Quick Answers to Calvinism, part 2 (#9-13)
#11-13 Parables, the "non-elect," blinded eyes and calloused hearts, and "prepared for destruction":
(I wish I could keep these answers shorter and quicker. I really do. But that's life.) This is the flipside of #10, where I said that God doesn't open the minds of certain sinners to cause them to believe, but that He opens the minds of those who already believe (like the disciples and Lydia) to help them grow in wisdom and go forward in the journey of faith.
#11. On the flipside, God doesn't arbitrarily close the minds of certain sinners (harden them) to prevent them from believing, but He can close/harden someone who first chose to reject Him. (As I've pointed out before, "hardens" - according to Strong's concordance with Vine's expository dictionary - is a punishment for first hardening our own hearts, for continuing to resist God after He's been patient and longsuffering with us.)
Calvinists say that God doesn't really want everyone to be saved, that He predestined people to be unbelievers (the "non-elect") who never had the chance or ability to be believe in Jesus. And they'll quote Bible passages like Matthew 13:10-15 (about why Jesus speaks in parables) to prove it, saying that Jesus speaks in parables to prevent the non-elect from understanding the gospel and being saved.
As one Calvinist said it (I think I found it on reddit somewhere): "[It's an unbiblical teaching that] God wants everyone to be saved [because] Matt 13:10-13 says clearly that Jesus speaks in Parables to prevent the unbelievers from understanding the gospel and being saved."
But that's not what's going on with parables or in these verses. Jesus isn't preventing non-elect people from believing in Him because they were predestined to hell.
He is veiling the truth enough that it allows each side (those who accept Him and those who don't) to choose to believe what they want to believe about Him and about truth, further confirming their own free-will decision. Those who believe in Him and want to know the truth (the disciples) will understand it or pursue more information to understand it better, letting it draw them closer to truth and to Jesus. But those who don't want to know the truth (the Jews and Pharisees who already rejected the truth and Jesus) won't bother to pursue it or try to understand it; they'll simply get angry about it or find excuses not to believe it or pursue it, further confirming their own resistance.
This is why Jesus spoke in parables*. He's honoring mankind's free-will, our ability to decide whether we want Him or not, whether we want truth or not.
And this isn't too hard to understand - because we all know people who don't want to hear the truth about something, who resist it no matter how clear it is. And so knowing that they will just fight us, grow more resistant, and try to find excuses/reasons to not believe the truth, we don't push it on them too much or too hard. (As Jesus said in Matthew 7:6, "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.")
We don't continue to push the truth on resistant people who really don't want it. We reveal just enough of it so that if they want it, they can choose to pursue it. But if they don't want it, then they can ignore it and go on their merry way. We leave it up to them. We plant seeds of truth but allow them to decide to water it or not, to grow it or not.
As the saying goes: In matters of faith, there is enough light for those who want to see, but enough shadows for those who don't.
We decide whether we get more light or more darkness based on whether we want or don't want Jesus, whether we accept or reject the truth that's been revealed to us. As Tony Evans says in his commentary about Matthew 13:10-17: "When you respond to the spiritual light you've been given, you'll receive more light - more understanding. But when you reject the light, the opposite happens (13:12)."
People are not unbelievers because God hardens them. People choose to be unbelievers first and then God hardens them, giving them the hard heart they wanted and chose. (In fact, their own continued resistance hardens them.) We decide first, and then God responds to us according to our decision, further drawing those who choose to have soft hearts toward Him and who really want to know His Truth, but further hardening those who choose to have hard hearts and who don't really want His Truth. But no one is hardened by God before they've made their own decision first.
"But," says the Calvinist, "Matthew 13:15 says that Jesus spoke in parables to prevent them from seeing the truth so that they couldn't believe. It says that if Jesus didn't speak in parables, if God didn't blind them, then they would've been saved."
But it seems that Calvinists attach the end of verse 15 to the beginning of verse 13: "This is why I speak to them in parables... Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them."
And so they think Jesus deliberately veiled truth from them so that they could not believe in Him - because they were "non-elect" and "predestined to hell," never having the ability or chance to believe and be saved
But - this is important! - the end of verse 15 comes after the beginning of verse 15, and it explains why the people don't believe and can't be saved: "For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn, and I would heal them.'"
Jesus is not saying that if He didn't speak in parables they would be saved or that He veiled the truth from them so that they couldn't be saved. He's saying that the people (the Jewish people and Pharisees) chose to be calloused against Him and to close their eyes to the truth... and so, as a consequence of their decision, they couldn't see, recognize, or understand the truth, which meant they couldn't believe in it, which meant they couldn't be saved by it. They consciously rejected the only way to salvation. But if they didn't do that (if they didn't choose to be calloused and blind, to reject Jesus), then they could have understood the truth and turned to Jesus and been saved. The choice was theirs.
[A question for Calvinists: If the so-called "non-elect" have no ability to believe because God never gave them the ability to believe (a result of Calvinism's unbiblical understanding of "depravity") and because Jesus didn't die for them anyway, why would Jesus need to speak in parables to veil the truth from them? [Likewise, why would God need to harden their hearts more (Romans 9:18) and why would Satan need to steal the truth from them and blind them (Matt. 13:19, 2 Cor. 4:4)?]
Even if Jesus spoke super clearly, the so-called "non-elect" could never understand and respond to the gospel anyway because they have no ability to, regardless of circumstances or what they hear. There is simply no reason for Jesus to speak in parables to prevent them from understanding. (In this case, parables wouldn't hurt the "non-elect," but it would hurt only the "elect" who can hear and understand, according to Calvinism. It would really only be veiling truth from believers because the non-elect never had the ability to understand anyway.)
In fact, saying that "Jesus had to speak in parables to prevent the non-elect from understanding, otherwise they would understand and believe" actually implies that the people (even unbelievers, even Calvinism's "non-elect") have an innate ability/option to understand and believe - because under different circumstances the people could have believed and been saved. This means that circumstances affect us and our decisions, which means that it's our choice how to respond, which means free-will is true and that Jesus really did die for all people's sins (the only reason belief and salvation are possible for everyone).
The Calvinist argument that Jesus speaks in parables to prevent the people from believing (and that God hardens the "non-elect" and that Satan blinds them and steals truth from them) is actually self-defeating, shattering the TULIP.]
"See!" says the Calvinist. "They could not believe because God blinded their eyes. It was God's choice, and it proves the Calvinist doctrine of election."
But this passage does not support Calvinism. It supports what I'm saying - that we choose first and then God responds to our choice, that if we want the truth then God will lead us closer to it, but if we don't then He won't. Because if we go back just a couple verses, we read this: “Even after Jesus had done all these miraculous signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him.... For this reason, they could not believe.” (John 12:37,39)
"Would not" led to "could not."
God did not just decide to harden random hearts for no reason. They chose first to not believe in Him. They "would not believe" - even after having the most proof, the best chance - and their self-chosen calloused hearts in the face of full proof of Jesus's divinity led to "they could not believe."
The choice is ours. God calls to all. God gives everyone the chance and ability to believe, to decide if we want Him or not, but He leaves it up to us. And then He "honors" our decision and responds to us accordingly, giving us what we want.
And this is seen over and over again in the Bible:
"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." (Zechariah 7:11-13)
"See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God…. so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness… Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts...” (Hebrews 3:12-15)
“But they would not listen and were as stiff-necked as their fathers, who did not trust in the Lord their God. They rejected his decrees and the covenant he made with their fathers and the warnings he had given them. They followed worthless idols and themselves became worthless…” (2 Kings 17:14-15)
“All day long I have held out my hands to an obstinate people, who walk in ways not good, pursuing their own imaginations – people who continually provoke me to my very face …” (Isaiah 65:2-3)
"But they were broken off because of unbelief ... And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in ..." (Romans 11:20,23)
“yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” (John 5:40)
“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.” (Matthew 23:37)
“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. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened... Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind... But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed." (Romans 1:18-2:5)
#13. This also explains Romans 9:22 which Calvinists use to "prove" Calvinist election: “What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction.” (KJV)
The ESV (Calvinist Bible) and many other translations say “… prepared for destruction,” which makes it sound like the people were specifically created by God to be destroyed, which could totally support Calvinism.
But as the KJV says, they were “fitted to destruction.” And according to Strong's concordance with Vine’s Expository Dictionary, the Greek word for “fitted” in this verse is about the people's destiny being tied to their character. And it's in the middle voice, meaning that the people fitted themselves to destruction by how they chose to be. Big difference!
We cannot be saved by The Truth if we choose to reject it. And if we reject The Truth, we fit ourselves for destruction and God can further harden us in our resistance, allowing Satan to blind us even more to it: "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not..." (2 Corinthians 4:4, KJV)
If we choose to "believe not," then God can allow Satan to further blind us. But make no mistake, we chose it first.
But here's the good news: "whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away." (2 Corinthians 3:16)
If and when we choose to turn to the Lord, to truth, Jesus takes the veil away, helping us see and understand the truth clearly.
God does not choose who will believe and who won't, nor does He cause it. But He does further confirm our self-made decision, whether for Him or against Him. And so whether we are softened or hardened is a result of the decision we made first. God gave us the choice and honors our free-will decision, whether it leads to our salvation or our destruction.
[*And here are two more reasons why I think Jesus spoke in parables and veiled the truth about His true identity and mission from those who rejected Him (but He revealed more truth to those who believed in Him):
1. If the rulers of His day (the visible earthly rulers and the invisible demonic rulers) really understood what His mission was - that He actually planned on being crucified so that He could die to pay the penalty for sin and rise again to prove He was God - then they wouldn't have crucified Him. The demonic powers wouldn't have enticed the people to crucify Him if they knew it meant their demise. And the earthly leaders wouldn't have tried to crucify Him if they truly believed He was the God, the Messiah. They would have tried to make Him an earthly King instead.
But He needed to go to the cross, or else sin wouldn't be paid for. And so the truth of what He came to do had to be veiled (until after the crucifixion) from people and demons who might try to thwart His plan if they knew what He was really up to.
1 Cor. 2:6-8: "We do, however, speak a message among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we speak of God's secret wisdom [His plan to offer salvation through Jesus's death, a plan which was only fully understood after Jesus died and rose again], a wisdom that has been hidden [until then] and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."
2. I also think that Jesus veiled the truth out of compassion for those who reject Him, to lessen the eternal punishment they would face. We are accountable for the level of truth, of light, of knowledge, that we have been given. If we have been given full revelation, then we are held more accountable, and the punishment for rejecting crystal-clear truth will be greater. And so in a way, I think Jesus - knowing the Pharisees rejected Him and would face eternal punishment - veiled it a bit so that their punishment wouldn't be as severe, because the revelation was not as clear. Does this make sense? It does to me, and it shows me what a compassionate God He is, even to those who reject Him.
Even if this isn't explicitly taught in the Bible, I think the general concept is there:
Luke 12:47-48: "The servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. But the one who does not know and does things deserving of punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."
Hebrews 10:26-27: "If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God."
Romans 1:21-2:5: “For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him... they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God... But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed."
James 3:1: "Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly."
Matthew 11:21-22: "Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. 'Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you."
The more revelation we get, the more severe the penalty for rejecting it. And so maybe, out of compassion, Jesus did what He could to lessen the punishment the Pharisees would receive.]
So what do you think: Is our God the kind who would pre-hate certain people before even creating them and predestine them to reject Him, with no real decision on their parts (Jesus didn't even die for their sins), and then punish them for being the unbelievers He predestined them to be? Or is He the kind who truly loves all and died for all and holds out His hands to all, beckoning all to come to Him and be saved, but who allows us to make our own choice about if we want or don't want Him and then allows us to face the consequences of our own free-will choice, even if it hurts Him?
Which of these Gods is truly good, gracious, loving, compassionate, and trustworthy, and which is not? Which is worthy of our worship and love and devotion, and which is not?
#9 Creation and the Gospel (a not-so-quick answer, but an important one):
Calvinists say that having free-will leads to a problem: that if God makes salvation available to all and conditional on people's free-will choice to believe, then He doesn't actually save anyone but just makes people save-able. It's potential salvation, not actual salvation, according to the Calvinist. And a problem with this (according to them) is that God doesn't make sure that everyone hears about Him, which means that those save-able people could never be saved anyway.
R.C. Sproul (in Chosen by God: God’s Sovereignty) says that a problem with believing in free-will (that God offers salvation to all, gives everyone the ability to believe, and lets them choose) is this: “However, there are millions and millions and millions of people who never hear the gospel and who, in fact, don’t have the opportunity… God has not made sure that everybody in the world hears the gospel. Could God make sure that everybody in the world hears the gospel? Could God print it in the clouds if He wanted to? Yes, but He doesn’t. So [in a strike against believing in free-will] we are left with the problem that God does not do everything He conceivably could do within the bounds of His own righteousness. He does not do everything conceivable to ensure the salvation of the world.”
And so to Calvinists, Calvinism is better because at least God makes sure to definitely save some people, instead of just giving everyone the potential of being saved.
(It's ironic that Sproul is bothered that a non-Calvinist God "does not do everything conceivable to ensure the salvation of the world"... but he has no problem with a Calvinist god who "does not do everything conceivable to ensure the salvation of the world" either. Calvinists would rather have a god who selects a few people to save while deliberately damning most to hell than have a God who truly loves all and offers salvation to all but lets them decide. Odd. Disturbing.)
Quick answer to Sproul and Calvinists like him: God did indeed write His truth in the clouds... and in the trees and the mountains and the stars and all of creation, for all to see - for all to see Him in His creation and turn to Him and reach for Him.
This is why all people have a chance, why all people can find Him. And this is why there is no excuse for not.
Isaiah 40:26: "Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one and calls them each by name..."
Not only that, but God also wrote His truth, His conviction, His law, on our hearts:
Ecc. 3:11: "... He has also set eternity in the hearts of men..."
John 16:8: "When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment"
Romans 2:14-15: "(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness...)"
[Sidenote: Calvinists say "totally-depraved" people have no spiritually good thing in them, nothing that could turn them to God. But isn't God's law in our hearts a very good spiritual thing, something that could turn us to God? And why would God write His law on our hearts if it wasn't meant to turn us to Him, if - according to Calvinism - He gave us no ability to see it, acknowledge it, or respond to it?]
Contrary to Sproul, God did do everything He could conceivably do (with respect to the free-will He gave us) to ensure the salvation of the world, to ensure that everyone has the chance, the option, the ability, to be saved.
“… 'Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the whole world.'” (John 1:29)
"He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)
"But the angel said to them, 'Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all people.'" (Luke 2:10)
He makes salvation possible for all, but He allows us to decide if we want to accept His offer or reject it.
Whether we have the Word or just the truth He puts in creation and in our hearts, everyone has enough information to know He's real and to find Him. No one will be able to say "You never gave me a chance, God." And whatever level of revelation we have, God will hold us responsible for how we respond to it, for whether we accept it or reject/ignore it, whether we draw near to Him through it or go our own way and make up our own truths.
[However, Calvinists will say that, sure, God can be seen in His creation, but God did not give the non-elect eyes to see it, and so they can never and will never seek Him. But then why does He search the earth to see if any wicked, wayward people are seeking Him? Psalm 14:2 says "The Lord looks down from heaven on the sons of men to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God." It would be very strange and fruitless for God to search for those who seek Him if He made it impossible for people to seek Him.]
Contrary to Calvinism, no one is destined to hell. No one is beyond hope, beyond grace, beyond forgiveness, beyond God’s reach. We can all reach out and find Him because He is near to us all, loves us all, wants to be found by us all, and will show us the way if we respond to the revelation He gives us, whatever amount it is.
"This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men..." (1 Tim. 2:3-5.)
"... '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...'" (Ezekiel 33:11)
"For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." (Romans 11:32)
"... He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9)
"For God so loved the world that he sent his one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life..." (John 3:16)
I don't know how much clearer God could've been!
And I don't understand how - in light of all these verses and what we know about God's good, loving, righteous, just, merciful, gracious, trustworthy character - Calvinists can still end up believing that God only loves a few people enough to save them, Jesus died for only a few people, God decides if we believe or not, and there are non-elect people who can never seek God or believe in God because God predestined them to hell for His glory.
I just don't get it. And it's such a massive slap in God's face!
Sidenote: Calvinists will probably just reply that nature is not "the gospel" and can't save.
[Remember that to Calvinists, Calvinism is the gospel, and so of course it's not for the "non-elect." The Calvinist gospel is only "good news" for the "elect," but it's damnation for everyone else.
And did you know that the goal of Calvinism's gospel is not really to save people, but it's to save "the elect" and condemn "the non-elect"? And according to my Calvinist pastor, the gospel is not about spreading God's love to draw all people to Christ, but it's merely about making God famous among the nations so that He can get more glory (which is something even wicked kings and gods can do through their wicked reign). So Calvinism's gospel and non-Calvinism's gospel don't even have the same goals or purpose or overall message. (And I'd say they don't even have the same God or Jesus. See "Calvinism: False Gospel or True (but warped) Gospel?")
And not only that, but the gospel doesn't even save anyone in Calvinism, because - in Calvinism - only election saves. The salvation of the "elect" is already determined before they hear/believe the gospel. In fact, their salvation results in them hearing and believing the gospel (they believe the gospel not to be saved, but because they are already saved) - a reversal of what the Bible says, which is that hearing/believing the gospel leads to salvation: 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." And 1 Cor. 15:2 says, “by this gospel you are saved.”
And that's another thing: Do you realize that Calvinism's gospel doesn't actually save anyone from hell? It rescues no one. Because, in Calvinism, the "elect" were never on their way to hell and the "non-elect" can never be saved from hell. All Calvinism's gospel does is make those who are already saved - the "elect" - realize that they're already saved, and it confirms for the "non-elect" that they never could be saved because God's doesn't love them, Jesus didn't die for them, and God predestined them to hell to get more glory for Himself somehow. It changes nothing about anyone's eternal destiny.]
Okay now, back to my opening sentence: "Calvinists will probably just reply that nature is not 'the gospel' and can't save."
Of course, I'm not saying that nature saves, but I'm saying that God can save people if they respond to the truth of Him that they see in nature and feel in their hearts. I believe nature is essentially the most primitive witness for God, the most basic form of the gospel because, like the gospel, it points the way to God, showing that there is a Creator whom we are accountable to and need to believe in and submit to.
Of course, the written gospel is much clearer and more complete, making it much easier for people to find Jesus and Truth (which is why it's so important to spread God's Word) - but this doesn't mean that creation cannot bring people to God in a more basic, primitive way (it just might be more difficult). As Romans 1:20 says, creation should have been enough to point people to God, to prove that He exists, and so there's no excuse for not believing in Him.
I am not denying the need for Jesus here or saying that people can be saved by something other than Jesus. If someone on a remote island comes to God through His creation and is saved, they are still saved by the work that Jesus did on the cross for them. Their sins were still paid for by Jesus - Jesus “gave himself as a ransom for all men...” (1 Timothy 2:6) - they just didn't know His name. It would be like crossing a bridge to safety even though you didn't know the name of the bridge.
But Calvinists lump those who never hear about Jesus into the same group as those who reject Jesus: the non-elect, predestined to hell. But I think there's a big difference. (And of course, I do not think there are any such groups as "elect" and "non-elect," as Calvinists define it.)
It's one thing for someone to hear about Jesus from His Word but deny/reject Him. They are consciously and deliberately rejecting the full Truth they clearly heard, and so therefore, they consciously chose/deserve the consequences, a life without God.
But it's another thing for someone who never heard about Jesus and never had access to the written Word. They are not necessarily choosing to reject Jesus because they never heard about Jesus (you can't reject something you never heard of). But if this person will respond to God's general revelation in nature and in our hearts, if they will seek God and His truth through it and respond to the call God places on all our hearts (instead of ignoring it or making up their own truths or gods), then I believe God will lead them to Himself and they will be saved.
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..."
And remember that when these verses were written, the people had never heard of Jesus because Jesus hadn't yet come to earth. And yet it still says they will find "the Lord" if they seek Him, even though they didn't know of Jesus or have the full gospel revelation from the New Testament. And if they can find the Lord even though they never heard of Jesus, I bet people on a remote island can too.
