So called "problematic passages" for Arminians

John 1:13 and 15:16 are proof texts that Calvinists use to try to establish their doctrines on scripture but it’s not surprising that those verses don’t prove reformed doctrine in any way. Let’s look at John 1 first “Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” We see here that this verse is dealing with the new birth of man which no arminian denies as can be seen from theologians like Wesley “Who were born - Who became the sons of God, not of blood - Not by descent from Abraham, nor by the will of the flesh - By natural generation, nor by the will of man - Adopting them, but of God - By his Spirit.” We also see this in Thomas Coke he says “They who thus believed on him, became possessed of this privilege; not in consequence of their being born of blood, or of their being descended from the loins of the holy patriarchs, or sharing in circumcision and the blood of the sacrifices; nor could they ascribe it to the will of the flesh, or to their own superior wisdom and goodness; as if by the power of corrupted nature they had made themselves to differ; nor to the will of man, or to the wisest advice and most powerful exhortations which their fellow-creatures might address to them; but must humbly acknowledge that they were born of God; and indebted to the efficacious influences of his unmerited and regenerating grace for all their privileges, and for all their hopes.” So the Arminain agrees with the Reformed when it comes to this verse that regeneration is solely done by God not by the will of man. This verse doesn’t mean that man has no libertarian free will when it comes to man having the ability to believe or not believe the Gospel with prevenient grace. Unless you want to argue that regeneration precedes faith which is a view that can’t work with the text of John 1 since we can’t separate verse 13 from 12 and the other preceding verses and I will argue that verses 9-13 prove that faith precedes regeneration. 

  If we look at verse 9 “That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” We see prevenient grace here Christ is the light and every man in the world receives this light as St. John Chrysostom says in his 8th homily “If He lights every man that comes into the world, how is it that so many continue unenlightened? For not all have known the majesty of Christ. How then does He light every man? He lights all as far as in Him lies. But if some, wilfully closing the eyes of their mind, would not receive the rays of that Light, their darkness arises not from the nature of the Light, but from their own wickedness, who willfully deprive themselves of the gift. For the grace is shed forth upon all, turning itself back neither from Jew, nor Greek, nor Barbarian, nor Scythian, nor free, nor bond, nor male, nor female, nor old, nor young, but admitting all alike, and inviting with an equal regard. And those who are not willing to enjoy this gift, ought in justice to impute their blindness to themselves; for if when the gate is opened to all, and there is none to hinder, any being willfully evil remain without, they perish through none other, but only through their own wickedness.” Chrysostom sees this light as salvific grace that is given to all men and when given man can willfully close their eyes to this light so interpreting this as a prevenient grace is not a historical novelty and it fits the text. The reason why it fits the text is because it makes the most sense of verse 11,12, and 13 which is dealing with soteriology which makes no sense if we understand light here to be “common grace” that the reformed espouses. Since giving the power to become the sons of God (12) and the new birth (13) relate to salvation so seeing this light in verse 9 as common grace makes no sense since why would light be given to all men but not lead into salvation when John is talking about salvation. Now we see here prevenient grace us given to all men then we see in verse 12 “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” So no matter if they are a Jew or Gentile once they believe on His name they become sons of God now this enters the new birth in verse 13. Since the people being regenerated in this verse are people who believe in Him since those are the people at the end of verse 12 and because of that regeneration preceding faith makes no sense of verse 12 and 13. Since to affirm that you have to argue that those who believed in him in verse 12 were already regenerated then believed and regenerated again which contradicts the ordering that the Apostle ordered. John put faith prior to regeneration since those who believe in His name become sons of God then regenerated. So using John 1:13 against Arminianism doesn’t work. It actually hurts Calvinism because it proves that faith precedes regeneration and it doesn’t go against the Arminian view of regeneration unless you think arminians believe that we regenerate ourselves. If you think that you just show that you never read any Arminian theologian like Wesley or Arminius.

 

 “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.” John 15:16

  Now this is another passage some Calvinist appeal to for evidence of unconditional election but this isn’t the case in this verse. John 15 is dealing with the choosing of the apostles not election to salvation even John Calvin agrees with this interpretation of John 15 “True, the subject now in hand is not the ordinary election of believers, by which they are adopted to be the children of God, but that special election, by which he set apart his disciples to the office of preaching the Gospel.” So it makes no sense that John 15 is an election to salvation since the audience were Christ's disciples and it included Judas and no calvinist will say Judas was elected to salvation. And this is not uncommon that God selects or chooses someone and it doesn’t relate to their salvation or damnation for example John 6:70 “Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?” Richard Watson talks about this type of election “The first is the election of individuals to perform some particular and special service. Cyrus was "elected" to rebuild the temple; the twelve apostles were "chosen," elected, to their office by Christ; St. Paul was a "chosen," or elected, "vessel," to be the apostle of the Gentiles. This kind of election to special office and service has, however, manifestly no relation to the limitation of eternal salvation, either in respect of time, persons themselves so chosen, or of others. With respect to themselves, it did not confer upon them absolute security. One of the twelve elected apostles was Judas, who fell and was lost; and St. Paul confesses his own personal liability to become "a castaway," after all his zeal and abundant labors. With respect to others, the twelve apostles, and St. Paul afterward, were "elected" to preach the Gospel in order to the salvation of all to whom they had access.” 

 Now some calvinist might appeal to Augustine in which he says John 15:16 is about unconditional election but that doesn’t really matter since John 15 is about Christ choosing his disciples to be his Apostles based off the context and there is no reason to accept Augustine’s interpretation of this text since it has no basis in the text at all. Since Augustine doesn’t give any reason why we should take John  15:16 as an unconditional election of men to salvation he just presupposes it to be about election to salvation instead to the office of Apostle. And because he gave no good reason for the verse to be about unconditional election we can just reject his interpretation which is not surprising since he is theologian so he can make mistakes. I would say that Thomas Coke the first Methodist Bishop puts it perfectly in his commentary "You have not, as principals in this affair, adopted me as your associate; but I, the great author of the gospel, have adopted you as my associates, to share with me in the honor and happiness of giving a new dispensation of grace to the world. For I have ordained you my apostles, that you should go out into the world, fraught with the doctrines of salvation; by the preaching of which you shall produce a general reformation and renovation, both in the opinions, hearts, and manners of the heathens, greatly to the glory of God, inasmuch as the Christian religion, thus planted by you, shall remain to all ages. Further, I have clothed you with the dignity of my apostles, that whatsoever miracle you shall ask of my Father, or whatsoever petition you shall put up in my name, for the confirmation of your doctrine, or for the success of it, the consideration of your character, and the end for which you ask it, may induce him to grant it." 

  In conclusion John 1:13 and 15:16 are no threats to Arminianism in any sense since John 1:13 is about the new birth/regeneration which all Arminians affirm is done by God alone. John 15:16 is dealing with the choosing to the apostolate not to salvation or damnation. So Cavlinist need to stop appealing to these verses since they don’t prove your theology in any way; it just shows that you never interact with people outside of reformed theology.