CALVINISM
Table of Contents
1. TOTAL DEPRAVITY. Ephesians 2:1 ‘dead in trespasses and sins’. (p.611,613).
Q: Does man have free will to receive Christ, and to do good? (p.610,613). Calvinist inability to receive Christ is based on:
i) John 1:13 ‘nor of the will of man, but of God.’ (Ans: ‘as many as..’ John 1:12). (p.614).
ii) Romans 9:16 ‘not of him that willeth,but of God’(Ans: John 5:40; Romans 6:17; Luke 15:24).
iii) John 8:43,44 ‘ye cannot hear my word.’ (Ans: Luke 15:24; Luke 16:23-28). (p.615).
Refuting Calvinists’ ‘Proof Texts’ for Total Depravity
i) Someone who ‘cannot’ do something:
John 8:43 ‘ye cannot hear my word.’ (John 8:44,45,46,24). (p.615). John 14:17 ‘the world cannot receive.’ (p.615).
Romans 8:8,7 ‘in the flesh cannot please God.’ (I Corinthians 1:21 preaching to save).
(p.615).
ii) Someone’s ‘inability’ but with a reason given for it:
John 6:44 ‘except the Father draw him.’ (Ans: John 6:45; 12:32; 1:9; 16:7-11).
(p.615,616).
John 6:65 ‘except it were given unto him of the Father.’ (p.615,616). John 12:39-40 ‘they could not believe, … He hath hardened their heart.’ (John 12:37,39; Matthew 12:15; Acts 28:27). (p.615; 631-632).
iii) Romans 3:11 ‘none that seeketh after God’ (Ans: Acts 10:2; Isaiah 45:19; 55:6; Psalm 10:4) p.616.
I Corinthians 2:14 ‘natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.’ (Ans: Eph.1:13)
Two Kinds of Scriptures that Overthrow Total Depravity Inability:
i) Scriptures containing a command to believe: Acts 17:30; Isaiah 45:22; Mark 1:15; Matthew 11:28; I John 3:23; John 7:37; Revelation 22:17; Isaiah 45:19. (p.618).
ii) Scriptures implying the possibility that a man can believe: John 5:40; I Thess. 2:16.
(p.618).
2. UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION. (P.618-643)
Q1: Are men elected to salvation or not? (Calvinists confuse election and predestination with salvation).
Q2: What does the Bible say about God’s decrees? (Ans: None involve salvation: Isaiah 10:1).(p.619).
Q3: What is the problem with Calvinists’ view of God’s sovereignty? (Ans: They exalt it above His other attributes). (p.620).
Q4: Has God from eternity past foreordained all things that happen? (Ans: Herod’s massacre).(p.620)
Q5: Does God foreordain the time of one’s death? (Ans: Isaiah 38:5; Ecclesiastes 7:17; Psalm 55:23).
Q6: Does God foreordain sin? (Ans: Jeremiah 19:3-5). (p.621).
Q7: Why does God bring evil on people and places? (Ans: Because of their sins). (p.621).
God Has Not Foreordained Everything In One All-Encompassing Decree Because:
1) God says so: ‘neither came it into my mind’ (Jeremiah 19:5). (p.621).
2) God’s Holy nature would not allow Him to be the author of sin. (p.621).
3) God permits something when He is said to do it, eg: Satan provoking David. (p.622).
4) Man’s responsibility is destroyed if God has predestined all things. (p.622).
5) Man’s free will is destroyed if God has predestined all things. (p.622).
- See 10 examples of man’s free will in Scripture refuting God foreordaining all.
6) Prayer changed things for Moses (Deut. 9:18-29); Hezekiah (II Kings 20:1-6); Righteous men
7) Calvinists’ Admissions that it seems ‘unscriptural, absurd, impious’. (N L Rice). (p.622).
8) Calvinists’ Rejections. (p.622).
9) Other False Philosophies are same as Calvinism, eg: Islam. (p.623).
10) Semantics, accepted word meanings, eg: ‘Whosoever’ disprove it. (p.623).
11) Contingency verses showing the possibility of an event happening disprove it, eg:
Matthew 11:21; John 5:30; I Thessalonians 2:16. (p.623). (eg: Luke
10:31; Deut. 22:6.
12) Chance disproves it. Some things happen by chance, not by foreordained decrees,
(p.623)
13) Common Sense disproves it. If all was foreordained, nobody could avoid carrying out
God’s decree.
Unconditional Election Blasphemes God’s Character in 4 Ways. (p.624). Bible teaches Election to 6 Things. (p.625,626).
Three Systems of Calvinism: Supralapsarianism, Infralapsarianism,
Sublapsarianism.(p.628,629).
Refuting Unconditional Election to Reprobation ‘proof’ texts (Jeremiah 6:30). (p.629).
i) Proverbs 16:4 ‘The Lord hath made the wicked for the day of evil’. (Psalm 76:10).
ii) I Thessalonians 5:9 ‘God hath not appointed us to wrath …’ (p.630).
iii) I Peter 2:8 ‘stumble at the word … being disobedient … as they were appointed’.
iv) II Peter 2:12 ‘made to be taken and destroyed …in their own corruption’. (p.631).
v) II Peter 2:17 ‘mist of darkness is reserved forever’. (Jude 13). (p.631).
vi) Jude 4 ‘who were before of old ordained to this condemnation’. (p.631).
vii) Isaiah 6:9,10 ‘blinded their eyes, hardened their hearts’. (p.631).
viii) Romans 9:13 ‘Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated’. (p.632).
ix) Romans 9:18 ‘Pharaoh … whom he will he hardeneth’. (p.633).
x) Romans 9:22 ‘… the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction’. (p.633).
xi) Jeremiah 18:1-10 Potter = God; Clay = Israel; Marring of clay = Israel’s disobedience; God remaking clay = discipline. (p.633).
Refuting Unconditional Election to Salvation ‘proof’ texts: (p.633).
1. God’s People. i) Acts 18:10 ‘I have much people in this city’. (p.634).
ii) Revelation 13:8; 17:8 Book of Life. (p.634).
iii) John 10:14-16, 26 God’s Sheep. (p.634).
2. Given to Salvation. iv) John 6:37; 6:39; 17:2; 17:6 Given to the Son. (p.634).
3. Ordained to Salvation. v) Acts 13:48 (p.635).
4. Chosen to salvation. i) Matthew 22:14 and 20:16 (p.635).
ii) John 15:16 ‘ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you’.
iii) Acts 9:15; 22:14 ‘He is a chosen vessel …’ (p.635).
iv) Galatians 1:15,16 ‘God separated me from my mother’s womb’
v) I Peter 2:9 ‘Ye are a chosen generation.’ (Exodus 19:6).(p.636)
vi) Psalm 65:4 ‘Blessed is the man whom thou choosest..’ (p.636)
vii) James 2:5 ‘Hath not God chosen the poor of this world’(p.636)
viii) 2 Thess 2:13 ‘God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation’ I Peter 1:2 ‘Elect according to the foreknowledge of God’(p.637)
ix) Eph. 1:4 ‘he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world’
x) 2 Tim 1:9 ‘grace…given us in Christ Jesus before the world began’
xi) Jeremiah 31:3 ‘I have loved thee with an everlasting love’(p637)
5. Elected to Salvation. (p.638).
i) Jesus is called ‘elect.’ How is Jesus Christ ‘elect’ when He never sinned? (value, worth).
ii) Angels are called ‘elect’ in I Timothy 5:21 ‘I charge thee before …the elect angels’
(p.638).
iii) Israel is still called ‘elect’ in the New Testament: (p.638).
a) Matthew 24:22,24,31 ‘but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened’.
(p.639).
b) II Timothy 2:10 ‘I endure all things for the elect’s sake … may obtain salvation’.
c) Luke 18:7,8 ‘Shall not God avenge his own elect …’ (p.639).
d) Romans 9:11,12 ‘purpose of God … election …the elder shall serve the younger’.
e) Romans 11:28 ‘As touching the election, they are beloved …’ (p.639).
f) Romans 11:5,7 ‘the election of grace, … the election hath obtained it’. (p.639).
iv) Church is called ‘elect’ nine (9) times in the New Testament: (p.640).
a) I Peter 5:13 ‘The church at Babylon, elected together with you …’ (p.640).
b) I Thessalonians 1:4 ‘knowing brethren, your election of God.’ (Acts 16:9,10).
(p.640).
c) II Peter 1:10 ‘brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure.’
(p.640).
v) Christians are called ‘elect’ 6 times in the New Testament: (p.640).
a) Romans 8:33 ‘who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect?’ (p.640).
b) Colossians 3:12 ‘Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved ,,,’
(p.640).
c) Titus 1:1 ‘Paul, a servant of God … according to the faith of God’s elect’. (p.640).
d) I Peter 1:2 ‘Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father …’ (p.640).
e) II John 1 ‘The elder unto the elect lady, and her children’. (p.640).
f) II John 13 ‘The children of thy elect sister greet thee’. (p.640).
Believers are described as elect, holy, justified, beloved and having faith.
Calvinists read unconditional election into every verse discussing election. (p.641).
i) I Peter 1:2
ii) Romans 8:29,30
iii) Ephesians 1:4,5
iv) II Thessalonians 2:13
v) Acts 13:48
vi) Romans 9,10,11
What does the Bible say we are predestined to? (p.642).
i) Ephesians 1:5 ‘Son-placing’ in heaven.
ii) Ephesians 1:11,12 Praise His glory.
iii) Romans 8:29,30 Conformed to the image of Christ in heaven.
Six Bad Conclusions about Unconditional Election. (p.643).
i) Non-elect are predestined to hell.
ii) Fatalism – Nothing we do makes any difference.
iii) Shaky Assurance of Salvation based on decrees, not on Bible promises.
iv) Missions and Evangelism change no-one’s destiny.
v) Confusing, unbiblical terminology.
vi) Makes vain all preaching, holiness, comfort, zeal and Scriptures.
3. LIMITED ATONEMENT (p.644).
Question: Did God intend to save all men, or not? (p.644). Four Point Calvinism. (p.645). Calvinists’ 5 arguments for Lim. Atonement. (p.646).
Two Old Testament examples proving the Atonement and its Application are different.
(p.646).
i) Passover lamb’s blood was efficacious only after applied to the doorpost. (p.646).
ii) Snake-bitten Israelites in the wilderness had to look at a brass serpent on a pole.Numbers 21:5-9
Calvinist argument 3 refuted – Christ died for Old Testament saints. (Hebrews 9:15).
(p.647).
Calvinist argument 4 refuted – Romans 5:17 says Christ’s gift must be received. (p.647). Calvinists inconsistently define MAN, ALL MEN, ALL in:
i) Romans 5:15 ‘offence of one MANY be dead …gift hath abounded to MANY’. (p.647).
ii) Romans 5:18 ‘judgment came on ALL MEN … free gift came on ALL MEN’. (p.647).
iii) Isaiah 53:6 ‘ALL we like sheep … iniquity of us all’. (p.647).
Calvinist argument 5 refuted – John 3:18 ‘he that believeth not is condemned’. (p.647).
Christ died for ‘the WORLD’, ‘ALL MEN’, and ‘ALL’: (p.647).
I. Christ died for ‘the WORLD’, eg: John 12:19 ‘The world is gone after him.’ (p.648).
i) In John, the word ‘world’ occurs 89 times but never means ‘elect’. (p.648).
ii) John 1:29 ‘Behold the lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of world.’ (p.648).
iii) John 6:33 ‘and giveth life unto the world’. (p.648).
iv) John 3:16 ‘For God so loved the world..that whosoever believeth in him should not perish’.
v) John 4:42 ‘This is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world’. (p.648).
vi) John 6:51 ‘my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world’. (p.648).
vii) In Paul’s letters, the word ‘world’ occurs 69 times, but never means ‘elect.’ (p.649). viii)II Corinthians 5:19 ‘God … reconciling the world unto himself, … committed to us.’
(p.649)
ix) Galatians 1:4 ‘Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world’.
Key: Paul differentiates between ‘us’ believers and the ‘world’. (p.649).
x) In I John,the word ‘world’ occurs 23 times and never means ‘elect’. (p.649).
xi) I John 2:2 ‘he is the propitiation for our sins;...not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world’
xii) I John 4:14 ‘The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world’. (p.648-650).
xiii) I John 5:19 ‘We know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness’.(p.650)
Calvinist Objection: John 11:49-52. Are the ‘children of God’ the church or Israel? (p.650). (Deuteronomy 14:1; Psalm 82:6; Isaiah 43:6; John 7:35).
II. Christ died for ALL MEN, eg: Matthew 10:22 ‘hated of all men’. (p.651).
i) Isaiah 53:6 ‘All’ means the same in both places. (p.651).
ii) II Corinthians 5:14,15 ‘elect’ are ‘us’ and ‘we’, so three ‘alls’ mean ‘all men’. (p.651).
iii) I Timothy 2:1-6 Three ‘alls’ don’t mean ‘elect’, because ‘elect’ is ‘we’. (p.651).
iv) I Timothy 4:10 ‘Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe’. (p.652). This contrast between ‘all men’ and ‘those that believe’ occurs in four places:
- Galatians 6:10 ‘do good unto all men, especially to them who are of the household of faith’
- Romans 3:22 ‘the righteousness of God …unto all (100%) and upon all them that believe’.
- Titus 2:11,12 ‘the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men (100% of men), teaching us (the ‘elect’) that, denying ungodliness…’
v) Hebrews 2:9 ‘that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man’. (p.652).
III. Christ Died for a Particular Group: His People, Sheep, Church of God, Many. (p.653).
i) Many: Matthew 20:28 ‘Son of man came … to give his life a ransom for many’.
(p.653).
Matthew 26:28 ‘This is my blood … shed for many for the remission of sins’. Hebrews 9:28 ‘Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many’.
(Ans: Romans 5:15,19. Did Adam’s fall affect all or only some of his descendants?).
ii) His People: Matthew 1:21 ‘He shall save his people from their sins’. (p.653). (Ans: Matthew 2:6; Luke 1:68 ‘His people’ = Israel)
iii) Sheep: John 10:15 ‘I lay down my life for the sheep’. (p.653).
(Ans: Matthew 10:6; 15:24 ‘lost sheep of the house of Israel’. Sheep = Israel).
Other Groups Christ Died for that Prove Unlimited Atonement
i) Those Christ died for who will ultimately go to hell. (II Peter 2:1). (p.654).
ii) Those Christ died for that describe everybody, all mankind: (p.654).
- Luke 19:10 ‘Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.’ Are all lost or only the elect lost?
- Romans 5:6 ‘Christ died for the ungodly’. Are all ungodly, or only elect ungodly?
- Galatians 4:5 ‘To redeem them that were under the law’. Are all under the law?
- I Timothy 1:15 ‘Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners’. Are all sinners?
- I Peter 3:18 ‘Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust’. Are all unjust?
iii) Christ died for His friends. ‘that a man lay down his life for his friends’. (John 15:13). (Ans: Judas was one of Christ’s friends: Matthew 26:50). (p.654).
iv) Christ died for ‘whosoever believeth’ may claim Christ’s atonement. (p.654).
- Acts 10:43 ‘whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins’.
- Romans 10:11 ‘whosoever believeth in him shall not be ashamed’.
- Romans 10:13 ‘whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved’.
- I John 5:1 ‘whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God’.
- Revelation 22:17 ‘whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely’.
4. IRRESISTABLE GRACE (p.656).
I. Scriptures Refuting: Acts 7:51; Genesis 6:3; John 16:8; 5:40; 3:19; Romans 1:24; Matt.23:37;13:15
II. Results of IG: Hopelessness; Wrong Conclusions; General & Effectual Call; Makes God a liar.657.
III.Verses Calvinists use to support IG: John 1:13; Matthew 20:16; 22:14; Acts 13:48. (p.658).
5. PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS. Arminianism; Lordship Salvation; 4 Definitions; Romans 9.
(p.660)
QUESTIONS TO ASK CALVINISTS
Q1: How many of the 5 points of Calvinism do you believe?
Q2: Does man have free will to receive or reject Christ as Saviour? (Revelation 22:17).
(p.613).
Q3: If man has no free will, and the non-elect cannot believe, how can non-elect people
be held responsible for what they cannot do? (p.614).
Q4: Why do men not seek God? Is it Total Depravity? No, it is pride. (Psalm 10:4).
(p.617; Q5).
Q5: Is a man responsible for what he is unable to do? Yes and No. It depends on why he
is unable.618,Q8
Q6: Would God offer salvation to men, knowing that they couldn’t receive it? Are God’s
offers genuine? (Isaiah 45:19). (p.618; Q10).
Q7: Are some men elected to salvation or are they not? (p.619; Q1).
(Ans: No. Calvinists confuse election and predestination with salvation).
Q8: Does God foreordain sin, suffering, the Fall, and all things? No. (p.619;Q2).
Q9: Show me where God decrees some people’s election or predestination to salvation
or hell in the Bible? (Ans: There is no such eternal decree of God in Scripture. Isaiah
10:1). (p.619-620;Q3).
Q10: If predestination is a secret decree of God, how come Calvinists know so much
about it? Deut29:29
Q11: What is wrong with Calvinists’ view of God’s sovereignty? (p.620;Q5).
(Ans: It means arbitrariness, and is exalted above His holiness, mercy and other
attributes).(Q10
Q12: Did God eternally decree for Herod to massacre children under 2 years of age?
Sodomy? Rape?
Q13: Why does God bring evil on people or places? (Jeremiah 19:3-5). (p.621;Q14).
(Ans: Because of their sins, not by any arbitrary decree).
Q14: How could God decree and foreordain sin if it never came into His mind? (Jer
19:5).(p.621;Q15)
Q15: Do you know 13 reasons why God has not foreordained all things? (p.621-623).
Q16: Do you know 8 reasons why man has free will? (p.622;Q17).
Q17: Does anything happen by chance? Jesus & Moses say so. (Luke 10:31; Deut
22:6)(p.623;Q19).
(Response to Calvinist accusing you of being Arminian or Pelagian: You: “I believe
some things that Arminius, Pelagius and Calvin believed. I reject some things that
they believed.”)
Q18: What are 4 bad effects of Unconditional Election? (p.624).
Q19: Is God just in electing some and passing by the rest? No. (p.629;Q25).
(Ans: The Calvinist god is like the priest and levite who ‘passed by’ the half-dead
man. (Luke 10:30-32). Did Jesus recommend their behaviour? No. Then neither
does God behave this way. Jesus commands us to ‘Go and do thou likewise’. (Luke
10:37), as the Good Samaritan did. Does Jesus practise what He preaches? Surely.
Q20: Has God made two groups of men as elect and non-elect? (p.633).
(Ans: No, because ‘he fashioneth their hearts alike’. Psalm 33:13-15).
Q21: When are people put ‘in Christ’, from eternity past or when saved? (Romans 16:7).
(p.636).
Q22: Can the ‘elect’ be ‘dead in sin’ and yet be ‘in Christ’ at the same time?
Q23: Have the ‘elect’ ever been in danger of going to hell? (Calv.say No) p637,8.Q38. (I
Peter 2:6. p.638.
Q24: What does it mean to say Jesus Christ was ‘elect’ in Isaiah 42:1? Might this apply to Christians?
Q25: Is Israel still called ‘elect’ in NT? Yes. (p.638-640).
Q26: Why would Paul endure stonings, beatings, shipwreck for the ‘elect’ if they were sure to be saved? (II Timothy 2:10). Do you? (p.639).
Q27: In II Peter 1:10 what is the significance of calling coming before election? ‘Make your calling and election sure’. (It destroys Calvinism, as Calvinists think that election comes before calling). (p.640)
Q28: In II Peter 1:10, how could man make sure what God has already made sure? (Ans: Calling and election relate to service). (p.640).
Q29: What is the true meaning of NT election from I Peter 2:9; Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 14:2? (Ans: NT election is of the church as a body. As the nation of Israel was corporately elected as a body, so also was the church corporately elected as a body.) (p.641).
Q30: Is your pay packet predestined? (If yes, why go to work?)
Are souls predestined to heaven? (If yes, why don’t you work to win them?)
Q31: Show me one NT verse teaching that some are predestined to heaven? (Ephesians 1:5 adoption of children = son placing in heaven). See Romans 8:23. (p.642).
Q32: Do dead babies go to heaven or hell? (p.643; Q47).
Q33: Do you want all people to be saved? (Yes). Does the devil want all people to be saved? (No)
Does God want all people to be saved? (Calvinists say No). Are you more merciful &loving than God?
Q34: What two OT examples refute Limited Atonement by showing that the Atonement and its Application are to be distinguished? (Passover lamb, and brass serpent on a pole). (p.646).
Q35: Do the first ‘many’, ‘all men’ and ‘all’ mean the same as the last ‘many’, ‘all men’ and ‘all’ in Romans 5:15; 5:18; Isaiah 53:6? (p.647).
(p.652.
Q36: Which 4 verses contrast ‘all men’ with ‘elect’? (II Tim. 4:10; Gal. 6:10; Romans 3:22; Titus 2:11,12)
Q37: What 4 groups did Christ die for, that prove unlimited atonement? (Ans: Those who will go to hell, everybody, Jesus’ friends, and whosoever believeth).
Q38: How does a Calvinist know if he is saved or not? (By Perseverance or Promises).
(p.655;Q14).
107. REFUTING 5-POINT CALVINISM (TULIP)
“My wrath is kindled against thee….for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right.” Job 42:7.
Calvinism or Reformed doctrine was completely expressed by the Swiss reformer John Calvin (1509-64). It is noted for its emphasis on Predestination and the Sovereignty of God. Martin Luther’s views on the sovereignty of God were similar to Calvin’s as seen by his tract on “The Bondage of the Will” which spoke strongly of Total Depravity.
After the Reformation, a reaction against Calvinism arose and in Holland, Jacob Arminius (1560-1609) taught a greater emphasis on free will. His 5 theses were condemned by the Synod of Dort (1618) which formulated the 5 points of Calvinism remembered by the acronym TULIP, standing for: Total Depravity of man, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistable Grace, and Perseverance of the saints.
Question: Is Calvinism Biblical? Does God want some to be saved, or all to be saved? “God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved…
The man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all,…” I Timothy 2:3-6.
“The Lord…is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” 2 Peter 3:9.
Five point Calvinists teach that:
a) God does NOT want all to be saved.
b) Christ did NOT give himself a ransom for all.
c) God does NOT love all the world.
d) God wants most people to go to hell.
e) God created most people to send them to hell, as a means of glorifying Himself.
The Effect of five point Calvinism is that it:
a) Presents God as unjust.
b) Presents Christ as a liar and a false advertiser.
c) Changes the doctrines of God, man, the Gospel, prayer and evangelism.
d) Presents the God of love as a monster.
e) Is a teaching that produces atheists.
f) Has no remedy for sin for some people.
Once a person accepts that Total Depravity means “Total Inability”, they must accept ULIP. If man is not able to call on Christ to save him, then God must elect people unconditionally if anyone is to be saved.
Calvinists start with a wrong understanding of man’s nature as having a will bound to his sin nature. They must then adjust the gospel facts to fit their theory.
The TULIP error seeks support from Scripture, but takes these verses out of context.
Question: What are the Errors of 5- point Calvinism?
1. TOTAL DEPRAVITY of man, or TOTAL INABILITY of man.
(A false view of the nature of man leads to 3 other false views about God).
By Total Depravity of man, Calvinists mean “Total Inability of man” to believe or call on Christ to save him. Calvinists mean that sinners cannot come to Jesus Christ to receive Him as Saviour, unless they are foreordained or predestined to come to Christ.
Answer:
a) We agree that man is totally depraved in the sense that he is “born in sin.” (Psalm 51:5); “he goes astray as soon as he is born.” (Psalm 58:3); “in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing” Romans 7:18.
b) We agree that man does not initiate any move to God and salvation on his own.
“there is none that seeketh after God.” (Romans 3:11; Psalm 14:2,3). c) We strongly disagree with “Total Inability of man.”
The Bible never hints that people are lost because they have no ability to come to Christ. Jesus said to unsaved Jews, “Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” John 5:40. Here Jesus states that lost sinners have the will to come to Jesus for salvation if they so choose.
If nobody has the ability to come to Christ, Jesus would have said, “ye cannot come unto me.”
Jesus wept over Jerusalem saying that he would have gathered them for salvation, but they would not be gathered.
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,…how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as an hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not.” (Matthew 23:37). Not that they “could not”, but that they “would not.” Jesus laid the responsibility for them not being saved squarely on their own rejection of Christ. Jesus did not say that they were unable to come, but that they were unwilling to come. Their unwillingness to come was the cause of their damnation, not God’s failure to elect them as Calvinists say.
d) Jesus in Revelation 22:17 invites all people to exercise their free will to come to Him for salvation. “And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” Revelation 22:17. “If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.” John 7:37.
If Jesus invited people to come, knowing that some were unable to come, he would have been guilty of falsely advertising something that he knew they were unable to take.
Question 1: Objection: Calvinists claim that John 6:44 proves man’s inability to come to Christ: “No man can come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw him:” Answer: It is true that no sinner can come to Christ unless drawn by the Holy Spirit.
We believe, however that Christ, through His Holy Spirit, draws every man sufficiently to Himself, to enlighten every man as much as is necessary for that individual to make a decision of his own free will.
Jesus states that from the cross of Christ issues a drawing power that all men experience. “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” John 12:32.
All men are drawn to Christ, in 4 ways, but not all men will receive Christ as their Saviour.
a) Christ: The Bible teaches that all men receive light from Christ, enabling them to come to Christ: “That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” John 1:9.
b) Creation: God calls every sinner to Himself through the witness of Creation, so that they are without excuse if they reject Christ. “The invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen; …so that they are without excuse.” Romans 1:19,20.
c) Conscience: God calls sinners through the convicting voice of their Conscience, even when they have not heard God’s Word. “their conscience also bearing witness.” Romans 2:11-15,16.
d) Bible: God calls sinners through the Bible: “The entrance of thy words giveth light.” Psalm 119:130
Hence, everyone who has ever been born, has been given light by Christ, by Creation, by their Conscience, and by the Bible (Canon of Scripture). To this light they are capable of responding, and are accountable to God if they reject Christ.
Hence Total Inability of man to come to Christ is a false doctrine without Biblical support.
Question 2: Does man have a free will?
Answer: Total depravity is not so much a statement that man is a sinner in need of salvation (true), BUT a statement on the interaction of the will, heart, and mind.
Question 3: Is man’s will governed and in bondage to his sinful heart and mind, as Calvinists claim?
Answer: Since man’s heart and mind are corrupt, Calvinists claim that the will is incapable of choosing any good at all. Is this true? No, because of these examples:
i) Fallen angels were created perfect. If their wills were governed by their sinless hearts and minds, then they were incapable of sin. Yet the fact that they willed to sin proves that one’s will is not governed by our heart and mind.
ii) Man was created sinless. If Adam and Eve’s will were governed by their sinless heart and mind, then it would have been impossible for man to sin.
That Satan, fallen angels and man have sinned, proves that our will can act independent and contrary to our heart and mind, to decide to do evil. Hence our will is not governed by our heart and mind.
iii) We often make hard decisions of our will contrary to our heart (feelings) and mind (reasoning).
For example, we say ‘This goes against my better judgment, but I’ll do it for you.’ If our will is not governed by our heart and mind, then we do have the power of choice, and we can choose to come to Christ.
Question 4: What if man does not have a free will? What a mockery it makes of Christ’s offer of salvation: “Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” Revelation 22:17.
Question 5: Would a loving God hold out the water of eternal life to thirsty souls if He knew they could not take it?
This would constitute false advertising and common deceit. God is not dishonest !!!!!
If God asks honest behaviour of us, He will act honestly to mankind. Calling God dishonest is evil.
Question 6: The “Total depravity” idea declares that all men are totally incapable of any good deed or righteous act. Is this true? Can an unsaved sinner be kind, honest, caring etc.?
Yes. A lost sinner can do righteous acts:
“Not by works of righteousness that we have done…” Titus 3:5.
Good deeds do not earn merit for salvation, nor can they cancel the guilt and penalty of sin.
Question 7: Calvinists quote Ephesians 2:1, that we “were dead in trespasses and sins.” How dead is dead? Calvinists say ‘as dead as a corpse’ so that man cannot hear the call of God. To resolve this problem, Calvinists must change the order of the process of salvation as follows: If natural man is so dead that he cannot hear the call of God to salvation, then before he can hear the gospel invitation, he must be given life. This act of giving life must therefore take place before the sinner can hear or respond to God. It is a decision by God in God’s Sovereign Will to impart faith to selected sinners.”
The Biblical order of salvation events are:
i) God strives with sinners, convicting them by the Holy Spirit of their sin. (Genesis 6:3).
ii) Man repents of his sin, and receives Christ to be his all sufficient Saviour. (John 1:12).
iii) God gives the gift of eternal life. (Romans 6:23).
iv) The Holy Spirit enters a person the moment he calls on Christ to be his Saviour. (Romans 10:13).
The Calvinist order of salvation events are:
i) God selects certain sinners to be the object of His grace.
ii) God does a work of grace on the sinner, enabling him to be no longer dead and unresponsive, but capable of a true response to God.
iii) God gives faith as a gift to the selected sinner.
iv) The sinner then believes and is saved.
Calvinists misunderstand Ephesians 2:8 to suggest that the gift of God is faith, and not eternal life.
“For by grace are ye saved through faith (Greek: pistis, feminine noun); and that (Greek: touto, neuter pronoun) not of yourselves: it is the gift of God…”
Question 8: What is the gift of God? Is it salvation or faith? It is salvation because:
a) Romans 6:23 says it is eternal life, not faith. “The gift of God is eternal life.”
b) In Ephesians 2:8 the Greek word “that” is neuter. This shows us that “that which is not of yourselves” cannot be referring to faith which is feminine, but to something which is neuter, such as salvation and eternal life.
Question 9: In what sense is man dead in trespasses and sin?
a) By separation from God. Adam and Eve were separated from God after the fall, but they still heard God’s voice in the conversation in Genesis 3:8-24:
“And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden.” Genesis 3:8. Even murderous unregenerate Cain could hear the voice of God in Genesis 4:6-15.
b) By his wayward life, as the prodigal son was separated from his father:
“For this my son was dead, and is alive again.” Luke 15:24.
c) Not annihilation, because the dead in hell can still speak (Ezekiel 32:20,21; Luke 16:19-31).
Hence, unsaved man is dead in sin, but sinners have the ability to respond. In the grace of God, provision has been made for his cleansing and quickening the moment he looks to Christ and cries “Lord, save me!’ (Luke 23:42 and Isaiah 45:22).
Question 10: Is faith a work? If the sinner believes before being saved, isn’t he doing something to get salvation? Does believing in Christ constitute works? No, because: “Therefore it is of faith, that it may be by grace.” Romans 4:16.
“And if by grace, then is it no more of works.” Romans 11:6.
“This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.” John 6:29. Hence faith is not a work a sinner does to merit salvation.
TOTAL DEPRAVITY (Completely Crooked) = TOTAL INABILITY
When a Calvinist says he believes in Total Depravity, he is giving you a smoke screen to cover what he really believes. He believes that ‘man is unable to repent and believe the Gospel as God commands him’
Importance: Total Depravity is the foundation of Calvinism.
The 3 key parts are: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election and Irresistable Grace. T necessitates U&I.
If all men are unable to repent and believe the Gospel, then it logically follows that if anyone is to be saved then God must first determine who they are by electing some to salvation (Unconditional Election) and then “irresistably” overcome their “inability” (by Irresistable Grace).
So if Total Depravity (Inability) is true, then there is nothing anybody can do except claim Lamentations 3:26 as their life verse,
“It is good that a man should both hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the Lord.”
If Total Depravity is true, all one can do is hope that he is the subject of Unconditional Election, and if he is, then quietly wait for God to save him by Irresistable Grace.
The Calvinist, by recognizing that most Christians believe in man’s depravity and sinfulness, gains adherents to his position by focusing on Total Depravity instead of its supposed result, Total Inability.
Calvinists then insist if we deny their doctrine of Total Depravity, then we must believe in some form of salvation by works, and thus weakening the doctrines of sin and the Fall. Because of Adam’s fall, unsaved man has imputed sin (Rom. 5:12-19), natural sin (Eph. 2:3), personal sin (Rom.3:23), physical death (I Cor.15:21), spiritual death (Eph.2:1), & eternal death (Rev. 20:14-15). He is dead: “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins.” Ephesians 2:1.
The Bible says the following about man’s sinfulness:
i) This spiritual death began before birth:
“Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Psalm 51:5.
ii) This spiritual death is present at birth:
“The wicked are estranged from the womb:they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.” Ps58:3
iii)This spiritual death is manifest in youth:
“The imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth.” Genesis 8:21.
iv) This human depravity is universal:“For all have sinned & come short of the glory of God.”
Rom. 3:23
v) Inside, man is a dark pit of sin and wickedness:
“That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness.” Mark 7:20-23.
vi) These come from the heart because the heart is corrupt: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Jeremiah 17:9; Ecclesiastes 8:11.
vii) It is not man’s wicked deeds that make him depraved, but his depraved heart is the cause of his wicked deeds. Man’s best unregenerate efforts are not good enough.
“Every man at his best state is altogether vanity.” Psalm 39:5.
“But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags.” Isaiah 64:6.
viii) Because of man’s depraved heart, everything man does is tainted with sin:
“An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked is sin.” Proverbs 21:4. “The sacrifice of the wicked is abomination.” Proverbs 21:27.
ix) The true tendency of man’s depraved nature is a constant increase in the habits and practice of wickedness, unless restrained by God’s grace: “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” Ecclesiastes 8:11.
Scripture describes unsaved man as ungodly (Romans 5:6), children of disobedience (Colossians 3:6), children of wrath (Ephesians 2:3), servants of sin (Romans 6:20), abominable and filthy (Job 15:15), foolish, disobedient, deceived (Titus 3:3), sheep gone astray (Isaiah 53:6), a troubled sea whose waters cast up mire and dirt (Isaiah 57:20), mouth full of bitterness and cursing (Romans 3:14), no fear of God before their eyes (Romans 3:18), blinded by Satan (2 Corinthians 4:4), his thoughts are vanity (Psalm 94:11), and as speaking perverse things (Acts 20:30).
Two ideas as to how a man can be saved are:
a) Bible: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” (Acts 16:31).
b) TULIP Calvinism: The sinner hopes he is one of the elect and then waits for God to save him if he is. (Lamentations 3:26).
Key Question: Does man have the free will to receive or reject Jesus Christ as his Saviour?
Answer: Total Depravity insists that man does not have a free will to receive Christ as his Saviour, nor indeed to do any good at all. Calvinists believe that man’s will is in bondage to his sinful nature, and may only choose between the greater and lesser evils. They base this on their understanding of the premise that man is “dead in trespasses and sins.” Ephesians 2:1.
To convince skeptics that the Calvinist doctrine of free will is correct, he first invents a caricature of “uncaused choice” of the Arminian position. He then uses the “guilt by association” argument to associate their opponents with Catholics, Arminians, Finneyites and Pelagians (the idea that man did not have a natural tendency towards sin. The Bible teaches the opposite in Romans 3:9-18).
4 things wrong with the Calvinist error that the natural man can only act according to his nature are:
i) Saved man: If an unsaved man is like a “corrupt tree” (Matt. 7:17) that can only produce rotten fruit, then a saved man must be like a “good tree” (Matt. 7:17) that can only produce “good fruit.”
Question: Does a saved man always produce good fruit? No.
Does a man stop sinning when he is saved? No. Do some Christians produce bad fruit? Absolutely!
ii) One would think that man’s “total inability” would be rectified by salvation since all Calvinists claim the natural man had “inability” and the saved man had “ability.” But Paul still acknowledged his “inability” after his salvation: “For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not..” Romans 7:15. This is true of all Christians: “For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit….so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.” Galatians 5:17. So even the elect have “inability.”
iii) After the fall, unsaved man lost his living spirit, but gained a conscience- a knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:25 and 3:7). Conscience explains why depraved man does not always express the full evil of his sin nature. A false view of man’s nature after the fall leads to the false Calvinist teaching that man is unable to act contrary to his nature.
iv) Man has ability in the state of depravity, as seen from:
a) A sinner who has never heard the gospel has “ability” because of his conscience: “For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law….their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another.” Romans 2:14,15.
This accusing and excusing proves that the fallen conscience still faces the choice between doing good or evil.
b) Jesus stated a principle that appeals to man’s free will: “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” John 7:17.
Whenever the heart is right, God gives the ability to know God’s truth.
c) Many Scriptures show that unsaved men do have the ability to do good.
- “A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children….” Proverbs 13:22.
- “But glory, honour and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and
also to the Gentile.” Romans 2:10.
- “Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.” 1 Peter 2:18.
- “If ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.” Luke 6:33.
- God stated that the wicked could do good: “God came to Laban the Syrian in a dream by night, and said unto him, Take heed that thou speak not to Jacob either good or bad.” Gen. 31:24.
- Jesus said that good deeds may be done with a wicked heart:
“If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children…” Matthew 7:11.
A deed can be good no matter what the motive.
Question: If unsaved men can do good, how do the above Scriptures fit with other Scriptures saying that no one does any good? (Ecclesiastes 7:20; Romans 3:12).
Answer: Total Depravity does not mean that there is no good in man, but that there is no good in man that can earn his salvation.
Man sins because of his own desire, not because his will can only follow his nature. (Romans 6:16).
“Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.” James 1:14. Several steps occur when any man sins:
1) Presentation, 2) Illumination as to whether it is right or wrong, 3) Debate, 4) Decision, 5) Action.
Key: The unsaved man sins because he yields to his depraved nature and chooses to sin, not because he is unable to do good.
When faced with such clear evidence of man’s free will, the Calvinist retreats and admits that man has free will, but not pertaining to his acceptance of salvation. If we dispute this Calvinist claim they accuse us of denying salvation by grace and endorsing works for salvation or of making man his own saviour.
Question: If man cannot believe, then how can he be held responsible for what he cannot do?
The Calvinist idea that man cannot accept Jesus Christ of his own free will, is based on 2 pillars:
i) John 1:13 ‘were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.’
The 2 phrases “nor of the will of man” (John 1:13) and “it is not of him that willeth” (Romans 9:16), are applied by Calvinists to the will of man to receive Jesus Christ. ie: that man does not have a free will when it comes to salvation. Calvinists have taken the phrase “received him” out of John 1:12 and substituted it for “born” in v.13, giving:
“which received him, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
John 1:13 gives the source of the new birth, not the reason why men receive Christ.
a) The source of the new birth is not of blood, not physical generation, inheritance or natural descent.
b) The source of the new birth is not of the will of flesh, not reformation, self-development or self-effort.
c) The source of the new birth is not of the will of man, not relatives, preachers or priests.
d) The source of the new birth is “of God”, not of man.
Question: Why does God give anyone the new birth?
Answer: God gives the new birth to “as many as received him.” v.12.
Conclusion: The new birth is God’s work, but receiving Christ is man’s responsibility. ii) ‘So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.’ (Romans 9:16). Calvinists apply the phrase “not of him that willeth” to claim that man does not have the will to receive Christ and salvation.
The Bible shows that man has the ability to respond to the gospel while in a state of depravity:
- “But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.” (Romans 6:17).
The reason men don’t receive Christ is not because they have the inability, but because they will not:
“And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” John 5:40.
By comparing a lost sinner to a dead man, a baby, and a creature, Calvinists attempt to prove that man has inability to repent and believe the gospel.
a) Dead man: “You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins.” (Ephesians 2:1).
All Calvinists compare Total Depravity to a physically dead man or to Lazarus (John 11:43,44), saying “A corpse does not cry out for help.” This may be true of physically dead men, but spiritually dead people are still biologically active and alive, able to walk, talk and fulfil desires. A spiritually dead man can lift up his eyes, see, speak, pray, hear, reason, and feel torment (Luke 16: 23-28). A true analogy showing how a sinner is “dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1) is the prodigal son who “was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.” (Luke 15:24).
b) Baby: “Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God.” (John 3:3). Some Calvinists liken regeneration to the birth of a baby to prove Total Depravity. Physical birth brings into the world a personality which had no existence before conception, but one who is regenerated did have a complete living personality before he was born again.
Question: Is a baby responsible for any of its actions before it is born? NO! Then neither would an unsaved man be responsible for any of his actions, if the analogy were true.
c) Creature: Calvinists analogise that just as any creature cannot cause its own creation, neither can any individual make himself a new creature in Christ. This analogy is false because regeneration is not creating a person with no prior existence, but is the renewing and restoring of a person whom sin had unfitted for communion with God.
All these 3 analogies break down because of responsibility:
Question: Is an uncreated creature responsible for anything? No.
Is an unregenerate sinner responsible for anything? Yes.
Refuting 3 Types of Calvinist “Proof Texts” for Total Depravity
Calvinists assume that these cannot do something because of Total Depravity, which is Total Inability.
i) Someone who “cannot” do something”
- John 8:43 “Why do ye not understand my speech? Even because ye cannot hear my word.”
- John 14:17 “Even the Spirit of truth: whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not,”
- Romans 8:8 “So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.”
Question 1: Who does John 8:43 refer to? “ye cannot hear my word.”
Answer: Not all mankind, but unbelieving Jews. They could not hear Christ’s word. Why?
- not because they were unregenerate (Acts 26:18),
- not because they were of their father the devil (John 8:43);
- not because they were “not of God” (John 8:47), BUT
- because they did the lusts of their father (John 8:44), and
- because they did not believe Christ when he told them the truth (John 8:45,46). Their inability was not foreordained, but conditional on believing that Jesus was I AM. (John 8:24).
Question 2: In John 14:17 what does the phrase mean, “whom the world cannot receive”?
Answer: The world cannot receive the Holy Spirit’s enlightening, not because they are non-elect or have total inability, but because “it seeth him not, nor knows him,” meaning because they judge by their physical senses. They walk by sight, not by faith. What they cannot see, hear, taste or feel, makes no impression on them. Because they cannot see the Holy Spirit operating, they conclude
that His influence is delusive. Hence they cannot receive Him.
Question 3: In Romans 8:7,8 what does the phrase mean “Because the carnal mind is enmity against God…They that are in the flesh cannot please God.”.
Calvinists say that “enmity against God” is total depravity, and “cannot please God” is total inability.
Answer: This means that unsaved man cannot do anything good enough to please God to merit or earn his own salvation. The flesh cannot be reformed, improved, trained or changed unless God changes it. The passage is not saying that because of this “inability,” a person cannot receive Christ. God is pleased when sinners receive the Gospel:
“it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” 1 Corinthians 1:21.
ii) Someone’s “inability” but with a reason given for it:
- John 6:44 “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him.”
- John 6:65 “No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.”
- John 12:39-40 “Therefore they could not believe, because Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, not understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.”
Question 4: What does John 6:44 mean: ‘No man can come to me except the Father draw him’? and ‘No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.’ John 6:65.
John 6:44 is the main Calvinist proof text for Irresistable Grace. John 6:44 is a major Calvinist proof text for Total Depravity, because it gives a reason for the sinner’s inability to come to Christ as being the lack of an ‘irresistable effectual call’ by God the Father. Calvinists teach that the ‘drawing’ in John 6:44 is Irresistable Grace. By misapplying v.44 to salvation in this Church age, Calvinists claim that, if God draws all men, then all men will be saved. Therefore, they conclude that God only draws the ‘elect’, those whom He has given to the Son (John 6:37).
Answer: This ‘drawing’ is amplified by 2 verses in the context:
a) ‘It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man, therefore, that hath heard and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.’ (John 6:45).
b) The other is John 6:65. ‘No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.’
In support of Christ’s statement in 6:44, Jesus appeals to Isaiah 54:13 by quoting it in John 6:45,
‘And all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the peace of thy children.’ (Isaiah 54:13). This verse refers to restored Israel in the Millennium as the entire chapter shows,
not to the ‘elect’ in the church age. The ones given to Christ are Jewish disciples during Christ’s public ministry, not ‘elect’ in the Church age. Doctrinally, these verses are still before Calvary.
The New Testament has not yet been instituted (Matthew 26:28) and the Holy Spirit has not yet been given (John 7:39). Hence the Calvinist error in John 6:44 is two-fold:
a) They misapply John 6:44 from its correct context as being in Christ’s earthly ministry to Israel, to a doctrinal statement on Salvation in the Church age.
b) They make the drawing of God irresistable and equate it with Salvation. Acts 7:51 shows God’s grace is resistable. “ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.”
Note: That John 6:44 is a pre-crucifixion passage directly referring to God’s true elect (the Jews), can be seen by the change taking place at the end of Christ’s public ministry after the Jews rejected Him. ‘And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.’ (John 12:32).
Key: Calvinists don’t understand that in John 6:44 it is the Father who draws people to Christ during His 3 year ministry, but in John 12:32 it is Christ who draws all men to Himself after Calvary. Not only did Christ’s death refer to more than the ‘elect,’ but His birth did also:
‘That was the true light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.’ (John 1:9).
Note: Instead of the Father drawing men during Christ’s 3 year ministry, the lifting up of Christ on the cross is followed by the Holy Spirit’s work in the Church age of “When he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.” (John 16:7-11).
The Holy Spirit will “reprove the WORLD of sin,” not just reprove the ‘elect.’
John 12:39-40 ‘Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.’ Calvinists claim that the reason why some ‘could not believe’ was because God ‘blinded their eyes’, calling it Unconditional Election to Reprobation (Predestination to hell).This will be explained later.
Calvinists often appeal to another 2 verses to teach Total Depravity.
iii) Romans 3:11 ‘There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.’ Calvinists correctly grant the initiative to God in saving sinners. John 3:16; Romans 5:8; I John 4:19. But to conclude from this that a sinner cannot believe the Gospel when confronted with it, is wrong.
Answer: There are 3 errors of Calvinists in using this phrase to teach Total Depravity.
1) The intent of the passage is not to teach man’s inability;
2) Nothing is said about people not being able to seek God;
3) Seeking God is different from believing the Gospel.
Firstly, Calvinists forget that Paul in establishing the universal guilt of Jews and Gentiles in Romans 3, quotes from the Old Testament for the purpose of giving weight to his arguments.
He is not charging every member of humanity with every sin.
He is not teaching the inability of unsaved people to receive Christ. eg: Cornelius, an unregenerate sinner (Acts 11:14), was a ‘just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report.’ (Acts 10:22).
He was a ‘devout man, and one that feareth God with all his house.’ (Acts 10:2). Secondly, nothing is said in this phrase, verse or context about anyone not being able to seek God, although this is how every Calvinist reads it. The Bible commands men to seek God in these verses:
- ‘Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near.’ (Isaiah 55:6).
- ‘Seek ye me, and ye shall live.” (Amos 5:4).
- ‘Seek ye the Lord, all ye meek of the earth.’ (Zephaniah 2:3).
- God set the bounds of the nations so ‘that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him.’ (Acts 17:26,27).
- ‘Seek the Lord and his strength, seek his face continually.’ (I Chronicles 16:11).
- Those who seek God will find Him: ‘Ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me, with all your heart.’ (Jeremiah 29:13).
- God ‘is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.’ (Hebrews 11:6).
- ‘Blessed are they that…seek him with the whole heart.’ (Psalm 119:2). (2 Chronicles 12:14.
- It is evil not to seek God: ‘he did evil, because he prepared not his heart to seek the Lord.’
- ‘They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord God . . . Whosoever would not seek the Lord. God of Israel should be put to death.’ (II Chronicles 15:12,13).
- These commands to seek God are not in vain: ‘I said not unto the seed of Jacob, seek ye me in vain.’ (Isaiah 45:19).
Note: This does not mean that a man who has rejected God will be able to find Him whenever he desires: ‘Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me.’ (Proverbs 1:28).
Finally, seeking God is not the same thing as believing the Gospel. Seeking God is not enough,
eg: A Jew who seeks God by keeping the Old Testament Commandments is just as lost as Gentiles who don’t seek God. Salvation is never obtained by seeking God, but by receiving Christ as your Saviour: ‘If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.’ (John 8:24).
‘no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.’ (John 14:6).
Key Question 5: If the reason men don’t seek God is not because they are Totally Depraved, then what is it?
Answer: The reason men don’t seek God is simple: ‘The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.’ (Psalm 10:4).
iv) I Corinthians 2:14 ‘But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Sprit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.’
Calvin concluded from this verse that ‘faith is not something that depends on our decision, but it is something given by God.’ (Commentaries, Vol 9, p 62).
Calvinists, to teach Total Inability read this verse as: ‘But the natural man receiveth not Jesus Christ: for he is foolishness unto him: neither can he receive him, because he is spiritually discerned’.
Question 6: How do we reply to Calvinists on this verse? Answer: The context is clearly things, not Jesus Christ.
Key: Receiving spiritual things and receiving Jesus Christ are two different things. ‘Things’ are discussed in every verse in I Corinthians 2:9-15. The context refers to believers knowing spiritual things. God gives the Holy Spirit to his sons, so that they may have spiritual understanding. Calvinists wish us to believe that, because the natural man cannot understand spiritual things, he cannot receive Jesus Christ. This verse teaches that the natural, unsaved man cannot discern the truth, beauty, wisdom, value and excellence of divine things, because he does not yet have the indwelling Holy Spirit. If he received Christ as Saviour, he would then have the Holy Spirit and would then be able to know and discern spiritual things. It does not teach that he is unable ever to receive Christ, due to Total Inability or Election to Reprobation. ‘In whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.’ (Ephesians 1:13).
Conclusion: None of these 3 types of Scriptures, which Calvinists use to prove Total Depravity,
ever mention man’s depravity. Calvinists who use these verses to prove Total Depravity are dishonest because Calvinists really mean Total Inability.
Conclusion: Reply to Total Inability.
Total Depravity is the foundation of Calvinism, and necessitates the other 4 points:
T: If all men are unable to repent and believe the Gospel, then it logically follows that,
U: If anybody is to be saved, then God must first determine who they are (Unconditional Election), and then
I: Irresistably overcome their ‘inability’ (Irresistable Grace) so they can repent & believe the Gospel.
If Total Depravity is true, there is nothing anyone can do except hope that he is unconditionally elected, and if he is, then quietly wait for God to save him by Irresistable grace. (Lamentations 3:26). But if Total Inability is false, so is ULIP.
Question 7: Why do Calvinists so persistently hold to Total Inability?
Answer: Calvinists believe that, if a man has the ability to respond to the Gospel, then this somehow robs God of his glory in saving sinners. While believing Total Inability, Calvinists strongly believe that man is fully responsible for what he cannot do. ‘Man’s total incapacity does not absolve him from full responsibility.’ (Custance, p. 117,118).
Question 8: Is a man responsible for what he is unable to do?
Answer: Yes and No. It depends on why he has inability. eg: A man under the influence of drugs is accountable for his actions only if he knowingly and wilfully put himself in that state (he took drugs). But a man under the influence of drugs is not accountable if he did not knowingly and wilfully put himself in such a state (he was drugged).
Question 9: Are infants and the retarded responsible to God, even though they lack natural ability?
Answer: No, says Pink (Son of God, p.154), yet Calvinists maintain that non-elect sinners are responsible to God, even though they have Total Inability.
Key Principle that overthrows Total Depravity/Inability is: A man can be condemned for his ignorance or his unwillingness, but never for his inability to do what God has commanded him to do. There are 2 kinds of Scriptures that overthrow Total
Depravity/Inability:
i) Scriptures containing a command to believe:
- ‘Look unto me and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth.’ (Isaiah 45:22).
- ‘repent ye, and believe the Gospel.’ (Mark 1:15).
- ‘God . . . now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.’ (Acts 17:30).
- ‘This is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love
one another, as he gave us commandment.’ (I John 3:23).
- ‘And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.’ (Revelation 22:17).
- ‘Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.’ (Matthew 11:28).
- ‘If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.’ (John 7:37).
Question 10: If Total Depravity/Inability is true, then is God mocking His Creation here?
Would God offer salvation to a man, knowing that the man could never even will to receive it? No!
The God of the Bible is not the god of Calvinism. God guarantees His offers are genuine: ‘I said not unto the seed of Jacob, seek ye me in vain: I the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.’ (Isaiah 45:19). Erasmus used this argument against Luther in their debate over free will, saying, ‘If it is not in the power of every man to keep what is commanded, all the promises, threats, reproofs, blessings, curses and precepts are of necessity useless.’
Desiderius Erasmus quoted in Luther. p 171. ii) Scriptures that imply the possibility that a man can believe:
- ‘Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.’ (John 5:40).
- ‘Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved.’ (I Thessalonians 2:16).
These verses do not mean that a man will always believe, but they do show that this possibility exists. If there exists even the slightest possibility that a man could believe (as seen by the word ‘might’), then the doctrine of Total Depravity/Inability is destroyed, because there are no possibilities in TULIP Calvinism.
2. UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION
If Total Inability be admitted, then Unconditional Election follows by the most inescapable logic, because if anybody is to be saved and if man cannot choose Christ, then God must choose those who shall be the objects of His grace.
Election and predestination are Bible terms, but we object to Calvinists’ perversion of these terms. ELECT = Select or choose. PREDESTINE = Determine beforehand.
Question: Who or what is elected?
Why were they elected?
What are they elected to?
Calvinist Definition of Unconditional Election:
‘By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His own glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life, and others are foreordained to everlasting death.’
(Westminster Confession of
Faith, III:3).
It is a sovereign, eternal decree where God chooses who is going to be saved & who is going to be lost. This second point of TULIP is the main teaching, and determines if one is to be classed as a Calvinist.
Question 1: Are men elected to salvation or are they not? This is the issue. Key Basic Error of Calvinism is: Confusing election and predestination with salvation.
If one denies Unconditional Election, Calvinists accuse us of:
- ‘The reason we are prone to disbelieve this doctrine is that we are not humble enough.’ (Rose p.19).
- ‘By making election conditional upon something that man does, even if what he does is simply to repent and believe the Gospel, God’s grace is seriously compromised.’ (Storms, Chosen for Life p.55)
- ‘The bottom line is, if you deny election, you deny salvation by grace. To reject election is to reject salvation by grace and promote salvation by works.’ (Carl Marton, Does the Bible Teach Election? The Berean Baptist Banner, Jan 5 1995, p.19).
Double predestination means predestining some to salvation and others to damnation. Well-known Calvinists are Louis Berkhof, A W Pink, Spurgeon, and Boettner.
Philosophical concepts in the Decree of Unconditional Election are:
i) Unconditional Election was by a sovereign, eternal decree. It is eternal and singular, meaning:
It is one decree for one purpose with many events.
ii) Sovereignty of God, meaning that God is in sovereign control of every detail of history. The Calvinists, Talbot and Crampton, say: ‘The sovereignty of God is foundational to Christianity.
It is the most basic principle of Calvinism.’ (p.14).
iii) This singular, eternal, sovereign decree is also said to be all-encompassing. ie: God by His decree has foreordained everything that ever happens in time.
Question 2: Does God really foreordain all things? Calvinists think so.
Answer: Check the Westminster Shorter Catechism:
‘The decrees of God are His eternal purpose, according to the counsel of his will, whereby, for His own glory, He hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass.’
Calvinists insist that God foreordained the Fall of man into sin, along with all the suffering. (See Boettner, Predestination, p.234, and Pink, Sovereignty, p.147).
Calvinists also insist that God foreordained every other sin. ‘It is even Biblical to say that God has foreordained sin.’ (Palmer p.82).
i) Question 3: What does the Bible say about decrees?
Answer: The Bible uses the word ‘decree’ in reference to God on 8 out of 56 occasions, and in reference to man 48 out of 56 times. It is used more of man than of God. Those making decrees were: Cyrus (Ezra 5:13); Darius (Ezra 6:1); Artaxerxes (Ezra 7:21); Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 3:10); Esther (Esther 9:32); Caesars (Luke 2:1; Acts 17:7); Apostles (Acts 16:4).
The decrees of God in the Bible concern: the rain (Job 28:26); the sea (Job 38:10); Jesus Christ (Psalm 2:7); the heavens (Psalm 148:6); a consumption (Isaiah 10:22); the sand (Jeremiah 5:22); and Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 4:24).
Notice the following about God’s decrees:
a) There are 7 decrees of God.
b) None of these decrees are said to be eternal.
c) No decrees involve election or predestination, yet Calvinists consider predestination a divine Decree.
Question 4: Which Scripture says this? None. There is no such thing as God’s eternal decree of predestination or election. Calvinists then say it is one of God’s secret decrees. Calvinist’s motto is Deuteronomy 29:29 ‘The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.’
Since God’s ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our thoughts (Isaiah 55:8,9), Unconditional Election is called a secret counsel of God that can’t be understood. If predestination is a secret decree, how is it that the Calvinists know so much about it? To the Calvinists’ invented decrees, God says: ‘Woe unto them that decreee unrighteous decrees.’ (Isaiah 10:1).
ii) The Sovereignty of God is the exercise of His supremacy (definition).
God is the one and only Supreme Being. ‘But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.’ (Psalm 115:3; See Psalm 47:2; Daniel 4:35). While
‘Sovereignty of God’ sounds Biblical, Calvinists misinterpret it to take precedence over His other attributes.
Question 5: What is the problem with Calvinists’ view of God’s sovereignty? Answer: The problem is that Saddam Hussein was sovereign. Hitler, Stalin and Mao were sovereign. The Pope is sovereign.
Key: When a Calvinist discusses God’s sovereignty, he means arbitrariness, thus presenting a god who could change, by-pass or ignore his own laws because of his so-called sovereignty. So by this arbitrary capriciousness, God could damn to hell men yet uncreated, for no other reason than His sovereign pleasure. The Bible paints a different picture of God than this Calvinist nonsense. God’s first and foremost attribute is absolute holiness. (Psalm 145:17; Isaiah 6:3; Exodus 15:11). His name is Holy (Psalm 33:21; Psalm 47:8). The most wicked, vile, bloody dictator could be sovereign yet unholy. Because God is holy, he exercises his sovereignty only in ways consistent with his holiness.
Key: The Calvinists’ error is to exalt God’s sovereignty above all his other attributes.
iii) Question 6: Calvinists think that God’s eternal, sovereign decree is all-encompassing, meaning that God, by his decree has foreordained everything that ever happens in time. Is this view right or wrong?
Answer: We agree that God has a right to guide (Psalm 73:24), direct (Proverbs 3:6), lead (Psalm 139:24), restrain (Psalm 76:10) and harden (Exodus 14:17); but God’s influence is different to God foreordaining every thought and action of man.
Key: Calvinists’ error is as follows: God’s influence, direction, control and permission are different to God’s election, predestination, foreordination and decrees. God knows what man will do in the future without God foreordaining it. (Isaiah 42:9; 46:10).
Major Question 7: Has God from eternity past foreordained all things that come to pass?
Question 8: If the Lord directs the steps of a man, is this not proof that he is being controlled or governed by God? ‘A man’s heart deviseth his way: but the Lord directeth his steps.’(Proverbs 16:9,1,33). ‘The King’s heart is in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will. ’ (Proverbs 21:1). Calvinists think that God has foreordained every thought, word, deed and motive of all people in history.
Note: When Calvinists see the words ‘preparations’, ‘answers’ (Proverbs 16:1), ‘steps’ (Prov. 16:4), ‘goings’ (Prov. 20:24), ‘judgments’ (Prov. 29:26), they see this as proof that God has foreordained all things. ‘The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue, is from the Lord.’ Prov. 16:1.
Question 9: Does God foreordain the following answers, steps, goings and judgments? a)What if a man prepared (Prov.16:1) to commit murder & rape? Did God foreordain this? Of course not.
b)What if a man’s answer (Proverbs 16:1) was blasphemous and filthy? c)Was the answer of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:25) from the Lord?
d)What about the steps (Proverbs 16:9) of a man as he steals or viciously beats innocent victims?
e)What about a man’s goings (Proverbs 20:24) into a pub or brothel?
f)What if a man judged (Proverbs 29:26) that sodomy and incest were OK? Did God ordain these? No!
That God does not foreordain these events contradicts and disproves the Calvinists’ claim of God’s all-encompassing, eternal, sovereign decree. Paul asks: ‘Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.’ (Romans 9:14).
Question 10: Did God eternally decree Herod to massacre all the children under 2 years old? (Matthew 2:16). No, but God foreknew Herod would do it. (Jeremiah 31:15). Did God foreordain the wickedness of Ahab (I Kings 21:1-13) and Manasseh (II Chronicles 33:9)? No!
Note: Calvinists’ error in Proverbs is to read ‘foreordained’ into expressions speaking of God’s control and influence, such as ‘of the Lord’, ‘from the Lord’, ‘directeth’, and ‘turneth’.
Question 11: Does God foreordain the time of one’s death, as Calvinists think Job 14:5 (“Seeing his days are determined”) and Ecclesiastes 3:2 (“a time to die”) teach?
Answer: No, because:
i) God was going to kill Hezekiah, but added 15 years to his life. (Isaiah 38:5).
ii) Calvinists take general statements about mankind and make them into individual decrees for each person. All men do not always die at exactly 70 or 80 years (Psalm 90:10). Some men ‘shall not live out half their days’ (Psalm 55:23), and some die before their appointed time.
(“Why shouldest thou die before thy time?” Ecclesiastes 7:17).
iii) Calvinists contradict their belief that God has predetermined the day of their death by using medical advances to preserve and extend their lifespan.
Question 12: Calvinists use the crucifixion of Christ as proof that God has foreordained every act of man. Is this true? ‘Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.’ (Acts 2:23).
‘to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.’ (Acts 4:27,28). Answer: If the Jews addressed in Acts were just carrying out God’s decree, then they wouldn’t be declared responsible. They would be declared obedient. The Bible affirms their responsibility by accusing them of crucifying Christ (Acts 2:36; 4:10), delivering up, denying and killing him (Acts 3:13-15), slaying and hanging him (Acts 5:30; 10:39), as well as betraying and murdering him (Acts 7:52). Jesus said: ‘And truly the Son of Man goeth as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed.’ (Luke 22:22). Although Jesus Christ had to be betrayed and crucified, no one man was foreordained to do it. Jesus said about the betrayer: ‘Good were it for that man if he had never been born.’ (Mark 14:21). If Judas had not been born, then someone else would have done it. No-one is ever foreordained to commit any sin.
Question 13: Does God foreordain sin as Calvinists claim? Some philosophers think that the existence of evil makes it unreasonable to believe in God. The Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) said of God and evil: ‘Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. Is God able to prevent evil but not willing? Then he is malevolent.’ Answer: The Christian answer to the fact that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and wholly good, yet evil exists, is that philosophers have not considered that God uses evil to punish evildoers and to discipline rebellious Christians. There is a big difference between evil on one hand, and sin and wickedness on the other. Because God is holy, he cannot sin or commit wickedness. God often brings evil upon individuals, such as Absalom (II Samuel 17:14), Jeroboam (I Kings 14:10), Ahab (I Kings 21:21) and Nebuchadnezzar Daniel 4:28-33), as well as nations, such as Israel (Nehemiah 13:18; Daniel 9:14) and Jerusalem
(Ezekiel 14:22), as punishment for their evil actions. ‘I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.’ (Isaiah 45:7). ‘Shall there be evil in the city, and the Lord hath not done it?’ (Amos 3:6).
Question 14: Why does God bring evil on people or places? (Jeremiah 19:3-5). Answer: Because of the people’s sins. It is not because of an arbitrary, sovereign, eternal decree. God brings evil to punish man’s sin. God said ‘Behold I will bring evil upon this place . …Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, . . . and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind.’ (Jer. 19:3-5). Notice: i) God brought evil because of the people’s sins.
ii) God expressly stated that he didn’t decree their sins: ‘Which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind.’ (Jeremiah 19:5).
Question 15: How could God decree and foreordain their sin if it never came into his mind?
Question 16: Why does sin take place? Because of the depravity of man, something Calvinists forget except when trying to prove man’s inability to respond to the Gospel.
God Has Not Foreordained Everything In One All-Encompassing Decree Because:
1) God says so: How could God decree and foreordain man’s sin if it never came into his mind? ‘commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind.’ (Jeremiah 19:5).
2) God’s holy nature would not allow him to be the author of sin. God would never command a man to repent, then fix it so he couldn’t repent in order to damn him. But this is exactly what TULIP Calvinism teaches.
3) God’s permission: Often God is said to do something when in fact He only permitted it to be done. For example:
- Satan provoked David to number Israel (I Chron. 21:1), but God was said to do it. (2 Sam.24:1)
- Satan was the cause of Job’s trouble (Job 1:12; 2:7), but Job (1:21), the writer of Job
(42:11), & Satan himself (1:11; 2:5) attributed it to God. God lifted the hedge, permitting Satan’s attacks.
4) Man’s responsibility is destroyed if God has predestined all things. The Calvinist Jay Adams sees the problem: “The doctrines of divine sovereignty, embracing predestination, election, etc, are often dismissed as foolish and dangerous teachings, that if accepted and believed, would destroy evangelism, human initiative &responsibility.’(Grand Demonstration,p.67)
5) Man’s Free Will is destroyed if God predestined all things. Sovereignty means that God
controls all things including our wills, and free will means that our wills are not controlled by God. This is a clear contradiction.
Question 17: How can a person be a free and responsible agent if his actions have been foreordained from eternity?
We reject this Calvinist error by discussing examples of man’s free will in Scripture:
i) Freewill offerings (16 times in OT) teach that after a person had made all the offerings prescribed by the Mosaic law, he might out of gratitude for God’s grace give something additional. “Ye shall offer at your own will a male without blemish,” Leviticus 22:19.
The phrase “at your own will” teaches that he had the free will to give it or not to give it.
ii) Freewill journey to Jerusalem teaches that man has freewill: “I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee.” (Ezra 7:13).
iii) Adam and Eve had free will: “of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat” Gen.2:16
iv) The people and governors of Israel “willingly offered themselves” (Judges 5:2,9) to defeat Sisera.
v) David encouraged Solomon to serve God “with a willing mind.” (I Chronicles 28:9).
vi) During Nehemiah’s time some people “willingly offered themselves to dwell at Jerusalem.” (Nehemiah 11:2).
vii) New Testament Prayer promises are based on believer’s free will: “If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.” (John 15:7).
viii) Paul preached willingly: “For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.” (I Corinthians 9:17).
Free will is both a Bible doctrine and used in the Bible, but unconditional election, sovereign grace, sovereignty of God and God’s eternal decree are neither.
6) Prayer proves that God has not predestined all things.
Question 18: Does prayer change things? Most Christians think so.
i) It did for Moses when in response to Moses’ prayer God changed His mind about destroying Israel and Aaron (Deuteronomy 9:18-29).
ii) It did for Hezekiah when God extended his lifespan by 15 years in response to his prayer. (2 Kings 20:1-6).
iii) It did for Elijah when he prayed for no rain, and then later for rain (James 5:17,18).
iv) It does for righteous men: “The effectual, fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” James 5:16. Calvinists insist that prayer doesn’t change things. Calvinists think that if God has already fixed everything, then who are we to infringe upon His sovereignty & request a change?
The Calvinist Joseph Wilson says: “Since predestination is true, it follows, as night follows day, that prayer does not change things.” (Baptist Examiner, June 8, 1991, p.8).
7) Calvinist’s Admissions reject the idea that God has foreordained everything by an all-encompassing decree. N.L.Rice (p.9) states that divine foreordination seems “unscriptural, absurd, and impious.”
8) Calvinist’s Rejections. G.C.Berkouwer wonders how theologians can “at the same time speak of God as the all-causing One, and not say that He is the cause of human sin.”(Baker, p.8)
9) Other Philosophies which teach “what will be will be” are no different to Calvinism.
i) When a philosopher believes “what will be will be” it is called determinism.
ii) When a stoic believes “what will be will be,” it is called fate.
iii) When a Muslim believes “what will be will be,” it is called fatalism.
iv) When a Calvinist believes “what will be will be,” it is called predestination, and claims it alone is a Bible doctrine.
10) Semantics or accepted meaning of words. The word “whosoever” clearly disproves any all-encompassing decree. “Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” Rev. 22:17.
11) Contingency verses showing the possibility of an event happening proves there is no such thing as God foreordaining everything by an all-encompassing decree.
There are many things in the Bible that are not fixed such as:
- if Christ’s works had been done in Tyre and Sidon they would have repented (Matt. 11:21).
- many of God’s promises to Jews were conditional such as Deuteronomy 5:33; 6:1-3; 11:16-17.
- “ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” John 5:30.
- “Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved.” I Thessalonians 2:16.
12) Chance is a reason that God did not foreordain everything by an all-encompassing decree.
Question 19: Does anything happen by chance? According to the Bible it does. “And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.” Luke 10:31.
“If a bird’s nest chance to be before thee in the way in any tree,…” Deuteronomy 22:6. This doesn’t mean that God doesn’t know what is going to happen, or has no control over His creation, but it does mean that there is no all-encompassing decree of predestination.
13) Common Sense rejects any foreordained all-encompassing decree. If ‘What will be will be’ was true, then nobody could avoid carrying out God’s sovereign, eternal, foreordained decree.
Question 20: Did the man who cut his concubine into 12 pieces and sent her parts throughout Israel (Judges 19:29) do so by God’s sovereign, eternal decree? No!
Question 21: Did the people who burned their children in the fire to Molech, or have sex with animals (Leviticus 18:21-24) do so by the determinate counsel of God’s decree? No! Erasmus well described this wicked error of absolute predestination in “Luther’s Discourse on Free will,” p.11,12 as follows:
“Let us assume the truth of what Wycliffe has taught and Luther has asserted, namely that everything we do happens not on account of our free will, but out of sheer necessity. What can be more useless than to publish this paradox to the world? Secondly, let us assume that it is true, as Augustine has written somewhere, that God causes both good and evil in us and that he rewards us for his good works wrought in us and punishes us for the evil deeds done in us. What a loophole the publications of this opinion would open to godlessness among innumerable people. In particular: mankind is lazy, indolent, malicious and in addition, incorrigibly prone to every impious outrage. How many weak ones would continue in their perpetual and laborious battle against their own flesh? What wicked fellow would henceforth try to better his conduct? Who could love with all his heart a God who fires a hell with eternal pain, in order to punish there poor mankind for his own evil deeds, as if God enjoyed human distress?”
Question 22: If God doesn’t decree all the sin &wickedness in the world, then why does it take place?
Answer: Because God permits it, but “permit” and “decree” are totally different concepts. Our responsibility is to “resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” James 4:7 and I Peter 5:9.
UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION Blasphemes God’s Character in 4 Ways.
2 Peter 3:9, 1 Peter 1:2, 1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, John 1:7; 3:17.
I) Definition: “God’s choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely on His own sovereign will. (False). His choice of certain sinners was not based on any foreseen response or obedience on their part, such as faith or repentance.
(F). On the contrary God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected.
(F). Those whom God sovereignly elected, He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. (F). Thus, God’s choice of the sinner, not the sinner’s choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.” (F)
Note: Every sentence in the above definition contains error. This definition says that some people are elected to heaven, while others are elected to hell, and can do nothing about it. It is wholly God’s part and without any human condition.
Calvin in his book entitled “Institutes”, Book III, Chapter 23 states it as follows:
“Not all men are created with a similar destiny. Eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Every man therefore, being created for one or the other of these ends, we say,
he is predestined either to life or to death.”
II) This wicked and foolish teaching of unconditional election is both unbiblical and blasphemous of God’s character in these ways:
a) It makes Christ a liar when he invites “whosoever will” to come to Him for salvation, if He knows that some are non-elect and therefore impossible for them to come and be saved. This false theory attacks the honesty of Christ when He invites people to be saved if He has already foreordained them to hell, all along never intending to save them.
It portrays Christ as a liar when He said to some Jews, “Ye will not come to me that ye might have life” (John 5:40) if He knew that they could not come to Him.
Calvinists claim that “whosoever will” (in Rev. 22:17), “any man” (John 7:37; 2 Peter 3:9), “all” (1 Timothy 2:3-6, 2 Peter 3:9), and “world” (John 3:16) do not mean what all dictionaries say they mean. It is Calvinists who are lying, not Jesus Christ.
b) It opposes God’s love and justice.
A Calvinist’s understanding of “God so loved the world” (John 3:16) is that “God so loved the elect.” The god of the Calvinist hates sinners. This is not the God of the Bible. According to 5 point Calvinism, God:
~ hates a non-elect baby before he is born,
~ hates a non-elect baby when he is born,
~ hates a non-elect person in his infancy,
~ hates a non-elect person in his childhood,
~ hates a non-elect person in his youth,
~ hates a non-elect person in his adulthood,
~ hates a non-elect person in his death, then throws him into hell.
This is not the God of the Bible. What a contrast this is to the God of the Bible who WEPT (Luke 19:41) over non-elect sinners in Jerusalem who would soon crucify Him:
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not !” Matthew 23:37.
What a contrast 5-point Calvinism is to the Saviour who said to the “non-elect” rich young ruler:
“Jesus beholding him loved him.” (Mark 10:21). Yes, God loves sinners.
c) It opposes Evangelism.
It follows logically that if God in eternity past unconditionally elected some people to be saved and others to be damned, then nothing you or I do will change these people’s destinies. So why should we bother getting rejected by people in the process of evangelism?
Why should we get excited, zealous, and hard-working in evangelism if nothing we do will change the final outcome?
d) It makes God a respecter of persons in choosing some and rejecting others.
This makes Peter and God’s Word a liar in Acts 10:34, “God is no respecter of persons.” Unconditional election is a teaching which makes atheists, and blasphemes the God of the Bible. It is an arbitrarily blind selection, with no discernable or explainable reason for His partiality to the few. If man is totally depraved in the sense that he cannot hear God speaking to him, then how else can he be saved except by “unconditional election” ?
The deceitful human heart of the 5-point Calvinist then has to quote some scriptures out of context in order to support his unbiblical system.
We must ask 3 questions to discover the Biblical position on election: Question 1: Does the Bible teach election? (Yes).
Question 2: Is election unconditional? (No). It is based on God’s foreknowledge. 1 Peter 1:2.
Question 3: What is the purpose of election?
a) To be conformed to the image of Christ (Romans 8:28) in heaven.
b) To be holy and without blame before Him in love, on earth now
(Ephesians 1:4,5).
III) True Definition Of Election
The Bible never teaches that some are unconditionally elected to go to heaven or to hell. The Bible teaches election (not unconditional election):
a) According to God’s foreknowledge of which individuals will obey the gospel and trust Christ’s blood sacrifice to pay for their sins, as 1 Peter 1:2 says: “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit (God’s part), unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (Man’s part).” 1 Peter 1:2.
Key: God foreknows who will be saved, but does not foreordain who will be saved.
b) According to both Divine Sovereignty and human responsibility, as seen in 1 Peter 1:2
1 Peter 1:2 “through sanctification of the Spirit (God’s part) and obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” (Man’s part).
2 Thess. 2:13 “God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit (God’s part), and belief of the truth (man’s part).” Note v.14 that God calls sinners by Christians preaching the gospel, “he called you by our gospel, to obtain glory…”
c) Not to salvation, but to the Method of salvation:
Question 23: What is the method of salvation?
Answer: It is by receiving Christ as Saviour, as seen by the expressions “by Christ”, and “in Christ” on 12 occasions in Ephesians 1:1 (in Christ), 3 (in Christ), 4 (in him), 5 (by Jesus Christ), 6 (in the beloved), 7 (in whom), 10 (in Christ, in him), 11( in whom), 12 (in Christ), 13 (in Christ, in whom).
God elects, chooses and predestines that all who get saved will be saved by, through or in Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 1:4,5).
“he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy.’ Ephesians 1:4.
“Having predestined us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ..” Ephesians 1:5. The condition or method of salvation is ‘in Christ.” This proves conditional election.
If Paul had omitted “in Christ”, we would have unconditional election, but he didn’t. d) Not to salvation, but to Service.
Just as some Christians may resist God’s call to service, so some unbelievers may resist God’s call to salvation.
The fact that God chooses or elects believers to service is seen in these verses:
i) “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…” John 15:16.
Here God chooses and ordains that every believer should bear fruit of souls won to Christ, because this fruit remains.
Calvinists love to quote the first part of this verse but not quote the second part. The verse says nothing about being chosen for heaven or hell, but that the disciples and every Christian are chosen to be soul winners by bearing the fruit of souls won to Christ.
ii) “he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.” Acts 9:15.
God chose Paul to the service of preaching Christ’s name to the Gentiles, kings and Israel.
iii) “that the purpose of God according to election might stand…It was said unto her, the elder (Esau) shall serve the younger (Jacob).” Romans 9:11,12.
Here God chose before Esau and Jacob were born that the elder son Esau would serve the younger son Jacob. Nothing is said here about their salvation.
iv) “Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ…knowing brethren beloved, your election of God.” 1 Thessalonians 1:3,4.
After discussing the Thessalonian believers’ work, labour and patience (all words of service), he reminds them of their election of God in the same context as their service. God elected them to serve Him and others.
v) “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.” 2 Peter 1:10.
Here, after Peter tells his readers to give all diligence to add to our faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity (vs.5-7), he says that if we do these things, we shall make our election sure and we shall never fall. The phrase “doing these things” in the context of election means that God elects us to serve Him by cultivating these qualities.
vi) “Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot.”
John 6:70,71.
Here Jesus states that He chose the 12 disciples to serve Him as disciples. All Calvinists agree that Judas was unsaved, and all Calvinists believe in security of the believer. Hence this proves that Jesus was discussing how He chose Judas as part of the twelve for service. Jesus says nothing here about choosing Judas for heaven.
e) Not to salvation, but to Godly living.
God chooses and elects every Christian to holiness and Godliness in this life.
God predestines that every Christian will be conformed to the image of Christ in heaven. Romans 8:29.
i) “he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, THAT we should be holy and without blame before him in love.” Ephesians 1:4.
ii) “Having predestinated us…to the praise of the glory of his grace…” Ephesians 1:5,6.
iii) “The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, THAT thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.” Acts 22:14.
God chose Paul to know God’s will for his life. God chooses that we should know His will for our lives.
iv) “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people: THAT ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.”
1 Peter 2:9. Here God chooses us to praise him by our life.
v) “I have chosen you out of the world.” John 15:19.
Here Christ chooses us to come out of the worldly way of living of unbelievers. The Greek word for church is “ekklesia” meaning “called out of the world to live for God.”
vi) “But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and
God hath chosen the weak things of the world to to confound the things which are mighty; and
God hath chosen the base things of the world, yea and the things which are not to bring to nought the things that are: THAT no flesh should glory in his presence.” 1 Corinthians 1:27-29.
Here God chooses foolish, weak and base things of this world to bring to nought the things that are, so that no flesh should glory in God’s presence.
vii) “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son…” Romans 8:29. Here God foreknew who would receive Christ as Saviour, and those people he predestinated to be conformed to the image of Christ in heaven.
f) Of Israel , not to salvation, but to Serve God, bring Christ into the world, preserve the Scriptures, and proclaim to the world the truth of One Almighty Creator God.
- “As concerning the gospel, they (Israel) are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the Father’s sakes.” Romans 11:28.
- “at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.” Romans 11:5,7.
Those of Israel who became Christians, did so because of faith and God’s foreknowledge. (1 Peter 1:2).
IV. Statements Of God’s Conditional Election
That God elects people to salvation based on certain conditions is seen in these verses:
1. Foreknowledge of God. “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” 1 Peter 1:2.
2. Sanctification of the Spirit and Belief of the truth. “God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.” 2 Thessalonians 2:13.
3. In Christ: “He hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world,…
Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ…” Ephesians 1:4,5. Hence unconditional election is seen to be false. Election is conditional upon God foreknowing which sinners will believe in Christ as Saviour.
V. Statements That God Wants All Sinners To Be Saved
The Calvinist who believes in unconditional election believes that God wants some to be saved (the elect), and wants other sinners to go to hell (the non-elect).
This can be shown to be false if we can find Scriptures showing that God wants all sinners to be saved.
1. “The Lord is..longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” 2 Peter 3:9. “Will” (1014) means decree, determine, intend, minded, disposed.
This states that God does not decree that any be lost.
Question 24: If God elects some to be saved and others to go to hell, how is 2 Peter 3:9 explained?
2.“Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” 1 Timothy 2:4.
VI. The Order Of Events In Salvation. Calvinists differ from the Bible on this.
The Bible clearly describes the order of events in salvation from God’s viewpoint in Romans 8:29,30, and from man’s viewpoint in Romans 10:13-15. What are they?
1. From God’s viewpoint. Romans 8:29,30
i) God foreknew all who would receive Christ as Saviour. (v.29).
ii) God predestinated all these to be conformed to the image of Christ. (v. 29).
iii) God called them and others through the preaching of the gospel (v.30). “Whereunto he called you by our gospel to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 2 Thessalonians 2:14.
iv) God justified them when they put their faith in Jesus Christ as Saviour. (v.30). “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Romans 5:1.
v) God will glorify them in heaven (v.30). This is God’s ultimate purpose. (Ephesians 5:27; Philippians 3:21; Hebrews 2:10; Col. 3:4). The resurrected and glorified Lord Jesus Christ will become the Head of a new race of humanity, purified from all contact with sin, and prepared to live eternally in Christ’s presence. (1 Corinthians 15:42-49).
Hyper-Calvinists arrange God’s decrees as follows:
a) Decree to save some and reprobate the rest.
b) Decree to create those who will be saved and those who will be reprobated.
c) Decree to permit (or secure) the fall of both groups.
d) Decree to provide salvation only for the elect.
2. From Man’s viewpoint. Romans 10:13-15.
a) God and the local church send a preacher. (v.15).
b) The preacher preaches the gospel to lost sinners. (v.15).
c) Lost sinners hear and understand (Matthew 13:19) the gospel.
d) Lost sinners believe in Christ as the gospel is explained. (v.14).
e) Lost sinners call on Christ to save them. (v.14).
f) Lost sinners are then saved by Christ. (v.13).
Wuest states reluctantly: “It is only fair that the author inform the reader that Greek scholars, Vincent, Denny, Robertson and Alford all translate “proginosko” as “foreknowledge” and understand it to refer to the “Prescience” of God. As Vincent puts it, “Not to the idea of pre-election.”
Therefore “proginosko” always means to “KNOW BEFORE.” God wants all to be saved. He knows that, no matter how much He strives, some will resist His gracious entreaty and harden their hearts. Sinners will be lost, not because God willed it, but because they rejected God’s call.
There are 3 Systems of Calvinism:
Supralapsarianism Infralapsarianism Sublapsarianism
(1.) Election + Reprobation (4 point Calvinism)
1. Creation 1. Creation
2. Creation 2. Fall 2. Fall
3. Fall (3.) Election + 3. Atonement for all
4. Atonement for Elect Reprobation (4.) Election +
5. Salvation for Elect 4. Atonement for Elect Reprobation
-- Makes God the author of sin 5. Salvation for Elect. 5. Salvation for Elect
and direct cause of damning
men.
-- The most repulsive part of
TULIP.
-- Is called Hypercalvinism by
those who want to make their
form of Calvinism appear
Biblical.
It is not Hypercalvinism.
1) Supralapsarianism: Arminius believed that the supralapsarian doctine of predestination was:
“repugnant to the nature of God, repugnant to the justice of God, repugnant to the goodness of God, contrary to the nature of man, diametrically opposed to the act of creation, at open hostility with the nature of eternal life, opposed to the nature of eternal death, inconsistent with the nature and properties of sin, repugnant to the nature of divine grace, injurious to the glory of God,
highly dishonourable to Jesus Christ our Saviour, hurtful to the salvation of men, and in open hostility to the ministry of the Gospel.” “Works of Arminius,” Vol.1, p.623-633. King James I of England who sent delegates to the Synod of Dort, recorded his hatred of
this system, as quoted in the “Works of Arminius”, Vol.1, p.213. “This doctrine is so horrible, that I am persuaded, if there were a council of unclean spirits assembled in hell, and their prince the devil were to put the question either to all of them in general, or to each in particular, to learn their opinion about the most likely means of stirring up the hatred of men against God their Maker; nothing could be invented by them that would be more efficacious for this purpose, or that could put a greater affront upon God’s love for mankind, than that famous decree of the late Synod, and the decision of that detestable formulary, by which the far greater part of the human race are condemned to hell for no other reason, than the mere will of God, without any regard to sin; the necessity of sinning, as well as that of being damned, being fastened on them by that great nail of the decree before-mentioned.”
Note:Calvinists divert their opponents criticism by pitting Arminianism against hyper-
Calvinism, and then take plain Calvinism as a mediating position. This makes Calvinism appear orthodox.
Calvin believed the following about predestination:
“We call predestination God’s eternal decree, by which He compacted with himself what he willed to become of each man. For all are not created in equal condition; rather eternal life is foreordained for some, eternal damnation for others. Therefore, as any man has been created to one or the other of these ends, we speak of him as predestined to life or death.” Institutes p.926 (III.xxi.5).
A.W. Pink said: “I am a strong supra-lapsarian.” Letters of A.W. Pink. p.74,75. Pink’s book “The Sovereignty of God” was first published in 1918 of 2000 copies.
Of this book, Arno Gaebelein (1861-1945) wrote: “Mr Pink used to be a contributor to our magazine. His articles on Gleanings on Genesis are good, and we had them printed in book form. But when he began to teach his frightful doctrines which make the God of Love a monster, we broke fellowship with him. The book you have read is totally unscriptural. It is akin to blasphemy. It presents God as a Being of injustice and maligns His holy character. The book denies that our blessed Lord died for the ungodly. According to Pink’s perversions He died for the elect only. You are not the only one who has been led into darkness by this book. Whoever the publisher is, and whoever stands behind the circulation of
such a monstrous thing has a grave responsibility. It is just this kind of teaching which makes atheists.”
Quoted in “Divine Sovereignty,” Fisk, p.24.
Because Pink’s views were deemed so radical, the Banner of Truth Trust 1961 Edition of “The Sovereignty of God” removed the chapter on reprobation. The Dutch Reformed people are the chief propagators of supralapsarianism, surviving today in the Protestant Reformed church, their premier theologian being Herman Hoeksema. Supralapsarianism teaches that God decreed the damnation of men and created them explicitly for that purpose.
2) Infralapsarianism was devised to avoid making God the author of sin, and to make Calvinism
more acceptable. None of the decrees have changed, only their supposed order.
Both supralapsarians and infralapsarians believe in double predestination - to election and reprobation.
The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter III, reads:
“By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.”
3) Sublapsariansism = 4 point Calvinism.
Sublapsarians seek to get around the repulsive implications of reprobation.
The Bible says of these decrees: “Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees.” Isaiah 10:1.
The contradictory, confusing nature of Calvinist decrees of God exclude them as coming from God, because God is not “the author of confusion.” I Corinthians 14:33.
Question 25: What is wrong with these Calvinist theories seeking to relate sin and the fall to election and reprobation?
Answer: i) SupraL makes God the author of sin and directly responsible for damning billions of souls.
ii) The fall of Adam effected the reprobation of all men, not just a certain class:
“for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” I Corinthians 15:22.
iii) Calvinist statements like that of Warfield: “The marvel of marvels is not that God, in His infinite love, has not elected all of this guilty race to be saved, but that he has elected any;” are negated when we remember that they are built on the false premise of Total Depravity.
iv) The real issue is whether God would be just in electing some and passing by the rest. According to the Bible, He wouldn’t be just.
- The god of the Calvinist is like the priest and Levite who “passed by” the half dead man in the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-32). Did Jesus recommend their behaviour? No! Then neither does God behave this way.
- Worse still, God would be like the thieves who “stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him and departed, leaving him half dead.” (Luke 10:30). For Calvinists to say that God came back after “leaving man half-dead,” “had compassion on him, and went to him, and bound up his wounds” (Luke 10:33-34), and that he should be praised for his mercy and grace, is absurd.
Jesus commands us to “Go and do thou likewise” (Luke 10:37), as the good Samaritan did who went to help the man. (v.34).
Question: Does Jesus practice what He preaches? Surely! Avoid the Calvinist philosophy sidetracks of:
a) Presbyterian route from Calvin to Hodge to Warfield,
b) Reformed route from Calvin to Kuyper to Berkhof, and
c) Baptist route from Calvin to Gill to Spurgeon.
Note: Calvinist theologians constantly praise each other while overlooking each other’s shortcomings. For example, Warfield, Machen and Boettner each did not insist on a literal 6 day creation. Hoeksema, John Murray and Spurgeon each smoked tobacco.
REPROBATION
Calvinists agree that God has elected some to salvation and others to reprobation.
Question 26: What does reprobate mean? What is a reprobate?
Answer: In the Bible, a reprobate is someone who is disapproved and therefore rejected. A probe is an examination, probate is the proving of a will, and probation is a proving period.
The prefix “re” means to “do something again.”
Hence, to re-probate something is to prove it again. Hence, a reprobate is someone or something that is disapproved and stands rejected to be tried again.
Note: “Reprobate” occurs 4 times in the Bible and “reprobates” occur 3 times.
Reprobate is defined in Jeremiah 6:30, “Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them.” They were reprobate because they were rejected.
Question 27: Why were they rejected?
Answer: Not because of a sovereign eternal decree, but because they said “We will not walk therein” (Jeremiah 6:16), and “We will not hearken.” (Jeremiah 6:17).
3 out of 6 New Testament occurrences of reprobate(s) are:
i) “Even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind.” (Romans 1:28). A person is reprobate because of something they do.
ii) “Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.” (II Timothy 3:8).
iii) “They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.” (Titus 1:16).
Notice that they are reprobate “to every good work.”
Note: When their profession is put to the test on a good work, they fail the test. God did not make them reprobate, but they made themselves reprobate because of something they did. There is nothing implying that a reprobate is in a permanent,
irreversible condition. Calvinists take any verse dealing with judgment or condemnation and read reprobation into it.
Question 28: Why did God want Israel to destroy the Canaanite nations?
Answer: Because of their sins of incest (Leviticus 18:6), adultery (Leviticus 18:20), human sacrifice (Lev.18:21), homosexuality (Lev.18:22), and bestiality (Lev.18:23). Nothing was decided in eternity past.
All was conditional.
Romans 9 is the Calvinist’s “haven of reprobation,” just as Proverbs is the Calvinists “haven of divine foreordination.”
Question 29: How do we explain Proverbs 16:4, another pillar of Calvinist reprobation? i) “The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” Answer: This verse discusses the use God makes of his creation, not the decisions he makes for them.
Calvinists think that God made certain men wicked to fulfil the “counsel of his own will.” (Eph.1:11).
Since God does all his pleasure (Isaiah 46:10), and has no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11), then he could not have created a man wicked to show his power by damning him.
Note: God has made all men the same in the sense of, “He fashioneth their hearts alike”
Psalm 33:13-15.
Key:Although God does not make a man wicked, he makes the wicked serve his own glory & purposes.
“Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee…” (Psalm 76:10).
Question 30: Explain 2 NT cases where Calvinists use the word “appointed” to endorse “reprobation.”
ii) The promise to Christians that “God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ.” (I Thessalonians 5:9).
Pink writes, “to say that God ‘hath not appointed us to wrath’ clearly implies that there are some
whom He has appointed to wrath.” (Sovereignty of God, p.85).
Wilson thinks that “appointed” refers to God’s decree, “wrath” means hell, and “salvation” means eternal life.” (The Baptist Examiner, 2 Feb 1991, p.1).
Answer: The Calvinists’ errors of equating “wrath” with hell, and “salvation” with heaven, are due
to failing to notice the context, where “wrath” refers to the 7 year Tribulation period, and “salvation” means “deliverance” from the Tribulation.
Proof of this is from, a) the context “then sudden destruction cometh upon them.” (I Thess. 5:3), and “The great day of his wrath is come.” (Rev. 6:17). Rev. 6-19 is a time of God’s wrath on the world.
b) The time of this “wrath” of I Thessalonians 5:9 is future.
iii) Calvinists use “appointed” in I Peter 2:8 to support “reprobation.”
“And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.” (I Peter 2:8). Pink says that
“Some have been appointed (same Greek word as I Thess. 5:9) unto disobedience.” (Sovereignty of God, p.98,99).
Answer: The disobedience is defined in the context as unbelief (I Peter 2:7), just as obedience is defined as belief in Romans 10:16. The reason a person is appointed to destruction (Proverbs 31:8) is because they “believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2 Thessalonians 2:12).
Key: God appoints to destruction all those who reject Christ, stumbling at the rock of offence.
Eg:God sends strong delusion to damn Tribulation sinners who believed not the truth.(2 Thess.2:11,12).
iv) In 2 Peter 2:12, Calvinists use the word “made” to support reprobation:
“But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption.” (2 Peter 2:12).
Pink implies that these “false prophets” and “false teachers” (2 Peter 2:1) have been foreordained
“to be taken and destroyed” before the foundation of the world.
Answer: a) The text says nothing about “why” or “when” these men were “made to be taken and destroyed.” Calvinists presume this was an eternal decree.
b) In both 2 Peter 2:12 (perish in their own corruption) and Jude 10 (“as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves”), the corruption was their own doing. God never makes a man in a
reprobate condition. Men are always reprobate because they’ve done something to earn it, as the next verse makes clear: “and shall receive the reward of unrighteousness.” (2 Peter 2:13).
A reward is something they earn. God “destroyed them that believed not.” (Jude 5).
v) Calvinists claim that these people have been reserved for condemnation by a sovereign, eternal decree: 2 Peter 2:17 “These are wells without water,..to whom the mist of darkness is reserved forever.”
Jude 13 “Raging waves of the sea,… to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.”
Question 31: Who is reserved?
Answer: False prophets and false teachers who deny the Lord (2 Peter 2:1), ungodly (Jude 15), angels that sinned (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6), unjust (2 Peter 2:9), wicked (2 Peter 2:7), etc. They were reserved in their lives after they committed wicked actions and because of their sins.
vi) Jude 4 “For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained (4270) to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” Calvinists like Pink think that these men were ordained of old to condemnation before the foundation of the world by a sovereign, eternal decree.
Question 1: When were they ordained?
Answer: During Enoch’s ministry. “Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these saying: Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”(Jude 14,15).
Question 2: Why were they ordained to condemnation?
Answer: Because of their ungodly deeds.
Question 3: How were they ordained?
Answer: By Enoch.
Question 4: What does ordained mean?
Answer: Ordained (4270) = prographo (Gk) = to write previously, to announce. They were announced by Enoch, not foreordained by a sovereign, eternal decree before the foundation of the world.
vii) Isaiah 6:9,10 is used by Calvinists to claim that some have the inability to believe because God has blinded their eyes by reprobation (election to damnation) proving that God hardens people.
“And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of the people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.” (Isaiah 6:9,10).
Answer: This prophecy is mentioned 5 times in the New Testament (Matthew 13:14,15; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; John 12:39-40; Acts 28:25-27).
Notice: a) Twice we are told to whom this passage refers: “this people,” which is the nation of Israel.
b) Israel shutting their eyes was not an act in eternity past. It took place after they were born. They were not created with their eyes shut, but were God’s elect people.
c) Of this passage’s 5 N.T. occurrences, 2 are clearly not used to teach reprobation because the
people closed their own eyes: “their eyes they have closed.” (Matthew 13:14,15; Acts 28:25-27).
Question 32: Why were they blinded? Why did God harden their hearts? Answer: Pink answers correctly: “these whose eyes God blinded and whose heart He
hardened, were men who had deliberately scorned the Light and rejected the testimony of God’s own Son.” (Sovereignty of God, p.124), and,
“In consequence of their rejection of Christ, the nation as a whole was judicially blinded of God, that is, they were left to the darkness and hardness of their own evil hearts. But it is most important to mark the order of these two statements:
In John 12:37, they did not believe;
Here in John 12:39 they could not believe…
They would not believe; in consequence, God gave them up, and now they could not believe…
The fault was entirely theirs, and now they must suffer the just consequences of their wickedness…This was God’s response to the wicked treatment that Israel had meted out to His beloved Son. They had refused the light, now darkness shall be their dreadful portion.” (Pink “John,” p. 689, 690).
Key: These passages teach the judicial hardening of a nation;not the sovereign hardening of individuals.
d) To further prove this, notice where this prophecy appears:
- in the gospels when the Jews rejected Christ, and the mystery form of the kingdom appears.
- in John’s gospel when the Jews rejected Christ, and he finished his public dealings with them.
- in Acts 28 when the Jews rejected the risen Christ, and God turned to the Gentiles for the Church Age.
- in Isaiah 6, it introduces the Tribulation, where the Jews accept a false Christ.
Hence, it doesn’t teach personal reprobation, but national hardening.
viii) – x) All Calvinists use 3 passages in Romans 9:13,18,21 to prove election and reprobation.
Romans 9 is their “haven of reprobation.” Romans 9-11 is a parenthesis where the Jew is considered nationally. Israel was an elect nation, as seen from these passages:
“For the Lord hath chosen Jacob unto himself, and Israel…” Psalm 135:4. “Thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen.” 1 Kings 3:8. “For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel mine elect…” Isaiah 45:4.
Question 33: How could God reject those whom he had elected? (Romans 11:1). What about the faithfulness of God and His Word?
Romans 9 discusses the problem:
Calvinists 3 pillars of reprobation in Romans 9 are:
i) “Esau have I hated.” (Romans 9:13),
ii) “whom he will he hardeneth.” (Romans 9:18),
iii) “vessels of wrath fitted to destruction.” (Romans 9:22).
viii) Romans 9:13 the Calvinist Hoeksema writes: “The predestination of Jacob and Esau is a personal election and reprobation unto salvation and eternal desolation respectively.” (Good Pleasure, p.24).
Answer: “The purpose of God according to election” (Romans 9:11) had nothing to do with individual salvation or reprobation at all. It concerned the Messianic line from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob to Jesus Christ. It was an election not to salvation, but to service, national preference and theocratic privileges.
Genesis 25:23 states that “Two nations are in thy womb and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.” (Genesis 25:23).
Romans 9:13 is quoted from Malachi 1:1-3 which was written 1400 years later: “yet I loved Jacob and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste.” In Genesis we have a prophetic statement looking forward.
In Malachi we have an historical statement looking backward.
Even Calvin admits that this refers to Jacob’s and Esau’s posterity. (Institutes, p.930 (III. xxi. 7))
Calvinists claim that Jacob and Esau were not only types of their posterity, but types of all men.
This is false because:
a) God didn’t hate Esau in eternity past. He only hated him nationally after seeing his sins for 1400 years
b) Jesus loved the rich young ruler who rejected him. (Mark 10:22).
These references in Romans 9 refer to election to the Messianic line, rather than to personal eternal salvation. Romans 9:8 teaches that the Messianic line would be continued through Isaac, not Ishmael.
ix) Romans 9:17,18 “For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh,… Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.”
(Theology, vol.
The Calvinist Herman Hoeksema writes: “Pharaoh was sovereignly hated from eternity, even as was Esau.” (Good Pleasure, p.46).
If we prove that God did not reprobate Pharaoh from eternity, then we have proved that God reprobates no man from eternity. Pharaoh was raised up to show God’s power, not to be damned to hell by a sovereign, eternal decree. The purpose of raising Pharaoh up from sickness was:
a) That God might prove to Israel that He was the Lord who delivered them. (Ex. 6:6,7; 10:1,2; 13:14-16
b) To show Pharaoh that YHWH was the only true God. (Exodus 9:14).
c) To show the Egyptians that YHWH was the Lord. (Exodus 7:5; 14:4,18).
d) That God’s name would be declared throughout the whole earth. (Exodus 9:16).
x) Romans 9:22 Calvinists refer to the “vessels of wrath fitted to destruction” as the reprobate.
Pink writes regarding these “vessels of wrath”: “He fits the non-elect unto destruction by his foreordaining decrees.” (Sovereignty of God, p.96).
Answer: The potter and the clay was a common OT illustration. (Isaiah 29:16; 45:9; 64:8; Jer. 18:1-6), yet it never referred to anyone’s salvation. Israel was the clay. Vessels are made empty, and bring honour or dishonour according to what is put in them. God doesn’t make anyone honourable or dishonourable. The individual determines what kind of vessel he will be:
“If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour,… prepared unto every good work.” (2 Timothy 2:20,21)
xi) Jeremiah 18:1-10 compares Israel with clay, God as the potter, the marring of the clay (v.4) was evil disobedience in Israel (v.10), and God making it again refers to God’s discipline of Israel.
Verse 9,10 discuss God’s change of plans from good to evil for nations who do evil. Calvinists miss the context by thinking this passage teaches individual reprobation of people in eternity past by a sovereign decree. Israel as the vessels of wrath, fitted themselves to destruction because they “stumbled at that stumblingstone” (Romans 9:32), were “guilty of the blood of Christ” (Matthew 27:25), and were “enemies of the gospel” (Romans 11:28).
Just as Israel was shown mercy in Pharaoh’s day (Romans 9:15-18) yet became vessels of wrath in Romans 9:21, so individual Jews who rejected Christ could become “vessels of mercy” if they accepted Christ. (1 Timothy 1:13,16).
Key note: All men are “vessels of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3), but God will have mercy on all who receive Christ (Romans 11:30-32; 1 Peter 2:10). The Calvinist error in Romans 9 is in reading sovereign personal election and reprobation into a passage teaching national election of Israel to service and God disciplining Israel for their sins.
Conclusion: When a man is reserved, appointed or ordained to condemnation, it is always because of something evil he did, not by an eternal decree of reprobation.
Refuting 7 Kinds of Unconditional Election to Salvation “Proof” Texts
The fallacy of Calvinist Unconditional Election is that they teach that mankind is divided into 2 groups: the “elect” and the “reprobate.” However, the truth is that God has made all men the same because:
“The Lord …..he beholdeth all the sons of men…..he fashioneth their hearts alike;” Psalm 33:13-15.
Hence,
i) there is no such thing as God’s one, eternal, sovereign, all-encompassing decree, and
ii) there is no such thing as “the elect” or “reprobate.”
Scripture proves that salvation is not limited to “the elect:”
- If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.” (John 7:37).
- “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” (Acts 10:43).
- “whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” (Romans 9:33).
- “he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.” (1 Peter 2:6).
- “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.” (1 John 5:1).
- “Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” (Revelation 22:17).
Question 34: How do Calvinists get around these clear verses on free will? Answer: They either ignore them, deny them or lie about their existence, by saying things like:
“The saving grace of God, changing the heart of the sinner precedes the will to come to
Christ.” (Hoeksema, “Whosoever Will” p.24).
Chafer says “It is misleading to assert...that whosoever God wills may come.”
6, p.252).
Note: The above verses teach that “whosoever himself wills”, not “whosoever God wills.”
Question 35: Does God have a predetermined number of elect people waiting to be saved by Irresistible Grace, as Calvinists claim?
Answer: Consider the Bible’s reply to Calvinist’s “proof texts:”
1. God’s People:
i) “I have much people in this city.” (Acts 18:10).
Calvinists think this verse teaches that God has a predetermined number of unsaved people in Corinth waiting to be saved by Irresistible Grace. The standard Calvinist interpretation is:
- “Being assured that God had chosen many to salvation, Paul set out to reap the harvest.”
[David Nettleton (GARBC President) “Chosen to Salvation”, RBP, 1983, p.161].
- Before Paul and the gospel ever got to Corinth, the Lord had much people there by virtue of God’s election of many in that city.” (D. Englesma, Hyper-Calvinism, p.57). Answer: That the Lord had “much people” in Corinth there is no doubt, but who were they?
They were NOT unsaved elect, because unsaved people are never spoken of as God’s people. The Bible describes unsaved people as “children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2), “children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3).
Key: The “much people” are defined in v.1-9 as:
a) Aquila and Priscilla (v.2),
b) Jews and Greeks that Paul persuaded in the synagogue (v.4),
c) Silas and Timotheus (v.5),
d) Justus (v.7),
e) Crispus and all his family (v.8),
f) Many Corinthians who heard, believed and were baptised (v.8).
ii) Book of Life. Are the elect’s names written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, and the non-elect’s names not written there? “And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Revelation 13:8).
“…they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world…” (Revelation 17:8).
Answer: Everybody’s name is written in the Lamb’s book of life at birth. When they willfully reject Christ their names are blotted out of the book of life. (Revelation 3:5; 22:19).
iii) God’s Sheep: Are God’s sheep the “elect”? (John 10:14-16, 26).
Calvinists like Pink think that the “elect” are “sheep” before they are born. (Satisfaction, p.251,252).
Answer: 2 problems with this are:
a) If the “elect” are sheep before they believe, then they already have eternal life. (John 10:28).
If sheep were never goats, then this contradicts the truth that all are born “dead in trespasses and sins.” (Ephesians 2:1).
b) Who are the sheep? The sheep are Israel according to Micaiah (I Kings 22:17), Asaph (Psalm 74:1; 78:52; 79:13), David (Psalm 119:176), Isaiah (Isaiah 53:6), Jeremiah (Jer. 23:1; 50:6,17), Ezekiel (34:6,11,12), and Jesus Christ (Matthew 10:6; 15:24).
“Go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 10:6).
When Christ came, his sheep, like Simeon (Luke 2:25), Anna (Luke 2:36-38), Zacharias and Elisabeth (Luke 1:5, 6), the shepherds (Luke 2:8-20), and the disciples (John 1:40-49), knew him (John 10:14), followed him (John 10:27), and received eternal life (John 10:28).
2. Given to Salvation.
Question 36: Does God the Father give “the elect” to God the Son? (John 6:37.
“All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.”
“And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.” (John 6:39).
Calvinists presume that “only those whom the Father gives to Christ can come to him.” (Palmer, p.27).
Answer: i) That this will of the Father was not a sovereign, eternal decree is clear because one of
those given to Christ was a devil (John 6:70), who was lost (John 17:12). Believers cannot become
lost, so this does not refer to all believers.
“that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.” (John 17:2). John 17:6,9,11,12,24. Calvinists connect these verses to John 6:37 and presume that the word “give” proves that God the Father by Unconditional Election gave the “elect” to God the Son before the foundation of the world
so He could make a Limited Atonement for them.
ii) John 6:37 reads that the Father gives to Christ those who believe, as v.45 teaches: “Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh to me.”
iii) John 17:6 says that Jesus manifested His ‘name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world’
Answer: - Christ hasn’t manifested His name to anyone since then.
- These given to Christ were men. Are all women lost? No!
iv) “thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.” (John 17:6).
Have all Christians kept God’s Word? No. Hence this doesn’t refer to all Christians.
v) Christ personally gave them the Father’s words. (John 17:8,14). We have the Bible, but Christ didn’t personally give it to us.
Conclusion: Yes, a definite group was given to Christ during His earthly ministry, and not before the foundation of the world. The ones given by the Father to the Son were the little flock of Jewish disciples, known as apostles, and his sheep. (John 10:27,29).
3. Ordained to Salvation. All Calvinists use Acts 13:48 to support the claim that every saved person was ‘ordained to eternal life’ before the foundation of the world by a sovereign, eternal decree.
Answer: The word ‘ordain’ never refers in the Bible to an unconditional, sovereign, eternal decree:
i) Judas was ‘ordained’ with the other 11 disciples (Mark 3:14),yet he turned out to be a devil (John6:70
ii) God did not accept the sacrifices of priests who were ordained after Calvary (Hebrews
5:1; 10:10-14
iii) God has ordained that all pastors who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel (I Corinthians 9:14), but not all do so;
iv) Do all Christians practise good works, even though ‘God has before ordained that we
should walk in them?’ (Ephesians 2:10).
Note: Acts 13:48 says ‘ordained’ not ‘fore-ordained.’
4. Chosen to Salvation. Any verse mentioning the word ‘chosen’ or ‘choose’ is a ripe candidate to support Calvinism. It doesn’t matter if salvation is not the context. So then to a Calvinist, if someone is ‘chosen,’ he always reads it as unconditionally, sovereignly, eternally elected to salvation.
i) Matthew 20:16; 22:14 ‘For many be called, but few chosen.’ (Matthew 22:14).
a) Calvinists after ‘chosen’ add the words ‘to salvation’, which is nowhere in the context.
b) Both passages concern ‘the Kingdom of heaven’ (Matthew 20:1; 22:2), not heaven or salvation.
c) Both passages are parables, not doctrinal statements on salvation.
d) Matthew 20:1-16 concerns labourers, whereas salvation is a gift (Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8).
e) In Matthew 22:14 the ones chosen, are chosen because they accepted the invitation (Matthew 22:9), and had the prescribed wedding garment (Matthew 22:11).
f) The ones chosen were ‘bid to the marriage’ (Matthew 22:9), not fore-ordained to go.
g) The ones chosen were ‘good and bad’ (Matthew 22:10), not just the ‘elect’;
h) The ones chosen responded to a general invitation (Matthew 22:9).
ii) John 15:16. Christ chooses his disciples to bear fruit, not to be saved.
The error of Calvinists twisting this verse is seen by comparing John 6:70, “Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil,” with Mark 3:13-14 which says, ‘He ordained twelve, that they should be with him.’ By reading Unconditional Election into these verses, we end up with a sovereignly elected, irresistably called, ordained devil. (John 6:70).
iii) Acts 9:15. ‘He (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles.’(Acts 9:15) ‘The God of our fathers has chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.’ (Acts 22:14). The Calvinist, Custance, said that Ananias knew Saul was elect: “Ananias knew that the
unsaved man to whom he was called to minister the Gospel was numbered among God’s elect.” (p.283).
Answer: Paul was a chosen vessel. However, Paul was already saved when he went to Ananias. He was not chosen to salvation, but he was chosen to ‘bear the Lord’s name’ (Acts 9:15); to know God’s will (Acts 22:14); to see Christ and hear his voice (Acts 22:14); to be a minister and a witness (Acts 26:16); to open the Gentiles eyes and turn them to God (Acts 26:18). Calvinists don’t see the context.
iv) Galatians 1:15,16 is used by Calvinists to teach Unconditional Election: ‘But it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace to reveal his Son in me.’
That Galatians 1:15,16 and Jeremiah 1:5 do not teach Unconditional Election of prophets from eternity past, is seen by these truths:
a) Paul’s election was not to ‘salvation and life’, but to ‘office and service’;
b) Election is supposed to be eternal, but these verses teach that it is only from their mothers’ wombs. This overthrows Unconditional Election from eternity past;
c) Paul was separated on another occasion. It was not to salvation, but to go on his first missionary journey (Acts 13:2) after he was saved: “Separate me Barnabus and Saul for the work…”
d) Paul classified himself as the “chief of sinners” (I Timothy 1:15), not as someone who
had an eternal union with Christ.
v) I Peter 2:9 is used to support Unconditional Election:
“But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.”
Answer:
a) It is not said when this choosing took place, why it took place, or what they were chosen for;
b) It is clear that individuals are not the subject, but the church as a collective body is in view.
vi) Psalm 65:4 “Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple.” Answer: a) This verse speaks of God’s courts, God’s house, and God’s temple, not about salvation.
b) The time of choosing is not mentioned;
c) New Testament salvation is not even remotely connected with the verse.
vii) James 2:5 “Hath not God chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?”
Answer: Is every welfare recipient one of the ‘elect’ and ‘chosen to salvation’? No! It just means that generally speaking poor people are more receptive to the Gospel than rich people.
viii) II Thessalonians 2:13 “God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.”
Answer: The Thessalonians were chosen from the beginning of what? The phrase ‘from the beginning’ according to Calvinists means eternity past, but from the Bible it means when we are saved as seen from Romans 16:7. Paul stated that Andronicus and Junia
were in Christ before him. This contradicts the Calvinist view that all the elect were in Christ from eternity past.
Key: “Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.” (Romans 16:7).
Key: Hence, in Calvinism the ‘elect’ are all put in Christ at the same time (eternity past), but in the Bible no one is put in Christ until he is saved. In II Thessalonians 2:13,
Calvinists have transported the phrase “from the beginning” back to “before the foundation of the world” to line up with their theology. The Bible defines the phrase ‘from the beginning’ as being the time Paul departed from Macedonia and came to Thessalonica: ‘Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the Gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only. For even in Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my necessity.’ (Phil 4:15,16).
Hence Paul defines the ‘beginning of the gospel’ as when he left the city of Philippi to begin his departure from the province of Macedonia. Thessalonica is in Macedonia. Hence God chose that the Thessalonians would hear the gospel from the beginning of Paul’s departure from Philippi (II Thess. 2:13) to get the gospel preached to them when the Lord gave Paul the Macedonian call in Acts 16:10.
Notice that God chose the Thessalonians to salvation not by a sovereign decree in eternity past, but ‘through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth,’ which choosing and belief took place in 53 AD (Acts 16:9,10 and 17:1-4). The conditions for God saving the Thessalonians are stated as sanctification of the Spirit and belief/obedience in the truth of Christ’s blood sacrifice in both
II Thessalonians 2:13 and I Peter 1:2. See Spiros Zhodiates, NT Word Study Dictionary: Note: a) The Greek phrase for ‘from the beginning’ is “απ αρχη” (ap’ arche), which is different from the phrase “from eternity”, “απ αιωνος” (ap aionos) as in Acts 15:18 (“known from eternity (“απ αιωνος”) are to God all his works”). Hence God did not choose the Thessalonians from eternity past, but from the beginning of when Paul left Philippi.
b) Calvinists err presuming that ‘from the beginning’ means from before the beginning of the world, by changing ‘from the beginning’ to ‘before the foundation of the world’, hoping nobody will notice.
c) Greek authority S. Zhodiates writes of this verse: “With a preposition preceding: apo (575), from, ap’ arches (746), from the beginning: (B) Of any particular thing eg: of the gospel dispensation, or of Christian experience meaning from the first (Luke 1:2; John 15:27; Acts 26:4; II Thessalonians 2:13;I John 1:1; 2:7,13,14,24; 3:11; II John 5,6).
(Complete New Testament Word Study Dictionary p.261). The same expression occurs in Acts
26:4, ‘My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first (“απ αρχης”) among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews.’
This is clearly not referring to eternity past, nor do most occurrences of this phrase (“απ αρχης”).
ix) Ephesians 1:4 is the twin Calvinist proof text of II Thessalonians 2:13 used to teach Unconditional Election to salvation in eternity past: “According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.” (Ephesians 1:4).
Answer: a) Election is neither mentioned here nor anywhere in Ephesians.
b) The choosing is ‘that we should be holy and without blame’, not that we should be saved or ‘in Christ.’ This may be why Calvinists mostly quote only the first half of this verse.
c) The correct interpretation is seen by noting the connection of ‘according as’ at the start of v.4, with ‘in heavenly places’ at the end of v.3. ‘Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love’. (Ephesians 1:3,4).
Note: The choosing had nothing to do with salvation, but concerned our position in Christ.
Once a man gets ‘in Christ’ he gets in on the choosing.
Key: God chose that whoever was in Christ would be blessed ‘with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places,’ and be ‘holy and without blame before him in love.’ Calvinists err in thinking that v.4 teaches how we get in Christ.
x) II Timothy 1:9‘Who hath saved us,and called us with an holy calling not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.’
Question 37: When did God give us saving grace?
In eternity past (Calvinist position), or when we got ‘in Christ’ (Bible)? The Calvinist Baker (p.102) says, ‘Paul declared clearly that the elect had been given grace before they ever existed.’
Answer: Grace was not physically given to any man ‘before the world began’, because there were no men around to give it to. Grace was ‘given to us in Christ Jesus.’
Key: God deposited grace in Christ before the world began. It was only given to us when we got ‘in Christ.’ This grace ‘is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ.’ 2Timothy1:10.
xi) An even greater error of Calvinism is to unite the phrases ‘in him’ (Ephesians 1:4) and
‘in Christ Jesus’ (II Timothy 1:9), with ‘before the foundation of the world’ (Ephesians 1:4) and ‘before the world began’ (II Timothy 1:9), to teach that the ‘elect’ were ‘in Christ’ before the world began. This teaching of the ‘eternal union’ of ‘the elect’ with Christ is also based on Jeremiah 31:3,
‘The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.’ (Jeremiah 31:3). Calvinists use this verse to teach Irresistable Grace, and that because of this ‘eternal union’, God eternally loved the elect. The result of an ‘eternal union’ & an ‘eternal love’ is an ‘unregenerate, elect sheep’ that is considered a child of God.
Question 38:If the ‘elect’ were always children of God, could they have ever been children of the devil?
Answer: According to Ephesians 2:1-3 and 12, the ‘elect’ were ‘children of wrath’ (Ephesians 2:3), and ‘without God’ (Ephesians 2:12), and not children of God. The problem Calvinists create for themselves is that, before the ‘elect’ got ‘in Adam’ (I Corinthians 15:22) they already had a relationship with Christ. This means that, according to Calvinism:
- The Fall didn’t affect the elect. It was only the means of reprobating the ‘non-elect’;
- This Fall that wasn’t a fall, allows Calvinists like Pink to claim that one can be dead ‘in sin’ and yet be ‘in Christ’ at the same time. (Exodus, p 19);
- None of the elect have ever been in danger of going to hell;
- ‘before God, His people are justified from eternity: and he beholds them forever as perfectly righteous in Christ.’ (Hoeksema, Grace, p.73).
Answer: This is a complete overthrow of the Gospel. How could the elect ever be lost? The Bible refutes this Calvinist nonsense by teaching that the Fall affected all men equally: ‘Wherefore, as by one man sin entered the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned’. (Romans 5:12).‘For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.’ (I Corinthians 15:22).
Note: No-one was ever ‘in Christ’ until his salvation: ‘Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.’ (Romans 16:7). In Calvinism, the ‘elect’ are all put in Christ at the same time, in eternity past.
In the Bible, no-one is put in Christ until he is saved.
5. Elected to Salvation
None of the Calvinist proof texts for Unconditional Election contain any form of the word ‘election’. You would expect verses containing a form of the word election would strongly teach this doctrine. Bible uses of election are:
i) Jesus Christ. When the word ‘elect’ is applied to Christ, it emphasises His value and worth, not His selection to salvation: ‘Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; . .’ (Isaiah 42:1; Matthew 12:18).
‘Wherefore also it is contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious; and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded’. (I Peter 2:6; Isaiah 28:16).
ii) Angels. ‘I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.’ (I Timothy 5:21). The Westminster Confession of Faith teaches the election and reprobation of men and angels:
‘By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory some men and angels are predestined
unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.’ (III, 3).
Pink writes: “God in the past made a selection among the hosts of heaven, choosing some to be vessels of honour, and others to be vessels of dishonour. Those whom He chose unto His favour, stood steadfast and remained in subjection to His will. The rest fell when Satan revolted, for upon his apostasy he dragged down with himself one-third of the angels. (Revelation 12:4).
Concerning them we read, “God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness” (II Peter 2:4). Those who belong to the election of grace
are “the holy angels”: holy as the consequence of their election, and not elected because they were holy, for election antedated their creation.” (Pink, Election, p.37). Answer: a) No angel was ever said to be elected before the foundation of the world by
a sovereign, eternal decree. Some angels have already fallen (Genesis 6:2), and are captive in chains of darkness of hell to be judged at a later day (II Peter 2:4; Jude 6) by their replacements (I Corinthians 6:3) the sons of God by faith in Christ (I John 3:2).
Key: God chose the angels that didn’t fall, hence they are called ‘elect angels.’ The election of angels parallels that of Christ. They are appraised or assessed as elect and holy, not selected to be holy. (Matthew 25:31).
b) ‘Elect’ cannot refer to holy angels because they never fell to be elected back to holiness.
c) Revelation 12:4 takes place in the future Tribulation, not before Genesis 1:1.
iii) Israel is said to be God’s elect (Isaiah 45:4; 65:9,22). God chose Israel to be a peculiar people above all nations (Deuteronomy 14:2). This was a pure case of Unconditional Election of a nation,
not of individuals. God did not choose each individual Jew to be elect. They were either
- born into it by being a descendant of Jacob, or
- chose of their own free will to be one of the ‘elect’, like the proselyte Ruth (Ruth
1:16).
The salvation and damnation of individuals was not the purpose of their election, as seen from Romans 9 where many members of the nation of Israel were reprobate.
Key: This election was because of their birth, not individual, not to do with salvation, and not by a sovereign, eternal decree. The national election of Israel is seen in the New Testament. Contrary to Amillennial and Post-millennial Calvinists, God is not finished with His elect nation Israel (Romans 11:1,25-27). Failing to recognise that Israel is still called the ‘elect’ in the New Testament has caused much misinterpretation of Scripture, such as:
a) Matthew 24:22,24,31 ‘And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.’ The context of Matthew 24 is the future Tribulation (v.21,29) called the ‘time of Jacob’s trouble’ (Jeremiah 30:7). Those addressed are not ‘elect sinners’ waiting to be saved by Irresistable Grace, but Jewish saints. The context of Matthew 24:13 has nothing to do with the salvation of anyone in the Church age, but here, as throughout this entire Olivet Discourse, the elect is Israel.
b) II Timothy 2:10 is another case of Israel as an elect nation being mistaken for the church. ‘Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.’ Calvinists think the elect here are ‘God’s people’ who were elected before the foundation of the world.
Answer: This passage refers to elect Israelites, not unsaved ‘elected’ Gentiles. If the ‘elect’ were elected before the foundation of the world by an unconditional, efficacious, sovereign, irresistable, eternal decree, then they could never miss
salvation, whether Paul preached it or not. To believe that Paul strove (Romans 15:20) and laboured in the gospel (Philippians 4:3), enduring beatings (II Timothy 2:10), stonings, imprisonments, shipwreck, perils, pain, hunger and cold (II Corinthians 11:23-27) for the sake of the ‘elect’ who would certainly be saved, is the most foolish excuse ever offered to support Unconditional Election. Paul longed to see his fellow Jews saved (Romans 9:1-3; 10:1-3; 11:12-14), but not by Unconditional Election.
c) Luke 18:7,8 ‘And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?’
Question 39: Who are these elect? When, why and how they were elected is not mentioned.
Answer: There is no basis in this verse to teach Unconditional Election.
- Historically, God’s own elect are Jews, as seen from other Gospel references;
- Spiritually, the elect may apply to anyone saved in any time;
- Doctrinally, the elect are likely to be suffering saints in the Tribulation (Revelation 6:9-10, the martyred saints crying out to God for revenge). The verse concerns prayer (Luke 18:1), not a sovereign, eternal, decree.
d) Romans 9:11 ‘For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.’
Answer: Paul argues that there is an Israel within Israel (Romans 9:6). The ‘purpose of God according to election’ has nothing to do with individual salvation or reprobation, but concerns the election of national preference of the Messianic line through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob to Jesus Christ.
e) Romans 11:28 ‘As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sake.’ This refers to the whole of the nation Israel and has nothing to do with salvation.
f) Romans 11:5,7 ‘Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.….What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.’ (Romans 11:5,7).
Calvinists see Unconditonal Election to salvation here because these verses concern only a portion of Israel.
Answer: The Romans 9-11 parenthesis considers the problem of how God could reject the nation of Israel whom He had elected. Personal election and reprobation of all individual humans is not even remotely discussed. The ‘even so’ of Romans 11:5 links it to v.4. Hence, the ‘remnant according to the election of grace’ (v.5) corresponds to the seven thousand men reserved to God who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. (v.4). Calvinists focus on the word ‘reserved.’
Question 40: Why were these 7,000 men reserved to God? Was it because of God’s decree of Unconditional Election?
Answer: Not at all. They were reserved because they hadn’t bowed to Baal’s image. As there was a remnant in Elijah’s days, so now there is a remnant.
Question 41: What was it that Israel sought after? (Romans 9:31; 10:3).
Answer: Their own righteousness of keeping the law.
Question 42: Why did most of Israel fail to obtain God’s righteousness?
Answer: ‘They sought it not by faith.’ (Romans 9:32-3). Only the remnant of Israel who sought righteousness by faith participated in the ‘election of grace.’ The remnant obtained salvation because they received Christ, not because they were unconditionally elected to be overcome by Irresistable Grace. The blinding of those who did not partake in the ‘election of grace’ (Romans 11:5) was because they sought it by works. That part of Israel which ‘hath not obtained that which he seeketh for’ (Romans 11:7) did not fail because they were hardened, they were hardened because they failed. Works nullify both faith (Romans 4:5) and grace (Romans 11:6).
Their blindness was national in scope and temporary in nature (Romans 11:25). ‘Reprobate’ Israel will one day become ‘elect’ Israel.
iv) Church.
Calvinists claim ‘There is only one way that leads to salvation and that is the way of God’s election.’ (Berkouwer, p.74).
Answer: The nine New Testament occurrences of ‘elect’ are never connected with any decree of God – sovereign, eternal or otherwise.
a) I Peter 5:13 ‘The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you saluteth you; and so does Marcus my son.’ Notice that no individual is said to be elected, and nothing is said about when, how or why anyone was elected.
b) I Thessalonians 1:4 ‘Knowing brethren beloved, your election of God.’
Notice that there is no mention of the time of this election, no eternal decree, no reason given, and no method of this election. Instead, it refers to how the Thessalonians received the gospel by God electing Paul to go to Macedonia. (Thessalonica is in Macedonia).
c) II Peter 1:10 ‘Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.’
Key: This verse destroys TULIP Calvinism because calling comes first, then election follows after. Pink panicked at this verse by saying it is ‘sheer blasphemy’ if you disagree with his reading Unconditional Election into II Peter 1:10 (Election, p.137), because all his life he taught that election comes first, then calling later. ‘Effectual calling is the consequence of election’(Election,Pink, p.138)
Question 43: How could anyone ‘give diligence’ to make sure a supposedly irresistable, sovereign, eternal decree that was sure to happen any way?
No-one could make it sure because God already made it sure. The Calvinist Custance correctly makes the calling and election relate to service, not salvation. (Custance, p.
249).
d) The word ‘elect’ is applied to Christians 6 times. None of these verses says that election is a decree of God, none says it is eternal, none says it is unconditional, & none says that it results in salvation. The word ‘elect’ in these verses is simply a title for New Testament Christians, showing our value, worth, appraisal and assessment. Thus the use of ‘elect’ parallels the election of Jesus Christ and the angels. ‘Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.’ Rom. 8:33
‘Put on therefore , as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering.’ (Colossians 3:12).
‘Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God’s elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness.’ (Titus 1:1).
‘Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:’ (I Peter 1:2).
‘The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth’. (II John 1).
‘The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Amen.’ (II John 13).
Answer: Calvinists want us to believe that because the word ‘elect’ occurs in the New Testament, their doctrine of an eternal, sovereign, irresistable, unconditional election must be Biblical.
They want us to read this into the text. These verses show that no-one is elect until they are saved. Believers are described as elect, justified, holy, beloved and have faith. None of these descriptions is true of believers from eternity past.
Question 44: How do Calvinists build a case for eternal, unconditional election? Answer: They go elsewhere to get this teaching, then read it back into every verse where election is found. They follow this sequence of verses:
1) Calvinists start at I Peter 1:2 since salvation is mentioned in the same verse as election.
Calvinists like Pink change foreknowledge here to fore-ordination (Sovereignty, p. 57,58).
Acts 2:23 forces Calvinists to treat foreknowledge as foreknowledge and not fore-ordination, because foreknowledge follows the ‘determinate counsel’ of God. Some Calvinists avoid I Peter 1:2 because it does not say that election took place before the foundation of the world.
Because foreknowledge is mentioned, they connect this verse to:
2) Romans 8:29, 30 ‘For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son.’ Now that ‘predestination’ is introduced, they link this with:
3) Ephesians 1:4,5 because v.5 contains the word ‘predestinate’ and v.4 mentions the terms ‘chosen’ and ‘before the foundation of the world.’
4) II Thessalonians 2:13 is quoted: ‘God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation’, while they fail to quote the rest of the verse which teaches both the divine initiative and human response in salvation ‘through sanctification of the spirit, and belief of the truth’. For support they turn to:
5) Acts 13:48 ‘as many as were ordained to eternal life believed’, without checking either the Greek meaning of ‘ordained’ or when this ordaining took place. They finally appeal to:
6) Romans 9,10,11 and a few other verses to teach election to reprobation.
The True Meaning of Election = Corporate Election of the Church, not Individual Election to salvation.
When Peter describes New Testament believers, he quotes from the Old Testament and hence reveals the true meaning of New Testament election:
‘But ye are a 1 chosen generation, a 2royal priesthood, an 3holy nation, a 4peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.’I Peter 2:9. This fourfold description of the New Testament church is quoted from God’s fourfold description of Old Testament Israel: ‘And ye shall be unto me a 2kingdom of priests, and a 3holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.’ (Exodus 19:6).
‘For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a 4peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth’. (Deuteronomy 14:2).
Key: Calvinists have completely missed and overlooked the fact that, as the nation of Israel was corporately elected as a body, so also was the Church elected as a body. (Ephesians 1:22,23; Col.1:18). Rather than see the truth of corporate election, the Amillennial and Postmillennial Calvinists think that God has permanently rejected Israel and so they get all of Israel’s blessings, but none of their curses.
Note: Calvinists completely miss the significance of Christians being described in this fourfold manner.
Forster and Marston rightly say: ‘The prime point is that the election of the church is a corporate rather than an individual thing. It is not that individuals are in the church because they are elect, it is rather that they are elect because they are in the church.’ (p.137). William Klein similarly concluded: ‘In the old covenant a person entered the chosen nation of Israel through natural birth. In the new covenant, a person enters the chosen body, the church, through the new birth. To exercise faith in Christ, is to enter into his body and become one of the ‘chosen ones.’ (Klein, p 265). Hence, New Testament election is of the body and includes individual men only in association with the body. Election has nothing to do with how any man gets into the body.
Our election of the New Testament church is typified by God’s election of Israel in three ways:
a) As national election of Israel included only those ‘in Jacob’, so to get into New Testament election one must be ‘in Christ.’
b) As Old Testament Individuals were only elect according to their relationship to the nation of Israel, so New Testament individuals are elect only according to their relationship with Christ.
c) Key: As God did not choose each individual Jew to be one of the elect, so God does not choose each individual Christian to be one of the elect – they are born into it. No unsaved man was ever elected to anything. The basic error of Calvinism is to confuse election with salvation.
In summary, the same five principles about Israel’s election also apply to the Church’s election:
1. Individuals are elect only according to their relationship to the elect one (Jacob or Christ);
2. God did not choose any individual;
3. The elect are only elect because of their birth (natural birth into Old Testament Israel, or new birth into the New Testament church);
4. Their election had nothing to do with salvation, but with service;
5. Their election was not by a sovereign, eternal decree.
6. Predestined to Salvation?
Predestine only occurs 4 times in NT. The context always determines what the person is predestined to.
Question 45: Does the Biblical use of predestination match the Calvinists’ definition?
Answer: No. The Westminster Confession defines predestination as: ‘By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his own glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death.’ (III, 3).
Question 46: What does the Bible say we are predestined to? Answer:
a) Son-placing in heaven: ‘Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children (Greek: huiothesia = son placing) by Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.’ (Ephesians 1:5).
b) Praise his glory: ‘In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.’ (Ephesians 1:11,12).
c) Conformed to the image of his Son in heaven: ‘For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called, and whom he called, them he
also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.’ (Romans 8:29,30).
Notice how these verses refute the Calvinist position:
a) Predestination is never called a decree of God;
b) Predestination is never said to take place before the foundation of the world;
c) No-one is said to be predestined to salvation;
d) No-one is said to be predestined to hell, condemnation, judgment or everlasting death;
e) None of these verses mention predestination of angels.
Conclusion: Hence, what the Bible says about predestination is irreconcilable with what Calvinists say about it. Predestination only concerns our destiny as Christians.
Note: Three Scriptures overthrow Calvinistic foreknowledge, that God had an eternal love for the elect:
a) ‘But Jesus did not commit himself unto them because he knew all men.’ (John 2:24). Hence Christ ‘knew all men’, not just the ‘elect’.
b) Christ did not know the ‘elect’ until their conversion: ‘Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereinto ye desire again to be in bondage?’ (Galatians 4:8,9). Hence, God could not have had an eternal, loving relationship with the ‘elect’ if He never knew them before their conversion.
c) God foreknew the whole nation of Israel, but this didn’t guarantee the salvation of anyone in the nation. ‘I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew.’ (Romans 11:1,2). All Calvinists agree that ‘his people’ means national Israel, but in v.2 God foreknew these people, yet not all Israelites were saved. Hence, foreknowledge here has nothing to do with foreordination to salvation. Believers are predestined by God to be conformed to the image of His Son (Romans 8:29). ‘And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.’ (I Corinthians 15:49; I John 3:2).
Conclusion: No unsaved man was predestined to anything.
Calvinists’ basic error is to confuse election and predestination with salvation.
Note: It is only by constructing an order of salvation to match the TULIP theology, that Calvinists can appeal to the predestination verses in Romans.
Elect Infants: If God unconditionally determines the eternal destiny of every member of the human race, then this includes infants, because all men, whether ‘elect’ or ‘reprobate,’ first have to be born as infants. The problem for Calvinists is, what happens when an infant dies? Does he go to heaven or hell?
Question 47: Are children who die in infancy counted among the ‘elect’?
Key: The obvious implication of Unconditional Election is that a dead infant is equally likely to be ‘elect’ or ‘reprobate.’ The most consistent Calvinist was Augustine, who held to the damnation of ‘non-elect’ and non-baptised infants. (Webb, p. 312,313; Schaff History, Vol. 8, p.556). Zwingli was the only Reformer who believed unconditionally in universal salvation for all infants by Christ’s Atonement. When it comes to unambiguously stating that all infants who die are saved, most Calvinists hesitate.
Note: The uncertain, wavering attitude of Calvinists on the salvation of infants is a far cry from their dogmatic assertions about the reprobation of adult ‘non-elect.’
Key: If Calvinists teach that all dead infants go to heaven, then this overthrows their whole system of Unconditional Election and Covenant theology. If Calvinists teach that non-elect dead infants go to hellfire forever, then this attacks the justice, mercy and love of God, as well as grossly offending normal human nature. Hence, Calvinists as a rule insist that all children who die in infancy are part of the ‘elect.’ They thus refute their own error of Unconditional Election.
Most Calvinists teach that infant ‘baptism’ (sprinkling) replaces circumcision. (Hoeksema,
Dogmatics p694.
The Calvinist Baptist Spurgeon strongly disagrees, saying: ‘A human and carnal invention, an addition to the Word of God, and therefore wicked and injurious.’ (Spurgeon, Infant Salvation, p.3).
Reformed Calvinists who quote Spurgeon in an attempt to convince Baptists to become Calvinists, suddenly cease appealing to Spurgeon when the subject of baptism comes up.
Conclusions about Unconditional Election: The doctrine of election, which Calvinists identify with Unconditional Election, is only as Calvinists think ‘prominently revealed in God’s Word’ because Calvinists have read it into every possible passage.
a) The other side of the ‘elect’ being predestined to salvation before the foundation of the world, is that God has predestined the ‘reprobate’ to damnation before the foundation of the world. This is unbiblical and abhorrent to the nature of God and man. Calvinists see election and reprobation as the twin branches of predestination.
b) In commenting on John 17 which Calvinists use to teach Unconditional Election, Martin Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) shows Calvinists’ belief in fatalism and reprobation: “My friend, if you are
a Christian, do you know that you were the object of God’s interest and concern before the foundation of the world? All these things have been worked out in eternity, before time, so you must always remember that nothing can happen in time which will make the slightest difference.” (Saved in Eternity, p.16). The best an unbeliever can do is to hope he is one of the elect. Lam 3:26.
c) Shaky assurance of salvation: Unconditional Election forces a Calvinist to seek assurance of salvation in a mysterious, sovereign, eternal decree of predestination, instead of the clear statements in the Bible. The Calvinist Coppes writes: ‘Predestination is the fount of assurance of salvation and God’s answer to doubt.’ (p.25).
d) Missions and Evangelism: If it be true, as Calvinists assert such as Zanchius that ‘the number
of the elect, and also of the reprobate, is so fixed and determinate that neither can be augmented or diminished.’ (p.92) and Storms: ‘But eventually, if they are elect, in God’s appointed time they will believe.’ (Chosen for Life, p.105), then what possible difference could it make whether one sent or withheld missionaries?
e) Confusing mass of Terminology: Wesley said, ‘Call it . . . Election, Preterition, Predestination or Reprobation, it comes in the end to the same thing: By virtue of an eternal, unchangeable, irresistible decree of God, one part of mankind is infallibly saved, and the rest are infallibly damned; it being impossible that any of the elect should be damned, or that any of the non-elect should be saved. But if this be so, then is all preaching vain.’ (John Wesley, quoted in Sell, p.73).
f) Practical results of Unconditional Election: Wesley charged it with:
- making all preaching vain;
- tending to destroy holiness (Why try if all is predestined?);
- tending to destroy the comfort of religion (Where lies any comfort if all is predestined?)
- tending to destroy zeal for good works, yea
- tending to destroy the whole Christian revelation by involving it in fatal contradictions. (Why command us to obey if our obedience or disobedience is predetermined?)
3. LIMITED ATONEMENT
The first 4 points of TULIP Calvinism involve the prefixing of a qualifying term to a Biblical doctrine:
a) Depravity of man is a Biblical doctrine, but Total Depravity is not;
b) Election is Biblical, but Unconditional Election is not.
c) Atonement of Christ is Biblical, but Limited Atonement is not.
d) Grace is Biblical (170x) but Irresistible Grace is not.
Limited Atonement is the most objectionable part of Calvinism. It adds insult to injury, the injury being Unconditional Election, for if some are not elected to salvation, then what does it matter whether Christ died for them or not? The non-elect couldn’t possibly be saved, whether Christ died for them or not. Due to Limited Atonement’s non-essential and objectionable nature, it is rejected by many Baptists and others who hold to Unconditional Election. Limited Atonement is connected with Unconditional Election. These 2 doctrines stand or fall together. We cannot logically accept one and reject the other. Total Depravity demands that God must elect and irresistibly save any who will ever be saved. Limited Atonement is so objectionable because it is so blatantly anti-Biblical. Limited Atonement is called by other names to de-stigmatise its implications, such as ‘particular redemption, effective redemption, limited redemption.’
Definition of Limited Atonement : ‘The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience, and sacrifice of himself . . . purchased, not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the father hath given unto him.’ (Westminster Confession, VII:5).
Simple Definition: ‘Christ shed his blood and made an atonement only for the sins of the elect.’
The theory behind Limited Atonement is that Christ’s blood was shed for the ‘elect’ because God did not want anyone else to be saved.
Question 1: Calvinists ask why others were not elected. Their answer is that God wanted them to go to hell. It is a waste of time to discuss Limited Atonement with a Calvinist, because, if Christ died 1000 deaths for the ‘non-elect’ they would still go to hell.
Key Question 2: Did God intend to save all men, or did He not? (Sexton, p 15).
Calvinists’ Accusations Against their Opponents:
1. If you reject T, U or L you are accused of being an Arminian. ‘It is simply Arminian to teach that Christ died for all men.’ (Hoeksema, Limited Atonement, p 49). Once they call you an Arminian, they then accuse you of believing in works for salvation, or being Arian, Pelagian or Socinian. This trick is known as ‘guilt by association.’ Clark, a Calvinist, says: ‘Though no one accuses Arminians of being Catholics, the two agree
. . . that while Christ’s sacrifice was necessary for salvation, it is not sufficient. Man must add some meritorious work of his own.’ (Gordon H Clark, The Atonement, p.140). Boettner, a Calvinist, says: ‘The Arminian theory that God is anxiously trying to convert sinners but not able to exert more than persuasive power without doing violence to their natures, is much the same as the old Persian view that there were two principles of good and evil at war with each other, neither of which was able to overcome the other.’ (Boettner, Predestination, p.218).
Question: Do we reject the Trinity or Incarnation because Catholics or Arminians believe them?No.
2. Calvinists accuse believers in Unlimited Atonement of ‘believing that salvation is partly our own doing . . . that we are not fully delivered from sin by the grace of God alone,’ (Rose, p.30) and that ‘they must be ready to bear the weight of their own guilt, ready to atone for their sins the best way they can.’
3. Boettner accuses his opponents of disparaging God: ‘If Christ’s death was intended to save all men, then we must say that God was either unable or unwilling to carry out his plans.’ (Boettner, Predestination, p.155).
Answer: Does God have the right to set forth the terms and conditions of how one appropriates salvation? Yes.
4. Calvinists claim that if Christ made a Limited Atonement, then some of his blood was wasted. Answer: This accusation has no Biblical support and is false.
5. Calvinists misrepresent their opponents by saying that: ‘Arminians have long accused Calvinists of limiting the power of the atonement.’ (Talbot and Crampton, p.37). Answer: Calvinists don’t limit the atonement’s power, but its extent.
6. Calvinists teach that Unlimited Atonement robs God of His glory: ‘Only Calvinism with its effective atonement limits man’s power and exalts God’s power and glory.’ (Coppes, p.49).
Four Point Calvinism
The reason a four-point Calvinist opposes Limited Atonement is to divert attention away from the fact that he still believes in Unconditional Election, which predestines the reprobate to hell with no chance of salvation. By focusing his opponents’ attention on an extreme position that he does not believe, the four-point Calvinist appears to take the middle ground and appear orthodox.
The belief of 5-point Calvinists is that God provides salvation for the elect that the elect might be saved. The belief of 4-point Calvinists is that God provides salvation for all men that the elect might be saved.
So what is the difference? If only the ‘elect’ will be saved, it doesn’t matter who Christ died for. Hence Limited Atonement is of no importance to the TULIP system.
The four-point position is inconsistent because, ‘Why should Jesus bear the sins of men, whom God’s decree has predestined to hell and have no chance of forgiveness?’
The Atonement
The true nature of the Atonement is ‘substitution’, where Christ became a sin bearer and curse bearer, not only on behalf of others, but in the place of others (II Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 3:13).
Christ’s death as a penal substitution presupposes that God’s holiness and justice demand man’s sins be punished. (I Timothy 1:15). God could not just forgive the sinner, but the sinner can only be forgiven on the ground of Another bearing his punishment. Christ did this voluntarily (John 10:17,18), completely (John 19:30), once for all (Hebrews 10:10), and by one offering (Hebrews 10:14) that God ‘might be just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.’ (Romans 3:26). The grace of God is any move of God toward man. The New Testament only mentions the word ‘atonement’ once: ‘We also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement’(Romans 5:11).
Old Testament Atonements just covered sin. Christ’s New Testament Atonement includes:
a) Sacrifice: God’s provision where sin might be covered and the liability of wrath and curse removed (I Corinthians 5:7; Ephesians 5:2; Hebrews 7:27; 10:10,12).
b) Ransom: The securing of release from bondage by paying a price. To be redeemed is to be delivered by paying a ransom. Christ, in His sacrificial death, was our substitute, thus redeeming us (Matthew 20:28; Colossians 1:14; I Timothy 2:6; Titus 2:14; Hebrews 9:12; I Peter 1:18,19).
c) Expiation: Christ’s ransom sacrifice was an expiation in that it removed the guilt of sin by cancelling it and purging it out. (John 1:29; Hebrews 1:3; 9:14; 9:26).
d) Propitiation: means to placate, pacify, appease and conciliate. These presuppose the wrath and displeasure of God at our sin. Hence, Liberals and Modernists dislike the idea of propitiation. Propitiation removes the judicial displeasure of God. It is turning away (or opposing) the wrath of a righteous God against sin, by accepting Christ’s death as a satisfactory substitute. (Romans 3:25; I John 2:2; 4:10).
e) Reconciliation: The propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is the cause for reconciliation (Romans 5:10; II Corinthians 5:18,19; Ephesians 2:16; Colossians 1:20,21; Hebrews 2:17). Hence, to reject Limited Atonement is not to reject Biblical Atonement. We agree with Calvinists on the NATURE of the Atonement, but disagree on the EXTENT of the Atonement.
Calvinist’s 5 Main Arguments for Limited Atonement
i) A universal atonement demands a universal salvation (most common). Calvinists believe that, if the atonement was unlimited in scope, then it would result in the universal salvation of all mankind.
ii) Double Jeopardy: If Christ has paid for a persons’s sins, then legally speaking it would be double jeopardy (double punishment) for him to be judged for those sins and sent to hell. Hence, since all men are not saved, Christ could not have died for all men. No man can be held accountable for a debt that has already been paid on his behalf. For God to have laid the sins of all men on Christ, would mean that the sins of the lost would be punished twice, once on Christ, and again on them. That would be unjust. So, God would be unjust to condemn any man to hell for whom Christ died.
iii) A universal atonement doesn’t actually save anyone. ‘Christ’s death in itself did not actually secure or guarantee salvation for anyone.’ (Steale and Thomas, p.39).
iv) The relationship between Adam and Christ. Because the sin of Adam was the ground of all men’s condemnation, so the righteousness of Christ secured the salvation of those He died for.
v) The sin of unbelief. If Christ died for all the sins of all men, why are not all men freed from the punishment of all their sins? Because of their sin of unbelief. Since this unbelief
is a sin, Christ was punished for this sin as well.
Answer: These Calvinist false conclusions about the Atonement are based on the false premise that the Atonement and its application is the same thing. That is, Calvinists confuse the provision of a Saviour with the applying of salvation. Note these Calvinists’ false statements:
a) ‘What does redemption mean? It does not mean redeemability, that we are placed in a redeemable position. It means that Christ purchased and procured redemption.’ (John Murray, Redemption p 63).
b) ‘From the moment that satisfaction has been made, that debt is forever removed.’ (Hoeksema, Limited Atonement, p 50,51).
c) ‘To say that everything turns on the sinner’s acceptance, is to affirm that Christ did nothing more for those who are saved than He did for those who are lost. It is not faith which gives Divine efficacy to the blood; it was the blood which efficaciously purchased
faith.’ (Pink, Satisfaction, p.264
So what the Calvinists are saying is that the ‘elect’ were actually saved, redeemed, reconciled and justified by and at the instant of the Atonement.
Answer: Then how is it that the ‘elect’ were born ‘dead in trespasses and sins’ (Ephesians 2:1)? and how could men who were saved, redeemed, reconciled and justified be ‘by nature children of wrath’ (Eph. 2:1)? If Calvinists object to this conclusion, then the only other alternative is Unlimited Atonement.
Old Testament Example proving that the Atonement and its Application are to be distinguished.
The blood of the slain Passover lamb (Exodus 12:6,21) became efficacious only after it was applied to the doorposts as per God’s instructions (Exodus 12:7,22). When the Lord went
through the land of Egypt, He only passed over the houses where the blood was applied, not just where the lamb was slain.
Key: The death of the lamb saved no one: the blood had to be applied. It is obvious that the Bible differentiates between the universal provision and the individual application of Christ’s Atonement.
The work of Christ is complete but conditional.
The Calvinist Boettner contradicts Limited Atonement:
‘The nature of a ransom is such that when paid and accepted it automatically frees the persons for whom it was intended.’ (Boettner, Predestination, p.155). Likewise Christ’s Atonement must be made and accepted. There is a universal provision of Christ’s death (Hebrews 2:9), as well as an individual application of Christ’s death (John 1:12; Romans 10:13). Christ’s Atonement does not result in anyone’s salvation until it is applied.’
Key 1: The answer to Calvinists’ five arguments for Limited Atonement is that they fail to distinguish between the universal provision and the need for an individual application of the Atonement.
Key 2: The Calvinists’s argument (1) about a universal atonement demanding a universal salvation disappears when we realise that the so-called ‘elect’ did not exist when Christ died on the cross.
Calvinist argument (2) of ‘double jeopardy’ has the alternative that all those for whom Christ died are automatically saved at the cross before they were born. Those unbelievers judged at the Great White Throne Judgment are judged not for their sins, but according to their works that they trusted in to see if they measure up to Christ’s perfect works. (Revelation 20:12,13).
The Calvinist argument (3), that a universal atonement doesn’t save anyone, is wrong because:
a) They imply that, because it did not save anyone at the time it was made, it is impossible to save anyone in the future;
b) even if no man ever availed himself of a universal atonement in the Church age, the Calvinist would have to admit that Christ made an effectual atonement for Old Testament saints:
‘And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called
might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.’ (Hebrews 9:15).
The Calvinist argument (4), concerning the analogy between Adam and Christ, is refuted by understanding that, although Adam’s sin was both universal and unrefuseable, Christ’s free gift (Romans 5:16,18) must be received (Romans 5:17).
a) In Romans 5:15, although Calvinists correctly interpret the ‘many’ in the first part of v.15 as ‘all’, they change the ‘all men’ in the last part of v.18 into ‘many’, and restrict the ‘all men’ in v.18b and the ‘many’ in v.15b to only the ‘elect’. ‘But not as the offence, so also is the free gift, for if through the offence of one many be dead (many = ‘all’ Calvinists agree), much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.’ (Many = ‘all’, but Calvinists being inconsistent restrict this ‘many’ to only the ‘elect’). (Romans 5:15).
b) Romans 5:18 ‘Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men (all men = everyone, Calvinists agree) to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men (all men = everyone, unlimited atonement, Calvinists disagree being inconsistent) unto justification of life.’
c) Verse 19 explains: ‘For as by one man’s disobedience many (many = all) were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many (many = all who receive it) be made righteous.’ (Romans 5:19).
The future tense shows that the benefits of Christ’s work apply only to those who receive it.
d) This is confirmed by ‘For as in Adam all die (all = everybody) even so in Christ shall all be
made alive.’ (I Corinthians 15:22). Although the sin of Adam was the ground of all men’s condemnation, they are excused if they get ‘in Christ.’ Calvinists go astray here because all men are in Adam by descent as sinners, and all men ‘in Christ’ are by faith ‘children of God’. Everything depends on being ‘in Christ’. (Ephesians 1:4).
e) Isaiah 53:6 ‘All (all = everybody, Calvinists agree) have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us ‘all’ (all = everybody = unlimited atonement, Calvinists disagree inconsistently)..
Calvinist argument (5) of the ‘sin of unbelief’ has two clear inconsistencies in their reasoning:
a) Why does God demand that men believe if Christ died for and thereby removed the sin of unbelief? If ‘he that believeth not is condemned already’ (John 3:18), and if this sin of unbelief is expiated and God is propitiated, then no one whom Christ died for could be held responsible for unbelief. They would already be saved.
b) If Christ did not die for certain men (as Calvinists claim), then those people cannot be condemned for unbelief. If Christ did not die for a man, then there is no Gospel for him to reject or believe. The Holy Spirit will ‘reprove the world of sin . . . because they believe not on me.’ (John 16:8,9).
Refuting Calvinists’ Proof Texts for Limited Atonement
Calvinists use 3 types of Scriptures in trying to prove Limited Atonement:
1) Christ died for the world. These clearly refute Limited Atonement, so Calvinists redefine
2) Christ died for all men. ‘world’ and ‘all men’ to defend their position.
3) Christ died for a particular group.
The biggest problem with limited atonement is found in Scriptures teaching Christ died ‘for all’, or for the ‘whole world’. The Calvinist Sproul adds: ‘The world for whom Christ died cannot mean the entire human family. It must mean the universality of the elect (people from every tribe and nation)’. (Sproul, Chosen by God, p 207).
1. Passages showing that CHRIST DIED for THE WORLD.
These verses occur in John’s gospel, Paul’s letters, and in I John. Although Calvinists confuse ‘the world’ with ‘the elect’, the Bible clearly teaches Christ’s unlimited atonement for the whole world :
A. JOHN’s Gospel
a) John 1:29 ‘Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world’. The Calvinist Gunn twists this, saying: ‘Christ will take away the sin of the world . . . at His Second Coming’ (Gunn, p.18). This is false because in the millennium ‘the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed’ (Isaiah 62:20 and Revelation 20:7-10).
b) John 6:33 ‘The bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, & giveth life unto the world’. The Calvinist John Owen twists this to teach that ‘he saves all the people of God (not Jews only), all over the world’. (Owen, p.342).
c) John 3:16 ‘For God so loved the world, that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life’.
The Calvinist Pink twists this verse, saying: ‘The world in John 3:16 must refer to the world of God’s people. “Must,” we say, for there is no other alternative solution’. (Pink, Sovereignty,p204). The Presbyterian Dabney writes: ‘Make “the world” which Christ loved, to mean “the elect world”, and we reach the absurdity, that some of the elect may not believe, and hence perish’. (Dabney, Theology, p.525).
d) John 4:42 ‘this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.’.
e) John 6:51 ‘the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.’
f) II Corinthians 5:19 ‘To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, .
. .’
g) I John 2:2 ‘And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world’.
h) I John 4:14 ‘the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.’
So everything hinges on the meaning of the word ‘world’. Calvinists quickly point out that ‘world’ is used in different senses, such as hyperbolic phrases like: ‘behold, the world is gone after him’ (John 12:19) to prove that the world only means the ‘elect’. We agree that ‘world’ is used in different senses. We dispute Calvinists’ claim that ‘the world’ ever signifies the so-called ‘elect’.
FACT: The word ‘world’ occurs 89 times in John’s Gospel and, although it is used in different senses, it never refers to the ‘elect’. Consider these examples where ‘world’ could never mean the ‘elect’:
1) The world (elect?) knew him not. (John 1:10).
2) The world (elect?) hates Christ. (John 7:7).
3) The world (elect?) consists of unsaved Jews. (8:23).
4) The world’s (elect’s) prince is Satan. (12:31; 14:30; 16:11).
5) The world (elect?) seeth me no more. (14:19).
6) The world (elect?) cannot receive the Holy Spirit. (14:17).
7) The world (elect?) hates the disciples. (15:18,19; 17:14).
8) In the world (elect?) ye shall have tribulation. (16:33).
9) The world (elect?) did not know the Father. (17:25).
10) Christ’s Kingdom is not of this world. (elect?) (18:36).
Hoeksema inadvertently admits that ‘when our Lord announces Himself as the light of the world, it is evident that He speaks of the world of men, of the entire human race’. (Whosoever Will, p 86).
Hence the world never denotes the ‘elect’, and the world is clearly condemned by God.
The world in John 3:16 could not be the ‘elect’ because:
1) What is true in the time of Moses (everyone that is bitten, when he looketh upon it shall live’ (Numbers 21:8) is certainly true in the time of Christ (‘whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life’ (John 3:16).
Hence, just as the cure for being bitten was believing what God said and doing it (Numbers 21:8), so the cure for sin was obtained by believing what God said and doing it (John 3:15).
2) In Calvinism, the so-called ‘elect’ have never been in danger of perishing and never can be.
3) John 3:19 defines the world as ‘men’: ‘And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil’.
B. PAUL’S LETTERS: ‘To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation’(II Cor 5:19).
Question 3: Calvinists use II Corinthians 5:19 to teach that not all men (without exception) have been reconciled, but that God has been reconciling His people (‘elect’) from the world one by one.
II Corinthians 5:19 teaches that there is a ‘world’ which is reconciled to God. Who are they? The ‘elect’, say Calvinists.
Answer:
a) Who is identified as the ‘world’? The ‘world’ occurs 69 times in Paul’s letters and is used in several different senses, but never refers to the ‘elect’. Consider these examples:
1) The world (elect?) by wisdom knew not God. (I Corinthians 1:21).
2) Not the wisdom of this world (elect?). (I Corinthians 2:6). World is disparaged.
3) The princes of this world (elect?) . . . crucified the Lord of glory. (I Corinthians 2:8).
4) We have received, not the spirit of the world. (elect?) (I Corinthians 2:12).
5) The saints shall judge the world. (elect?) (II Corinthians 4:4).
6) Satan is the god of this world. (elect?) (II Corinthians 4:4).
7) Deliver us from this present evil world. (elect?) (Galatians 1:4).
8) In bondage under the elements of the world. (elect?) (Galatians 4:3).
9) Christians shine as lights in the world. (elect?) (Philippians 2:13).
10) The rudiments of the world (elect?) are warned against. (Colossians 2:20).
b) What is the nature of reconciliation in II Corinthians 5:19? The Bible distinguishes between the universal provision of atonement and the individual application of the atonement.
The context of II Corinthians 5:19 shows this is also true of reconciliation.
1) Galatians 1:4 Paul contrasts ‘us’ with the ‘world’: ‘Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world . . .’
2) The ‘elect’ could not have been reconciled at the cross (God ‘not imputing their trespasses unto them’- II Corinthians 5:19) because they did not exist then.
3) The ‘elect’ could not have been personally reconciled at the cross, because they were still in their sins until they were saved. (‘If Christ be not raised…ye are yet in your sins.’ I Cor 15:17).
4) If the ‘elect’ were actually reconciled at the cross (as Calvinists say), then what is Paul doing with a ministry of reconciliation? (II Corinthians 5:18).
5) In II Corinthians 5:20, Paul is beseeching unsaved people to be reconciled to God (‘we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God’.) Obviously, unsaved people were not reconciled at the cross, but at salvation. Paul did not believe in Limited Atonement.
6) The two aspects of reconciliation are seen in Colossians 1:20,21 ‘And having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled.’
On the cross, Christ laid the foundation for reconciliation between God and man. He did what He could to secure it. Christ executed a plan that, if properly appropriated by man, the blood of His cross was fitted to secure entire reconciliation between heaven and earth. The offended party (God) sought to be reconciled. God turned His face towards mankind. Hence, the world in
II Corinthians 5:19 means the human race generally, without distinction of nation, age or rank. The whole world was alienated from God, and He sought to have it reconciled.
When one receives Christ, he is reconciled to God.
C. I JOHN 2:2 and 4:14 clearly state that Christ died for the world, as an unlimited atonement.
2:2 ‘he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.’
4:14 ‘And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.’ Calvinists admit that I John 2:2 is a problem to them: ‘On the surface this text seems to demolish limited atonement’. (Sproul, Grace Unknown, p.176).
Pink gives the standard Calvinist position on I John 2:2: ‘When John says, “He is the propitiation for our sins”, he can only mean for the sins of Jewish believers. When John added, “And not for ours only, but also for the whole world,” he signified that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of Gentile believers too, for, as previously shown, “the world” is a term contrasted with Israel.’ (Sovereignty, p.259). Pink adds that ‘to insist that the “whole world” in I John 2:2 signifies the entire human race is to undermine the very foundations of our faith’. (Sovereignty of God, p.260).
Answer: It is very strange how Reformed Calvinists, who are so anti-dispensational and who minimise any distinction between Israel and the Church, suddenly become dispensationalists when trying to explain away the unlimited atonement in I John 2:2.
Question 4: Is this catholic (universal) epistle (I John) addressed only to Jews or to the churches?
Answer:
1) ‘These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God;’ (I John 5:13).
2) The ‘our’ in I John 2:2 cannot be limited to just the Jews. This group referred to as ‘our’ has ‘fellowship’ with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ (I John 1:3), and has ‘an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous’. (I John 2:1). John makes no Jew-Gentile distinction here whatsoever. In Christ there is no Jew or Gentile. ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek . . . for ye are all one in Christ Jesus’. (Galatians 3:28).
3) The words Jew and Gentile do not even occur in I John.
4) In I John , the word ‘world’ occurs 23 times and never refers to the so-called
‘elect’.
i) We are commanded to ‘love not the world’ (elect?). (I John 2:15).
ii) The world (elect?) is full of lust. (2:16).
iii) The world (elect?) will pass away. (2:17).
iv) The world (elect?) knows neither Christ nor the Christian. (3:1).
v) The ‘spirit of antichrist’ is in the world. (elect?) (4:3).
vi) Believers overcame the world. (elect?) (5:4).
vii) In I John 5:19, John contrasts Christians with the world as two separate groups: ‘And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in
wickedness’. John uses the term ‘whole world’ twice in I John (2:2; 5:19) and neither case refers to ‘elect Gentiles’. Hence Christ is the propitiation for the sins of John, the believers he wrote to, as well as for the sins of the whole world.
Question 5: Is John 11:49-52 a parallel proof passage as Pink claims? ‘If the reader really desires to know the meaning of I John 2:2 let him compare John 11:51,52 . . . it is a strictly parallel passage’. (Satisfaction, p 263; Sovereignty, p 259).
‘Caiaphas, being the high priest . . . said . . . it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not . . . he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; and not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad’. (John 11:49-52).
Pink makes the ‘children of God’ the Church: “Is it not remarkable that the members of the church are here called ‘children of God’, even before Christ died, and therefore before He commenced to build His church! The vast majority of them had not then been born, yet were they regarded as ‘children of God’; children of God because they had been chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world”.
(Pink, Sovereignty, p. 66).
Answer: But is it not more remarkable how wrong TULIP Calvinism is?
i) If Christ died for the whole Jewish nation as prophesied by Caiaphas, then, according to Calvinist Limited Atonement, all Jews would have to be saved.
ii) The phrase ‘children of God’ (except in referring to Israel, Deut.14:1; John 11:52) never refers to members of the church, until they are saved. ‘For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus’. (Galatians 3:26). Before salvation, the ‘elect’ were ‘children of wrath’ (Ephesians 2:3) and ‘children of disobedience.’ (Colossians 3:6).
iii) If a man was already a New Testament child of God, why would he need an atonement?
Question 6: Who were the ‘children of God that were scattered abroad’, mentioned in John 11:52? Are they Israel or are they future elect Christians? Answer: They are Israel because:
1) John meant only the Jews who were dispersed among all nations since Rome conquered Judea. . These are called the ‘dispersed’ (‘to the 12 tribes which are scattered abroad,’ James 1:1;
‘will he go to the dispersed among the Gentiles?’ John 7:35).
2) The term ‘children of God’ was an ancient title of the Jewish people, as seen in:
- ‘Ye are the children of the LORD your God: ye shall not cut yourselves’ (Deuteronomy 14:1)
- ‘I have said,….. all of you are children of the most High.’ (Psalm 82:6).
- ‘I will say,..bring my sons from far,and my daughters from the ends of the earth’ (Isaiah 43:6)
3) The meaning is: ‘Christ was to die, not only for the then inhabitants of Judea, but for all the Jewish race scattered abroad. This would result in all Jews being gathered from dispersion abroad into one body. Paul prophesied that this would occur after Christ’s second coming (Romans 11:1-32).
John interprets Caiaphas’ prophecy that Christ would die for the Jewish nation, as well as for the Jews ‘scattered abroad’. (v.52). Hence John 11:49-52 does not interpret I John 2:2.
2. Passages showing that Christ DIED for ALL MEN
As with the word ‘world’, Calvinists point out that the word ‘all’ is used in different senses, such as hyperbolic phrases like ‘hated of all men’ (Matthew 10:22) to teach that ‘all’ only means the ‘elect’.
Answer:
1) These are normal accepted cases of hyperbole, meaning ‘an exaggerated statement not meant to be taken literally’ (Oxford Dictionary). Other examples of hyperbole that Calvinists use to distract people from the unlimited atonement meaning of ‘all men’ are:
- ‘all men seek for thee.’ (Mark 1:37).
- ‘all men did marvel.’ (Mark 5:20).
- ‘Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you.’ (Luke 6:26).
- ‘Ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake.’ (Luke 21:17).
- ‘Thou shalt be his witness unto all men.’ (Acts 22:15).
- ‘Your obedience is come abroad unto all men.’ (Romans 16:19).
- ‘Prayers … be made for all men.’ (I Timothy 2:1).
2) We agree that ‘all’ is used in different senses. We disagree with Calvinist claims that ‘all’ ever means the so-called‘elect.’ The Bible clearly teaches that Christ’s Atonement was for all men.
i) Isaiah 53:6 ‘All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned everyone to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all’..
The last ‘all’ is just as extensive as the first ‘all’ and ‘everyone’. Calvinists agree that all men have gone astray, but disagree that all men’s iniquities have been laid on Christ. Let us be consistent: ‘all’ means the same in both places. The context defines ‘all’ as ‘everyone’.
If words have any meaning, then ‘all’ those who went astray (100% of mankind) had their iniquity laid on Christ.
Question 7: Have all men gone astray or only some of them? All!
Note: If Calvinists want to get dispensational and say that Isaiah was only referring to
Jews (Isaiah 53:8), then they still have the same problem, that the sins of every
Jew was borne by Christ (an unlimited atonement for Israel).
ii) II Corinthians 5:14,15 ‘For the love of Christ constraineth us (‘elect’); because we (‘elect’) thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead. And that he died for all, that they which live (are saved) should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again’. Calvinists limit ‘all’ to the ‘elect’.
Answer: The ‘all’ in v.14 means ‘all men’ as seen by:
a) The ‘elect’ are already represented in v.14 by ‘us’ and ‘we’.
b) Calvinists’ mistake is assuming that all for whom Christ died will live.
c) After the restrictive ‘us’ and ‘we’ in v.14, ‘all’ is used 3 times in a universal, unlimited sense.
d) The restrictive phrase ‘that they which live’ (v.15) implies that not everyone of the ‘all’ for whom Christ died, lives. Dabney recognised this: ‘If we make the all for whom Christ died, mean only the elect, it implies that of those elect that Christ died for, only a part will live to Christ’. (Theology p.525).
iii) I Timothy 2:1-6 ‘I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers … be made for all men, for kings, and for all that are in authority; they we (elect) may lead…, for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. …. the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all’.
Since Calvinists confuse universal provision and the individual application of the Atonement, they maintain that ‘a ransom for all’ should be limited to ‘a ransom for the elect’ because the ‘elect’are the only ones who get saved. Custance thinks it means‘all sorts of men.’ (Custance p.162)
Answer: Five reasons why ‘a ransom for all’ does not refer to ‘a ransom for the elect’:
a) The mediator is between ‘God and men’, not ‘God and the elect’.
b) The ‘all men’ of v.1,4 do not refer to just classes of men, because classes of men are given in v.2. There would be no point doing this, if it had already been done in v.1.
c) The ‘all that are in authority’ of v.2 already make up a class, and hence would be meaningless if Calvinists consistently interpret the ‘all’ of v.2 as they did in v.1.
d) If Paul wanted to say all ‘classes of men’ he could have done so:
‘to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.’ (Matthew 10:1).
‘For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea,’ (James 3:7)
e) Calvinists attempting to make the ‘all’ (v.6) and ‘all men’ (v.4) refer to all classes of men, does not solve their problem. God desires their salvation (v.4) and gave Himself a ransom for them (v.6). The ‘we’ (v.2) are the ‘elect’, not the ‘all men’ (v.1,3,6).
iv) I Timothy 4:10 ‘For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.’
This irrefutably proves unlimited atonement by giving the biblical definition of ‘all men’. The phrase ‘all men’ (100% of mankind) is contrasted with ‘those that believe’ (the ‘elect’). Hence the ‘all men’ couldn’t be ‘all sorts of elect men’ as Calvinists want it to be in I Timothy 2:1-6. This contrast between ‘all men’ (100% of mankind) and ‘those that believe’ (the ‘elect’) occurs 4 times:
a) I Timothy 4:10 ‘Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.’
b) Galatians 6:10 ‘Let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.’
c) Romans 3:22 ‘Even the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all (100% of mankind) and upon all them that believe (the ‘elect’): for there is no difference.’
d) Titus 2:11,12 ‘For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men (100% of mankind), teaching us (the ‘elect’) that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world.’
v) Hebrews 2:9 ‘But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour, that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man’. Calvinists change Scripture when it doesn’t agree with TULIP. Boettner gives the standard Calvinist interpretation: ‘The original Greek, does not use the word “man” here at all but simply says, “for every”.’ (Predestination, p.288).
Answer:
(a) Boettner takes advantage of most people’s lack of knowledge of simple Greek grammar, and shows his ignorance as well. Like any other adjective, demonstrative,
participle or prepositional phrase, the word ‘every’ is used substantively. This means that the word ‘every’ is used by itself without a noun because the noun ‘man’ is so commonly and obviously understood to be meant. Examples include:
Luke 6:30 ‘Give to every (Greek: παντι ) (man) that asketh thee.’ Romans 12:3 ‘to every (Greek: παντι) (man) that is among you.’
I Peter 3:15 ‘be ready to give an answer to every (Greek: παντι ) (man)’ Revelation 22:18 ‘I testify unto every (Greek: παντι) (man) that heareth’ Hebrews 2:9 ‘should taste death for every (Greek: παντι) (man).’
Question 8: Is Boettner supported by any Greek grammarian? Not Henry Alford (1810-1871). Not Kenneth Wuest (1893-1961). Not A T Robertson (1863-1934). Pink violates every Greek grammar and text in the world and alters ‘every man’ to ‘every son’, inventing a reading to support limited atonement that occurs in no New Testament manuscript anywhere in the world. If God wanted to teach limited atonement here, he could have added the word ‘son’ (Greek: υιος).
See Hebrews 12:6 ‘scourgeth every son (Greek: παντι υιον) whom he receiveth.’
(b) The starting thought is ‘What is man?’ (Hebrews 2:6) not ‘what are the elect?’ Calvinists fail to note that the context changes from the general (v.9) discussing man in general, to the particular (v.10). The importance of ‘every man’ is that it is even stronger than ‘all men’. As Alford writes, “Why ‘every man’ rather than ‘all men’. We may safely say, that the singular (every man) brings out far more strongly than the plural (all men) would, the applicability of Christ’s death to each individual man.” (Alford, Vol. 4, p.1459).
4. Passages showing that CHRIST DIED for a PARTICULAR GROUP. Calvinists, when faced with such a mountain of evidence for unlimited atonement,
retreat to Scriptures discussing Christ dying for a particular group, hoping this will disprove unlimited atonement. In these passages, Calvinists insist that Christ died for a particular group (the ‘elect’) to the exclusion of all mankind. Calvinists presume that if Christ died for a particular group (the ‘elect’), then he died for no one else.
Consider these examples:
a) His People: Calvinists identify the ‘many’ that Christ died for as God’s people. Matthew 1:21 ‘And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.’ All Calvinists presume that ‘his people’ here are ‘the elect’, all whom the Father has ‘given’ him. (Pink,
Sovereignty, p 65).
What Scriptures prove this? They don’t give any.
Question 9: Who are ‘his people’?
Answer: The nation Israel, because,
i) ‘the world knew him not. He came unto his own (Israel), and his own received him not.’ (John 1:10,11). Question: Are the ‘world’ and ‘his own,’ the same as the ‘elect’? Answer: No, because they neither knew him, nor received him.
ii) ‘A Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.’ (Matthew 2:6).
iii) ‘Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people.’
Luke1:68
b) Sheep: ‘I lay down my life for the sheep.’ (John 10:15).
In John 10:15 the ‘sheep’ are the same as ‘his people’, the nation Israel:
Key:If Christ died for all of Israel &some were lost, then Christ made an unlimited atonement.
c) Church of God: ‘Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood’. (Acts 20:28). ‘Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it’. (Ephesians 5:25).
d) Many: In Matthew 20:28 ‘The Son of man came…… to give his life a ransom for many.’
‘For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins’ (Matthew 26:28). ‘Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many.’ (Hebrews 9:28).
Every TULIP Calvinist who has ever lived, presumes that ‘many’ means ‘elect’. ‘Many: Notice, this verse does not say that he gave his life a ransom for all, but for many.’ (Boettner, Predestination, p.155). ‘The name “sheep” is synonymous with “elect”, for such are “sheep” before they believed, yea, before they are born’. (Pink, Satisfaction, p.251-2). Notice that the word ‘many’ sometimes means ‘all’: Romans 5:15 ‘For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.’.
Romans 5:19 ‘For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.’
Question 10: Did Adam’s fall affect all or only some of his descendants? (Ans: All). ‘Many’ is used because it better contrasts with ‘one’. Hence ‘many’ does not prove Limited Atonement.
Calvinists’ claim that Christ only died for a particular group is proven false because:
i) The Bible never states that Christ died only for these groups to the exclusion of all others.
ii) These groups are not all one and the same. Israel is not the church (I Corinthians 10:32).
iii) Key: Using this same false Calvinist reasoning, one could conclude that Christ died:
- only for Paul, ‘… who loved me, and gave himself for me’. (Galatians 2:20), or
- only for John and those he wrote to, ‘he laid down his life for us (I John 3:16), or
- only for Paul and Titus, ‘who gave himself for us’ (Titus 2:14), or
- only for weak believers, ‘the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died.’ (I Cor 8:11). Calvinists’ err by confusing universal provision & individual application of the
atonement.
iv) There are other groups mentioned in Scripture for whom Christ died that Calvinists don’t want to discuss, because they prove unlimited atonement:
a) Those that Christ died for who will ultimately go to hell.
‘But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.’ (II Peter 2:1).
Not only is Jesus Christ the Saviour (I Timothy 4:10) and Redeemer (I Timothy 2:6) for the world, but he bought the false prophets and false teachers. (II Peter 2:1). Question 11: Calvinists claim that ‘Lord’ here refers to God the Father and not Christ, because the Greek word for Lord (despotes) is not the usual word for ‘Lord’.
Answer: If it is God the Father spoken of in II Peter 2:1 it makes no difference, because Paul told the Ephesian elders to ‘Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.’ (Acts 20:28). (The same Greek word is used of God in Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; Revelation 6:10; and of Christ in 2 Timothy 2:21).
Question 12: Some Calvinists change ‘bought’ to ‘delivered’ or ‘created’. Answer: The same word ‘bought’ is used in I Cor. 6:20: ‘For ye are bought with a price.’
b) Those groups Christ died for that describe everybody, all mankind.
‘For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost’. (Luke 19:10). All of us!
‘For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.’Romans5:6
‘To redeem them that were under the law.’ (Galatians 4:5). Are we all born under the law?
‘Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.’ (I Timothy 1:15). Are we all born sinners?
‘For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust.’ (I Peter 3:18).
All unjust!
Answer: The reason Calvinists never mention these verses is because, if Christ died for and came to save the lost, the ungodly, those under the law, sinners, and the unjust, then he made an unlimited atonement, for that is the condition of all men, not just the ‘elect’.
Are only the ‘elect’ lost? (No.) Are only the ‘elect’ ungodly? (No). Are only the ‘elect’ under the law? (No). Are only the ‘elect’ sinners? (No). Therefore, Jesus Christ is ‘the Saviour of the world’ (John 4:42; I John 4:14), of all men, whether all men accept him or not.
c) Christ died for his friends: ‘Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.’ (John 15:13).
Question 13: Who are Christ’s friends?
Answer: Judas was one of Christ’s friends, yet Judas was not ‘elect’.
‘And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come?’ Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him’. (Matthew 26:50).
Problem: Calvinists read Limited Atonement into every conceivable verse, for example:
‘The Lord redeemeth the soul of his servants.’ (Psalm 34:22).
The Calvinist Jimmie Davis makes ‘servants’ to be ‘none other than the elect’.
d) “Whosoever” verses proving that Christ’s atonement was for all men.
These verses teach that ‘whosoever believeth’ may claim Christ’s atonement and be saved.
-‘through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins’. Acts 10:43.
-‘gospel of Christ:..is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.’ (Romans 1:16)
-‘Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.’ (Romans 10:11).
-‘For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’ (Romans 10:13).
-‘Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God’. (I John 5:1). -‘And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.’ (Revelation 22:17). Key: There are no ‘whosoevers’ with a doctrine of Limited Atonement.
Calvin’s Rejection of Limited Atonement
Calvin is thought by some to have modified his doctrine of Limited Atonement as he became older and wiser, until he finally reached the conclusion of an unlimited atonement. (James Richards, Lectures on mental Philosophy and Theology, New York, M W Dodd, 1846, p 308).
Others claim that it was Beza and other followers of Calvin who developed the doctrine of Limited Atonement. Beza was Calvin’s successor and chief theologian of the Reformed Church after Calvin.
Note: Article 31 of the Church of England’s 39 Articles adopted shortly before Calvin’s death, states that, ‘The offering of Christ once made is the perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world.’ (Schaff, Creeds, Vol 3, p 507).
Consider Calvin’s comments on these verses:
a) ‘gave his life a ransom for many’ (Matthew 20:28) - ‘… Paul is not talking of a part of mankind, but of the whole human race’. (Calvin, Commentaries, Vol 2, p 273).
b) ‘shed for many for the remission of sins’ (Matthew 26:28) – ‘The word ‘many’ does not mean a part of the world only, but the whole human race’. (Commentaries, Vol 3, p 139)
c) ‘bear the sins of many’ (Hebrews 9:28) – ‘He says many meaning all, as in Romans 5:15’ (Vol 12, p131)
d) ‘taketh away the sin of the world’. (John 1:29) – ‘When he says the sin of the world he extends this kindness indiscriminately to the whole human race’. (Vol 4, p 32).
The Other Side of Limited Atonement
Calvinists insist that the reason Christ’s blood was shed only for the ‘elect,’ is because God did not want any others to be saved.
The Calvinist Custance says: ‘Limited Atonement tends to weaken the incentive to evangelism’. (Steele & Thomas, p.38). John Murray laments: ‘It is frequently objected that this doctrine is inconsistent with the full and free offer of Christ in the Gospel.’
(Custance, p.286).
Key: If no offer can be made to the ‘non-elect’, and the ‘elect’ are sure to be saved, all preaching is not only vain and useless, but an absolute, total and complete waste of time.
The Calvinist Custance says: ‘We ought not to use such a misleading appeal as “Christ died for you” because we cannot apply this to any man indiscriminately unless we know he is to be counted among the elect, a knowledge which we cannot have with certainty’. (Steele and Thomas, p.38).
In Calvinism, election does not guarantee anyone’s salvation unless Christ dies for them. Calvinists cannot tell someone that Christ died for him unless he is ‘elect’, which Calvinists cannot know for sure.
John 16:8
Question 14: How does a Calvinist know if anyone is saved or not?
Answer: The Calvinist answer is if they persevere in holiness in their profession of faith to the end.
Conclusion: The Calvinist debate about Limited Atonement is a smoke screen to conceal the true nature of Calvinism which says that God by a sovereign, eternal decree of Unconditional Election has consigned billions of people to hell before their birth. To make it certain, God has given them Total Depravity so that they will be unable to receive Irresistable Grace, which will not even be offered to them, since Christ did not make a Limited Atonement for them.
Bible reply: God’s Word is not bound by the philosophical speculations of Limited Atonement.2Tim2:9
Conclusion:
i) Calvinists, in order to believe and preach limited atonement, must rewrite both the Dictionary and the Bible, so that: a) “world” doesn’t really mean “world”,
b) “all’ doesn’t really mean “all’,
c) “whosoever” doesn’t really mean “whosoever”.
ii) Calvinists who believe limited atonement, cannot tell people that Christ died for “their” sins, or “our” sins, because they don’t know if the unsaved hearers are elect. Yet Paul did tell the Corinthians this in 1 Cor. 15:3. Instead, they preach a false gospel saying that “Christ died for His people’s sins.”
iii) If 5-point Calvinists want to limit the atonement to only the elect, then to be consistent, they must also limit the death which passed from Adam to the human race to many, and not all, as Romans 5:18,
“Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.”
This teaches that the free gift of eternal life is available to all mankind, not just to the elect. Paul’s passionate drive for souls was based on the fact that “Christ died for all.” 2 Corinthians 5:13-15.
4. IRRESISTABLE GRACE (The Efficacious call of the Spirit).
Definition: God’s grace, when presented by the Holy Spirit, is such that it is impossible for the sinner to resist or refuse.
Calvinists claim that in addition to a general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit efficaciously calls the elect that inevitably brings them to salvation. Calvinists claim that God’s grace is invincible, never failing to result in the salvation of those it is extended to.
Answer: There is no such thing in the Bible as “irresistable grace.” Never in the Bible do we find the word “irresistable” connected with the word “grace”. It is the vain philosophy and imagination of John Calvin and his followers.
Grace means “God’s unmerited favour”. Grace is an attitude, not a power. God does not force people to be saved with an imaginary “irresistable grace.”
I. Scriptures refuting “Irresistable Grace”
Can a sinner resist God’s grace when presented by the Holy Spirit? These verses say “YES”:
i) “Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.” Acts 7:51.
Stephen declares that the Holy Spirit was exerting a drawing power on the Sanhedrin, but they resisted God’s saving grace. They and their fathers opposed the message brought by Moses, the prophets, Christ, the apostles, and by Stephen. This refutes "irresistable grace”.
People can resist the Holy Spirit. The term “stiffnecked” also refutes the Calvinist’s “irresistable grace”. It is a farming term describing stubborn oxen that would not submit to be yoked. Stephen applied it to the Sanhedrin who resisted God’s efforts to save them. ii) “And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man,…” Genesis 6:3.
God’s Spirit strove with sinners before the Flood, but only 8 were saved. All the rest resisted God successfully. This proves that people can resist God’s striving with them for salvation.
Question: Why would God strive with sinners whom He has not chosen to be saved? The whole idea of God “giving people up” would be meaningless if there had not been prior strivings.
iii) God the Holy Spirit strives with all men.
“And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, &of righteousness and of
judgment.”
iv) When sinners continually resist God’s saving grace, there comes a time when God “gives them up”. In Romans 1:24,26,28 three times it is said that “God gave them up”. The whole concept of “giving people up” would be meaningless if there had been no prior strivings.
v) Jesus said sincerely with tears (not generally) that He would have gathered them, but they would not.
The Jews at Jerusalem resisted Christ’s efforts to gather them together, as seen by the phrase,
“how often would I have gathered thy children together…and ye would not.” Matthew23:37.
vi) If Christians can resist God’s grace in sanctification, so can unbelievers resist God’s
grace in salvation: “ Quench not the Spirit.” 1 Thessalonians 5:19.
“ Grieve not the Spirit.” Ephesians 4:30.
vii) Proverbs 29:1 shows that men do resist and reject God. “He that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.”
God often strives with and reproves some people, until after they have continually hardened their neck, God suddenly destroys them. This shows that man can resist God’s saving grace.
viii) Jesus said to the Jews, “Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” John 5:40. Here Jesus clearly teaches us that men can and do resist God by refusing to come to Him. If ‘irresistible grace” was true, Jesus would have said “Ye cannot come to me”. “Ye will not” means that:
a) God wants all “non-elect” to be saved, thus refuting unconditional election, and
b) Sinners can resist God’s grace, thus refuting irresistible grace.
ix) Question: Why would God strive with sinners whom He hasn’t chosen to be saved? “Their eyes have they closed”. Matthew 13:15. They resisted God’s saving grace by closing their eyes.
x) Men are condemned not because they are un-elect, but because they resisted God’s saving grace,
and because they loved darkness rather than light.
“And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” John 3:19.
Conclusion: People do resist the Holy Ghost. Some do refuse to come to Christ.
Some do harden their necks. Some do refuse when God calls.
This means that those who rejected Christ, could have received Him.
God offers salvation to all who want it, but doesn't force it on those who don't want it.
II. Results of the ‘Irresistible Grace” Error.
1. Hopelessness: Many people are hopelessly lost if TULIP is true. If you are not pre-selected to salvation, this means that:
a) You cannot ask Christ to save you, because you haven’t got a free will. (T)
b) You cannot get elected, because that decision was made before creation. (U)
c) Even if you wanted to be saved, you couldn’t, because the Limited Atonement
theory
says that Jesus did not die for your sins. (L)
d) If you are un-elect, you never get any “irresistible grace” to save you. (I)
2. One wrong assumption leads to wrong conclusions.
All of this nonsense comes from one basic false assumption, which is that man has no free will.
Key: The Bible plainly teaches and everywhere assumes that mankind (saved or lost) has the power of choice even though he is sinful and powerless to save himself. Man would not be responsible for his actions if he had no choice. Follow how this wrong assumption leads to wrong conclusions:
a) Total Depravity denies that man has a free will.
b) Unconditional Election teaches that, because man does not have a free will (being dead), he cannot choose Christ. Hence, if any are to be saved, God must predestine some to be saved and some to be damned. (This can be the only explanation as to why some are lost, following false assumption a)).
c) Limited Atonement logically follows because it would be unreasonable to expect God to
lay the sins of non-elect people on Jesus if He had no intention of saving them.
d) Irresistible Grace
~ If man has no free will to choose Christ (unless preselected), and
~ If God unconditionally elects some to be saved and others to be damned (if anyone was to be saved),&
~ If Jesus bore the sins only of the preselected ones, how could anybody resist God’s determination to save them? They couldn’t resist God! Hence if you have no free will, and you are elect, then you can’t resist getting saved, right? No! Wrong! Dead wrong! All because of a wrong first assumption.
Bible Truth: God foreknows who will choose Christ to be their Saviour.When people receive Christ, they are part of the elect body, the church. God predestines them to glory. God wants all men to be saved and has provided sufficient redemption for all men to be saved. This includes: free will, a condition of election, and unlimited atonement. If men go to hell, it is because they rejected Christ.
“He that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” John 3:17-19,36
3. Inventing a General Call and an Effectual Call to Salvation.
After accepting Irresistible Grace, Calvinists must then invent two calls (a General and an Effectual call) to explain why some get saved and others don’t in response to Christ’s many invitations to salvation. Calvinists support ‘Irresistible Grace’ by claiming that there are 2 calls:
a) A General Call (or insincere call) of God to sinners. This invitation goes out to the whole world inviting them to receive Christ. This call is rejected by the non-elect. It is not intended to bring sinners to repentance, but to leave sinners without excuse. They cannot say that they were not invited to be saved. Therefore, they have to say that they rejected God’s invitation. The general call is not effectual to produce salvation.
b) An Effectual Call (sincere call) is the call that God gives to the elect. It does not go to the un-elect, but is reserved for those especially chosen to salvation. Calvinists claim support from these verses:
i) General Call: “For many are called, but few are chosen. Matthew 22:14. “Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.”
Matthew 11:28.
This general call to sinners is designed to shift the blame for their damnation from God to them. There is no possibility that this general call can result in salvation.
ii) Effectual Call: “We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” Romans 8:28.
4. This theory makes God out to be a hypocrite, dishonest, and a liar, who has a “sincere call” and an “insincere call”. In the general call, He insincerely invites everybody to come for salvation, but He doesn’t really mean it. What an insult against Christ that He would invite sinners to Himself, promising them salvation if they came, yet having no intention of giving them the effectual call that enables them to respond. This is BLATANT DISHONESTY. It is like offering lollies to a crippled child, knowing that he could not reach out and receive it. “God’s blessings are God’s enablings.”
If God commands all men everywhere to repent(Acts17:30),then it must be possible for all men to repent.
There is no more serious charge against God than to infer that God is LYING when He invites millions of lost souls to be saved. “It was impossible for God to lie.” Hebrews 6:18.
“he (the devil) is a liar, and the father of it.” John 8:44.
To attribute dishonesty to God is to identify God with Satan. This is a very serious error. Let Calvinists acknowledge their blasphemous error and seek the pardon of God for their sins. (Leviticus 4:22,28,35 discusses a sin offering made for the sins of ignorance).
III. Verses Calvinists Use To Support “Irresistible Grace.”
1. John 1:13 ‘Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.’
Question: Doesn’t John 1:13 say that we are born again NOT by the will of man, but by God’s unconditional election?
Answer: What does the will of blood, flesh and man mean?
a) “Not of blood”: Jews prided themselves in being descendants of Abraham. (Matthew 3:9).
They saw this as a sign of God’s favour. Here this error is corrected. It is not because men are descended from pious parents such as Abraham, that they are entitled to God’s favour.
b) “Nor of the will of the flesh”: Not by the natural human desire for children, not by natural generation, not the result of the husband’s will.
c) “Nor of the will of man”: Not to the will of man in adopting a child.
Hence, we become children of God, not by our descent from illustrious parents like Abraham, not by our natural birth, and not by being adopted by a pious man.
d) “but of God”: God produces the change and confers the privilege of being called His children.
A person receives Christ as Saviour, but the work of the Holy Spirit is “the cause” of regeneration.
2. a) Matthew 22:14 “For many are called, but few are chosen.”
Question: Doesn’t this say that God only chooses a few to be saved, and that they experience irresistible grace, and that everyone gets a general call, but only a few get an effectual call?
Answer: No. It just teaches that the great mass of people in the time of Christ, who had been called, had rejected the mercy of God in Christ, so God didn’t choose them.
When the King who made the marriage feast for his son greeted the guests, he noticed a man without a wedding garment. In anger, the King rebuked him, asking him to explain his situation. The man was speechless, so the King ordered him bound hand and foot, taken away, and cast into outer darkness. Then he said, “For many are called, but few are chosen.”
In Christ’s day, wedding garments were provided by the host for the wedding guests. This man’s lack of a wedding garment was inexcusable, and his speechlessness indicated his realisation of the fact.
A garment had been provided for him by the King, but he had refused or neglected to wear it.
Christ placed the responsibility for the man’s lack of a wedding garment, squarely on the man himself. His lack of reply indicated his guilt. This in no way pictures “irresistible grace”, nor does it teach a “general” and “effectual” call. It pictures unlimited atonement because of:
i) The custom was for the host to provide wedding garments.
ii) His speechlessness & lack of excuse indicates his guilt& personal responsibility, not the King’s fault.
b) Matthew 20:16 “For many be called, but few are chosen.”
The parable of the householder hiring labourers to work in his vineyard, has nothing to do with anyone’s election to salvation, but it relates to service and rewards. It means that among the multitudes of Christians called to serve God, God chooses some to a short period of labour but to great usefulness, while this does not injure others who serve God longer but have less useful, less widespread and less rewarded ministries. Christ calls many to service, but few are chosen to big ministries. God chooses some for higher stations in churches, with superior talents, gifts and wider usefulness. Their life’s work may be shorter, but Christ has a right to choose to honour them in this way. Christ chooses some to be more useful than others, without regard to their length of service. Christ will reward them accordingly.
3. Acts 13:48 “And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” Question: Calvinists claim that this verse teaches:
i) Unconditional election of God ordaining some people to eternal life.
ii) A Limited number only are “ordained to eternal life.”
iii) This “ordination of God” is not to service or external privileges, but to eternal life.
iv) Irresistible grace, as seen from the words “as many as” meaning that all who are
ordained by God to eternal life will most certainly believe.
Answer: This text has been most pitifully misunderstood. Calvinists presume it to mean that those in the assembly who were foreordained, or predestined by God’s decree to eternal life, believed under the influence of that decree.
We must be careful to study what a word means before we attempt to fix its meaning.
In Greek, “ordained” here is “tetagmenoi” coming from the verb “tasso” (5021) meaning to: “appoint, arrange in military order, to determine, to order, to place in a certain rank or order, to dispose.”
i) Notice how these authorities explain this passage:
a) “It does not properly refer to an eternal decree, or directly to the doctrine of election; …but it refers to their being THEN (not in eternity past decreed) disposed to embrace eternal life.
They were then inclined by an influence from outside themselves, or so disposed as to embrace eternal life. It refers not to an eternal decree, but that then there was such an influence as to dispose them, or incline them, to lay hold on salvation. That this was done by the influence of the Holy Spirit, is clear from all parts of the New Testament.
(Titus 3:5,6; John 1:13). It was not a disposition or arrangement originating with themselves, but with God…
The meaning may be expressed in few words:- who were disposed, and in good earnest determined, to embrace eternal life, by the operation of grace on their hearts.” “Albert Barnes Commentary on the New Testament in One Volume”. p.464.
b) “Whatever “tetagmenoi” may mean, which is the word the KJV translates “ordained,” it includes no idea of preordination or predestination of any kind. The verb “tasso” signifies to “place, set, order, appoint, dispose”; hence it has been considered here as implying the disposition or readiness of mind of several persons in the congregation, such as religious proselytes mentioned in v.43, who possessed the reverse of the disposition of those Jews who spake against those things, contradicting and blaspheming, v.45.
Though the word in this place has been variously translated, yet, of all the meanings ever put on it, none agrees worse with its nature and known signification than that which represents it as intending those who were predestined to eternal life; this is no meaning of the term and should never be applied to it.”‘Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible’ p.995.
c) “Ordained: This is the perfect passive participle of the verb “tasso”, which was used primarily in the military sense: “draw up in order, arrange in place, assign, appoint, order.” R.J. Knowling comments: “There is no countenance here for the absolute decree of the Calvinists, since v.46 had already shown that the Jews had acted through their own choice, “but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn unto the Gentiles.” He goes on to say: “The Jews as a nation had been ordained to eternal life- but they had rejected this election. But those who believed among the Gentiles were equally ordained by God to eternal life, and it was in accordance with His divine appointment that the Apostles had turned to them.”
“Word Meanings in the NT”, Ralph Earle.
d) “There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an absolutum decretum of personal salvation. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away.” ‘Word Pictures in the NT.’ A.T. Robertson, Vol. III. p.200.
ii) Notice some other Greek words which were not used:
a) “DIATASSO” is a strengthened form of “TASSO”, frequently denotes to arrange, appoint, prescribe (eg. of what was appointed for tax collectors to collect, Luke 3:13; as God appointed Moses to make the tabernacle, Acts 7:44; what Paul ordained in all the churches about marriage, 1 Cor. 7:17; what the Lord ordained regarding the support of preachers, I Cor. 9:14). These show “Tasso” is not irresistable.
b) “PROTASSO” is to “appoint before”, as “pro’ means “before”. God “hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.” (Acts 17:26) of the nations. ‘Vines Expository Dictionary of NT Words’ p. 70,71. This word “protasso” is NOT used in Acts 13:48. If it had been used, it would have presented a stronger case for “foreordination.”
It’s absence is fatal to the Calvinist’s claim of unconditional election. c) “PROORIZO” = “To predestine, decree beforehand” is not used.
iii) The word “TASSO” is used 8 times in the N.T., with meanings as follows:
a) To command, or designate: “Into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.” Matthew 28:16.
Before Jesus’ death, he previously appointed or commanded them to meet him on a mountain. They could have disobeyed. There is no idea of irresistible compulsion. Jesus told Paul to “go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all the things which are appointed for thee to do.”Acts 22:10. The Jews at Rome “appointed Paul a day” to visit his house to hear him preach about Jesus. Acts 28:23.
b) To institute or appoint: “The powers that be are ordained of God.” Romans 13:1.
c) To determine, take counsel, resolve: “they determined that Paul and Barnabus…should go up to Jerusalem about this question.” Acts 15:2.
d) To subject to the authority of another: “For I also am a man set under authority.” Luke 7:8. The centurion was appointed or designated, as a soldier, to be under the authority of another.
e) To addict to, devote to:‘They have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints.’ 1Cor. 16:15.
The meaning of “TASSO” is thus:
I) “TASSO” is never used to denote an internal disposition or inclination arising from one’s own self. It does not mean that they disposed themselves to embrace eternal life.
II) “TASSO” means ordering, disposing or arranging from the outside, from some source other than himself. Eg. As of a soldier, who is arranged, classified, disposed or inclined by the will of his superior officer.
III) Key: “TASSO” in Acts 13:48 means that the Gentiles were THEN disposed, and in good earnest determined, to embrace eternal life, by the Holy Spirit influencing their hearts. It does NOT refer to an eternal decree of election, but they then experienced and submitted to a drawing power of the Holy Spirit to salvation.
5. PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS (POTS)
‘Perseverance of the saints’ is ambiguous and obscure. As POTS was originally formulated and interpreted, it is opposed to eternal security. POTS is not essential to Calvinism. Some Calvinists, recognising the Arminian implications of ‘perseverance’, change it to ‘preservation’.
If all Calvinists defined POTS as Rose does, we would have no argument with them on the fifth point.
‘The doctrine declares that once God has begun the work of salvation in any person, He will persevere therein to the end and will never let any of His own be lost’. (Rose, p. 49). However, most Calvinists do not emphasise this. They say that it is the believer who perseveres outwardly in the faith, as shown in these 3 quotes: ‘This doctrine teaches that those who truly come to saving faith in Christ will persevere in the faith.’ (Gunn, p 24). ‘We may entertain the faith of our security in Christ only as we persevere in faith and holiness to the end’. (John Murray, Redemption, p.155).
‘They whom God hath accepted in the Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere to the end, and be eternally saved’. (Westminster Confession of Faith, XVII:1). In spite of Calvinists’ attempts to connect them, God’s preserving in salvation is not the same thing as the saints persevering outwardly in the faith.
Six Conclusions from Calvinists’ Definition of Perseverance of the Saints
i) The saints will persevere in the faith.
ii) Only those who persevere in the faith are true Christians.
iii) Those who do not persevere in the faith are lost, no matter what they once professed. ‘Those who persevere not in faith and holiness, love and obedience, will surely perish’. (Pink, Eternal Security,p28). Since all Christians do not always persevere in perfect obedience, Calvinists are faced with a problem.
iv) The solution to Christians not persevering is that real Christians will return to the faith before death.
v) When faced with the problem that some Christians never return to the faith, Calvinists conclude that such were never saved in the first place.
vi) Calvinists’ definition of perseverance is that POTS is different from eternal security.
Key: Because eternal security is so often equated with POTS, Calvinists often coerce Christians into accepting all the 5 points of Calvinism, by capitalising on their opponents’ belief in eternal security. This is done by implying that a rejection of election and predestination (as taught by Calvinists) is a rejection of eternal security. The Calvinist, Mason, says: ‘If unconditional election is false, then the doctrine of “once in grace, always in grace” is false.’ (Mason, p 32).
‘If the doctrine of election is false, then this doctrine (POTS) is false too, but if the doctrine of election is true, then this doctrine (POTS) necessarily follows.’ (Palmer, p 69).
Many who believe eternal security think they are Calvinists because they equate it with perseverance of the saints.
Arminianism
Calvinists insist that there are only two tenable schemes among true Christians: Calvinism and Arminianism. According to Calvinists, anything contrary to Calvinism is Arminianism. Key: This arbitrary division of men into Calvinist or Arminian is the strength of the Calvinistic system. Calvinists make such shocking statements about Arminianism that no one would dare claim to be an Arminian. If there are only two theological systems, then most men who desire to appear orthodox would claim to be a Calvinist.
Calvinists further misrepresent their opponents by using the ‘guilt of association’ argument, by classifying Arminians with everything that is unorthodox or heretical. Calvinists then attempt to denigrate Arminianism by implying that Arminians believe in salvation by works. Calvinists think that only in Calvinism can we find the teaching of salvation by grace, so they charge any non-Calvinist with believing in salvation by works. This accusation is often enough to convert one to Calvinism. Key: When everything contrary to Calvinism is labelled Arminian, and Arminianism is presented in the worst possible light, many know they are not Arminian and take the name
of Calvinist by default.
Note:
i) Arminianism is not an acceptable alternative to Calvinism.
Calvinists think that if one rejects Calvinism, then he is an Arminian. To this we strongly object.
ii) Calvinists have a false view of eternal security. Their view on perseverance is the same as Arminians. a) R L Shank (an Arminian): ‘There is no saving faith apart from obedience (Life in the Son, R L Shank, 2nd Ed, p 219, Westcott Publishers, Springfield).
b)‘There is no valid assurance of election and final salvation for any man, apart from deliberate perseverance in faith’. (Shank, p 293).
c) A W Pink (Calvinist): ‘Reader, if there is a reserve in your obedience, you are on the way to hell’. (Practical Christianity, p.16).
d)‘Holiness in this life is such a part of our “salvation” that it is a necessary means to make us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in heavenly light.’ (Pink,
Sanctification, p.28).
Hence Calvinists have the same thinking on perseverance as Arminians.
Calvinists confuse God’s preservation of the believer with the believer’s perseverance in the faith, thus making salvation possible only with a holy life without any blemish. Hence, the other side of POTS is Arminianism, which is a works-based salvation, and not by faith alone. ‘not of works, lest any man should boast’. (Ephesians 2:9). ‘Not by works of righteousness which we have done …’ (Titus 3:5).
For a Calvinist to teach otherwise, is to teach another gospel (Galatians 1:6).
Key: Contrary to salvation through perseverance (as taught by Calvinists), the Bible presents salvation by one thing – believing.
‘This one word “believe” represents all a sinner can do and must do to be saved.’(LS Chafer,Salvation, p32 God saves those who believe (John 3:16; 6:47; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9). Those who refuse to believe are lost (John 3:18; 3:36; 8:24). Calvinists require that believers must persevere in good works as a condition of salvation. This is another gospel. Hence, Calvinists are Arminians regarding the fifth point. Calvinists and Arminians both wrongly presume that:
a) The ‘castaway’ in I Corinthians 9:24-27 has lost his salvation;
b)‘He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved.’ (Matthew 10:22). Calvinists think this means that one’s salvation is only sure by enduring to the end of one’s life. This passage, in fact, has nothing to do with anyone’s salvation in the Church age, but teaches that if Tribulation saints endure the Antichrist’s persecutions until the end of the 7 year Tribulation, then they will be saved/delivered from this persecution by Christ’s return. c)‘Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself (from carnality, not hell), and them that hear thee.’ (I Timothy 4:16). Calvin writes of this: ‘Pastors … own salvation and that of their people depends on their serious and earnest devotion to their office’. (Calvin, Commentaries, Vol 10, p 248). Calvinists and Arminians presume that the word ‘salvation’ always refers to salvation from hell. Salvation from hell is not meant in II Corinthians 1:6; I Timothy 2:15; Luke 1:71; Acts 27:31. Curtis Hutson wrote: ‘The eternal security of the believer does not depend on his perseverence.’ (p.16). The Calvinist E K Garrett calls Hutson an ‘Arminian Baptist Evangelist.’ Calvinists call any opponent an Arminian, no matter what they believe.
Note: The New Testament clearly teaches that Christians may not persevere. It is possible to:
1) Depart from the faith (I Timothy 4:1).
2) Err from the faith (I Timothy 6:10).
3) Err concerning the faith (I Timothy 6:20).
4) Deny the faith (I Timothy 5:8).
5) Make shipwreck of the faith (I Timothy 1:19).
6) Cast off one’s first faith (I Timothy 5:12).
7) Swerve from the faith (I Timothy 1:6).
8) Not continue in the faith (Colossians 1:23).
9) Fall from their own steadfastness (II Peter 3:17).
10) Become barren and unfruitful (II Peter 1:8).
11) Deny Christ (II Timothy 2:12).
12) Be ashamed when Christ returns (I John 2:28).
Bible characters that did not persevere include:
1) The Corinthian fornicator who was delivered to Satan (I Cor. 5:5) and later restored (II Cor. 2:6-8).
2) Hymenaeus and Alexander were also delivered to Satan (I Timothy 1:20).
3) Demas forsook Paul having loved this present world (II Timothy 4:10).
4) Mark deserted Paul (Acts 13:13), yet Paul later said, ‘He is profitable to me for the ministry.’ 2Tim4:11
5) ‘Just’ Lot (II Peter 2:7), ‘righteous’ Lot (II Peter 2:8) last seen drunk in a cave committing incest with his two daughters (Genesis 19:33,36).
Question: Did Lot persevere in the faith? No. A righteous man can turn from his righteousness and never turn back (‘When the righteous turneth away from his righteousness and commit iniquity.’ Ezekiel 18:24).
The Bible exhorts believers to persevere, and practise good works, but never in order to keep salvation.
a) ‘Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord.’ (I Corinthians 15:58).
b) ‘Keep yourselves in the love of God.’ (Jude 1:21).
c) ‘Be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your
mind.’(Romans 12:2). These and other Scriptures have no meaning if all Christians are sure to automatically persevere.
See Ephesians 2:10; Colossians 1:10; Titus 3:8; Hebrews 10:24.
Question : Why do some Christians not persevere? (Matthew 26:41.
a) ‘Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.’
b) ‘For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present
with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not’. (Romans 7:18).
Key: The error of Calvinists and Arminians is in discounting the Judgment Seat of Christ (Romans 14:10; I Corinthians 3:13-15; II Corinthians 5:10) where crowns are given. (I Corinthians 9:25;
I Thessalonians 2:19; II Timothy 4:8; James 1:12; I Peter 5:4).
Compare salvation and rewards:
a) Salvation is offered to the lost (John 3:18); rewards are offered to the saved (I
Corinthians 3:14).
b) Salvation is a free gift (Ephesians 2:8); rewards are earned by our works (I
Corinthians 9:25).
c) Salvation is a present possession (John 5:24); rewards are a future possibility (II Timothy 4:8).
Key: Christians are given many instructions on how to live, but never on how to maintain or persevere in salvation: ‘Abstain from all appearance of evil.’ (I Thessalonians 5:22);
See I Corinthians 10:31; Colossians 3:17; Philippians 4:8.
Question: What can happen to Christians in this life if they fail to persevere?
Answer: They may lose their joy; assurance of salvation; close fellowship with the Father, Christ and believers; rewards; and physical life, but they cannot lose their salvation.
Lordship Salvation: The Calvinist teaching of Perseverance of the Saints has recently surfaced among modern Fundamentalists and Evangelicals as ‘Lordship Salvation’, which is ‘front loading’ the Gospel by requiring works of submission and obedience as conditions for salvation. (Dillow, p.10).
The real issue here is whether a sinner must make Christ the Lord of his life at the time he believes on Christ for salvation. Lordship advocate, Otis, writes: ‘Friend, if Jesus Christ isn’t the Lord of your life, then you are yet lost in your sins.’ (Otis, p.7).
Notable propagators of Lordship Salvation are A W Pink, J I Packer and John MacArthur. MacArthur’s Calvinism is seen from his using terms like ‘sovereign grace’ and ‘perseverence of the saints’.
Errors of Lordship Salvation are:
1) Their denial that there can be a carnal Christian.
Answer: Paul referred to the Corinthian brethren as carnal: ‘And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.’ (I Corinthians 3:1).
2) Their denial that a believer has two natures which conflict: ‘For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.’ (Galatians 5:17). This states the possibility of Christians not ‘walking in the Spirit’ which is not practising the Lordship of Christ. ‘So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.’ (Romans 7:25).
3) They blur the distinction between a believer’s standing and state:
Answer: Standing is, ‘He hath made us accepted in the beloved’. (Ephesians 1:6) and State is: ‘Wherefore we labour, that whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.’ (II Corinthians 5:9). (See also Romans 5:1 and Philippians 4:7).
Standing concerns what I am as God sees me through Christ’s work. State concerns my actual condition of soul.
4) They accuse their opponents of ‘easy believism’ or believing in ‘cheap grace.’ Answer: In the Bible, grace is not only cheap, it is free, otherwise it would not be grace. ‘But not as the offence, so also is the free gift… much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, … hath abounded unto many.’ (Romans 5:15).
Question: What do we reply to the charge of ‘Easy believism’?
Answer: Are Calvinists advocating ‘hard believism’? What is ‘hard believism’? How hard is belief?
The Bible nowhere presents believing on Christ for salvation as something hard to do. (Except in the NIV’s false and foolish rendering of Mark 10:24). In fact, believing is the only thing one can do to claim salvation: ‘But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.’ (Romans 4:5).
It might be hard to admit that one is a sinner heading to hell, or hard to admit that trusting in religion or good works won’t save us, but once these are conceded, believing on Christ for salvation is easy.
Salvation is pictured as being as easy as calling on Christ to save (Romans 10;13); looking (Isaiah 45:22); asking (John 4:10); coming (Matthew 11:28); receiving (John 1:12); eating (John 6:51); drinking (John 7:37); trusting (Ephesians 1:13), and taking (Revelation 22:17).
Claiming salvation is easy, since Christ has done all the work on the cross.We can add nothing to it.
Note: Departing from the Bible’s plan of salvation is the only way that believing on Christ can be made difficult.
5) They confuse salvation and discipleship. Salvation is obtained in an instant. Discipleship is an
on-going process. Salvation costs us nothing. Discipleship costs us everything. (Luke 14:26,27).
That discipleship is not salvation, is seen from these Scriptures:
a) Some were disciples first and then Christians later: ‘his disciples believed on him’(John 2:11)
b) Judas was a disciple, but not saved (John 12:4).
c) Joseph of Arimathea was a secret disciple for fear of the Jews (John 19:38,39), yet still saved.
d) If discipleship is salvation, then Christ’s disciples lost their salvation when they lost their discipleship, because ‘all the disciples forsook him and fled.’ (Matthew 26:56).
6) They fail to understand that there are 3 aspects of sanctification.
This error leads to lordship salvation and perfectionism.
a) Positional sanctification: ‘ye are washed, but ye are sanctified,…by the Spirit.’ (I Cor. 6:11). ‘We are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all’. (Heb.10:10). God sees us sanctified positionally in Christ.
b) Progressive sanctification: ‘Sanctify them through thy truth’. (John 17:17). ‘For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication’. (I Thess. 4:3). As we gain victory over temptation, we are progressively sanctified.
c) Future sanctification ‘who shall change our vile body.’ (Philippians 13:21). ‘When he shall appear, we shall be like him.’ (I John 3:2). (future sanctification).
‘Every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself (progressive sanctification), even as he is pure (positional sanctification by justification)’. (I John 3:3).
The sanctification necessary for the salvation of any Christian has already been attained by Christ’s sacrifice. (Hebrews 10:10).
7) They have a distorted view of faith and repentance. Repentance is basically a change of mind about Christ, myself as a sinner, and the inability of my works to save me. Paul preached repentance as being different from turning to God and doing works: ‘that they should repent, and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance’. (Acts 26:20). Calvinists and Lordship salvationists wrongly define repentance as turning from sin, changing one’s life, remorse, etc.
Key: The obvious question is: How much must one turn from sin to be saved, when nobody can ever totally turn from sin? This brings us to works for salvation.
8) They rely on modern Bible versions to prove Lordship salvation. Compare KJV (correct) with:
Colossians 2:6 KJV: ‘As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him.
New International: ‘So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, so continue to live in him.’
Good News Bible: ‘Since ye have accepted Christ Jesus as Lord, live in union with him.’
Instead of reading ‘the Lord’ (KJV), many modern versions change it to ‘as Lord’ or ‘is Lord’.
Romans 10:9
Authorised Version (KJV): ‘That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,’ New International Version: ‘That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord”, …’ Good News Bible: ‘If you declare with your lips, “Jesus is Lord”, …’
II Corinthians 4:5
Authorised Version (KJV): ‘We preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; …’
New International Version: ‘For we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, …’
Good News Bible: ‘For it is not ourselves that we preach; we preach Jesus Christ as Lord.’
9) They don’t precisely define what Lordship salvation really is.
Otis writes: ‘Obedience to God’s commandments is submission to Christ’s Lordship.’ (p. 21). ‘Submitting to Christ’s Lordship is the constant obedience to God’s commandment.’ (p.25).
Answer: If this is true, then no Calvinist ever submitted to the Lordship of Christ. To walk as Christ walked is to really submit to his Lordship. This means sinless perfection which is impossible before heaven. God demands absolute perfection at all times. Anything less is a rejection of Christ’s Lordship. No Lordship salvation advocate says that a man must live absolutely sinless to be a genuine believer. But how much lordship is required to be one of God’s ‘elect’? Does smoking (as Spurgeon did) disqualify one from practising lordship? What about drinking alcohol, lying, coveting, pride, anger, bad thoughts? Calvinists reply that it is the habitual practice of these that prove one is lost.
Question: But how does one define ‘habitual practice’?
Question: What if someone surrendered to quitting all these the moment he was saved, but was unable to continually achieve it always? Is his salvation now questionable?
Key: The real problem is that Lordship salvation teachers have set up their own standards to measure a person’s salvation. If these standards are not met, they conclude he is not saved. Only if the person meets their standards do they consider him saved. ‘The gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth’ (Romans 1:16) not to every one who surrenders to the Lordship of Christ.
10) The difference between salvation and lordship is seen in Paul’s different instructions to unsaved and saved men:
To the unsaved: ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.’ (Acts 16:31).
To the saved: ‘I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service’. (Rom 12:1). No unsaved man could ever meet the demands for always 100% surrendering to Christ’s lordship.
The Calvinist John Robbins calls John MacArthur a semi-Arminian because of his book ‘The Gospel According to Jesus.’ ‘MacArthur’s book is very confused and dangerous. It does not present the Gospel according to Jesus, but another gospel, which is not the gospel at all, and similar to that of the Roman Church.’ (p.1,4).
Lordship salvation is dangerous because it gives:
a) a false assurance of salvation to those trusting their works to save them;
b) assurance of salvation based on our works, rather than a trust in Christ’s finished work on the cross.
Preservation by God or Perseverence by us?
If salvation is all of grace and entirely the work of God, it could never depend on whether a man persevered. Perseverence implies persistence, continuance and effort by us, and is a work of man.
1) a) The word ‘persevere’ is used only once in the Bible, in relation to prayer (Eph. 6:18), not salvation.
b) The word ‘preserve’ is used 5 times in relation to salvation: (II
Timothy 4:18.
- ‘The Lord shall deliver me from every evil work,and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom’
- ‘to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Christ Jesus, and called.’ (Jude 1).
- ‘The Lord shall preserve thy going out and thy coming in from this time forth, & even for evermore.’ Ps 121:8
- ‘The Lord … forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved forever.’ (Psalm 37:28).
- ‘Your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ (I Thessalonians 5:23).
2) Christians are united with Christ (‘in Christ’). The solution is to get out of Adam and into Jesus Christ: ‘For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.’ (I Corinthians 15:22). Believers are: ~ ‘joined unto the Lord.’ (I Corinthians 6:17);
~ ‘members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones’ (Ephesians 5:30);
~ ‘partakers of the divine nature’ (II Peter 1:4);
~ ‘crucified with Christ’ (Galatians 2:20);
~ ‘quickened with Christ’ (Ephesians 2:5);
~ ‘risen with Christ’ (Colossians 3:1);
~ ‘alive with Christ’ (Colossians 3:3-4);
~ ‘seated together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus’ (Ephesians 2:6).
This union with Christ is the central truth in salvation, and is pictured as a:
i) Foundation and its building (Ephesians 2:20-22);
ii) Vine and its branches (John 15:5);
iii) Husband and his wife (Ephesians 5:23,30-32);
iv) Body and its members (I Corinthians 12:12);
v) Shepherd and his sheep (John 10:14);
vi) Adam and his descendants (I Corinthians 15:22).
3) Question: Is salvation an instantaneous act of God, or is it a process that depends on man’s perseverence? Both Calvinism and Arminianism teach the latter.
4) Believers are preserved because of Biblical predestination that we are ‘predestinated to be conformed to the image of his Son.’ (Romans 8:29). This is one of the greatest promises and surest proofs of eternal security. ~‘we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.’ (I Corinthians 15:49).
~‘who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body.’ (Phil 3:21)
~‘we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him.’ (I John 3:2). Predestination is a Biblical doctrine, but Calvinists have misapplied it.
5) ‘If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.’ (II Timothy 2:13). Both Calvinists and Arminians teach that a man must continue believing throughout his life in order to be saved. (MacArthur, Gospel According to Jesus, p 172; Shank, Life in the Son, p 55,60). Both hastily refer to II Timothy 2:12 ‘If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us’. (II Timothy 2:12). This verse refers to Christ’s denying some believers the reward of millennial rulership if they deny him now. The next verse destroys Calvinist and Arminian perseverence: ‘If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself’. (II Timothy 2:13). Our preservation depends on Christ’s faithfulness, not on our perseverence. Christ would have to deny himself and his promises, if we lost His salvation, because we are in him (Philippians 1:1), no man can pluck us out of his hand (John 10:28), and we are part of his hand (Ephesians 5:30).
Calvinists make perseverance depend on something man does. Perseverance of the saints is a result of Reformation concern that ‘justification by faith’ would produce moral laxity in the church, so they teach that only those who persevere are truly saved.
Bad results of Perseverence of the Saints:
1) Lack of Bible teaching on: a) The Judgment Seat of Christ;
b) God disciplining backslidden believers in this life;
c) Gain or loss of heavenly rewards.
These subjects are rarely taught in churches that believe in works or perseverance for salvation.
2) Calvinists’ error is in equating preservation by God, with perseverance of the saints. God knows who is saved: ‘Man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.’ I Sam 16:7
3) Perseverance of the saints contains a false view of assurance of salvation,
because it makes salvation depend on election, and not on receiving Jesus Christ as Saviour.
Conclusion: Calvinism, according to John Wesley, “represents our Lord as a hypocrite, a deceiver of the people, a man void of common sincerity, as mocking his helpless creatures by offering what He never intends to give, by saying one thing and meaning another.” (Schaff, History, Vol. 8, p.566).
One’s view of election determines one’s method of evangelism. In Calvinism, there is no need for any evangelist at all, because the ‘elect’ are sure to be saved by ‘irresistable grace’ whether we preach the gospel or not. Refuting this, Paul warns, “Woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel.” (I Cor. 9:16).
It is sure that the more consistently a man practices his Calvinism, the less evangelistic he becomes.
When all else fails, Calvinists appeal to Charles Spurgeon’s ministry as proof that one can be both evangelistic and Calvinistic. Spurgeon’s successful, large church was not due to his Calvinism, but was because he inconsistently practiced his Calvinism.
Custance alleges that “when we depart from Calvinism with its emphasis on God’s sovereign grace and man’s helplessness, we constitute ourselves as sowers, germinators, & with the power to give life.” Paul departed from Calvinism: “my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds.” Philemon 10.
“(I) might save some of them.” (Romans 11:14). “that I might by all means save some.” (I Cor. 9:22).
“in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.” (I Cor. 4:15).
Source: “The Other Side Of Calvinism”, Laurence M. Vance, Vance Publications, PO Box 11781,
Pensacola, Florida, USA, 32524, Phone/Fax 850-474-1626. Used with kind permission of L.Vance.
4 KEY DEFINITIONS: Adoption, Predestination, Foreknowledge, Election.
Many people wrongly embrace Calvinism because:
i) They fail to correctly define these four terms, and
ii) They fail to study and understand all the scriptures discussing each term.
1. ADOPTION (Gk:huiothesia =son-placed = getting our resurrected, glorified bodies in heaven 5206). Four scriptures discussing ‘adoption’ are:
i) Present adoption for our soul: “ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.” Romans 8:15,16.
ii) Future adoption of our body: “For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, …waiting for the adoption, the redemption of the body.” Romans 8:23.
iii) Future adoption of our body: “to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, …” Galatians 4:5,6.
iv) Future adoption of our body: “Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children (Gk: sons) by Jesus Christ to himself…” Ephesians 1:5.
Definition: “Adoption” in the NT is “son placed”, not “son made.”
It comes from the Greek word “huiothesia” (5206), which is made up of two words, “huios” (a son, 5207), and “theso” (future tense of “to place” (5087)).
I. The Meaning of Adoption (huiothesia). See Ephesians 1:5.
Adoption is an act where God sets a goal, or placed a certain destination and position for the believer. That goal is:
i) To receive a sinless resurrection body (Romans 8:23),
ii) To be fully conformed to the image of Christ in heaven (Romans 8:29), and iii)To be introduced to the universe as fully glorified sons of God ( I John 3:2). Adoption in the NT does NOT mean “adopting a child born of other parents.”
Calvinists think that adoption means “son made”, which would prove from Ephesians 1:5 that we are predestinated to become saved. Since adoption means “son placed” in heaven, this refutes the Calvinist view of predestinated to be saved, and proves that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ. (Romans 8:29).
The difference between being “son made “ and “son placed” is as follows:
i) You are “son made” or made a son of God the moment you receive Christ as Saviour. As a son, God has provided some privileges and benefits that we will only receive in the future, when we get our resurrection body at Christ’s return.
ii) No one has been “son-placed” (adopted) yet. One time you will be. You belong to Christ now, just as much as you ever will be. But you have not yet arrived at the goal which God has predestinated you to become which is Adoption (or son placing).
Question: What is the background meaning and origin of being “son -placed”?
In the early days of the Roman Empire, when a boy was born into his family, he was cared for by his parents until he was 21 years of age. At age 21, they took their child and placed him in the marketplace before the public. This was his “son placing” event. From that time on he could sign his own legal documents, and possessed the full legal authority of a man. Note: This act at the market place did not make him a son. He was made a son when he was born into his parent’s family. At age 21 he was “son placed”.
Translation problem: The KJV translators could find no equivalent English word for “huiothesia”, this act of “son placing” at age 21, because “son placing” does not occur in our society. So the KJV translators used the word “Adoption” as the only word to express God’s transaction of placing a certain destination, position, inheritance and full legal status for the believer. Hence the translators have Paul using “adoption” in the NT to mean “son placed.” We can now see how Ephesians 1:5 does NOT teach that God predestines us to be saved, but that God predestines us to be “son placed” after Christ’s return.
“Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children (Greek is “sons” in “huiothesia”) by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.” Ephesians 1:5.
II. The Time of Adoption (huiothesia = son placing). Romans 8:23. Question: When will this “son placing” adoption take place?
i) When our groaning, travailing bodies get redeemed when Christ returns.
“For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit,… waiting for the adoption, to wit the redemption of the body.” Romans 8:23.
The firstfruits in a believer’s life are pardon, forgiveness, service, fellowship, acceptance, security, sanctification, etc. Notice that adoption is not mentioned here among the firstfruits of the Spirit. We should have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groaning within ourselves and waiting for something to take place.
Question: What are we waiting for? The Adoption.
Question: When will it take place? At the redemption of our bodies when Christ returns. (Romans 8:23). We now have redeemed souls in unredeemed bodies. Many teach that the new birth and adoption mean the same thing. This is not the teaching of God’s Word. The new birth took place when we received Christ as Saviour, and became a child of God. Adoption will occur when we receive our glorified body. “That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.” Ephesians 2:7.
Question: When will believers experience the riches of his grace and kindness? Answer: After we are “son placed” in heaven in the ages to come. Christ came not only to
save us from the penalty and power of our sins, but He came that we might be “son placed.” The angels of heaven will gaze at us with an unbelievable amazement when they see the wonderful grace of the Lord Jesus in “son placing” saved sinners.
ii) We may not be much like Jesus now, but some day every believer will be like Him. “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” I John 3:1,2. This is the real purpose of God, to have many sons who would be like His Son. Thus we define Adoption as “God setting a goal for each believer to be son placed in heaven.” This is what God predestines us to be, and our adoption is therefore certain.
III. The Present Manifestation of Adoption. Romans 8:15.
“For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.” Romans 8:15.
These believers in Rome in addition to receiving Christ as Saviour, had at the same time also received the Spirit of adoption, known as the Holy Spirit. As a believer, we have not yet been adopted, but we
do have the Spirit of adoption. We are:
i) Now under God’s protection and care,
ii) We relate to God as children by obeying him,
iii) We call upon him as “Father” in loving confidence.
The Bible Knowledge Commentary states: “Because of present sufferings (Romans 8:18) believers,
like creation, groan inwardly (Romans 8:22) as they wait eagerly for their adoption as sons, which is identified as the redemption of their bodies. The word “adoption” (huiothesia) means “placing as a son”, and describes a believer’s legal relationship to God.
In one sense each believer has already received the adoption, because he has “received the Spirit of adoption” (Romans 8:15) and is a son of God (Galatians 4:6,7). At the same time, as Romans 8:23 states, believers still anticipate their adoption in its completeness, which is said to be the redemption of their bodies (Romans 8:23). This is called the “manifestation of the sons of God” (Romans 8:19), and the “glorious liberty of the children of
God” (Romans 8:21). It will occur at the rapture of the church when believers will be raised and transformed with glorious bodies. Paul called that day the “day of redemption.” (Ephesians 4:30). Walvoord and Zuck. p.472,473.
IV. The Participants in Adoption – “we.” Galatians 4:5.
“To redeem them that were under the law, that WE might receive the adoption of sons. And because
ye are sons…” Galatians. 4:5,6.
Question 1: Who looked forward to the adoption of sons?
Answer: “We.” This means that Paul and the Galatians both did. Only those who are “son made”
will be “son placed.”
Question 2: Why did Jesus Christ come?
Answer: a) To redeem them (everybody) that were under the penalty of the law. b) That we might receive the adoption of sons.
Comments by Other Authorities.
i) “Adoption: What is that to which God has foreordained us? The answer is: adoption. The Greek word is “huiothesia”, which occurs in Romans 8:15,23; 9:4; Galatians 4:5, and Ephesians 1:5. Literally the term means “a placing as a son.” “Adoption of children” (KJV, Eph. 1:5) is literally “adoption as sons.” We become children of God by the new birth; we become sons of God by adoption. The latter is a legal term. Adoption was not a Jewish custom, but a Roman one.” “Word Meanings in the NT.” R. Earle. p.289.
ii) “Waiting for the adoption (Romans 8:23): Waiting for the full blessings of the adoption. Christians have the spirit of adoption when they are converted (Romans 8:15), but they have not yet been admitted to the full privileges of their adoption into the family of God. The fullness of their adoption is their complete admission to the privileges of the sons of God. It is the completion of our being received into the family of God. “The redemption of the body”. The complete recovery of the body from death and corruption. The particular and striking act of the adoption… will be the raising up of the body from the grave, and rendering it immortal and eternally blessed. The particular effects of the adoption in this world are on the soul. The completion of it will be seen particularly in the body; and thus the entire man will be admitted into the favour of God, restored from all his sins, and all the evil consequences of the fall. In the presence of an assembled universe he will be acknowledged as a son of God. This elevated privilege gives to Christianity its high value.” Barnes Notes on the NT. p 608.
2. PREDESTINATION (Gk: “proorizo” = to determine or to decree beforehand. 4309). It comes from 2 Greek words, “pro” (before, 4253) and “horizo” (to determine, 3724). Let us study the 6 times it occurs in the NT (Acts 4:28; Romans 8:29,30; 1 Cor. 2:7; Ephesians 1:5,11.)
The peace of Christendom has been disrupted due to many people misunderstanding this word.
I. Definition: “Adoption” is an act where God sets a goal (son placing) for each believer. “Predestination” is an act where God makes that goal (of son placing) certain for each believer.
Note: “Predestination” is made up of 2 words, “pre” meaning “beforehand”, and “destination” meaning the “climax, end, farthest extent.” It has nothing to do with anything in between. Illustration: By paying a train fare beforehand, the railway promises to deliver you to your destination.
II. The Purpose of Predestination.
Question 1: What are we predestined to become?
Answer: i) The Adoption of sons, or “son placing” us in heaven.
“Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children (sons) by Jesus Christ himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.” Ephesians 1:5.
ii) Conforming us to the image of Christ:
“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose”. (What is God’s purpose?)
“For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.” Romans 8:28,29.
(Note: ‘Firstborn’ (4416 Gk: “prototokos” means “pre-eminent, first, ruler”, not “firstcreated”). iii) Becoming like Jesus Christ:
“Beloved, now are we the sons of God (“son born”), and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.” 1 John 3:2.
III. The Time of Our Conforming to the Image of Christ. Question 2: When will we be conformed to the image of Christ?
Answer: When our body is redeemed (Romans 8:23) in heaven. That is the time of our adoption.
“We ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption (Gk: huiothesia (5206) = son placing), to wit, the redemption of our body.” Romans 8:23.
IV. The Church in Ephesians.
a) In Ephesians 1-3, we have the church as God sees her, accepted (v.6), redeemed, forgiven (v.7), an inheritance (1:11), sealed with the Holy Spirit (1:13), enlightened in understanding, hope of his calling, riches of glory, great power (1:18,19), Head of the church (1:22), quickened (2:1,5), raised and seated in heavenly places (2:6), his workmanship (2:10), near to God (2:13), broken partition (2:14), abolished enmity of the 10 commandments (2:15), reconciled (2:16), access to the Father (2:18), fellow citizens, household of God (2:19), built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ chief cornerstone (2:20), holy temple (2:21), habitation of God (2:22), Jews and Gentiles fellowheirs (3:6), demonstrating the wisdom of God to principalities and powers in heaven (3:10), boldness and access with confidence (3:12), family of God (3:15), inner strength (3:16), Christ in our hearts, rooted and grounded in love (3:17), filled with the fulness of God, knowing the love of Christ (3:19).
b) In Ephesians 4,5,6, we see the Church as God desires the world to see her, in her walk and work (Note 40 elements to walk worthy from 4:1).
c) In Ephesians 1:4,5 God decided before the foundation of the world that He would have a church with its foundation “in Christ”, and that it would be a holy, blameless, and loving church. The words “us” and “we” in Ephesians refer to the church as Christ’s body.
d) God does not predestine individuals to heaven or hell. The only individual God predestines is Christ, and it is to suffering and to glory: “the Spirit of Christ…testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should folow.” 1 Peter 1:11. It is blasphemy to say that God predestines individuals to hell.
V. NT Occurrences of “Predestination.” (proorizo (4309) = determine beforehand).
a) Acts 4:28 “For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.”
Herod and Pilate crucifying Jesus was predetermined or foreordained by God.
b) “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son… Whom he did predestinate, them he also called…” Romans 8:29,30.
c) “but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery,..which God ordained before the world unto our glory.” I Cor. 2:7. We proclaim God’s wise plan of salvation. It’s purpose was for our glory and benefit.
d) “Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself…” (v.5) “being predestinated according to the purpose of him…” (v.11). Ephesians 1:5,11.
3. FOREKNOWLEDGE (proginosko (4267) = to know beforehand).
This comes from 2 Greek words, “pro” (before, 4253), and “ginosko” (to know, 1097). “For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son” 1 Pet 1:2
I. Definition: Foreknowledge is a divine attribute, where God sees all things in the present tense. There is no past or future with God. God is “I AM”, eternally present tense. Neither time nor space restrict God, since He created both (2 Peter 3:8).
Because God foreknows all things, it doesn’t mean that He foreordains or causes them.
II. Scriptures Teaching God’s Foreknowledge
i) Psalm 139:1-8 “Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar of…and art acquainted with all my ways. (v.3)…thou knowest it altogether (v.4).”
God knew David, his thoughts, his whole life conduct, at all times and in all places.
ii) John 8:55,58 Jesus said: “I know him (my Father)”, and “Before Abraham was, I am.” Jesus knew all things that existed before him in the present tense.
4. ELECTION (Greek: ekloge (1589) = to choose, select). Election in Romans 9: “God’s Election of Israel.”
9:1 “I say the truth in Christ, I lie not.”
Paul here makes one of the most solemn oaths possible. He makes a 3-fold appeal to:
i) Christ as the searcher of hearts, that he tells the truth.
ii) His Conscience was totally clear in this matter.
iii)The Holy Ghost bore him witness that what he said was true.
This oath in the Name of the Messiah shows that it is right on solemn occasions to appeal to Christ for the sincerity of our motives, and for the truth of our words.
Christ Who is present everywhere with all believers (as God) searches our hearts to detect insincerity, hypocrisy and perjury.
9:2 “That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.”
Paul moved from the joy of thinking about Christ in Romans 8, to the sorrow and burden of unsaved Israel in Romans 9. Whenever Paul thought on Israel’s rejection of Christ, it gave him great grief.
9:3 “For I could wish that myself were accursed (Greek: anathema) from Christ for my brethren my kinsmen according to the flesh.”
Question: What does this mean?
A: The word “accursed” (Greek: anathema) means anything devoted to destruction, complete ruin or subject to a curse (I Kings 20:42). (Compare “anathema” = curse, with “anathēma” = suffering). It does not denote eternal death. Paul is saying: “I am willing to be destroyed, devoted to death, suffer the bitterest evils, to forego all pleasure, to endure any privation, suffering and toil if it resulted in saving the nation Israel.” Moses had this attitude (Exodus 32:32). Paul was willing to be so greatly devoted to Christ and to suffer and die if by that means he could save Israel. This is an example to all Christians that we should be willing to endure pain, privation, toil & death if this resulted in others getting saved.
9:4,5 “(i) Who are Israelites; (ii) to whom pertaineth the adoption , and (iii) the glory, and
(iv) the covenants, and (v) the giving of the law , and (vi) the service of God, and (vii) the promises; (viii) whose are the fathers, and (ix) of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.”
Background: Romans 9 discusses Israel’s past election. Romans 10 discusses Israel’s present rejection.
Romans 11 discusses Israel’s future restoration to favour.
In Romans 9, Paul shows how Israel’s past history magnifies the character and attributes of God, those being His faithfulness (v.1-13), righteousness (v.14-18), justice (v.19-29), and grace (v.30-33).
In Romans 9:4,5 Paul mentions 9 historical benefits of Israel:
i) Who are Israelites: They were descended from Israel (formerly Jacob) meaning “prince of God” (Genesis 32:26-32). The name “Israelites” conveyed their very high dignity as a royal nation as being princes of the Most High God.
ii) The Adoption: God adopted the nation Israel into His family.
“Israel is my son, even my firstborn.” (Exodus 4:22). “I am a father to Israel.” (Jeremiah 31:9).
“When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.” (Hosea 11:1). “The LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself…” (Deuteronomy 7:6).
This adoption took place when God made a covenant with them at Mount Horeb.
iii) The Glory: The shekinah glory cloud was the manifestation of God’s very presence among them.
It appeared as the pillar of cloud and fire as they left Egypt (Exodus 13:21).
It appeared between the cherubim in the Ark of the Covenant in the Tabernacle (Exodus 25:22 and 40:34), and in Solomon’s Temple (1Kings 8:10,11; Isaiah 6:1-5).
The glory Moses beheld on Mt. Sinai came to dwell with Israel (Exodus 24:16,17; Isaiah 6:1-5).
No other nation was ever thus favoured.
iv) The Covenants given to Abraham (Genesis 15:18), Moses and David (II Samuel 7:12-16).
The Covenants included the Abrahamic (Genesis 12:1-3; 15:1-7; 17:1-8), the Mosaic (Exodus 20,21), the Davidic (2 Samuel 7:10-16; 1 Chronicles 17:7-15; Psalm 89:27-37), and the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 34).
v) The Giving of the Law on Mt. Sinai to govern Israel’s political, social and religious life (Exodus 20; Deuteronomy 5:1-33). It was the foundation of all true legal codes ever since.
vi) The Service: The ceremonies and sacrifices in the temple teaching the sinfulness of sin and the holiness of God.
vii) The Promises include the land of Canaan, the Messiah’s blessings, and His coming 1000 year kingdom on earth.
viii) Whose are the fathers: some of the greatest men that ever lived were Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, Samuel and David.
ix) And of whom as concerning the flesh came Christ who is over all (Most High) God blessed forever. Amen.
Question: Does Romans 9:5b refer to God or to Christ?
If it refers to Christ, it would clearly prove His Deity as reading “Christ who is over all God blessed forever. Amen.” There were no commas in the early NT Greek manuscripts. The placing of commas, full stops and question marks were inserted by the translators’ opinion. Does Romans 9:5b equate Christ with God? We say it does refer to Christ as God because:
i) The KJV, ASV, NASV, NIV put a comma before ‘who’. This endorses the Deity of Christ. KJV: “of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.”
NIV: ‘from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised’.
This reading is supported by most church fathers.
ii) The RV, RSV, NEB, GNB, NWT place a full stop after “Christ”.
Thus they don’t equate Christ with God. They merely make the end of the verse a benediction to God.
GNV:‘Christ,as a human being, belongs to their race. May God, who rules over all, be praised forever’
NWT: ‘from whom Christ (sprang) according to the flesh: God, who is over all, (be) blessed forever’. Answer: We endorse i) for these reasons:
i) The antithesis implied between the 2 clauses in the verse, favours this view. Paul has just stated that Christ (as to his human nature) was an Israelite, and now states that according to His higher nature, is the supreme, Most High God, or “God over all.” These are a matching contrast, an appropriate antithesis, and are complementary to each other.
For a similar example see Romans 1:3,4 “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, And declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.”
Here Christ is said to be according to His human nature, the Son of David, but according to His Divine nature declared to be the Son of God.
ii) Romans 9:5b makes 3 statements about Christ.
He is Lord over all, He is God by nature, and He will be praised and blessed forever. Paul’s salvation experience and scripture study forced him to redefine his Jewish monotheism to include Christ within the category of Deity.
iii) The relative pronoun “who” must agree with its nearest antecedent, which is “Christ.” This link proves Christ is the Supreme God. There is grammatical agreement between the noun “Christ” (ó Christos) and the participle “who is” ( ó ων).
iv) Context: The blessing to Christ best suits the context. It is a natural climax to the list of special privileges enjoyed by the Jews. It would be very unnatural to suddenly change the subject, and break out in blessing to God.
v) Word Order: Those who deny that Romans 9:5b teaches the Deity of Christ, must make the word “blessed” (Gk: eulogatos) refer to God the Father as a Doxology to Him. Examples:
-The Revised Version (1880) reads: “…according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed forever. Amen.”
-The Good News Version reads: “May God, who rules over all, be praisd forever! Amen”. -The New World Translation reads: “flesh: God, who is over all, [be] blessed forever.Amen.” They are faced with a major difficulty, as follows:
Whenever “blessed” (Gk: “eulogatos”) occurs in an independent doxology, “eulogatos”
always precedes the name of ‘God’ (Θεος =theos) (eg: “εϋλογητος ó εоς” as in
2Cor.1:3;Eph.1:3;1 Pet 1:3
But in Romans 9:5, “eulogatos” follows the name of God: “ εоς εϋλογητος ”.
The word order of doxologies is never “God blessed” or “God be blessed” as in Romans 9:5.
(In doxologies to God or Christ, the word “blessed” (“eulogatos”) always occurs first. This is not the case in Romans 9:5).
Hence Romans 9:5 cannot be a doxology to God, but must be taken as a declaration of who is blessed, that being Christ as God. This potent argument is conclusive in itself.
vi) Absence of the article before “blessed.” Because “εϋλογητος” (“blessed”) is not preceded by the article in Romans 9:5, the meaning cannot be “the blessed God”, which
would require a different reading “(ó) εоς ó εϋλογητος.” See “Jesus as God.” Murray J. Harris. p.161.
vii) “over all”is equivalent to “Most High, supreme.” We may read Romans 9:5b as: “as concerning the flesh came Christ who is Most High God blessed forever. Amen.” The same words occur in Ephesians 4:6, “One God, who is above all.” (επι παντων). This passage, therefore, shows that Christ is God in the highest sense of the word. Since Jesus Christ is God over all, and blessed forever, how profound should be our reverence, how complete our obedience, and how joyful should be our confidence in Him.
viii) The expression “Christ who is over all (things) God blessed forever. Amen,” is expressly acknowledged to refer to Christ by 60 well known early church writers, these being: Irenaeus, Hippolytus (3 places), Origen, Malchion, 6 Bishops at the Council of Antioch (269 AD), ps. Dionysius Alex (2 places), the Apostolic Constitutions, Athanasius (6 places), Basil (2), Didymus (5), Gregory of Nyssen (5), Epiphanius (5), Theodorus Mops, Methodius, Eustathius, Eulogius (2), Caesarius (3), Theophilus Alex (2), Nestorius, Theodotus of Ancyra, Proclus (2), Severianus Bishop of Gabala, Chrysostom (8), Cyril of Alexandria (15 times), Paulus Bishop of Emesa, Theodoret (12 times), Gennadius, Severus, Amphilochius, Gelasius Cyz., Anastasius of Antioch, Leontius Byz (3), Maximus, J. Damascene (3), Tertullian (2), Cyprian, Novatian (2), Ambrose (5), Palladius the Arian at the Council of Aquileia, Hilary (7), Jerome (2), Augustine (30 times), Victorinus, the Breviarum (2), Marius Mercator, Cassian (2), Alcimus Avit, Fulgentius (2), Leo Bishop of Rome (2), Fernandus (2), Facundus, plus 6 ancient writers. All these see in Romans 9:5 a glorious assertion of the eternal Godhead of Christ. “The Revision Revised,” John Burgon, p. 210-214.
ix) If the theme of Romans 9:1-4 is Israel’s unbelief, it would be very appropriate to end the paragraph by referring to the exalted status and nature of Israel’s rejected Messiah. It would be totally inappropriate to conclude with a joyful praise to God in the context of Israel’s rejection of Christ.
x) Since Paul elsewhere taught that Jesus shares the full names, nature, attributes and functions of God, we should not be surprised to see Paul here referring to Jesus as God.
xi) The phrase “blessed forever” was usually added by Jewish writers after mentioning God’s name as an expression of reverence.
I Chronicles 16:36 “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel for ever and ever.”
I Chronicles 23:13 “to minister unto him, and to bless his name for ever and ever.”
I Chronicles 29:10 “Blessed be thou, Lord God of Israel our Father, for ever and ever.” Nehemiah 9:5 “Stand up and bless the Lord your God for ever and ever.”
Psalm 72:19 “Blessed be his glorious name for ever.” Psalm 145:1 “I will bless thy name for ever and ever.”
Daniel 2:20 “Daniel said: Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever.” Romans 1:25 “the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.”
Conclusion: As opposed to the indignity and rejection perpetrated on Jesus by His fellow Israelites, the Messiah, Jesus Christ, is in reality exalted over the whole universe, He is fully God by nature, and is eternally the object of worship.
9:6 “Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect.”
In spite of these 9 privileges, Israel failed by rejecting and crucifying their Messiah. Question: Does Israel’s failure mean that God’s word has failed? (Or taken none effect). No.
Question: What is the “word of God” here?
Answer: The word of God means anything that God has spoken, and here it refers to the promises to Abraham regarding the salvation of Israel. These include
“I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant.” (Genesis 17:7);
“But my covenant will I establish with Isaac.” (Genesis 17:21); (Gen.17:19.
“I will establish my covenant with him (Isaac) for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.”
“For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel.” (Romans 9:6)
All the natural descendants of the patriach Israel (Jacob) are not the true people of God. Here Paul distinguishes between the natural seed and the spiritual seed of Abraham. Romans 2:28,29 “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly...But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly;”
9:7 “Neither because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” Natural descent from Abraham does not secure the promised inheritance. The seed, or natural descendants of Abraham, are not all true spiritual children. But, in Galatians 3:7 we see “They which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.” Israelites cannot conclude that because they are Abraham’s natural descendants, that they are all the children in whom the promised inheritance will be fulfilled. “but in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” (Romans 9:7b and Genesis 21:12).
God chose Isaac as the son through whom the line of Christ and the covenant promises to Abraham would come. “But my covenant will I establish with Isaac.” (Genesis 17:21). This has nothing to do with God choosing Isaac to be saved and Ishmael to be damned,
because in Genesis 21:13 God assured Abraham that Ishmael would have a future because he too was Abraham’s offspring. “And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.” (21:13)
9:8 “That is they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”
a) The children of God are not those who descend from Abraham’s loins, nor those who are circumcised as Abraham was (children of the flesh). This opposed the popular Jewish thinking that being an Israelite entitled them to the covenant blessings and to being children of God.
b) Who are the children of the promise? Galatians 4:22-31 is a parallel passage:
“And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal. 3:29); “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.” (Galatians 4:28). Believers are the children of the promise in the same sense as Isaac was. The main idea is that the birth of Isaac was supernatural (when Sarah was age 90, humanly impossible, promised 10 years earlier), so believers in Christ are the children of God by virtue of a supernatural, spiritual birth (John 3:6-8), and heirs of the promise made to Abraham. Hence Isaac was born because of a promise, and was also heir of the promised blessings. “But he (Ishmael) who was of the bondwoman (Hagar) was born after the flesh (Abraham’s will): but he (Isaac) of the freewoman (Sarah) was by promise (v.23).
Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants: the one from the mount Sinai (Mosaic covenant of Law), which gendereth to bondage (of the Law, 10 Commandments), which is Agar (v.24).
But Jerusalem which is above (New Covenant of Christ by faith from heaven – Rev.21:2) is free, which is the mother of us all (v.26).
Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise (v.28).
So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.” (v.31). (Galatians 4:23-31).
9:9 “For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.”
This is the promise made to Abraham in Genesis 18:10,14 and 21:1,2.
“At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.” (Genesis 18:14). This promise was fulfilled one year later in Genesis 21:1,2: “And the LORD visited Sarah as he had said and the LORD did unto Sarah as he had spoken. And Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him.”
Meaning: God here assured Abraham that the promise would come through Isaac, not Ishmael.
“At this time” means “at the exact time promised, the prediction will be fulfilled.”
Note: God comes or visits whenever He especially manifests His presence or power in answering prayer. Luke 1:68; 19:44; Ezekiel 38:8; 1 Peter 2:12; John 14:23.
9:10 “And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
9:12 It was said unto her, the elder shall serve the younger. 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”
Calvinist argument 1: Calvinists claim that this passage teaches that God chooses (elects) both to
1) national privileges of Isaac and Jacob to be in the line of promise (we agree), as well as
to
2) the personal salvation of individuals to eternal life, such as Isaac and Jacob and the personal damnation to hell of individuals such as Ishmael, Esau and others (we strongly disagree).
Answer: Paul is only explaining the basis of Israel’s national election to be in the line of God’s promises to Abraham. This passage is to be taken in a national sense, not a personal sense because:
i) v.4-6 explain nine national blessings of Israel. In spite of these blessings, Israel failed by rejecting and crucifying Christ. Does this mean that God’s Word had failed? (taken none effect v.6)? No.
ii) The whole context of Romans 9,10,11 refers to Israel’s past choice as the nation of Abraham’s blessings (9), present rejection of Christ (10), and future restoration as the nation of God in the millennium (11).
iii) “The elder (Esau) shall serve the younger (Jacob).” Romans 9:12. Personally Jacob never did exercise any power over Esau, nor was Esau ever subject to (or serve) Jacob. Jacob was subject to Esau and was greatly afraid of him. (Genesis 32:8; 33:3). But nationally this was true.
iv) Jacob personally acknowledged Esau to be his lord (“Let my lord pass over before his servant” Genesis 33:14), and himself to be his servant ( “Thy servant Jacob” Genesis 32:4; “The children which God hath graciously given thy servant.” Genesis 33:5).
v) Neither Esau, Jacob or their descendants are given here as examples of personal damnation from eternity, because many, if not most of Jacob’s descendants were wicked and rejected by God. Some descendants of Esau were saved.
vi) The nation of Esau (Edom) did serve and was inferior to the nation of Jacob (Israel) as seen by their future history. The nation of Edom was subject to Israel under David. Edom was finally subjected under the Maccabees. Edom’s history was outside the privileges and spiritual blessings of Israel.
vii) “The purpose of God according to election might stand,…it was said unto her “The elder shall serve the younger.” v.11,12. This clearly refers to election to service of Esau’s nation to Jacob’s nation. The purpose of God’s election was for Esau’s descendants to serve Jacob’s descendants.
viii) The context of Romans 9:12 “The elder shall serve the younger” is from God’s prophecy to Rebekah in Genesis 25:23 where He said “Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.” This declaration refers not to Esau and Jacob personally, but to their posterity, their descendants as 2 nations.
Notice that a) God says nothing about the salvation of Jacob or Esau, but only that “one people shall be stronger;…and the elder shall serve the younger.” Genesis 25:23 shows that Romans 9:12 refers to the national posterity of Esau (Edomites) and not to Esau as an individual. The national descendants of Esau would be subject to the descendants of Jacob. Jacob was to have the priority, the promised land the promises and the honour of being God’s chosen people.
b) God here refers to the babies as “two nations.”
ix) Romans 9:13 “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”
Two problems need to be resolved about this verse:
a) These words are not referring to God loving and saving Jacob personally, and hating and damning Esau personally, but refer to each of their nations. God did not say this before they were born.
God hated Esau’s descendants because of their idolatry, continued wickedness and persecution of Israel. (See Obadiah). These words are quoted from Malachi 1:2,3 which were spoken 1400 years after their birth. They refer to God loving the nation Israel, and loving less the nation of Edom: “I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob’s brother? Saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste…”
b) The word “hate” means “to love less, to regard and treat with less favour.”
It was common among Hebrews to use the terms “love” and “hate” in a comparative sense where “love” implied strong positive attachment, and “hate” meant not positive hatred, but merely less love, or withholding affection. Examples of this are:
~Genesis 29:33 “Leah said, Because the LORD hath heard that I was hated (by Jacob)…” ~Proverbs 13:24 “He that spareth his rod hateth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth
him betimes” ~Matthew 6:24 “No man can serve two masters, for either
he will hate the one and love the other…” ~Luke 14:26 “If any man come to me,
and hate not his father and mother, and wife, children, brethren, . sisters,
yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.”
~John 12:25 “He that loveth his life shall lose it; he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.”
Conclusion:
a) Paul and Malachi are not discussing the persons of Jacob or Esau, but their national descendants.
b) God’s love to Jacob, or God’s hatred to Esau did not determine their eternal destiny to heaven or hell
c) There is no Biblical or rational basis for the foolish Calvinist idea of unconditional election.
d) God does not hate sinners. God loves sinners as John 3:16 makes clear. The statement concerns national election to service, not individual election to salvation.
Romans 9:11,12.
Calvinist argument 2: Calvinists claim that because Romans 9:11 says that God’s election of Jacob and Esau took place before their birth and apart from their works, then these two ideas prove that God unconditionally and personally elects some to salvation and others to damnation, before their birth.
Answer 2: This Calvinist argument can be simply resolved by remembering that this entire passage discusses God’s national election of Isaac and Jacob to inherit the promises and blessings made to Abraham. It does not mention individual election to salvation anywhere in the passage. To think so is adding to scripture and is the sin of presumption. God’s election of Israel was not based on a) natural descent (9:6-10) or b) human merit (9:11-13). All the passage states is that God had a separate plan for Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob and Esau. In eternity past God chose each to serve God in a certain way and to fulfil God’s plan for their lives. Their salvation or damnation is not in the text. So God has a different plan for each believer’s life ever since. God has a different task for Paul, Peter, John, you and me. The purpose of God according to election was for life service and not for eternal salvation. Notice that in each case God chose the second born child to inherit the promises to Abraham, and bypassed the eldest son. This brings us to define the Biblical doctrine of Election.
ELECTION (Greek: ekloge (1589) = to choose, select).
Definition: Election is a Divine choice, where God (for reasons known only to Himself), in the blessing of mankind, sets aside the firsts, and chooses the seconds.(“For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth), It was said unto her, The elder
shall serve the younger.”
Question: What is the purpose of God according to election? (v.11). Answer: Service: “The elder shall serve the younger.” (v.12).
The firstborn serves the younger. The greater shall serve the lesser. God sets to one side the elder or the first, and chooses the younger or the second through whom the blessing would come.
Question: What Biblical examples do we find of God setting aside the first and choosing the second?
i) Ishmael (Abraham’s firstborn) was set aside, and Isaac (Abraham’s secondborn) was chosen.
ii) Esau (Isaac’s firstborn) was set aside, and Jacob (Isaac’s second born) was chosen.
iii) Reuben (Jacob’s firstborn) was set aside, and Judah (Jacob’s fourth born) was chosen for the line of Christ to continue through. (1 Chronicles 5:1,2).
iv) Manasseh (Joseph’s firstborn) was set aside, and Ephraim (Joseph’s secondborn) was chosen by Jacob and God for the promised blessing. “his younger brother shall be greater than he,… and he set Ephraim before Manasseh..” Genesis 48:17-20.
v) Saul (Israel’s first king) was set aside, and David (Israel’s second king) was chosen by God for the line of Christ, Kings and blessing to continue through. (1 Samuel 15:23,28; 2 Samuel 7:1-17).
vi) Eliab (Jesse’s first born) was set aside, and David (Jesse’s last born, or eighth) was chosen to be king of Israel. (1 Samuel 16:1-13).
vii) Adam (the first man) was set aside, and Jesus Christ (the second man) was chosen to be the head of the human race. (1 Corinthians 15:47).
viii) The first heaven and earth will be burned and set aside, and the second heaven and earth will be created to last forever. (Revelation 21:1,2).
ix) Our first corruptible body will be set aside,& replaced by an immortal resurrection body.1 Cor. 15:35
x) The Mosaic Covenant was set aside, and the New Covenant of Christ was chosen to replace it.
“For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” Heb. 7:6,7,13.
xi) The Ten Commandments of Moses have been set aside (Eph. 2:15; 2 Cor. 3:7, 11; Heb. 8:13-9:4; Gal. 4:24, 25), and the New Testament Law of Christ was chosen to replace it. (Romans 8:2).
xii) The Sabbath (the Mosaic day of worship) was set aside, and Sunday (the N.T. day of worship) was chosen to replace it. (1 Cor. 16:1,2; Acts 20:7).
xiii) The OT offerings were set aside. Christ’s perfect offering on the cross was chosen to replace them.
Election is not God choosing some to be saved and others to be damned. To believe this would limit the work of Christ on the cross, and would label God as a respecter of persons. 9:14 “What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.” What do we conclude?
Question: Does God choosing Isaac and Jacob, whilst not choosing Ishmael and Esau to inherit the promises, privileges and blessings show God to be unjust or unrighteous?
Answer: By no means, because, whatever God does is right. He may dispense His blessings to whoever He chooses, for whatever reasons He chooses. We don’t know all the facts as God does, so we are in no position to charge God with unrighteousness (injustice) or to tell Him what to do. Each of us must best use our talents to honour God and further His kingdom. God has given every one of us unique and exciting opportunities to serve Him. We should not charge God with unrighteousness because God may have given someone else a different or apparently better ministry, talents or position.
Calvinist argument 3:
9:15 “For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Calvinists here cannot resist the temptation to read personal salvation into another verse teaching national election to earthly privileges. Calvininsts jump to the conclusion that mercy and compassion are limited to personal salvation. They read this verse as “I will save whom I will (the elect) and I will damn whom I will (the non-elect).” God says no such nonsense.
Question: On whom will God have mercy? Only the elect? No.
Answer: Romans 11:32 tells who are the objects of God’s mercy.
“For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon ALL”. How many people are the objects and beneficiaries of God’s mercy? The text clearly says that God has mercy upon ALL people. God not only has mercy on a few, but His mercy is bestowed on all men.
Question: What is the significance of Exodus 33:19 from which Romans 9:15 is quoted? Answer: As God showed His mercy to Moses by making all His goodness pass before him, as well as proclaiming the name of YHWH before him, so God made it clear that no act of grace or mercy was merited by man. Mercy comes from God because God is essentially good, gracious, and merciful. It is God’s will and pleasure to bless man and to be merciful to him. God will bestow mercy on all men in whatever way He sees fit. This verse does not say that God will only have mercy on a predetermined number of people. It states that it is God who shows mercy and grace. It is God-given, not man-given.
Calvinist argument 4:
9:16 “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.” Calvinists again introduce personal salvation into a context discussing God’s election of individuals into the national privileges of promises to Abraham.
Answer: All this verse teaches is that God is the original cause of showing mercy to us in allocating our role of service to Christ in this life. “So then” links this back to v.15. The making or continuing of any people as the people of God is determined by the mercy of God, and not by the will or efforts of men.
Calvinist argument 5:
9:17 “For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.”
9:18 “Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” Calvinists make two claims to support their position here:
a) God raised up (or called into existence) Pharaoh to declare God’s name through all the earth, all along intending to damn him to hell as non-elect. They claim he was unconditionally elected to hell.v17 b) God hardened Pharaoh from the beginning as part of God’s predestined plan to use him, then send him to hell as non-elect. (v.18).
Answer: a) 9:17 Question: What does “raised up” mean? Does it mean: ~ I have called Pharaoh into existence, and raised up Pharaoh as King? or
~ To preserve alive, to raise Pharoah from sickness of boils, to cause Pharaoh to continue at his post?
This second idea is correct because Hiphil verbs mean the continuance of a thing. Hence, Hiphil of “to live” means to “preserve alive.” (Genesis 6:19,20; 19:19).
Romans 9:17 is quoted from Exodus 9:16 “for this cause have I raised thee up, for to shew in thee my power.” “Raised thee up” means “I have sustained or supported thee.” That is, I have kept thee from death, I have strengthened Pharaoh by healing his boils which were “upon all the Egyptians” (Ex. 9:11-16). I have restored you to health by removing your boils, and by postponing your destruction to a later day, so that I may demonstrate my power in your final overthrow so that all mankind may learn that I am the righteous Judge of all the earth.
“That I might shew my power in thee” means that God’s power (Romans 9:22) was demonstrated to all the earth by the mighty miracles He performed in defeating Pharaoh’s military as He freed the Israelites from under Pharaoh’s hand. Other nations heard about it and were awed at God’s might (Exodus 15:14-16; Joshua 2:10,11; 9:9; 1 Sam. 4:8 (300 years later)). God kept Pharaoh in circumstances which were fitted to develop his true character,and to accomplish some great purposes by his existence and conduct.
b) Question: Does God hardening Pharaoh’s heart prove unconditional election of Pharaoh to hell? NO
Answer: Whom does God harden? Those who purposely harden themselves against God. God showed mercy on Pharaoh even while Pharaoh hardened his heart.
Question: Who hardened Pharaoh’s heart? Was it Pharaoh himself or God who hardened his heart? BOTH. In Hebrew, of the 20 passages discussing Pharaoh’s hardening, exactly 10 ascribe it to Pharaoh himself, and 10 ascribe it to God. Although in the KJV only the word “harden” is used, yet in the Hebrew 3 different words are used. (See “Old Testament Bible History,” A.Edersheim, Vol.1, p.59,60).
i) Exodus 7:3 qashah (7185) = to make hard or insensible.
ii) Exodus 10:1 kabed (3513) = to make heavy, or unimpressionable.
iii) Exodus 14:4 chazaq (2388) = to make firm, stiff, immovable.
Before the 10 plagues, when Aaron converted the rod to a serpent, Pharaoh hardened his heart himself. (7:13,14). After each of the first 5 plagues (7:22; 8:15, 19, 32; 9:7) Pharaoh hardened his heart himself. After the sixth plague (9:12) for the first time do we read that “the Lord made firm the heart of the Pharaoh.” After the seventh plague (9:34), we read that Pharaoh made heavy his heart.
After the eighth plague God hardened his heart (10:1).1 Sam 6:6 Egyptians and Pharaoh hardened their hearts.
Pharaoh hardening himself God hardening Pharaoh
Ex. 7:13 Firm Ex. 4:21 (God informed Moses before the
7:14 Heavy (1st p 7:3 contest of the outcome). Insensible
7:22 Firm 9:12 (6th plague)
8:15 Heavy (2nd plague) 10:1 (8th plague) Unimpressionable
8:19 Firm (3rd plague) 10:20
8:32 Heavy ( 4th plague) 10:27
9:7 Heavy (5th plague) 11:10
9:34 Heavy (7th plague) 14:4 Immovable
9:35 Firm 14:8
13:15 Hard 14:17
God, by declaring His Word and revealing His power, gave Pharaoh opportunity to repent, but instead, Pharaoh resisted and hardened his heart. The fault lay not with God, but with Pharaoh. The same sunlight that melts the ice, also hardens the clay. The outcome depends on what is inside the person. God was not unrighteous in His dealings with Pharaoh because He gave him many opportunities to repent. Pharaoh made a determined choice of evil, from which neither warning nor judgment would turn him away. Thus he hardened his own heart. (Exodus 8:15).
God bestows his mercy and blessings on one part of mankind (OT Jews and NT Gentiles), while He suffers another part (Egyptians of Moses’ day and Jews during the Church age) to harden themselves in sin, until God judges them or brings them to repentance. Paul says nothing here about eternal life or hell. He never says or implies that God has created man (or Pharaoh) for the purpose of damnation.
Reprinted with permission from Pastor Keith Piper. http://www.keithpiper.org/
Dean. www.calvarystudy.info
http://calvary-study.blogspot.com/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-53GaMT9JMtMPzukkeD6MA
