balls” (211). On the contrary, Calvin would argue that if people focus their attention on scriptures and the higher things, God’s divine plan would be clear to them. Since humans do not and God’s logic remains hidden to them, it is important for people to understand God as a good God. Through this understanding of God humans do not have to worry about anything because God has everything under divine providence and control. This is the argument that Calvin sets up in chapter sixteen in its simplest way. Calvin’s argument in its syllogistic form would flow like the following:
1. As humans our carnal minds think of events as happening because of fortune or God’s divine game.
2. If we are to fight the ideas in our carnal minds about providence, we need to focus on scriptures.
3. If we set our minds on scriptures then we can see clearly with our carnal minds the rationality of God’s will.
4. God is perfectly good in every way.
5. Therefore, we have nothing to worry about because everything is under God’s divine providence.
This is Calvin’s argument from chapter 17 section 1 of the Institutes of the Christian Religion. Calvin uses underlining assumptions, logic, and scripture to support his argument. According to premise number 1, experience will demonstrate that people do describe cause and events to some sort of fortune or misfortune. Some people even consider this a kind of karma. Calvin argues from this first premise that people go through life with no understanding of any divine plan and they believe that everything happens in life by chance. He argues further, saying that people believe God is playing a divine game with humans (211). People often accuse God of being entirely evil when they see certain events take place. People insult God’s divine wisdom by believing it does not exist because God’s actions are often a mystery to human understanding. With this support that Calvin gives, the first premise here makes logical sense, and is clearly understood.
Under the second premise, Calvin assumes that the Scriptures have the answers to all the questions of life and they can help the understanding of the human mind. In Calvin’s understanding, people arrogantly insult God’s hidden wisdom when they should respect it (212). The scriptures help people’s carnal minds with arrogance and respecting God’s mysterious wisdom. However, it is not clear because Calvin does not provide adequate reasoning for concluding that scriptures are what corrects human thoughts. Calvin assumes that Scriptures have the answers to correcting people’s carnal minds and understanding, but he leaves it unclear as to why or how scriptures can provide correction for people.
To support the third premise, Calvin uses a Bible verse to demonstrate how the Scriptures give clarification on the understanding behind what seems to be pointless events. The Scripture that Calvin cites is John 9:3, where some people ask Jesus if it is the sin of the parents or the sin of the man that causes him to be blind. Jesus replies by telling the people that it is for neither reason why the man is blind. He was not born blind because of punishment, but for God’s glory and goodness might be shown through his life. In this passage, Jesus healed the blind man and he received his sight. As a result, many people gave God the glory and praise because of the miracle that took place. It is understood from this passage that the man’s fortune or chance was actually part of God’s divine plan. Calvin then generalizes this example for all things being counted for God’s glory. He does not give a line of reasoning for why people can apply all events in life to this same purpose. Calvin applies this one story to all the events in life. He says, “For here our nature cries out, when calamity comes before birth itself, as if God with so little mercy thus punished the undeserving” (211). Although this quote makes it clear that the doctrine of providence is useful, the only way this line of reasoning can make logical sense is if the reader takes Calvin’s words as they are since, the argument has been generalized with no facts or evidence for being able to do so correctly.
Calvin gives a lengthy list of God’s possible rationales for every action: “Either to instruct his own people in patience, or to correct their wicked affections and tame their lust, or to subjugate them to self-denial, or to arouse them from sluggishness; again, to bring low the proud to shatter the cunning of the impious and to overthrow their devices” (211). In this statement Calvin is showing the rational and reasons for why God might do anything. He then makes a distinction between God’s actions for those who belong to God and those of the wicked. All of the things that God does for Christians is for their further sanctification, and the things that happen to the wicked are to show them their weakness in the eyes of God. Now that there is a clear understanding to why God might cause certain events to take place, there is a firm foundation to God’s providence.
The fourth premise also has an underlining assumption. This assumption is based on Calvin’s knowledge of God. He quotes Psalm 40:5 to show how God is always worthy of praise because of mighty deeds. This is a Psalm of David, who gives God praise for everything. Calvin does not immediately go into detail to prove this fourth premise because it is a granted fact about Christianity. Calvin says, “But we must so cherish moderation that we do not try to make God render account to us, but so reverence his secret judgments as to consider his will the truly just cause of all things” (211). There is only one explanation for why one should believe God’s will is the best. Under the previous premise, there is specific reasons to why God allows things to take place which in turn would lead to the next premise—God is perfectly good in every way. It is an underlining assumption that every person, who reads Calvin’s Institutes of Christian Religion, would have it in mind that God is perfectly good in every way. However, it is worth noting that Calvin gives other arguments for God’s goodness in his other works.
Calvin concludes in this section that Christians do not have to worry about anything because everything is safe in God. The conclusion also has an underlining assumption.
Calvin states, “God out of the pure light of his justice and wisdom tempers and direct these very movements in the best-conceived order to a right end” (211). Calvin started from human’s problematic understanding, then went to scripture to promote the right view of God. He gave reasons for God’s decisions and then came to this conclusion. Therefore, when Calvin applied God’s providence as useful to the Christian, he has come also to the conclusion that the providence of God is a place of safety for Christians. There is freedom from worry under the protection of a wise and good God who knows the best right end.
I will now evaluate the structure of the argument.

Calvin begins the argument in the right place. He begins by addressing important issues of true understanding of Christianity. Calvin has already formed the doctrine of providence in chapter 16. In this chapter, he confronts the wrong understandings of providence. In the first premise stated above, it can be seen as a different way to understand why things take place. People view events as a result to fortune instead of accounting them to be controlled by God. It was a great idea for Calvin to bring up this first point because it is one of the major alternatives of the

time.
In order to make the argument better, Calvin should have included other scripture verses, treating this as a Christian instruction book.

Instead of stating reasons for why God wills certain events to happen, it would have been helpful if Calvin gave scriptures that would demonstrate each point he made. Instead of just stating, “To correct their wicked affections and tame their lust” it would have been beneficial to give a biblical account for God doing this (211). Calvin is a well-known and trustworthy interpreter of the scriptures, but providing these scripture passages would be helpful for his argument. Calvin also makes a generalization in that everything shows the glory of God. Unbelievers might take this statement as God not loving the created beings and being selfish. In order to strengthen the argument it would have been a good idea to treat this issue with the fourth premises about God being perfectly

good.
Calvin’s argument here is not a simple deductive argument, so it must either be a strong or weak form of argumentation. In order to make the argument stronger, there should have been a paragraph or two addressing common issues. These paragraphs could also have included scriptural support on some of his specific claims and addressing his few generalizations. Calvin does provide more detailed explanations in other sections of his work, but in this section he provides no support for things he is arguing besides some assumptions. Therefore, with more support his argument will be stronger than it is currently.