Calvinists blame the internet for comments that oppose them

Calvinists blame the internet for comments that oppose them

(Excuses, excuses! Always excuses! All because they think they can never be wrong!)

Calvinists blame the internet for much of the opposition they get from biblical Christians. The fact is that calvinists do not want you to think for yourself! They want to tell you what they believe and to stifle all others who might oppose. Calvinism seeks to control people, and those who think for themselves are harder to control.

Calvinists allege that the internet has “contributed to the rise of anti-Calvinism in our church“. (This is certainly true; we who disagree with calvinism have a right to expose their heresies. It’s called “freedom of speech”!) They allege that anti-calvinists have “skewed sources that unfavorably misrepresented” calvinism. (We declare that calvinism uses skewed sources that misrepresent the Bible itself!) They blame “the intrusion of internet hotheads” for the subsequent division. (Yet, if those “hotheads” were calvinists, then they’d be declaring them to be “heroes”!)
Everyone should research as widely and as deeply as they can in order to arrive at their own conclusions without undue pressure from either side. Test all things for yourselves!

There is a growing list of websites today that openly oppose the heresies of calvinism. And many calvinists are quite upset about this. They don’t mind using the internet to ram home their own doctrines; in fact, they are often quite aggressive in their use of internet forums. (Just try opposing their doctrines on most forums and see how quickly the moderator will caution you and then shut you down if you don’t toe the correct doctrinal line!)  But when their opposition uses the internet to expose calvinist heresies, calvinists are very quick to cry, “Foul!” However, it’s just a case of you can’t have your cake and eat it! If they can use the internet, then others can too.

A lot of calvinists blame the availability of the internet itself for the opposition they face from non-calvinists. They say that the internet has fostered an age of “experts”.
They claim that everyone thinks he is an expert on calvinism just by reading someone’s opinion on a website post, and that such opinion is without basis because it is wrong (because they say so!). Of course, if the opinion favours calvinism, then, they claim, it must be true, but, on the other hand, it must be false if it opposes calvinism. That is, the internet can only be true if it agrees with calvinism. Any website that disagrees with calvinism can not be true. This is extremely biased thinking indeed!

So, is there any logical basis for such biased thinking? After all, we do tend to be very biased against such non-Christian cults as the Jehovah’s Witnesses. If one side is very clearly biblical, and opposes doctrines that are just as clearly non-biblical, then such bias may be justified. If calvinists could biblically demonstrate clearly that their doctrines were true and that opposing non-calvinist doctrines were false, then fair enough. But can they??

You see, that would require biblically-sourced solutions (sola scriptura) that consistently supported their doctrines, and just as consistently denied the doctrines of non-calvinists. According to calvinist logic, my website consistently tells lies, while those who oppose my teachings must be consistently correct. However, if this were so, then it would be quite simple to demonstrate me wrong by quoting the Bible alone to demonstrate my errors. Any inconsistency between beliefs and the Bible always indicates such beliefs to be false. If the Bible were to consistently teach calvinism while consistently denying non-calvinism, then any inconsistency would expose my lies. But, after many years of challenging calvinists to try to prove my statements to be inconsistent with the Bible, not one calvinist yet has taken up the challenge.

Oh yes, I do get calvinists opposing me. Often they won’t even quote any Bible verses at all, probably considering it beneath their dignity to overstate the “obvious” (obvious to them, anyway!). And when they do quote verses, they rattle off a reference without much (if any) explanation, as if to say that the verse quoted is definitive proof of their doctrinal truth. I sometimes get a whole passage of many verses without any reasoning as to why it is good for calvinism.

For example, they’ll quote John 6:44, stating that it proves the unconditional election. MacArthur uses it to support his doctrinal statement “All whom the Father calls to Himself will come in faith and all who come in faith the Father will receive.” But John 6:44 does not say that all who are called must come. Instead it says that all who come must have been called. (If you cannot see the difference, you must be a calvinist!) Think! If all dogs have four legs, that does not mean that everything with four legs must be a dog!

Others use John 6:39that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing” to prove that it is only those who are given unconditionally to Jesus who can be saved. However, when I ask how Jesus lost Judas who had been given to Him (John 17:12), they never answer this.

Again, they sometimes quote John 15:16 to demonstrate that we do not choose God; God chooses us. When I ask if they are aware that Judas was one of those chosen here, they refuse to go any further on that discussion. I also point out that Judas was one of the twelve chosen disciples in spite of him being a devil (John 6:70), and also chosen to be an apostle in spite of him being a traitor (Luke 6:13-16). They never answer this either.

Many other scriptural examples can be presented – just ask me!

In fact, often in my replies to comments, I point out the scriptural inconsistencies with their claims. (Just read the Comments on this website to find out just how many questions I raise about their claimed doctrines, over and over ad infinitum.) Why has not one made any serious effort to defend calvinism by refuting my statements? If they reply (of course they mostly will never reply to my comments) it’s to change the subject, trying to push another heresy which I then refute as well (and which they also refuse to argue with any further).

So, if the calvinists are always right and the non-calvinists always wrong on the internet, why has not one single calvinist ever been able to refute scripturally (sola scriptura) any of my accusations against them? Why do calvinists in general refuse to take me on in serious biblical debate concerning their doctrines? And does this, in fact, prove that they are the ones who are misusing the internet, not the non-calvinists?

To tell the truth, it was the internet that has given calvinists their greatest opportunity to spew forth their heresies. Calvinism has endeavoured to take control of as much media as it can: literature, video, internet etc. In particular, calvinism would like a monopoly on the internet where their views may be put forward without opposition. It declares its views to be the only acceptable ones, yet is unable to present any serious debate against those who refute their heresies. Calvinism does not desire any dialogue at all with those who oppose because many of those who oppose can effectively demonstrate the falsehoods of calvinism. They will steer well clear of those who know their Bibles well! So why should this be so, eh?

Calvinists want to be the only ones talking here. No-one else may join the discussion unless they support calvinist teachings. The internet is good if it supports calvinism and bad if it doesn’t. This is calvinist internet philosophy in a nutshell. Only their doctrines may be taught; all other views must be declared lies.

So, here’s the challenge for calvinists. If you disagree with my internet “opinions”, if you think that my views are misinformed and misleading, if you consider that I am misrepresenting calvinism, then say so. Make sure you use the Bible alone to demonstrate your views, for I will not pay much attention if any to your so-called “experts” such as MacArthur, Piper, Sproul, Mohler, Edwards, Boettner, Pink, etc etc, people who make up opinions with little regard for biblical truth.

If you could refute me, you would, but because you cannot refute me, you remain silent. Your silence is deafening; it is your defeat. If my opinion is false, then refute it or admit that you cannot. (Your silence itself admits of your defeat.)

And those of you who are still considering whether or not calvinism is scriptural, ask yourselves: Where is the clear and indisputable demonstration of my “misrepresentation”? If there is none, it is because no such demonstration can be made. I have many documents on my website that demonstrate the heresies of calvinism. Not one has been biblically refuted yet. Calvinists just don’t want to know what I write because they are afraid of losing the debate. (I used to print all reasonable comments, both positive and negative, but now I refuse to reply unless the actual document is referenced, plus the exact wording quoted. Even then, if I have dealt with that issue already on the website, then I may choose to ignore you. I dislike stating the obvious more than once!)

And so I will continue to use the internet to proclaim the lies of calvinism in the hope that as many as possible will read and carefully consider its doctrinal claims, weighing them up against the truth of the Bible alone (sola scriptura). Please do not take anyone’s word for anything either but test all things against the truth of the Bible alone. It is you who has to believe one way or the other. Do not ever let anyone else at all tell you what you must believe. That also includes checking everything I write against the Bible.

It is you who will stand before God as judge one day and answer for what you believe. No-one can stand there for you. No-one else can believe on your behalf. (Ezekiel 18:20) So test all things against the Bible for yourself. (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

And calvinists, keep in mind that one day you (yes, even you!) will stand before God as judge to answer for your actions. If you have taught falsely such that others are condemned for eternity, then you will be judged accordingly. (We will all be judged one day; no-one will be excused, even calvinists. (This is what the first half of John 6:37 actually means!)
Matthew 18:6But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and [that] he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

If you twist meanings using verbal gymnastics to cause people to be lost, then you will certainly face eternal condemnation.
2 Peter 2:3And through covetousness shall they (false teachers) with feigned (plastos = carefully sculpted) words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

If you don’t like the KJV, then your NIV says: In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
or in the calvinist-preferred ESV: And in their greed they will exploit you with false words. Their condemnation from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.
or the Amplified Bible: And in their greed they will exploit you with false arguments and twisted doctrine. Their sentence [of condemnation which God has decreed] from a time long ago is not idle [but is still in force], and their destruction and deepening misery is not asleep [but is on its way].

In fact, whatever version you read will condemn false teachers to eternal condemnation. False teachers, be warned now!


If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments may be recorded on the Comments page. However, I may choose to reply to reasonable comments via email.

List of all my posts on this site.

If you wish to read other documents on the heresies of calvinism, please use this link.

Sermons and Messages

Calvinist heretics & heresies

Please feel free to comment  Comments and contact page
Reasonable comments and replies may be recorded on the Comments page.