Calvinism & Evangelism: Are They Really at Odds with Each Other?

Is Reformed Theology inherently opposed to evangelism because of the doctrine of unconditional election?  JP, over at JP’s Mind, had an intriguing post (Reformed Doctrine and Evangelism) where he asks this very question.  The argument generally goes something like this:

Calvinism teaches unconditional election, whereby God has predestined those who will come to faith in Him.  Therefore, the doctrine of election reduces (if not eliminates) the need for evangelism.

There are other forms of this argument, but all are getting at the same question: Doesn’t the doctrine of election reduce the importance of evangelism?

So, let me attempt to wax eloquent on this topic.  The short answer to the question is ABSOLUTELY NOT…or, at least it shouldn’t.

First, evangelism is a Biblical mandate.  So, regardless of what you believe Reformed Theology teaches, all those united with Christ are commissioned and commanded to share the Gospel.  We have a responsibility to participate in bringing the Gospel message to other folks.

Secondly, election compels us to spread the Good News.  The love that Christ has poured out on us through His irresistible grace compels us to spread the Word.  We obediently speak the Gospel because we are motivated by the love and grace that Christ has freely bestowed upon us.  Love is the fuel that drives us to share the story of redemption.  I am compelled to love my wife because of the grace and love she has shown me, not only because I am commanded to do so.

Thirdly, election promises results.  If unconditional election didn’t exist, no one would respond to the external and internal call.  Of course, this goes back to the doctrine of total depravity which states that left to ourselves and apart from the grace of God, no one would choose Christ because our entire being has been corrupted by sin and we are incapable to choose Christ.  See the book of Romans for Biblical support.  If there are no guaranteed results, Christ would have died in vain, because, left up to ourselves, we wouldn’t choose Christ.  Therefore, unconditional election promises that Christ did NOT die in vain, and people will respond through faith and repentance.

Fourthly, election glorifies God.  In the evangelistic endeavor He is the one sovereignly at work drawing His elect to salvation through the gospel message that we deliver.  If God sovereignly elects, then we become a means that God uses to bring others to saving faith in Christ.  Stated another way, God uses broken vessels to spread His gospel message, and He delivers the results.  Whether or not an individual comes to faith in Christ is not contingent upon our persuasive prowess.  If it was up to our power of persuasion, we should all be studying sales techniques from Dwight Schrute.  We can take no credit for the end result, because the truth is not contingent upon us.  God is ultimately glorified, we are ultimately humbled and overwhelmed by His grace.

So, evangelism is a Biblical mandate, whereby, the doctrine of election compels us to spread the Gospel, promises results, and glorifies God.  What are your thoughts on election and evangelism?  What have I left out?

As a side note, the tension that one might feel in the argument is due to God’s sovereignty and human responsibility, the argument that’s also known as compatibilism and incompatibilism.  I’ll cover that later.