Don't answer Calvinist questions. Dismantle them.

A snippet (edited a bit) from the end of my post "When Calvinists say, 'But Sovereignty!': 

Many people often get suckered into Calvinism because of a Calvinist's strategic use of false dichotomies, often starting with "Is God sovereign, or are you?"  We are given two options: a ridiculous one that no good Christian would pick and the one that is designed to lead us deeper into Calvinism.  

And it's a very effective method for a simple reason: We never question their definition of "sovereign."  We go "Oh, well, of course God is sovereign," and then we let the Calvinist implant their definition of sovereign into our minds, their idea of how a sovereign God must act... and before we know it, we're viewing the Bible through that lens.

There are also other false dichotomies like "Is God all-powerful, or are you?  Does God control everything, or do you?  Did God save you, or did you save yourself?  Either God controls everything, or God controls nothing.  Either God deliberately saves some people, or everyone goes to hell.  Either God preplans, causes, and controls everything that happens, or else He has no idea what's going on and is at the mercy of humans, helplessly waiting on us and anxiously wringing His hands while wondering what we'll choose, and then scrambling to figure out how to work it into His plans.  Etc."

They have a whole long string of these to slowly reel us into Calvinism.  And once again, it works because we do not challenge the options they gave us or their definitions.  We answer their questions the way they ask them, which gives them the upper-hand and control over the direction of the conversation, leading us deeper and deeper into Calvinism.

A tip for when you're discussing theology with a Calvinist: Do not answer their questions the way they ask them.  Do not let them be the question-asker while you're forced to be the question-answerer.  This will only give them control over the conversation and the definitions, and it will trap you in their web.  

Instead, find the problem in their question and expose it, forcing them to explain it or answer for it.  Expose and challenge the inherent error in the question, the false dichotomy, the bad definition, the bad illustration, the bad logic, the misuse of Scripture, the shaming and manipulation, the deceptive tactic, etc.  

Do not let them trap you with carefully-crafted questions meant to slowly and gently trick you into Calvinism.  Do not take what they say at face-value or blindly accept their definitions.  There is always an error in their questions, in their definitions, in their use of Scripture, in the thinking/theology behind their questions.  Find it.  Expose it.  Make them answer for it.  Make them define their terms clearly.  Make them carefully examine the verses they misuse (even using a concordance to understand the words better), to see the proper context and definitions.  Make them answer probing questions about what they really mean, forcing them to admit the deeper beliefs they're hiding or sugar-coating, the ones that contradict the things they say on the surface.  

The more you force them to explain themselves, the more obvious their errors, contradictions, bad definitions, bad use of Scripture, deceptive and manipulative tactics, etc., will be.    

So when they say something like "Is God sovereign, or are you?", ask them to first define "sovereign" so that you both know exactly how they're using the word (so that you can see you're not both on the same page, as they want you to think, to trap you)...

... and then ask them to show you the verse that clearly defines "sovereign" the way they define it (they won't be able to do this)...

... and then, since they can't do that, ask them to show you the verses that they think supports their definition of sovereign...

... and then examine those verses and the surrounding verses (the context) carefully to see exactly what it's teaching, to help them see how they are taking those verses out on context...  

        [Such as if they use Prov. 21:1: “the kings’ heart is in the hand of the Lord, he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases” as literal, hard-core, bottom-line theology to "prove" that God controls our thoughts, desires, actions, destinies, then you remind them that Proverbs are wise sayings, not literal, hard-core, bottom-line theology.  

        And besides, if they were literal, hard-core, bottom-line theology, then all Proverbs would have to be literal, hard-core, bottom-line theology, even these:

        21:9: "Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife"

        12:21: "No harm befalls the righteous" (If this was a literal, hard-core theological "promise," it contradicts verses that tell us Christians will face hardships and maybe even be martyred.)

        23:2: "and put a knife to your throat if you are given to gluttony."  (Well, the Bible says!)

        23:14: "Punish [your child] with the rod and save his soul from death." (So, taken literally, salvation can come through Jesus or beating your child with a rod.)

        Would they take those Proverbs as literal, hard-core, bottom-line theology through which they read/interpret the rest of the Bible?  No?  Then why would they do it with Proverbs 21:1?

        And after that, if they still want to insist that 21:1 is literal theology, then remind them that it literally specifies that the king’s heart is in the Lord’s hand: the king's heart... and no one else’s.  After all, that's what it literally says.  And who are they, O man, to talk back to God?]

.

.. and then show them verses that contradict their idea that God preplans, causes, controls everything we think and do, verses that show God has voluntarily restrained His use of power and control in order to allow mankind to have free-will, within boundaries, to make our own decisions about things, even to do things He doesn't want.  Such as ...

Genesis 1:26: "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over [all the animals and earth]."

Acts 14:16: "In the past, [God] let nations go their own way."

Hosea 8:4: "They set up kings without my consent; they choose princes without my approval."

Isaiah 30:1: "'Woe to the obstinate children,' declares the Lord, 'to those who carry out plans that are not mine...'"

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.''"

Jeremiah 19:5: "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."

Ezekiel 13:22 (CSB): "Because you have disheartened the righteous person with lies (when I intended no distress)..."

Matthew 23:37: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem … how often I have longed to gather your children together … but you were not willing.”

Ezekiel 33:11: "Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live..."

Zechariah 7:11-13: "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 [the Lord].  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."

(And almost all of these are God's own words about Himself, not Proverbs or Psalms about God from Solomon or David.)

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Never let a Calvinist define the terms.  Never answer a Calvinist according to the parameters they set around the questions.  Always challenge and expose and ask them to explain more.  Because there's always a problem behind their thinking, their questions.  And the more they talk, the more you (and, hopefully, they) will see it.

Additional example:

Not only do Calvinists use false dichotomies, but they also use bad analogies such as the "100 people on death row" analogy: "There's 100 people on death row for murder, and God graciously chooses to save 10 of them, but He lets the other 90 go to their punishment.  Was He unjust to save some but not others?  No.  None of them deserves to be saved.  They all deserve to be punished.  So it's not unjust to rescue some but let others pay the penalty they deserve."  

This kind of analogy hooks many people because it seems to fit.  

But the glaring flaw that you need to point out to them is that, in Calvinism, those people are only on death row in the first place because God "ordained" their crimes.  He preplanned/caused them to do what they did, gave them no option or ability to do anything differently, but then He punishes them for it, as if that's true justice.  And then He rescues some, as if it's true grace.  

Ask the Calvinist to explain how this is "justice," "grace," and "deserving the punishment."  And when they say that God needed non-elect people to put in hell so that He could show off His justice so that He could get glory for it, show them this verse where God Himself tells us how He has chosen to show His justice:

“God presented [Jesus] as a sacrifice of atonement through faith in his blood.  He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished- he did it [sent Jesus to the cross for our sins] to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.”  (Romans 3:25-26, emphasis added)

And show them where God Himself tells us that it was through Jesus's sacrifice that He would get glory: 

John 12:27-28: Jesus said "Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say?  'Father, save me from this hour'?  No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour.  Father, glorify your name!" 

John 13:31: "When he was gone, Jesus said, 'Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him.'"

God Himself says that to show His justice and get glory, He sent Jesus to the cross to pay for sin, not that He created non-elect people to go to hell for sin.  (If we end up in hell, it's by our choice to reject God's offer of salvation, not because God predestined anyone to go there.)

And so although it presents itself as so "God-glorifying," what Calvinism actually does is contradict what God said He did to show His justice and to get glory.  It replaces/detracts from Jesus's sacrifice.  It steals God's glory. 

See this post for more: "The 9 Marks of a Calvinist Cult #4 (strategic tactics)".

There is almost always a problem with a Calvinist's question or example or definition or use of a Bible verse.  So don't answer the Calvinist's questions the way they ask them.  Dismantle them, exposing the errors and manipulation, turning the questions back on them.