Is Calvinism's TULIP Biblical? (Intro and Total Inability)
[This is based on a post I found online: What's wrong with Five-Point Calvinism? I was going to send a copy of that post to my relative who is in jail awaiting trial, but I ended up adding so many of my own notes that it became a whole new post. (But there are still some very similar parts, and I give credit to the author of that post for what he wrote. Read it. It's short and good and worth reading.) My relative (who dabbled in, if not embraced, Calvinism, at least back in the day) shares what I send with the women on her floor, doing their own little Bible study. And so I figured, "Why not send them my thoughts on Calvinism since I know they will read it?" And as a bonus, the cops have to read every letter that passes between us, and so they will have to read it too! A captive audience! (Ha Ha! Bad joke. But if I don't laugh, I'll cry.) Anyway, this is what I sent to her, a "brief" look into Calvinism's TULIP. This is part one of three, but for the whole TULIP post in one, click here.]
There is an aggressive cancer that’s invading the Church and many Christian colleges and seminaries today. It’s called Calvinism, an unbiblical theology that stems mostly from John Calvin's view of Scripture from the 1500’s. (Most of his beliefs come from Augustine.) It is spreading into the Church with little awareness or opposition. In fact, most people in the Church today are ignorant about what this theology is and how it differs from and contradicts the Bible, and so most do not recognize it as a danger or know enough about it to question it. (And sadly, many Christians have not studied God’s Word for themselves well enough to know what the Bible really says.) And the spread of Calvinism thrives on this ignorance, on people who allow themselves to be manipulated into accepting it.
(I recently found my 20-years-old "Required Books" list for my college classes - a college that's well-known for training today's preachers - and for my Intro to Theology class, we had to read books by Grudem, Piper, and Packer. All huge Calvinists. But I had no idea back then. I assumed that since they all taught from the Bible, they must all be biblical. Well, you know what happens when you assume things! For a big list of Calvinists, see this post.)
Briefly, on the bottom line, Calvinism is a theology which believes that God has predestined who goes to heaven (and consequently, who goes to hell), that Jesus only died for those He predestined to heaven, and that God (in His sovereignty) essentially preplans, causes, and controls everything that happens, including our thoughts, choices, and sins, to make it all work out just like He predestined. (And most of Calvinism's hundreds of pages of theological writing is an attempt to cover those bottom-line ideas up, to make them sound better and more reasonable and more biblical than they are, to try to force Scripture to teach these things when it really doesn't.) Calvinists have said that if there was even one speck of dust that God didn’t actively control, then He wouldn’t, couldn’t, be God.
Calvinist preachers often use deception and manipulation to spread their theology. (And once you see it, you can't unsee it. Maybe it's my training as a counselor that helped me see it when others didn't.) They deceive by using the same words, concepts, and verses that all Christians use, but they have very different meanings which they keep hidden for as long as possible so that they can reel you slowly and stealthily into Calvinism. And they manipulate by making those who agree with them feel smarter, more humble, and more godly, and by shaming those who would disagree with them. (I watched it happen firsthand.)
[Many pew-sitting Calvinists do not think of themselves as being deceptive though and are not necessarily trying to be deceptive; they’ve just been taught the Calvinist answers so thoroughly – and embraced them as Biblical Truth – that they themselves can’t even see the errors, contradictions, or deceptions in it anymore. They're repeating what they've been taught, confident that the Calvinist teachers have taught them correctly. It’s sad.
While I will call Calvinism heretical, I do not like to call Calvinists themselves "heretics" because that's getting too personal. Many of them are good, godly, fellow-believers who are just as saved as I am, and they are doing their best to try to live the faith as they've been taught. They just don't realize they've been taught things that contradict the plain truth of Scripture. They truly think it's just a "deeper" understanding of Scripture. It's sad. And I think these people need to be helped, not condemned as heretics.
But the teachers of Calvinism, the leaders, well, that's a different story. They are the ones pushing these heretical views on the trusting masses. And so my fight is not with the average pew-sitting Calvinist whom I believe has been manipulated and trapped into Calvinism, but it's with the Calvinist preachers and teachers who are doing the trapping and manipulating, the ones who should know best what the Bible really teaches because they've spent years in school studying it. They will be held doubly-accountable for leading others astray.]
Such as, Calvinists will agree that “For God so loved the world …,” but what they really believe is that “God does not love all individual people, but He loves all kinds of people, the elect (the people He predestined to heaven) from all over the world.” (Or they break God's love up into 2 different kinds: a saves-your-soul one for the elect but merely a gives-you-food-and-sunshine one for the non-elect.) But they hide this so that you think they’re really saying that God loves all people. They don’t reveal too much too soon of their real beliefs so that people don’t reject Calvinism or push back. They need time to slowly reel you into Calvinism, without you even realizing it. (I have even read of Calvinist pastors bragging about doing this.)
[We noticed that the Calvinist pastor in our ex-church always says this: "God loves people. He loves peoples." Why does he always follow up "people" with "peoples"? And why does he stress the word "peoples"? Because he doesn't mean "all individual people" when he says "people." He means "all people groups, all kinds of people" - peoples - which he confirmed once when he preached "God does not love all people, and He doesn't love all people the same." See "Calvinism 101: "Free-Will Choice" is not really "Free-Will" or "Choice" for more like this. ("People" sounds like a funny word when you say it over and over again.)]
Calvinist pastors also manipulate people into Calvinism by praising those who agree with them, making you think you’re more humble, intelligent, and God-glorifying than those who believe in free-will, convincing you that you’re learning/accepting the “deeper truths” of Scripture if you agree with them, making you feel like you’re with them on the “elite” level of Christian intellectuals. And they manipulate by shaming anyone who might disagree with them, painting those who will disagree as unhumble Christians who oppose God’s Truth, steal God’s glory, resist God’s authority, deny God's sovereignty, and take credit for their salvation, ensuring that people will be afraid to speak up because no one wants to be accused of that or have others view them as "bad" Christians. And this manipulation often starts early, when the pastor gets into a new non-Calvinist church and starts to “reform” it (to turn it into a Calvinist one), and it often starts before they even reveal their Calvinism, to pre-condition people into accepting – or at least not vocally opposing - whatever they are going to teach. I've seen it happen. [See "Predestination Manipulation" for more.]
But to know what’s wrong with Calvinism and why we should oppose it, I urge you to compare Calvinism’s Five (main) Points to the plain, commonsense, easily-understood teaching of the Word of God. As you do this, ask the Holy Spirit to guide you into truth.
I once heard this from someone who opposes Calvinism: All that really needs to be known about the gospel - about Jesus, God’s love, how to be saved, etc. – can be understood by a child. I love that! It’s so true! But Calvinists would have you think that you need to do months and months of study with a Calvinist teacher, reading big Calvinist books written by highly-educated Calvinist men to understand what God really meant to say.
What do you think? Do you think God intended His gospel message (how to be saved) to be easily understood by all in a plain, clear, commonsense way ... or do you think He wrote one thing but means another, that He has secret, deeper, hidden layers underneath the surface layer (and that contradicts the surface layer, the plain, commonsense meaning of a verse) and that He expects us to discover the hidden "truths" by spending months reading Calvinist books or listening to Calvinist preachers telling us what they learned from Calvinist books?
John 20:31: “But these [the Scriptures] are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”
Does God mean what He says and say what He means ... or not? When God says He loves all people and Jesus died for all people, does He really mean all people ... or not? When He says "seek Me," does He mean it's possible for people to seek Him ... or not? Etc.?
[If you're a Calvinist who's getting worried right now because you're thinking "Oh no! I've been believing a lie all this time! What do I do? What should I think?", let me just say this: Don't worry, because the true biblical truth is even more beautiful than what you've been told by Calvinists. What God did for you, He can do for anyone.
God loves all people and wants all people to be saved (not just the elect). Jesus died for all people, paying for all men's sins on the cross (not just the elect). And He offers the gift of eternal life to all people, for anyone to accept. No one is beyond God's reach, beyond His love, grace, forgiveness, healing, salvation, etc. It's for all people, not just the elect. And so no one is hopeless. No one is predestined to hell, unable to be saved. God loves all, Jesus died for all, and God offers salvation to all (but He leaves it up to us to accept it or reject it).
But in Calvinism, God truly loves only the elect, Jesus died for only the elect, and God offers salvation only to the elect and so only the elect can/will be saved, and so the non-elect have no hope at all, no chance to be saved.
The truth biblical truth of the gospel is so much more wonderful, hope-filled, gracious, loving, etc., than what Calvinism teaches, because in the Bible, no one is beyond hope. Anyone can be saved.
(Not to mention that in the Bible, God is not the cause of sin and unbelief, but He gives us the ability to choose our own decisions/actions and then He responds accordingly. But in Calvinism, He is the ultimate cause of all sin and unbelief but then He holds us responsible for it, for what He predestined and caused. Can you see the damage this does to God's character and to people's faith in Him and trust of Him?)
The truth of the Bible is so much more beautiful and hope-filled and life-giving and "for all people" than Calvinism ever could be. And so don't worry. When you give up Calvinism for the plain teachings of the Bible, you get something so much better!]
Another bit of manipulation that Calvinist pastors use (among many others) is that they will remind us that God wants the church to be unified, and then they will accuse those who disagree with them of being “divisive,” of trying to cause trouble, of trying to split the church. This makes people afraid to speak up. Yes, God wants unity, but He doesn’t mean He wants us to be unified around an unbiblical theology. In this case, “division” - causing “trouble/split” - is necessary. You don’t treat cancer by trying to live in harmony with it, by giving it room to grow. Well, Calvinism is a cancer, and so we need to do our best to “cut it out,” to keep it from destroying God’s Truth and infecting the rest of the Church.
2 Timothy 4:3-4: “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from truth and turn aside to myths.”
Galatians 1:8: “But even if we or an angel should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!”
2 Corinthians 11:13-15: “For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.”
Calvinist Loraine Boettner has said that if you prove any one point of Calvinism true then you have to accept the whole thing (because all points hinge on each other) but that if you prove any one point false then the whole system must be abandoned. Calvinists try to get you to swallow Calvinism whole by convincing you that if you agree with their first point (Total Inability) then you must agree with all of it. But according to Mr. Boettner’s own advice about Calvinism, if you find any one point of Calvinism to be wrong (to contradict what God plainly said in His Word) then you should and must abandon the whole thing.
And so what are the Five Points of Calvinism, which are known as the acronym “TULIP"? (Did you know tulip bulbs are poisonous and can cause death?) They are:
1. Total Inability (also called Total Depravity, but it's really Total Inability)
2. Unconditional Election
3. Limited Atonement
4. Irresistible Grace
5. Perseverance of the Saints (I agree with Calvinists that true believers cannot lose our salvation, but not for the reasons they say. I will explain later.)
This will not be a deep study of these points or an examination of the Bible verses Calvinists use to support Calvinism. (Always look up the verses they use - read the whole chapter too, with the help of a good concordance - to see if they're using them correctly and in-context. The more you do this, the more you find that they twist verses out of context to try to support Calvinism. See 'Defend Your Calvinism' Challenge" and "According to the concordance... It's NOT predestination" and "A Quick Study of Calvinism's Favorite Words" and "Is the ESV a Calvinist Bible?" for more insights, tips, and help.) This post is simply to help the average Christian who wants to know the basics of Calvinism, the deceptions they use, and how Calvinism contradicts Scripture.
(FYI: The God of the Bible and the god of Calvinism are not the same God. Keep this in mind when Calvinists talk about “God.” Their version of God – how He acts, how He saves, what He expects from us, how He treats us, what Jesus’s death accomplished, etc. – is very different from the Bible’s God, which is why I often call the god of Calvinism "Calvi-god," to help you know when I'm referring specifically to Calvinism's distorted version of God.)
[And for the record, I'm not saying you can't get a lot of good teaching from a Calvinist preacher. 95% of what they teach could sound great, setting off no alarm bells. And I think there's enough truth in there that unaware people could find the Lord through it. God can use anything, good or bad. But when you know what the last 5% is - the bottom-line of Calvinism, the hidden layers they cover up with the 95% good stuff - it all becomes tainted, and you can't listen to even the good stuff from them anymore because you understand what they really believe and how deceptively they present it.]
Now, onto the points (and FYI, my version shows you Calvinism as it really is, unvarnished, with the sugar-coating taken off, stripping off the nicer-sounding layers that Calvinists add when they try to make it sound more biblical than it really is):
1. Total Inability
Calvinists don’t believe in free-will, that God gave us the ability to make decisions for ourselves (within boundaries, of course) or that He gave all people the ability to believe in Jesus. In Calvinism, mankind is so totally depraved that there is nothing good inside us, nothing to make us want good or God. We are so spiritually dead and depraved that we are totally unable to do anything to be saved, including wanting/seeking God, repenting, believing in Jesus, or even wanting to be saved. They think that “believing in Jesus” is a “work,” and since we can’t work our way to heaven then it must mean that we can’t choose to believe in Jesus either. Therefore, since we have no ability to believe in Jesus, God must make us do it, and He only makes the elect do it.
According to them, way back in eternity past, God chose all the people who would go to heaven (the elect), and He causes all of them to be “born again” by giving them the Holy Spirit who makes them “spiritually alive” (regenerating their spiritually-dead hearts and minds), giving them “saving faith” that causes them to seek/want God, to repent, to believe in Jesus. Everyone else is “non-elect,” predestined for hell, never able to believe or be saved because God withholds faith/salvation from them, causing them to be unbelievers, to remain unrepentant sinners. There is nothing we can do about whether we go to heaven or hell because God made the decision for us, controls our thoughts, and causes it to happen.
However, Acts 17:30 tells us that God “… commands all people everywhere to repent.” And if He commands it, then He expects us to do it, which has to mean that we can do it, that He made it possible. And 2 Peter 3:9 says that God is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." God truly wants all men to be saved, and so He made it possible for all men to be saved. Do you think God would give us commands but then cause us to disobey them? Would He predestine most people to hell but then say that He wants all men to be saved and no one to perish? Does God make a mockery of us and of His commands by telling us to do things that He prevents us from doing?
Calvinists would say that, yes, God can and does command people to do things (repent, believe, obey) that He prevents the non-elect from doing, and that He commands us not to do things (sin, disobey, reject Him) that He then causes us to do. [But they disguise the word “causes” as much as possible to hide it, to make it sound like Calvi-god doesn’t cause sin when he really does. They will say “Of course, we have free-will and choose what we want to do,” but they mean that God gives each of us the will, the nature, He wants us to have, which comes with the specific desires He wants us to have (to repent or not, to sin or not, to seek God or not, to believe in Jesus or not, etc.), and these desires cause us to “freely choose” to do what He predestined us to do, and we couldn’t choose to do anything different. But how in the world is that “free will” or “choice”? So deceptive!]
They will say “Yes, God commands all people to repent, but that doesn’t mean that all men can repent. God can command people to do things but then prevent them from doing it and punish them for not doing it - because He is sovereign and can do whatever He wants, for His glory. Who are you, O man, to talk back to God?” (Can you hear the manipulation?)
But does this sound biblical? If it were true, what would it do to God’s character and Word? Does God say He wants us to do one thing when He really wants, preplans, causes us to do the opposite, but then He punishes us for what He caused? (Calvinists say "yes.") Does that sound like a holy, loving, righteous, just God who can be trusted? (Calvinists say "yes.") Can we trust any of His commands then, that they are what He really wants us to do? [Example: God says to not sleep with your neighbor's spouse. But if you sleep with your neighbor's spouse, Calvinism would have to say that it was ultimately predetermined/caused by God for His pleasure, plans, and glory, and that you couldn't have chosen differently. And so I ask, "What was God's true Will for you: His command (to not sleep with your neighbor's spouse) or the thing He predestined/caused you to do (sleep with your neighbor's spouse)?" Can you see what a theological mess this causes?] And why give commands to us anyway if we have no ability to decide to obey them or not? What a mess! And what an attack on God’s Word, Truth, commands, and character!
Calvinists will say “Yes, God wants all men to be saved and no one to perish, but He has ordained that there will be people in hell anyway because He gets glory for displaying His justice and wrath against sin. And so even though it makes Him sad that there will be people in hell, He does it for His glory.” But is it really justice to punish people for something they had no control over, for what He predestined/caused them to do? Can an unjust God be trusted? And what would it say about God if He was glorified by causing evil, sin, and unbelief?
“Oh,” the Calvinist says, “but God gets to define what’s justice and what’s not, and we can’t understand it with our limited understanding. And so justice might look like injustice to us. But to God, it’s justice.” But if there is no discernable line between justice and injustice, doesn’t it just mean that justice and injustice are essentially the same thing to God? That good and evil are the same? And then how can He tell us over and over again in His Word to seek/administer justice if there’s no way to tell the difference between the two?
[Oh, and Calvinists tell us that we should not/cannot use human logic to evaluate God's Word (they mean their view of God's Word: Calvinism), that we can't subject His Word (their Calvinism) to logic, meaning that we cannot ask the kinds of questions I'm asking in trying to determine if Calvinism is biblical or not. And why would they say this? Because they know that Calvinism falls apart under logical scrutiny, and so they have to shame you into not asking questions like these, while presenting themselves as so humble and God-honoring for doing so. Very cult-like manipulation and control!]
So now let's look at some of the concepts that are part of this first TULIP petal and that lead to the Calvinist misunderstanding of Scripture:
What is "Sovereign?": One of Calvinism’s big, fundamental flaws is that they misunderstand “sovereign.” Calvinists might deny it (but listen to how they talk), but they define “sovereignty” as: “Since God is all-powerful and in-control, He must preplan, cause, and control everything that happens, even sin and evil, or else He wouldn’t, couldn’t, be an all-powerful, in-control God.” (Telling God how He has to act in order to be God is a foolish, dangerous thing!)
But really and biblically, “sovereign” isn’t about how God has to act or use His power; it’s about the position of power and authority He has. He is the highest authority there is, and He can use His power and control however He wants to, even deciding to not actively control everything, to give men free-will, to simply allow (not cause) various things to happen (and then working it into His plans).
So, what do you think the Bible teaches about how God has chosen to be and to act, to exercise His power and control, to interact with people, and about the responsibilities and freedoms He has chosen to give to mankind? Can you find biblical examples of free-will, of God not preplanning, controlling, causing everything? Consider these verses (I haven't yet seen a Calvinist adequately address these or incorporate them into their theology):
Hosea 8:4 (God's words): "They set up kings without my consent; they choose princes without my approval."
Jeremiah 19:5 (God's own words): "They have built the high places to Baal to burn their sons in the fire as offerings to Baal - something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind." (So, who causes and is responsible for our sins: us or God?)
Isaiah 30:1: "Woe to the obstinate children," declares the Lord, "to those who carry out plans that are not mine..."
Psalm 33:10: "The Lord foils the plans of the nations ..." (Does God first cause us to have plans but then He foils the plans He caused us to have? Silly and contradictory. What kind of a God is that?)
Acts 14:16: "In the past, he [God] let nations go their own way."
1 Kings 20:42: "He said to the king, 'This is what the Lord says: 'You have set free a man I had determined should die.''" [So Calvi-god predetermined that they didn't carry out his predetermined plan!?! Does that make any sense to you? How "sovereign" can Calvi-god be if the thing he predetermined to happen didn't happen? And then which one was his true Will: kill the man or don't kill the man? If it's "kill the man," then Calvi-god caused the people to not do his Will (he willed that his Will didn't get done). But if it's "don't kill the man," then he gave a command at first to put the man to death that he didn't really mean. Either way, he's untrustworthy and nonsensical.]
And if God alone controls every single movement that everyone and everything makes, then why would He need to put "boundaries/limits" around things, such as when He put a boundary around the forbidden tree in the Garden of Eden, and a limit on how far the sea can go in Job 38:11, and a protective hedge around Job and limits to what Satan could do to him in Job 1? Boundaries/limits are only needed when there is freedom to move within those boundaries.
So, do you think Calvinists understand God’s sovereignty correctly or incorrectly? And what problems does it cause and what damage does it do to view it incorrectly, the way they do?
What are the differences between a god who preplans, causes, and controls all sin and evil for his glory, but who punishes us for it (Calvinism’s god) … and the God of the Bible who gave us free-will, the right to make choices, who allows (not causes) us to sin and make bad choices and reject Him, who punishes us for sins we (not He) are responsible for, and yet who can turn all bad things around and work them into His plans for good and for His glory? Which God can be trusted, and which can’t, and why? Which one is truly holy, righteous, and just?
Which God would you rather have: The god who causes all your sins and all the evils done to you (but who will punish us for it) because he really did want it to happen, for his glory … or the God who really doesn’t want bad/evil things to happen and who isn’t glorified by it but who allows it to happen because He gave people free-will, but He can and will take all the evil/sins we do and the ones done to us and work it into His plans, turning it all into something good, for us and for His Kingdom and glory? If, as Calvinism teaches, God is the ultimate cause of all sin and evil, if He is the very reason for all our sinful traumas and tragedies and for the evil Satan works in our lives, then who could we turn to for help, healing, comfort, and justice for all these things?
Born-again when?: Now onto the order that Calvinists give to being born-again, having faith, repenting, believing, etc. As said early, Calvinists believe the elect were chosen for salvation before time began, and so basically they were saved before they were ever born. (In fact, they've always been saved and were never on their way to hell or in danger of hell. And so technically, Calvi-god does not actually rescue anyone from hell. All he does is make those who are already saved realize they are already saved.) And then eventually, Calvi-god causes all the elect to believe in Jesus, but only after he makes them born-again (after he gives them Calvi-Holy Spirit who causes them to have faith so that they can believe).
Do you get this? Do you hear what Calvinism is teaching? In Calvinism, being born-again comes before/leads to believing in Jesus. In Calvinism, faith in Jesus does not save, but being saved leads to faith in Jesus. As Calvinist Loraine Boettner says in his The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination: "A man is not saved because he believes in Christ; he believes in Christ because he is saved."
So, in Calvinism, the elect are saved first and then God causes them to be born-again (to get the Holy Spirit) who causes them to understand the gospel, respond to the gospel, repent of their sins, and to have faith/believe in Jesus. (So in Calvinism, the gospel doesn't and can't actually save anyone, because the elect are saved/born-again before being able to understand/respond to the gospel. And the non-elect can never respond.) Having faith in Jesus comes last, after being saved, born again, and filled with/regenerated by the Spirit.
But what do these verses clearly, plainly say about the order of things:
John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
Acts 16:31: “… Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved …”
Romans 10:9: “… if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” (In these three verses, which comes first: eternal life/salvation or believing in Jesus? Which results in which?)
Acts 2:38: "Peter replied, 'Repent and be baptized ... And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'" (Do we need to get the Holy Spirit first to cause us to repent, as Calvinists say ... or does repentance lead to getting the Holy Spirit?)
Acts 11:18: “… So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto [that leads to] life.” (This verse is saying that God gave the offer of salvation, the ability to repent, even to the Gentiles, not just the Jews. Does being born-again cause us to repent, as Calvinists say ... or does repentance lead to life/being born-again?)
John 7:39: "By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive." (Do we have to get the Holy Spirit first to cause us to believe in Jesus, as Calvinists say ... or does belief in Jesus lead to getting the Holy Spirit?)
Ephesians 1:13: "And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit." (Once again, does getting the Holy Spirit lead to belief, as Calvinists say ... or does belief lead to getting the Holy Spirit? Also notice that the believers in this verse were not included “in Christ” until they believed. This contradicts Calvinism's view that all the elect people were pre-chosen in Christ from the beginning of time to be believers and that no one else can believe. The believers in this verse were not "in Christ" or sealed by the Holy Spirit until after they believed, and then they joined the body of Christ alongside those who believed before them.)
John 20:31: “But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” (Are we saved/born-again before we believe the gospel, as Calvinists say ... or after? Which leads to which?)
John 1:12: “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.”
John 3:15,36: “that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life… Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.”
John 5:24: “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”
John 6:40: “For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
I don't even have to tell you how to read these verses, nor am I trying to convince you that there's some deeper, hidden, contradictory meaning to them, as Calvinists do. I am telling you to read them for yourselves, as they are written, to see what they plainly and clearly teach. You can easily understand them for yourselves. There is no deeper, hidden, contradictory Calvinist meaning. You don't need Calvinist theologians to tell you how to interpret them. And these Scriptures clearly and repeatedly say the same thing: that believing in Jesus comes first, that it leads to spiritual life/being born-again/being saved/getting the Holy Spirit. Not the other way around, as Calvinists believe. Calvinists do not take God’s Word as it is written or at face value, the plain understanding of it. They add secret secondary-layers to verses and/or reverse the order of verses to make it fit their ideas, leading to a whole different gospel.
Biblically, we are saved because (and when) we believe in Jesus (and anyone can). But Calvinists reverse this to say that only the elect can and will believe in Jesus because only the elect are saved from the beginning of time. What a complete lie it becomes when you subtly twist the plain teaching of God’s Word!
Choosing and Seeking: And now regarding the Calvinist view that man does not have a free-will, the ability to make decisions, or the ability to seek/come to God unless God causes it to happen (they interpret Romans 3:11 - “no one seeks God” - as “it’s impossible for us to seek God”):
John 7:17: "If anyone chooses to do God’s will …"
1 Chronicles 22:19: "Now devote your heart and soul to seeking the Lord your God."
Psalm 119:30: "But I have chosen the way of truth..."
Deuteronomy 4:29: "But if from there you seek the Lord your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul."
Jeremiah 29:13: "You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart..."
Acts 17:27: "For God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him..."
Psalm 14:2: "The Lord looks down from heaven on the sons of men to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God."
Hebrews 11:6: "... anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."
Isaiah 55:6: "Seek the Lord while he may be found ..."
Amos 5:4, 14: "Seek me and live ... Seek good, not evil."
Proverbs 8:17: "... those who seek me find me."
Joshua 24:15: "But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve ..."
So what do you think? What does the Word of God clearly and repeatedly say? Does it sound like God expects us to seek Him, believe in Him, obey Him? Are these real commands we can follow? Could it be that God expects us to do these things because He made it possible for us to do them? Would He tell us to seek Him, believe in Him, and obey Him if He made it impossible for us to do so (and if He made the non-elect never able to do so)? Is He deceptive like that? Does He play word-games and mind-games with us?
[And so considering all the commands to seek Him (assuming they’re real commands we can follow), how else could we understand “no one seeks God”? Should we view all those other verses as “fake commands” just to fit the Calvinist view of Romans 3:11? Read the whole chapter in context to see if it’s teaching that it’s impossible to seek God unless/until God causes you to ... or if it’s really teaching something else, such as that Jews and Gentiles are all in sin, that no one has a right standing before God (apart from Jesus), that (left to ourselves) sinful people don't naturally pursue God which is why God pursues us (all of us), and that the Jewish people's good works and Jewish bloodlines can’t get them into heaven, which is why they, too, need Jesus in order to be saved, just like the Gentiles.]
If the Bible makes sense when it’s read plainly, in a commonsense way, then don’t go looking for hidden, deeper meanings, and don’t let anyone convince you that God really meant to say something else. That’s how false religions and religious cults get started.
John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” It’s as simple as that! Something even a child can understand. This is a real offer that God gives to all people, that anyone can believe and be saved. But Calvinists say that “whoever believes” means “only the elect” … because, in Calvinism, only the elect can and will believe. They don’t think a verse like John 3:16 is an offer to all people or instructions about how you can be saved. They think it’s simply a statement about how the elect are saved.
But what do you think? Overall, from beginning to end, does the Bible teach that God has given us the free-will to make real decisions (within boundaries) that have real consequences, that He holds us accountable for the choices we make, that He expects us to seek Him and find Him, that He gives us the choice about whether or not we put our faith in Jesus? Or does it sound like it’s all been predestined, that God controls all our choices and actions, that we have no effect on anything that happens in life or eternity, and that He will hold us accountable for what He ultimately caused us to do?
I would say that, over and over again the Word tells us that if we sin, disobey, ignore God, or reject Jesus, it’s because we chose to, not because God caused us to:
John 5:40, Jesus rebukes the Jews: "yet you refuse to come to me to have life.”
Romans 2:5: "But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath against yourself..."
Zechariah 7:11-13, about people resisting God: “But they refused to pay attention: stubbornly they turned their backs and stopped up their ears. They made their hearts as hard as flint and would not listen to the law or to the words that the Lord Almighty had sent by his Spirit through the earlier prophets. So the Lord Almighty was very angry. ‘When I called, they did not listen; so when they called, I would not listen,’ says the Lord Almighty.”
Romans 1:18-20: “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” [But wouldn’t “God caused me to not believe” be a great excuse!]
Matthew 23:37: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.”
Romans 11:20,23: "But they were broken off because of unbelief ... And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in ..."
God offers eternal life to all people. Jesus paid the price for all men’s sins. God did everything to make salvation possible and available to us. And all He asks us to do is to believe it, to accept Jesus’s payment for our sins. God has opened the door of salvation up to all people, and all He asks of us and requires of us is that we walk through it.
But Calvinism shuts the door of salvation to most people, declaring most people beyond God’s reach (by His design and for His glory), hopelessly, helplessly, eternally beyond His grace, mercy, forgiveness, and saving love. (Don't be deceived when Calvinists say "anyone can be saved." They don't mean that all people have the ability/option/opportunity to be saved, just that God could have chosen anyone to be one of the elect. Deceptive!)
How demonic! Satanically-inspired!
I mean, who else would try to convince us that we can’t seek God or believe in Jesus or be saved unless God makes us do it … when the Bible clearly shows that it’s our responsibility to seek God (responding to the call He places on all hearts and in His creation) and believe in Jesus in order to be saved? Who else would try to convince us that our eternal destinies are already determined and that we can’t do anything about it - that if you won the “salvation lottery” then God will cause you to believe (and so you don’t have to, and can’t, do it on your own) but that if you lost the “salvation lottery” then there’s nothing you can do about it anyway (so why bother?)? Who else would spread the idea that being born-again comes before hearing/believing the gospel (making the gospel superfluous, inconsequential, ineffective) and that being born-again comes before believing in Jesus (which is essentially being born-again/saved without believing in Jesus)?
Sounds satanic to me!
Total Depravity: Non-Calvinist Christians would agree that mankind is depraved, but we would mean that mankind is sinful and that because of our sins, we are separated from God and cannot save ourselves or work our way to heaven, and so we needed God to make salvation possible for us, available to us.
But Calvinists don’t just mean “sinful, fallen, separated from God” when they say "depraved." They mean that mankind is so totally depraved that there is no part of us that can do/think/want good or want/think about/seek God or even want to be saved. And this utter, complete, “total depravity” is why we are totally unable to come to God on our own, which is why He has to cause it to happen (for the elect only).
But once again, Calvinists start with a wrong understanding, this time of “depraved,” and then they read the Bible through that lens and twist Bible verses to fit their ideas. They use verses about how unbelievers are deceitful, ungodly, full of evil, dead in sins, love darkness, don't understand spiritual things, etc. to support their view. However, those verses simply describe life without God, but it doesn't say how they came to not believe in God or that they didn't have a choice about being that way or that there is no way they could become believers or that God has to cause people to believe. Calvinists read into verses things that are not there, twisting Scripture to fit their views.
They misinterpret "dead in sin" (I'll look at this more later) to mean not just "spiritually separated from God" (the true meaning) but to mean "brain-dead in sin, to the point that sinners are unable to think on their own or to want/seek/choose God."
They use Genesis 6:5 ("The Lord saw how great man's wickedness on earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.") to "prove" their idea that mankind is so wicked inside that we couldn't possible seek/want/choose God, and so God has to cause it to happen in certain, pre-chosen people. But if you look at the verse in context, it's about the half-demonic race of people who lived on earth during Noah's time. Their wickedness was so great that God chose to flood the earth to start over. It has nothing to do with unbelievers being unable to seek, want, choose God unless God causes it; it's just that the generation of Noah's day was so evil (from the demonic influence) that they never would seek, want, choose God. (And this verse actually hurts Calvinism because, if Calvinism is true, then God would have first predestined and caused them to be that evil but then punished them for it, pretending that they deserved the punishment they got. How unjust and untrustworthy the Calvinist god is!)
Anyway, their wrong view of depravity is how they suck in many good, well-meaning Christians. They hook you with “Do you agree that mankind is depraved?” And since most Christians will agree (not realizing the different Calvinist view of "depraved"), then they reel you in step by step: “Well, since you agree that all men are depraved, then you agree that we are totally unable to save ourselves, which means that God has to save us, which means that God decides who gets saved and who doesn’t - and God can do this because He is sovereign and can do what He wants - which means that God has to cause the elect ones to have faith because depraved people can’t have faith on their own, etc.”
And before you know it, you’re a Calvinist - all because you didn’t know their hidden definitions, and because you let them convince you that there’s a deeper layer to all those easy-to-understand-in-a-plain-way verses, and because you never looked up the verses they use in support of Calvinism to see what they really say in context and overall, and because you never compared their understanding of things like "depraved, dead, elect, predestined, sovereign, etc." to the Bible's teachings on it.
Calvinism: A theology that thrives on and spreads through ignorance, deception, and manipulation!
So now, let’s go back to that advice from Boettner: Do you think the Calvinist idea of Total Inability/Depravity is biblical or unbiblical? Does it fit with or contradict the plain teaching of Scripture? If you say it’s unbiblical, then you would be wise to – and are obligated to – reject the other Calvinist points too, according to a Calvinist theologian's own advice.
