Calvinism argues very seriously that, since God has elected some to eternal life. He also must have elected others to eternal damnation. In other words, there must be an election of wrath (eine Zornwahl) to correspond to the election of grace ("die notwendige Kehrseite," the necessary reverse side).
The Lutheran denial of an eternal reprobation to damnation (electio aeterna, qua Deus . . . alios ad interitum praedestinavit) Calvin rebuked with the harshest terms (inscite nimis et pueriliter; plus quam insulse, Inst., III, 23, 1).
So also the followers of Calvin designate the Scriptural position of the Formula of Concord on predestination as “untenable ground” (Hodge, Syst. Theol., II, 325). Shedd entirely ignores the Lutheran position and divides all Christians into Calvinists (denial of universal grace) and Arminians (denial of the sola gratia). In his system of theology there is no room for the Scriptural doctrine of eternal election as the Lutheran Church confesses it (Dogm. Theol., I, 448).
However, Holy Scripture knows of no “reverse side” of God’s eternal election of grace; for while the one (election unto eternal life) is clearly taught in many passages, the other (election unto eternal damnation) is plainly repudiated.
In Acts 13, 48 we are indeed told: “As many as were ordained to eternal life believed,” but this passage does not add: “As many as were ordained to eternal damnation believed not.” On the contrary, it cites as the true reason why the others did not believe their wilful and perverse rejection of the proffered grace (v. 46: “Seeing ye put it from you and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles”). The reason why some do not believe is stated clearly by Christ when He says of them: “Ye would not,” Matt. 23, 37. 38.
In accord with this verdict of Holy Scripture the Lutheran Church teaches: All who are saved are saved by grace; but all who are lost are lost through their own perverse opposition to the Holy Ghost, Hos. 13, 9. Calvinism indeed declares that also to those whom He from eternity has reprobated to damnation God offers a certain kind of grace (common grace), while to His elect He offers “irresistible grace”; but this is only a new error, designed to confirm the error of eternal reprobation. Calvinism thus teaches contradictory wills in God; for by the outward call, extended to the non-elect, He wills their salvation, while according to His eternal decree of reprobation (horribile decretum), by which He reprobated the non-elect to damnation, He does not desire to save them. Scripture, on the contrary, plainly teaches that also those who reject the divine offer of grace are seriously called. Acts 13, 38—41; Matt. 23, 37. 38: vocalio seria.
Moreover, the fact that God hardens the hearts (Ex. 10, 1; 5, 1—23) of those who first harden themselves (voluntas Dei consequens) does not prove an eternal reprobation to damnation; for Scripture tells us expressly that the divine act of obduration is a measure of wrath and punishment which occurs as a “recompense” (et? dvianodojua, Rom. 11, 9) for their resistance and rejection of divine grace. "Verstockung ist immer eine Folge der Selbst- verstochung” ,
It is true, Christian believers are by nature in the same guilt (in eadem culpa), Rom. 3, 22. 23, as are all other men, so that, if they should compare themselves with those who are lost, they are “just like them and in no way any better” (quarn simillimi depre- hensi), Ps. 51, 5; John 3, 5. 6; Eph. 2, 3. Hence they have no reason whatever to boast of their goodness and to ascribe their faith and salvation to their own worthiness, 1 Cor. 4, 7, but must praise and glorify the indescribable mercy of God, who out of pure grace has endowed them with spiritual life (Formula of Concord, Thor. Decl., XI, 60).
Nevertheless Holy Scripture assures us that God most seriously offers His grace also to those who resist His Spirit, Acts 13, 46, and harden their hearts against His divine Word, Acts 7, 51, indeed, that with much long-suffering He endures the vessels of wrath, fitted to destruction by their own hardness of heart, Rom. 9, 22. 23, to the end that they, too, might be converted and saved, 2 Pet. 3, 9; Rom. 2,4.
Thus Scripture everywhere extols the unspeakable mercy of God, which offers grace and salvation also to those who are lost, and leaves no room whatever for a doctrine of eternal reprobation.
With respect to the statement of St. Paul that “God endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction/’ Rom. 9, 22, the Formula of Concord rightly says Thor. Decl., XI, 80: “Here, then, the apostle clearly says that God endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath, but does not say that He made them vessels of wrath; for if this had been His will, He would not have required any great long-suffering for it. The fault, however, that they are fitted for destruction belongs to the devil and to men themselves and not to God.”
God has indeed “afore prepared” (προητοίμαοεν) unto glory the vessels of mercy, Rom. 9, 23, but not the vessels of wrath; for these, as the apostle plainly states, are “fitted to destruction” (κατηρτισμένα εἰς ἀπώλειαν), sc., by their own perverseness. According to Scripture, God earnestly desires the salvation of all men, John 1, 29; 3, 16; 2 Pet. 2,1. “Hell was originally not built for men.” If men enter into it, it is because of their own wicked rejection of divine grace (cp. Matt. 25, 34: “Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world”; v. 41: “Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels”).
The voluntas consequens, according to which God judges and condemns all who do not believe the Gospel, Mark 16, 16; John 3, 16—18. 36, must therefore not be interpreted as an eternal decree of damnation, since according to His voluntas antecedens God desires the salvation of all sinners, 2 Pet. 3, 9; Matt. 18, 11; 1 Tim. 2, 4.
If the objection is raised that we must not speak of a voluntas prima and a voluntas secunda in God because there is neither a prius nor a posterius in Him, we answer that God is indeed the eternal, immutable Lord, in whom there is no change, or no prius or posterius, Mal. 3, 6; 1 Sam. 15, 29. However, since, in accommodation to our feeble understanding, God has revealed Himself to us as the loving Lord, who desires to save all men, John 3, 16.17, and then again as the righteous Lord, who punishes eternally all who will not believe on Him, John 3, 18. 36, we must speak as Scripture does and predicate of Him both a will to save and a will to condemn. However, this will to condemn is not the “reverse side” of His gracious election unto life, but rather that just punishment (iustitia vindicativa) which He inflicts upon all who wickedly despise His voluntas antecedent and will not hear His Word, Rom. 10, 21.
As we must not argue from Scripture that “there is an eternal decree of damnation,” so we must argue this error neither from history. That is indeed the mistake of Calvinism, which reasons: “The result is the interpretation of God’s purposes” (cp. Calvin, Inst., III, 24. 12). From the fact that not all men are saved or that not all nations enjoy the blessings of the Gospel, Calvinism infers that God does not desire to save them. But also this position is anti-Scriptural; for Scripture commands us not to draw conclusions from the unsearchable judgments of God, but to adore them with awe and reverence, Rom. 11, 33—36.
Of the unsearchable judgments of God the Formula of Concord says Thor. Decl, XI, 57—63: “Likewise, when we see that God gives His Word at one place, but not at another; removes it from one place and allows it to remain at another; also, that one is hardened, blinded, given over to a reprobate mind, while another, who is indeed in the same guilt (qui in eadem culpa haeret), is converted, etc., — in these and similar questions, Paul (Rom. 11, 22 ff.) fixes a certain limit to us how far we should go, namely, that in the one part we should recognize God’s judgment for He commands us to consider in those who perish the just judgment of God and the penalties of sins. For they are well-deserved penalties of sins when God so punishes a land or nation for despising His Word that the punishment extends also to their posterity, as is to be seen in the Jews. . . . However, as regards these things in this disputation which would soar too high and beyond these limits, we should, with Paul, place the finger upon our lips and remember and say, Rom. 9, 20: ‘0 man, who art thou that repliest against God?”’
Hence we must not conclude as the Calvinists do: “Since God does not save all men, He does not desire the salvation of all,” and so try to explore the secret will of God; but we must rather adhere to the revealed will of God, made manifest in Scripture, which bears witness in many clear passages that God “will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth,” 1 Tim. 2, 4.
As proof for the “eternal reprobation of the damned” Calvinism cites also Rom. 9,18: “Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth.” But this passage does not teach an eternal election unto damnation, but merely reveals God in His supreme sovereignty, according to which He is not subject to human criticism.
That these words are not designed to deny universal grace is clear from St. Paul’s express teaching of that doctrine in chap. 10, 21 and chap. 11, 32. In other words, the same God who has mercy on whom He will “stretched forth His hands all day unto a disobedient and gainsaying people” and “concluded them all in unbelief that is, declared all men lost in unbelief that He might have mercy upon all.” Hence the passage (Rom. 9,18) is not directed against the gratia universalis , but against the proud spirit of self-righteousness and work-righteousness in men, Rom. 9, 16.
The Formula of Concord rightly interprets the passage when it writes Thor. Deck, XI, 61: “No injustice is done those who are punished and receive the wages of their sins; but in the rest, to whom God gives and preserves His Word, by which men are enlightened, converted, and preserved, God commends His pure immense grace and mercy, without their merit.”
In conclusion we may say that just as we are not to solve the mystery of election by denying the sola gratia (synergism), so we must not solve it by denying the gratia universalis and ascribe to God, contrary to Scripture, an eternal decree of reprobation. Both “solutions” are equally rationalistic and in direct conflict with the Word of God.