5) Calvinism and Armenianism: Intro to Paradoxicalism

               What can we do now?  We cannot hold that either one or the other is true, and we cannot mix and match them.  There is one option which we have yet to consider; one which has, as far as I know, never been proposed by any serious theologian today.  I believe that we ought to propose it and consider its merits.  That idea is this: Calvinism and Armenianism are both true.  I like to call it Paradoxicalism; I do not know what others have called it, or even if others have thought of it.  It is, in essence, the belief that Calvinism and Armenianism are two sides of a paradox, in which case they are both true, though immediate logic condemns this union.  You could say that, rather than being a 50/50 view, it is a 100/100 view.  Calvinism is 100% right and Armenianism is 100% right because the real Truth which the theologies are trying to explain contains every principle from each, as well as many principles of its own.

                This may be a good visual.  Think of Calvinism and Armenianism as two circles on a paper.

               The area inside the Calvinist circle is “Calvinist” and the area outside the circle is “not Calvinist”.  The same goes for Armenianism.

               Now, the two circles never touch, nor do they intersect.  Thus, you cannot indicate a point on the paper which is found in both Calvinism and Armenianism.  The Calvinist holds that the area within their circle represents what is “true” – that is, it accurately describes the nature of God and his providence – and that the area outside their circle represents what is “false”. 

               The Armenianists holds the same for their circle.

               The 50/50 view recommends that we try and find an area where the two circles intersect, and that that area ought to be considered “true” (while, of course, no such instance can be found).  But the Paradoxicalist view holds that the truth about the nature of God and his providence is represented by all of the area on the page.

               Calvinism and Armenianism both contain some of that area – i.e. they both contain some of the truth about the nature of God and his providence – but there is area on the page which neither Calvinism nor Armenianism contain – i.e. there are some parts of the truth about the nature of God and his providence which neither theology can express.  And further, since the truth about the nature of God and his providence is represented by all of the area on the page, Calvinism and Armenianism are both true.  In short, Paradoxialism holds that both Calvinism and Armenianism are true because they are like two different snapshots from the same picture, or two different provinces from the same country, etc.

                I should address, before I go on, a misunderstanding that may occur by those who believe in Paradoxicalism.  It presents the danger of us getting flippant about the truth value of certain theologies; I don’t want anyone to get it into heads that all theologies are equally true.  Return to the circles on a page analogy.  Not all circles will be the same size; that is, some theologies will contain more truth than others.

                We can even consider the possibility that some theologies do not deserve a circle on the page because they contain no truth at all.  The only point I am trying to make in this whole essay is that Calvinism and Armenianism are relatively equal in the amount of space they share on the page.  Obscure theologies from somewhere-or-other probably have much smaller circles; if they have circles at all.