“Calvinisms”

Calvinisms

1/. The calvinist gospel in a nutshell.

The calvinist gospel is very simple to explain. The calvinist God has chosen (from the beginning) a small group (his elect) for heaven and the rest (most of the world) for eternal condemnation. Where you go when you die was determined by the calvinist God from the beginning of time without any regard to anything you might do, whether good or bad. You have no choice in the matter and can do nothing to influence the calvinist God. This is the calvinist gospel in a nutshell. You are either going to heaven or you’re going to hell; one or the other is your destiny and you will go where the calvinist God tells you to go. And he decided who would be on each list from the beginning; you literally have no say in the matter! Like a dictator (see point 9 below), the calvinist God’s will is the only will in the universe.

The calvinist Jesus only died for the sins of the ones chosen to go to heaven. Not one of the rest can ever be forgiven even if they wanted to be, for no-one died for any of their sins. The calvinist God didn’t intend saving them. The biblical gospel is irrelevant to those heading to hell for they can never be forgiven anyway, ever. And the chosen ones of God (the elect) can only respond to the biblical gospel of faith in Christ after they have been born again (regenerated). Thus, according to calvinist teaching, the biblical gospel cannot save any of those chosen to go to hell, and can only save those chosen for heaven after they have been born again.

2/. Calvinists teach universal salvation.

Calvinists love to teach that, according to John 6:44, all whom the Father calls (draws) will come in faith and go to heaven. But John 12:32 says that Jesus drew all (all mankind) to Himself on the cross, which means that all may come if they choose to do so, yet many do not come. Therefore, either all must come in faith (which they don’t), or there must be free will to resist the calling and drawing of God. Calvinists claim that John 6:44 proves their unconditional election, saying that all whom God draws will come in faith, yet that can only be true if man has no free will to resist God’s drawing. Also, if all are drawn, then all must come if there is no free will. So, without free will, calvinists have locked themselves into a universalist salvation logic. Please think carefully on this!

3/. Calvinists teach that God’s elect have eternal life before they can come to Christ to receive eternal life.

Calvinists teach that we must be born again with life from the Holy Spirit before we may respond to God in any way. Then why is there any need to come to Christ for eternal life if they already have eternal life?
John 5:39-4039Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
Why bother coming for life if you already have life before you can come?

4/. The calvinist God cannot be eternal.

Calvinists love to mock those who teach (quite correctly, of course) that God uses foreknowledge to determine His elect. (The Bible does teach clearly that God’s elect people are chosen according to His foreknowledge of future decisions as per 1 Peter 1:2aElect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father. Thus it is an election conditional upon God’s foreknowledge.) Calvinists picture this foreknowledge as God peering (or looking) through the corridors of time (or history) in order to see the future which they picture as being quite distant. But, if God is eternal, He has no need to peer through any corridors of time. The God of the Bible is outside time, not bound by time in any way. Any who picture God as peering through corridors of time are depicting their God to be merely temporal, bound by time, not eternal.

Because God is eternal, He can see the end at the same time as the beginning. God is the I AM, as also is Jesus; Before Abraham was, I AM. (John 8:58). God doesn’t just know what is going to happen in the future; He is already in the future, and the past, and the present, all simultaneously. In fact, in the same way that God exists at all places in the universe simultaneously, God exists at all points along the timeline from the beginning of time to the end of time, all simultaneously. This is the definition of eternalness: that one who is eternal must not be bound nor limited by time in any way or at any time. Even when Jesus came to earth and people therefore say He existed at a particular point in time, He also made it clear that this was not so, that He in fact existed before Abraham was born simultaneously with His time on earth as a man. Thus, “before Abraham was, I AM”.

Therefore God can make promises that will come to pass because he can see them come to pass at the same time that He promises them. And God, from the beginning of time, can observe all future decisions made by man throughout all time, at all times, simultaneously. Think about this carefully!

Calvin said it was futile (vain) to discuss God’s foreknowledge (or prescience) because he knew all things merely because he had already decreed everything. If God merely foresaw human events, and did not also arrange and dispose of them at his pleasure, there might be room for agitating the question, how far his foreknowledge amounts to necessity; but since he foresees the things which are to happen, simply because he has decreed that they are so to happen, it is vain to debate about prescience (= foreknowledge), while it is clear that all events take place by his sovereign appointment. (Institutes, Book III Chapter 23 Section 6)

And Boettner in The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Page 30) says Common sense tells us that no event can be foreknown unless by some means, either physical or mental, it has been predetermined. That is, unless the calvinist God predetermines future events, then he cannot know those future events until they happen. Clearly Boettner’s God isn’t eternal! It seems that calvinists deny foreknowledge because their God is unable to foreknow things unless he has already decreed that they should happen!

This is at the very least making mockery of the God of the Bible, for they make it impossible for Him to know the future except by peering through the corridors of time, or decreeing everything totally from the beginning. Such a God is not eternal but temporal; that is, bound by time.

5/. Calvinist salvation is not a gift of God.

While the Bible says clearly that salvation is a gift of God, calvinists teach that if you choose to receive this gift, then that is a work of your salvation. However, a gift is only a gift if it is willingly received (that is, an act of the will) or else it becomes a requirement or an imposition. The calvinist God requires that those whom he has chosen must receive the “gift” (they cannot refuse it) and those whom he has not chosen for salvation cannot receive the “gift”. Thus the calvinist God imposes his “gift” upon a select group of people who are not permitted to refuse it. Thus the imposed calvinist salvation cannot be defined as a gift because gifts must be willingly received, and shouldn’t be imposed upon people without any option to refuse.

6/. Calvinists teach that if we willingly receive this gift of salvation, then that makes the gift imperfect.

However, receiving a gift can never alter the intrinsic value of that gift. A gift must be fully paid for before it may be offered as a gift. Just the receiving of a gift can never define that gift to be imperfect. This is illogical. However, calvinists do illogically teach that if we accept the gift of salvation offered by God, then that is a work of that salvation and thus renders the salvation imperfect. Of course, if that “gift” is really an imposition (that is, thrust upon us without any choice), then we have no say in the matter, which is really what calvinism teaches anyway. They teach that God chooses who goes to heaven, and therefore chooses who goes to hell. You have no say in the matter, ever. This is the calvinist gospel in a nutshell, after all. If you are chosen for heaven, the calvinist God will impose salvation upon you. If you are not chosen for heaven (that is, most of the world), then the calvinist God has not provided any salvation options for you at all.

7/. The calvinist unconditional election is really a conditional election.

If the calvinist election is truly unconditional (as they try to claim), then why are there no converts among the heathen until the missionaries get there with the gospel? An unconditional election would not rely upon the preaching of the gospel. And why is there a greater percentage of calvinists among white Caucasians than any other racial group? That is, calvinism is most likely to be found among those who are most likely to hear the gospel preached.

Calvinists will then say that it is the gospel which God uses to draw his people to himself, yet conveniently ignore the fact that this then imposes a condition, that the gospel must be preached in order to be chosen as God’s elect. But, how may the gospel preaching draw them if they cannot respond to God (and his gospel) until after they have been drawn to God and regenerated? Of course, the calvinist gospel is whether or not you have been chosen for heaven; this is all that counts in their teaching, and the biblical gospel of faith in Christ can only happen after you have been born again.

8/. Calvinism does not teach assurance of salvation.

Calvinists can never be sure they have been chosen by God until the day they die. Calvinists teach the perseverance of the saints (or the elect), but can only be assured of salvation if they persevere to the end. As they say, it is not the words we say but the life we live that determines our entry into heaven. If your works fall away before the end, then they teach that you were never saved in the first place. Even Calvin taught that God gave a temporary faith to some, an inferior operation of the Spirit (Institutes Bk 3, Ch 2, Section 11). Such people could think they were saved, and others around them could also think they were saved, and yet the calvinist God never chose them for heaven. So a calvinist who thinks he is heading for heaven may actually fall away before the end, and then he is to be considered unsaved, in fact, never saved in the first place.

9/. The calvinist God is a dictator

The calvinists love to claim how sovereign their God is, yet they depict a God far from sovereign. Sovereignty has more to do with right to rule, while a dictatorship has more to do with rule by might. Sovereignty generally exhibits power and authority over a nation by right of position or descent, or by common vote, or by being chosen for the task. That which uses force to demand power and authority rarely, if ever, exhibits sovereignty of rule, especially if the ruler, being fearful of opposition, considers it necessary to continue to rule by might rather than by right.

A sovereign ruler may feel comfortable with permitting basic personal freedoms such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc, while a dictator is so afraid of an uprising against him that he quells all forms of personal freedom, effectively forbidding his subjects to demonstrate a will that is not totally in line with his own will. It is the dictatorship that forbids the free will in its subjects. In a dictatorship, only one will is permitted: the will of the ruler (which will be demanded by force if necessary). In a dictatorship, no-one has the freedom to choose whom they wish to serve. If anyone does demand freedom to choose, he is likely to quietly or otherwise “disappear”. Ask yourselves: why does the calvinist God refuse anyone the free will to choose this day whom they will serve.

But the God of the Bible is not a dictator, for He permits personal freedoms including the freedom to choose whom they will serve. Listen to Tozer’s wisdom here.
Here is my view: God sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice, and man from the beginning has fulfilled that decree by making his choice between good and evil. When he chooses to do evil, he does not thereby countervail the sovereign will of God but fulfills it, inasmuch as the eternal decree decided not which choice the man should make but that he should be free to make it. If in His absolute freedom God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay His hand or say, “What doest thou?” Man’s will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so. Knowledge of the Holy P 76

And if all free will choices, both good and bad, are to be judged one day, then God’s sovereignty is total. A doctrine of no free will for man merely reduces absolutely sovereign God to a fearful dictator.

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 will be recorded on the Comments page.

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

Please feel free to comment  Comments and contact page
Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

A guide to the navigation and use of this website.

A guide to the navigation and use of this website.

While this website largely focuses upon heresies and false teachings, in particular, those of the calvinists, it also is the website of a small yet active home church. Of course, our home church commenced when an arrogant and aggressive MacArthur-style church (are there any that are not arrogantly aggressive?) made serious moves to take some measure of control over a local fundamentalist church which my family had some significant involvement with. I have a strong belief in good biblical teaching and discerned that the addition of calvinism into the mix was far from biblical indeed.

 So, while I have an understandable opposition to a doctrine that demands (like calvinism does) to be the dominant belief system, yet far from sola scriptura (the Bible alone), our church does focus upon solid Bible study and the serious discernment of biblical truth. In over 5 years since we commenced, over 250 messages and sermons have been prepared and delivered. Much research has gone into every message, including the meanings of the original languages of Greek and Hebrew. A typical sermon might take the best part of a day to prepare. There are no short-cuts!

A typical sermon will last for at least 60 minutes plus time allowed for discussion and questions raised during the meeting. (I was also church organist for many years over 25 years ago, so having our favourite hymns is definitely not a problem. I was also secretary of this fundamentalist Bible-believing church for many years; and not having a regular pastor for much of the time meant that I was largely responsible for the day-to-day running of the church. As a result I did much of the preaching each Sunday. This experience has been of inestimable value in running our home church now.)

We will go through each verse carefully, looking at context, biblical consistency, original word-meanings, and even relevant historical data. Where more than one possible interpretation might exist, then all reasonable options are listed, with usually one of them recommended as most likely. After all, this is God’s truth we’re looking at and there can be no room for even the slightest bending of meaning to suit one’s own personal opinion. And no-one can possibly know the whole truth this side of death! (Except maybe the calvinists, according to the claims some make.)

Any inconsistency generally points to a lie somewhere, and so the best interpretation has to be when all verses relevant to the discussion are looked at. The truth always has to be acceptable to all the Bible, not jut a part of it. One might find a “truth” by looking at a verse at a time, yet the rest of the Bible may declare it to be a lie. Unleashing God’s word just one verse at a time is a good recipe for heresy.

I also do not demand that all in the church service agree with me just because I say it is true. I am not perfect, and so if there are questions raised, they must be dealt with. All attending must be teachable, even the one doing the sermon; therefore all queries must be defended only on good scriptural grounds. All should be good Bereans and ask the difficult questions to see if what is being taught is truly so (Acts 17:10-11). All should test (prove) all things, holding fast to that which is good (1 Thessalonians 5:21). All should rightly divide the word of truth (2 Timothy 2;15). All should think for themselves and not believe something merely because the leader has said to believe it.

Our home church commenced with a series of 7 sermons on “All or Nothing”, teaching on the so-many absolutes of God’s truth. This set the standard and the pattern for all consequent studies. This series was followed by further studies on various topics including Sovereignty & Responsibility, Spiritual Warfare and sermons on Christian living. After 8 months we commenced doing books of the Bible, starting with Zechariah in May 2014. By 2015 most sermons were based on various books of the Bible studied in detail. The earlier ones such as Zechariah, Malachi, Titus and Zephaniah were not put online as we did not have our website up and running until some time in 2017. I have started putting Romans (2015) online. The rest (Hebrews, Isaiah 1-12, Ephesians and Revelation 4-22 ) are all online.

Currently we are doing Genesis 1-11; some of these are already online.
I try to add sermons as soon as possible but busy-ness can get to me and slow down putting them online. However, my aim is to put all sermons online eventually. They are all in written format; I have not taped my sermons for playing online.

You can follow this link to Old Testament and New Testament studies. Messages not specifically on books of the Bible may be found at Messages & Teachings. This currently includes studies on The Foreknowledge of Sovereign God, The Rapture, Only the Cross of Jesus, and the 7-series All or Nothing studies. (The link for “All or Nothing” goes to the 1st study; the rest may be accessed via the 1st study in this series.)

While I endeavour to teach as accurately as I can, I also try to explain what the sermon has to say about life today – the application. This includes how the teaching should be applied to our daily living. In particular, if it makes a point that can be applied to today’s church scene, then I generally will do just that. I note that often my application will probably focus on the problems of our local church scene, especially on the reasons why we commenced our home church in the first place. In many sermons, therefore, I will finish off with my application-to-today section; and because our home church commenced as a result of local ultra-aggressive calvinism, then much of my application looks at the issues with the calvinist heresies that have invaded our local fundamentalist churches. If it looks like I am obsessed with calvinism, then please understand how destructive this calvinism has been in our local church scene. You really only learn how to fight when what you always believed in is threatened with destruction!

Our church website may be confusing to navigate but here’s some simple instructions on how to find things.

1/. The Home page has 8 main headings. The 4th one (Sermons & Messages) takes you to Old Testament and New Testament studies as listed above. Other books of the Bible will be added to these 2 categories.
Sermons & Messages also takes you to Messages & Teachings (which includes the topical sermons such as The Rapture and the All or Nothing series).
The other heading on Sermons & Messages is Calvinist Heretics & Heresies which covers most of my research on the heresies of calvinism.

2/. The 5th heading on the Home page is Blog which includes all my posts on various topics including calvinism.  The Blog page shows my more recent posts. For a complete listing of my posts online, go to List of all Posts.

3/. The 6th heading on the Home page is Contact. If you wish to make a comment on any of our documents, this is where you need to say it. If it is to do with a specific document, then please let us know clearly what document you are talking about and the points you wish to make about it. If possible please quote the exact wording from the document concerned.
Comments may be positive or negative, as long as you genuinely wish to discuss a point made or to make a general comment. Please use the Bible to define doctrinal issues; quoting what other writers say is not usually acceptable unless they are totally scriptural themselves.

4/. The 7th heading on thee Home page is Comments. This is where all genuine comments are recorded, along with my comments on your comments. Comments for previous years will be archived; they may still be accessed from this Comments page.

5/. The 8th and last heading on the Home page is the Search. It can be handy if you know a heading, phrase or even key word that you are trying to find.

I do not charge for anything on this website. I accept no advertising, nor payment for any services offered. As I see it, God’s truth is free to all and should never be limited by anyone’s inability to pay for it. And there will be no disruptive advertising to distract you from the real issue: the truth of the Bible. All I ask is that no-one misrepresents what I say by rewording etc. If you use this information, please use it properly. I don’t require that you ask for permission to use it, either, although it is nice when someone contacts me and says that they have used it.

Quotes are best made first-hand and not via a middle party. If I have quoted someone, then it is best to check that out for yourself; be certain in your own mind that the quote is genuine before you use it. I research all quotes carefully, but some are not easy to define or even track down. If I have doubts as to the genuineness of a quote, I generally do not use it. When I read a document with quotes in it, I always research thoroughly any quotes before I use them for my own documents. Where possible, I will give clear information on where to access any quotes I have used. Therefore, before quoting someone that I’ve quoted, please check it out for yourself first.

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 will be recorded on the Comments page.

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

Please feel free to comment  Comments and contact page
Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

Calvinists will oh-so-often thrust this chapter in your face as if it is the holy grail of calvinism, the definitive answer to all objections! But, it is not! You see, because calvinists do not believe in the Bible alone (that is, they do not believe in sola scriptura), they are forced to either have to admit their heresies, or manipulate the Bible so that it appears to support those heresies. If the people they are talking to do not have a firm grasp of the Bible and its truths, then some passages are relatively easy for them to manipulate in order to present their lies cleverly disguised as the truth. (It’s called deception, the favourite trick of satan. After all, satan is the father of lies, so why be so surprised that his servants should also practice lies and deception?)

Such favourable passages for calvinists include John 6, Ephesians 1 & 2, Acts 13:48, and, of course, Romans 9. Its truth actually denies calvinism its heresies, yet lends itself to their verbal gymnastics such that those who lack good grounding in the Bible may be easily swayed by their deceptions. In order to “prove” the unconditional election, they will spout forth with Romans 9, expecting that it will quell all opposition. (Of course, the election and predestination are biblical truths, but conditional upon the foreknowledge of God – please read the Bible and not their lies – 1 Peter 1:2 and Romans 8:29.)

The real truth is that Romans 9 is not the support for calvinism that calvinists try to say it is. And, generally, when I use the term “election” or similar in this document, then I will mean the calvinist unconditional election unless otherwise specified. This is a longish document because there is much calvinism to refute. However, never take my word or anyone else’s for what you believe. Always think things out for yourself and believe what you know to be right, not what someone else says is right! The one thing that calvinists fear the most is the person who knows his Bible well enough to ask difficult questions. [When this happens, they usually try avoidance tactics such as (a) only God knows, for it’s a mystery hidden in the secret counsels of God, (b) you aren’t spiritual enough to discern such spiritual answers, (c) you haven’t been to Bible school, (d) so many calvinist heroes such as Calvin, Spurgeon, Edwards, Piper, MacArthur etc etc etc ….. say the same thing, or, if you still insist on arguing the point, (e) I don’t really want to talk to you about that (that is, they’ll ignore you)]

1/. Romans 9:1-51I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises; 5Whose [are] the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ [came], who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Paul wishes himself accursed for the sake of his fellow Israelites. If the calvinist unconditional election is true, then what is the point of Paul trying to lose his salvation for those who have not been chosen? Or losing his salvation for those who will be saved anyway because they are of the election of God? Paul’s comments here cannot be reconciled with calvinism. If calvinism is right, then Paul can do absolutely nothing to ever change the eternal fate of every one of his fellow Israelites! Calvinism just doesn’t make sense here.

Calvinism teaches that from the beginning, God chose without any conditions at all who would go to heaven, and who would go to hell. No-one may change that list. No-one may change the list they’re on. Whatever list you’re on, it is your destiny! Get used to it!
No-one may change anyone on either list by any amount of evangelism, for nothing will ever change what the calvinist God has chosen for every person who will ever live. And even the elect cannot respond to the gospel and be saved until after they have been born again. So why does Paul not appear to know this basic “truth” of calvinism? (Unless, of course, he wasn’t a calvinist! And, if he weren’t a calvinist, then why would he write this chapter in favour of it? The simple answer is that this chapter is not in favour of calvinism!)

2/. Romans 9:6-136Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel: 7Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. 9For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son. 10And not only [this]; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, [even] by our father Isaac; 11(For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) 12It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated (miseo).

Paul explains how Israel became the chosen nation over Esau who was therefore rejected. The election of Israel cannot be used to prove the election of individuals in any way! It is totally illogical, but then, calvinists are illogical.

(a) Note that the word “hated” (Vs 13) is miseo. Note what this word means and that it is usually a comparative term, meaning “loved less”.

Note what biblehub.com says about this word.
3404 miséō – properly, to detest (on a comparative basis); hence, denounce; to love someone or something less than someone (something) else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another.
Lk 14:26: “If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate (3404 /miséō, ‘love less’ than the Lord) his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple” (NASU).
[Note the comparative meaning of 3404 (miséō) which centers in moral choice, elevating one value over another.] (https://biblehub.com/greek/3404.htm)

Also compare these two equivalent verses, which demonstrate this point. Clearly “hate” must be translated as “love less”, because both these verses are telling us to love God more than anyone else.
Luke 14:26If any [man] come to me, and hate (miseo) not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Matthew 10:37He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

(b) This passage in Romans talks about the election of a special nation for God. Logically the choice of one nation means no other nation may be chosen. Only one nation can be chosen as God’s people! But calvinists try to say that this somehow proves the election of individuals, which is totally incorrect, for if that were so, then only one might be chosen at the expense of everyone else! The choice of a nation cannot ever be used to prove the choice of individuals! Think about it!

(c) If Israel were God’s elect nation, and they sinned more than the other nations around them (2 Chronicles 33:9), and most of them were eternally condemned (this is what Paul is saying at the start of Romans 9), then we must conclude that being chosen by God is likely to lead to sin and eternal punishment. How far are calvinists willing to carry their analogy here?

(d) Calvinists are forced to concede that, without free will, God must have ordained Israel to fall into sin and error, thus causing Him to reject them. Do calvinists understand that by using this passage in Romans to prove the unconditional election, they have to assume that God might also have chosen them (the elect of God) in order to also ordain them to sin against Him and be sent to hell?

3/. Romans 9:14-1614What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 15For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

Calvinists claim that showing mercy is of God, not man, and that it is God’s decision to whom He shows mercy (Exodus 20:5-6). However, this does not in any way deny the free will of man to call upon God for mercy. Luke 18:13-14 demonstrates that God shows mercy because of the cry of a sinner for mercy. God can still choose to refuse mercy; He is God, after all. But He does show mercy to those who repent and desire forgiveness; this is His promise (Psalm 103:8-13). The calvinists say this is due to God’s will alone, but where does it say that God’s will ignores man’s plea for mercy? Where does it teach that man’s desire to be forgiven is entirely and always by the decree of God alone? Where is man’s free will specifically denied here?

4/. Romans 9:17-1817For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. 18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.

Calvinists teach that God made Pharaoh to do what he did without any input from the will of Pharaoh. Certainly God is able to do this if He desires, but does this passage deny Pharaoh any free will in the matter? So let’s look at the facts and you decide for yourself what you want to believe.

(a) God has raised Pharaoh up. “raised up” can mean “to arouse; raise up (from sleep); to rouse up; stir up; incite”. It literally means to have made Pharaoh to stand where he did, probably figuratively. It neither accepts nor denies the free will of Pharaoh in this matter. Either Pharaoh was literally made to do this (like a puppet) or else Pharaoh had already chosen to be opposed to God’s will, and God merely then caused those choices to remain in position until the battle with Moses was over. This statement alone cannot determine whether God just made Pharaoh do it, or raised up the person who had already previously chosen to oppose God in such matters. God simply says that He will show His power through this situation.
It is similar to the statement: “The devil made me do it!” Does that mean that the devil actually took control of that person’s life such that the person, like a puppet, had literally no say in the matter, or did the devil so influence that person because of that person’s previous free will choices to serve the devil?
Was God’s will concerning Pharaoh the cause of his wilful rebellion, or was it the consequence of Pharaoh’s wilful rebellion? The context demonstrates the latter.

(b) “whom he will he hardeneth” – That word “hardeneth” is “skleruno” from which we get sclerosis, a term that all medical people will readily understand. It is a process that hardens bodily parts (like arteries) and takes away their flexibility. It literally sets them in the shape they were in before. After sclerosis occurs, the body part cannot be easily moved around without damage.
This is similar to the Old Testament meanings for “harden”. We’ll look at chazak and kabad; both are used in relation to Pharaoh.

chazaq – strengthen, harden, prevail, sustain, encourage, grow rigid. It has the idea of reinforcing something so that it is able to maintain its position. It is used in the KJV 290 times, including “strong” 48, “repair” 47 “strengthened” 28, “strengthen” 14, “stronger” 5, yet “harden” only 13 times. It is clear that its main meaning has to do with strengthening or reinforcing a position.
This is much like the setting of something in a mould, such as jelly or plaster, clay or even concrete. For instance, until the clay sets, it can be reshaped over and over, but once it has been left to dry and especially hardened in a fire, it cannot be remoulded into any other shape. The Old Testament context of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart has this meaning: that Pharaoh was hardened in the position that he (Pharaoh) had been in before the hardening. He no longer had the ability to change! He had chosen and now God required him to remain that way.
Exodus 9:12And the Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and he hearkened not unto them; as the Lord had spoken unto Moses.

kabad – to make heavy, dull, unresponsive – more of an act of Pharaoh’s will here, relating to his lack of response to God’s requirements.
Exodus 8:15But when Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart, and hearkened not unto them; as the Lord had said.

5/. Romans 9:19-2419Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus? 21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 22[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: 23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

(a) No-one has the right to argue with God. This neither proves nor negates the free will of man. If man were to have free will, God may overrule this at any time if and when He so chooses. But this alone cannot deny the free will of man in general. The truth is that man does contend with the Almighty; free will permits him to do so, even though it may be sin.
Job 40:2Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct [him]? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.
Sin is man doing that which God has forbidden him to do. But forbidding man to sin has not prevented man from sinning.

(b) Yes, God, as the potter, does have the right to make people in any way He desires. But the calvinists try to use this to somehow prove that God made people the way they are without any free will input from those people. Thus we have the vessels of honour and vessels of dishonour. They then teach that this proves the unconditional election of man to either salvation (the elect, the honourable vessels) or to eternal condemnation (the non-elect, the dishonourable vessels).

However, look at this passage in Timothy and ask yourself whether or not vessels of dishonour can, in fact, be cleansed to become vessels of honour! (Calvinists rarely teach the whole truth but pick and choose what they thing will support their teachings.)
2 Timothy 2:20-2120But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, [and] prepared unto every good work.
If vessels of dishonour may be cleansed to become vessels of honour, then calvinists must agree that the non-elect may become the elect, according to their analogy!

It really comes down to your priority: the truth of the Bible, or teaching for doctrines the commandments of men (Matthew 15:9). So, read and learn the truths of the Bible. Those who read their Bibles properly and study carefully are not likely to be taken in by the half-truths and false teachings of calvinists.

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

Please feel free to comment  Comments and contact page
Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

When does the whole world mean only Christians?

When does the whole world mean only Christian believers?

Answer: When calvinists make the rules!
(And calvinists, if you disagree, why not explain using sola scriptura (the Bible alone) to demonstrate your “truth”. Please state your argument clearly and logically. Or else admit that there can be no argument that may oppose the truth of the Bible!)

Calvinists believe that “the whole world” in 1 John 2:2 means only the calvinist elect (those whom their God has selected to go to heaven).
1 John 2:2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
Because calvinists believe that only those chosen by their God can go to heaven, then those whom their God does not choose cannot ever go to heaven, and therefore it was pointless to die for their sins. The calvinist God chooses who will believe and only these chosen ones will be atoned for on the cross of their Jesus. (But they are wrong, because the Bible demonstrates clearly that “the whole world” has to be a larger group than just all the believers. Therefore “the whole world” includes non-Christians. Jesus died for all the sins of the whole world without exception or qualification!)

High profile calvinist MacArthur says “Jesus on the cross offered an atonement for those in Israel who would repent and believe and those throughout the world who would repent and believe. It is not a universal appeasement of God. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Judas because when Judas died, he went to his own place to pay for his own sins. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Herod. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Pilate. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Adolph Hitler. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of the mob that screamed for His blood.” (Sermon code 62-10)
(So why did Jesus pray “Father forgive them for they know not what they do,” if it were impossible for them to be forgiven? Obviously the calvinist God didn’t have any intention of forgiving them! Did not the calvinist Jesus realise this?)

Note the following from “One Perfect Life: The Complete Story of the Lord Jesus” excerpts from Pages 509 & 510 – By John MacArthur. “And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world. …..” (Footnote) FOR THE WHOLE WORLD. This is a generic term, referring not to every single individual, but to mankind in general. Christ actually paid the penalty only for those who would repent and believe.” (Underlining mine)

So let’s look at the context of 1 John 2:2 by studying 1 John 2:1-2 together.
1 John 2:1-21My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
Note the pronouns underlined here. Who is John writing to? Primarily he wrote to the Jewish Christians of his day, yet now we correctly apply “we” in Vs 1 to all genuine Christians today. That same group “we” who have an advocate in Jesus Christ also are the same ones who are propitiated by Jesus Christ. As MacArthur says, “He IS the propitiation. He couldn’t be our Advocate if He wasn’t our propitiation.” (Sermon code 62-10). Thus it is clear that “our sins” (of Vs 2) applies to that same group who are represented by “we” in Vs 1.

Then John says “but not for ours only” … that is, Jesus Christ is the propitiation not only for the sins of the “we” in Vs 1, but “also for the whole world”. Now anyone who can reasonably think will understand that the group represented by “the whole world” must be a larger group than the group represented by “we”, “our” and “ours”. This is very basic logic.

Some extremely misguided (or possibly deliberately deceiving) calvinist “teachers” then try to say that the “our sins” that are propitiated in Vs 2 are specifically Jewish sins, the sins of the nation of Israel, and therefore “the whole world” means the addition of the Christian believers since John’s day. This is absolutely ridiculous! That would mean that “we” of Vs 1 could also only apply to those same Jewish believers and no-one else. Yet the calvinists who claim that Jesus Christ is the advocate of all genuine Christians today also then have to redefine the sins of those genuine Christians as only those of the nation of Israel.

Just think it through and see the stupidity of such teaching. In 1 John 2:1, “we’ is all Christians, yet in 1 John 2:2 they are now Jewish Christians only (“our sins”, “ours”).  And that’s not all folks! Just 2 verses earlier, John says that if “we” confess “our sins” God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. This is clearly the same group that John is talking to just 2 verses later in 1 John 2:1, and whose sins (“our sins”) in 1 John 2:2 are now only the sins of Israel! Calvinists, you are all over the place with your reasoning here. You jump in and out of various explanations as it pleases you. If “our sins” in 1 John 1:9 may be applied to the sins of all Christians for all time, then “our sins’ in 1 John 2:2 must likewise be applied to all Christians for all time. Likewise, if the “we” who have an advocate, Jesus Christ the Righteous, in 1 John 2:1 applies to all Christians of all time, then “our sins” in 1 John 2:2 must also apply to all Christians of all time.

And, here’s the part the calvinists just hate about this passage. If Jesus Christ is the propitiation for “our sins” in 1 John 2:2, then “and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world must apply to a larger group than the all Christians of all time who may claim forgiveness of sins (1 John 1:9) and Jesus Christ as advocate (1 John 2:1). That is, it not only includes all those represented by “we” but also (that is, added to the number) others not represented by “we“. And, if “the whole world” is a bigger group than all Christians of all time, then it must include non-Christians! Primary school children can understand this, so why can’t the calvinists? The answer is that they probably do understand this, yet they don’t want to admit that they have got it totally wrong. Calvinists can never be wrong! Therefore, no matter how clearly one spells out the truth, they just will not see it, in fact, will refuse to see it.

So “the whole world” must include non-Christians or else it makes a bigger group equal in size to a smaller group (which is ridiculous). No matter how you explain it, it cannot make sense unless non-Christians are included in “the whole world”.

MacArthur, as a calvinist, demonstrates his need to propagate the lie that the atonement was only for those who believe. He says: John was an Apostle to the Jews. The recipients of his epistles would be predominantly, if not completely, Jewish. ….. John is telling them that the sacrifice that Jesus offered is not just for the nation Israel, it’s now for the world because the Lord is calling out a people for His name from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. ….. First John 2:2, that He is the propitiation for our sins as a nation, Israel. But not for ours only but also for all the sins of the world, or the sins of the whole world. …. Jesus dies not for the nation only, but for the children of God scattered abroad (Sermon code 62-10) But where does it say this in the Bible??

That is, MacArthur’s Jesus died, not only for the sins of the nation Israel, but also for the sins of all the other Christians for all time. Not one more than that, though! He didn’t didn’t pay for the sins of Judas because when Judas died, he went to his own place to pay for his own sins. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Herod. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Pilate. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of Adolph Hitler. Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of the mob that screamed for His blood. (Sermon code 62-10) The calvinist Jesus didn’t die for anyone unless they were on his list of chosen ones headed for heaven.

Of course, there’s the other calvinist camp which teaches that “the whole world” means Christians from all nations of the world. Piper says: The “whole world” refers to the children of God scattered throughout the whole world. (“What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism” Revised March 1998) However, it doesn’t take much intelligence to realise that even then, “the whole world” still has to be a larger group of people than just the Christians of the world. There’s just no escape from this logic.

The biblical Jesus died for all the sins of the whole world without exception or qualification. Then the calvinist will say that if Jesus died for all mankind, then all must be going to heaven. What? Where does the Bible say that? They claim that no-one whose sins were paid for will go to hell, for that would be double jeopardy. (Again, where does the Bible teach this? Nowhere!) However, those who go to hell go there because of their lack of works, not to pay for their sin. They go to hell in spite of the sacrifice that paid for their sins, because they rejected the gift of that payment for their sins. They were offered a free pardon for sin, yet refused because they wanted to do things their way. You believe by faith and go to heaven, or you trust in your works and go to hell (Romans 4:4-5).

Matthew 15:14Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

For further information, please see my document 1 John 2:2.

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

Please feel free to comment  Comments and contact page
Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

How may one be saved without praying?

How may one be saved without praying? (Unless like calvinists, you believe that God alone may choose whether or not you are saved!)

This comment came in today. I have spent much time thinking my reply through, and feel that it may be of assistance to others who may be struggling with the same or similar questions. Name etc have been omitted but are held on file.

Message Body:
While I don’t agree with Calvinism, you have completely taken a lot out of context in regards to what Mr. Todd has said. He’s stated repeatedly that he doesn’t believe in works salvation. But, as the Bible states, faith is never alone. There will be fruit and a transformation. Just “saying a prayer” is not enough. Faith without works is dead. No. This does not mean works saves, but works/fruits are a BY PRODUCT of a genuine confession. We are saved and justified through grace, and Christ righteousness is imputed to us. Sanctification should be intentional and as the holy spirit makes us more into the image of Christ, we are growing. No, “the sinners prayer” is not in the Bible.

Reply:
I am unsure just what I have said that you disagree with. What have I actually stated which you feel is incorrect? Please quote my words! I have repeatedly said that if anyone wishes to comment on what I have said, you must state clearly what it is that I have allegedly said. Unless, of course, you don’t really know what it is that I have said that you find out of context.

You say, “There will be fruit and a transformation. Just “saying a prayer” is not enough. Faith without works is dead.Where have I said otherwise? In fact, I do not have any disagreement with these words. In fact, I agree with much (not all!) of what you have written. You seem to have misread what I have actually said!

Friel says (“Ten reasons to not ask Jesus into your heart” – also see The Heresy of Todd Friel) So, what must one do to be saved? Repent and trust. (Heb.6:1)
Yet Hebrews 6:1 (Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,) actually teaches that we should move on from the foundation of repentance and faith toward God. That is, to grow as a Christian instead of staying a Christian baby. (See the context in Hebrews 5:12-14 in your Bible.) Apparently Friel is teaching that we must do the works of our salvation in order to be saved. But the works should be a consequence of that salvation, not the cause. At the very least Friel seems to be mightily confused here.

I have quoted Todd Friel (with my comments added) in The Heresy of Todd Friel:
In order to be saved, a man must trust in Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31). Asking Jesus into your heart leaves out the requirement of faith. [I fail to see even one justification, here or anywhere else for that matter, how asking Jesus into your heart leaves out the requirement of faith! This is a ridiculous grasping at straws! It might be possible to leave out faith, but nothing says the sinners’ prayer cannot involve faith! It’s the person who has or hasn’t faith, not the sinners’ prayer!]

Are my comments out of context here? The mere praying of the sinners’ prayer cannot automatically assume faith, nor the lack of faith for that matter. And if you think faith is a gift of God, check it out properly, for faith is the response of man to the character of the God who makes such great and precious promises. (Try reading Hebrews 11 carefully.) Also, the gift of God in Ephesians2:8-9 cannot grammatically be faith. The word genders are wrong! The gift of God there is your salvation by the grace of God.

I also mention the sinners’ prayer in Calvinism is incompatible with Biblical doctrine: “This calvinist lack of free will leads directly to a serious problem between calvinists and non-calvinists. Calvinists cannot accept any notion at all of free will in your salvation. If you claim to be a Christian because of any decision of your will to repent and be saved, or pray the sinners’ prayer, or ask Jesus into your life as Lord and Saviour, or anything else that relates to choosing today whom you will serve, then calvinists have to reject your testimony as invalid.

The point being made is that any decision made by one’s own free will is unacceptable to the calvinist because of that claim to have used free will to decide. I am not giving an unqualified tick of approval to every sinners’ prayer that is prayed. However, if one has free will to decide to come to Christ for salvation, then one must pray to Him at some stage. (I assume you believe that it is acceptable and maybe probable even that a person may pray at this time?)

Todd Friel says: People who ask Jesus into their hearts are not saved and they will perish on the Day of Judgment. (“Ten reasons to not ask Jesus into your heart”)
Where does it say in the Bible – or even suggest it – that “people who ask Jesus into their hearts are not saved? Is it a sin to ask Jesus into your heart? And where does it say that it was because they asked Jesus into their hearts that caused Jesus to reject them? Read it carefully! Also note Matthew 7:21-2321Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
It is those whom Jesus never knew (who didn’t do the will of the Father) who will be rejected. And the will of the Father is that all should call upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13; 1 Timothy 2:3-4). There are many who profess to know Christ but never submitted to His authority.

You said, “No, “the sinners prayer” is not in the Bible.” However, as for the sinners’ prayer not being in the Bible, how else may one call upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13) if one cannot use prayer to do so? Calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved is the biblical requirement for salvation. Please tell me, how may someone call upon the name of the Lord to be saved without praying? And if someone calls upon the name of the Lord to be saved, then that is a prayer for salvation, that is, the sinners’ prayer. I do not claim that all who pray such a prayer will be saved, either. If a person’s life does not show the change of such a prayer, then that person’s salvation must be considered non-existent. I quote from my last post: “Many do struggle with sin for a while after they are saved; sins such as addictions do not always miraculously completely disappear immediately the person comes to Christ for salvation. However, if they do not disappear at all, ever, then that person’s salvation was probably non-existent. But it should not disqualify them from being declared Christian if they do not completely change from the start. What they often need is encouragement, not a dismissal because they failed to measure up immediately.” (Just exactly what is the calvinist gospel?)
That is, if there is no transformation ever in a person’s life after praying to be saved, then it may be assumed that the person was never truly saved. Certainly faith without works is dead. Where have I stated (or even implied) that this is not so?

In Luke 18:10-14, Jesus gave the example of a sinner who prayed to God to be merciful to him a sinner (actually “to propitiate him a sinner”). This man prayed a prayer to God, “Lord be merciful to (propitiate) me a sinner!” (And if a sinner prays to God like this, then how is it not a sinners’ prayer?) He showed no works other than extreme repentance for his sins, yet Jesus declared him justified. Now, if the sinner had then made little or no effort to put this prayer into action (that is, continuing to live as he had previously), then it is clear his prayer may well have been false and his justification non-existent. Of course, this is just a parable that demonstrates the effective use of a sinners’ prayer. Because it is not necessarily a real situation, we are not told what happened after that. It was a parable, after all.
But it is an example of a sinners’ prayer. Is it not in your Bible?

One last thing to note: the only people who deny a sinners’ prayer in any shape or form are those who believe that man has no free will to choose his salvation. Thus the calvinists teach that only God alone may choose your salvation for you, and thus a sinners’ prayer cannot be acceptable to them regardless of whether it is genuine or not! You disagree with calvinism but you also appear to disagree with a salvation that requires a person to pray to God for salvation. Some sinners’ prayers may well be a waste of time, especially if not accompanied by godly sorrow and genuine repentance.
2 Corinthians 7:10For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

However, some sinners’ prayers must be genuine. If man has free will to choose to accept or reject salvation, then in order to be saved he must pray a prayer at some stage to call upon the name of the Lord. (Unless no genuine Christians exist in the world today??)

By the way, did you make a decision to be saved at some point in time? That is, did you call upon the name of the Lord to be saved? Of course, calvinists don’t agree with this, because they don’t believe man has the free will to do so. “You don’t choose God; God chooses you!” they say. But you have said, “I don’t agree with Calvinism” which may assume you agree in the free will of man. Or do you? Free will requires a response to God, generally in the form of prayer, unless you have found another way?
You said, “No, “the sinners prayer” is not in the Bible.” Apparently the following verse may be missing from your Bible?
Romans 10:13For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Please feel free to comment. However, my replies won’t be on this page. Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

Just exactly what is the calvinist gospel?

Just what exactly is the calvinist gospel?

A lot of allegedly Christian religious groups have what seems to be an on-the-ball biblical gospel. But it is how the converts to that gospel are counted or recorded that defines the actual gospel being preached. No matter what you preach to the alleged lost, it’s how you assess your results that defines your gospel!

The Catholics, for instance, appear to teach a reasonable gospel. But to be seen as a good catholic you must remain a member in good standing, including regularly attending masses and confessions. If you cease being a good catholic, then it is usual to consider you as not saved. A catholic who renounces catholicism is generally pronounced anathema, that is, rejected by their God. The catholic gospel is therefore to be a good catholic.

The Seventh Day Adventists (SDAs) likewise appear to have a biblical gospel, but then assess the salvation of their members according to their adherence to the law of God. If you break God’s law without due repentance, then you may be considered to be not saved, especially if you worship on any day other than Saturday. The SDA gospel is therefore one of obedience to the law of God, especially with respect to the sabbath commandment.

The Jehovahs Witnesses (JWs) teach that only a JW may be saved. Those who belong to other religions cannot be saved. If you leave the JWs, you lose your salvation. Therefore the JW gospel is to belong to the JW religion! This is common to most cults.

In many charismatic and Pentecostal churches, the gospel may be preached faithfully, yet if a person is “slain in the Spirit” or speaks in tongues, or is apparently miraculously healed, then that person is automatically deemed to be a Christian. The reasoning is that if the person has experienced a spiritual manifestation, it must be attributed to God, because they are Christian churches and therefore spiritual activity must be of God. But satan and his demons can also cause spiritual manifestations such as these. We are told to test the spirits (1 John 4:1-3) but I have yet to see a church test the spirits behind spiritual manifestations. If the spiritual manifestation is used to define that person as Christian without qualification, then their gospel is not biblical but of spiritual manifestations.

Calvinists preach a gospel which does appear to be the same as the biblical gospel. Their doctrinal statements of belief are often seemingly very scriptural. But how do they count their converts? How do they assess whether or not a person is truly a Christian according to their doctrines? One thing is certain: they cannot assess their converts by any testimony involving free will choice in any way. If you claimed to have heard the gospel and responded in faith, repenting of your sins and choosing to trust Jesus Christ as your Saviour and Lord, then this is insufficient for calvinists to accept you as a genuine Christian. In fact, any decision that involves your free will in any way should disqualify you from being accepted by a calvinist as a genuine Christian!

So how does the calvinist assess the results of his gospel preaching? Calvinists often claim to be great evangelists, seeking the lost more vigorously than any non-calvinist! They claim that calvinist missionaries have sparked revivals, have built churches in many godless communities, all through their preaching of the gospel. Yet, the calvinist can’t count anyone whose claim to being Christian rests on free will in any way. So who can he count? Or, who does he actually count?

The answer lies in their doctrines. Without free will permitted for mankind to choose salvation, what do they actually teach? Some teach that you must repent and forsake all your sins before you can claim to be a Christian. Others preach that you must give up all your worldly sins in order to be saved. But one thing stands out: that you don’t choose God; God chooses you! If you repent, then God has made you repent.

The calvinist God has chosen from the beginning (without imposing any conditions at all) a small select group of people to be his own people, his elect. These and only these will go to heaven. In fact, they can’t go anywhere else, for God has chosen them unconditionally to go to heaven, and to heaven they will go! God will make them go!
MacArthur teaches that no-one is willing until God makes that sinner willing.
No sinner has the capacity to be willing.   …….
It is only when the power of God makes him willing that he becomes willing.
(“The doctrine of God’s effectual call”)

All the rest (the majority of mankind) have not been chosen, so there is no hope of salvation and heaven, ever. The calvinist Jesus only died for God’s chosen elect; therefore those not chosen cannot go to heaven, even if they wanted to, for their sins remain unpaid for. These non-elect sinners will never be saved because the calvinist God intends that they remain unwilling to come! 

This means that only those who have been chosen can be saved, and the rest cannot be saved. Not one may have free will to choose for himself. The calvinist therefore may only count those who have been chosen by God for salvation, not necessarily those who say they have made a personal decision to be saved. But how does the calvinist know the difference? Well, to start with, those who claim to have made a personal decision to be saved have to be counted out of the running. In fact, most calvinists do teach clearly that your free will in salvation renders your salvation imperfect and thus useless.

Paul Washer says: My friend, Jesus is Lord of your heart and if He wants to come in, He will kick the door down. ….. And ….
The greatest heresy in the American evangelical and protestant church is that if you pray and “ask Jesus Christ to come into your heart,” He will definitely come in.
http://www.triviumpursuit.com/blog/2010/10/13/paul-washer-quotes/
Todd Freil says: People who ask Jesus into their hearts are not saved and they will perish on the Day of Judgment. (“Ten reasons to not ask Jesus into your heart”)

So, to count calvinist converts to their gospel, first of all cross out all people who have a testimony of salvation through accepting Jesus as Lord and Saviour. Note that if the calvinist actually preaches the biblical gospel, people may get saved in spite of the calvinist denial of man’s free will in salvation. But the calvinist cannot count them as converts as such because their claim to have chosen salvation by their free will has caused them to be unable to be saved by the calvinist God. Only those whom God has chosen may be counted. Of course, many calvinists try to then say that they only made a free will choice because God had first chosen them and regenerated them (caused them to be born again) before they heard the gospel and made a decision to be saved. But then, how can a person be born again with life from the Spirit before he can be saved? How can he have eternal life before he comes to Christ for eternal life? (John 5:40)

Ultimately, the calvinist gospel is one of good works. You must demonstrate your salvation in order to be considered to be saved. You must attend church, you must have forsaken all your sin, and, in general, be a better, nicer person than you were before. In other words, you must be seen to be living a pure life, free from worldly pursuits. Pure living? Read this as “puritan”! Converts to the calvinist gospel are to be puritans. In fact, this is what calvinists teach, that the puritan lifestyle is what demonstrates your salvation. It’s not the words that you say but the life that you live that determines your eternal destiny! So, if you made a free will decision to be saved, then as long as you go to church and live a good moral life, you can be counted as a puritan and thus a genuine calvinist convert.

So, who can the calvinist witness to without telling lies? After all, if he goes out into the wide world and starts witnessing to the lost in the streets, what does he say to them? That Jesus loved them so much that He died for them? No, that would be a lie, because the calvinist Jesus didn’t die for many of them at all. Do you tell them the truth, that the calvinist God has chosen a small proportion of them and if they are one of those chosen ones, then they should listen up and hear the gospel message? Of course, you should also tell them that it is most likely that God hasn’t chosen them for heaven, having instead chosen them to go to hell. (Calvinism doesn’t like to admit this fact, that by not choosing most of mankind for heaven, the calvinist God has effectively chosen to send most of mankind to hell. Note that Calvin did teach this clearly.)

Calvin taught that those whom God had chosen for salvation would firstly be drawn to the church where they would be nurtured and finally brought forth into full salvation. In fact, he said that there was no salvation, no forgiveness of sins, outside the Church. (Institutes Bk IV Ch 1, Section 4) Now we’re getting close to our answer. Many calvinist churches and reform churches teach that the gospel should only be taught to those attending church because those attending church are likely to be chosen ones who have been drawn to church by God through regeneration (= being born again). They reason that those attending church are more likely to be of the elect group, and the calvinist gospel can only be preached effectively to those who have already been regenerated (born again) by the Spirit.

Those who regularly attend church, do good works, and appear to have forsaken their sins are likely to be declared calvinist elect. They may or may not also have a testimony of asking Jesus to be their Saviour and Lord, as long as it is assumed that they were born again (regenerated) first before they were thus saved. However, it is their behaviour that will define their elect status rather than their free will salvation testimony which might be considered irrelevant by many calvinists. Those who have a testimony of calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13) yet appear to continue to struggle with sin may be rejected as God’s elect. Only those with godly behaviour may be certified as the elect of God. This describes the puritan.

And this also describes the ideal convert of the calvinist missionary and church planter. The ideal convert may be permitted to have called on the name of the Lord as long as he also demonstrates the puritan lifestyle. That is, he must attend church regularly, have given up all vices (this included alcohol but surprisingly smoking of any kind was permitted – note Spurgeon!), be faithful to his spouse, doesn’t lie, or cheat others, in fact, has become a “nicer” person. And this effectively describes the preferred attributes of the calvinist convert; in general you must be a nicer person. If you struggle with drugs or have a problem with alcohol, for example, then it is likely to define you as probably not one of God’s elect. If you cannot forsake all those obvious sins, then you aren’t likely to have been born again by God’s Spirit, because you are apparently still dead in your trespasses and sins. (Ephesians 2:1)

While a missionary outreach should produce nicer people and hopefully fill the churches, not all Christians become perfect all at once. Many do struggle with sin for a while after they are saved; sins such as addictions do not always miraculously completely disappear immediately the person comes to Christ for salvation. However, if they do not disappear at all, ever, then that person’s salvation was probably non-existent. But it should not disqualify them from being declared Christian if they do not completely change from the start. What they often need is encouragement, not a dismissal because they failed to measure up immediately.

The calvinist gospel is therefore defined as puritan (better, nicer people with better, nicer works, attending church and doing the good works expected of such people). Those with a testimony of salvation (through having called upon the name of the Lord to be saved) may be declared elect if they also demonstrate the puritan lifestyle. They may be declared non-elect if they have a testimony of salvation without the puritan lifestyle. All Christians should endeavour to live a puritan life, yet not all who live a puritan life are necessarily Christians.

Calvinists may be great evangelists and church-planters, but their gospel is puritan and their converts are likewise puritan. Church members in good standing are usually seen as God’s elect. For many calvinist outreaches, this is the measure of their effectiveness: to get people sitting on seats in church; to be “nicer” law-abiding people; to be obedient to God’s commandments; and so on. Ultimately, the calvinist gospel comes down to just one thing: either you have been chosen by God (and therefore will be saved) or you have not been chosen by God (and therefore will not be saved). And if God has chosen you, you will be a nicer, better person (that is, a puritan). This is what they have to assess in order to define your Christian status. You are either elect or non-elect, and the way you live will demonstrate this, and there’s nothing you can do about it, ever. If you are elect, then you cannot miss out on heaven. All others go to hell!

So why evangelise? Effectively, calvinist evangelism cannot ever in any way change who’s going to heaven and who’s going to hell. The bottom line is that even if calvinists sat back and did nothing to seek the lost, the end result (according to their doctrines) would be exactly the same! So why bother? They might as well go out and enjoy themselves, for if they are chosen ones, they are going to heaven anyway. And if they aren’t chosen ones, then they’ll end up in hell no matter whether they are good or not. Really, this is the non-gospel of the calvinists!

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Please feel free to comment. However, my replies won’t be on this page. Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

Calvinism is incompatible with Biblical doctrine

Calvinism is incompatible with biblical doctrine

Many people might wonder why I am apparently so opposed to calvinism, declaring it to be heresy. Once upon a time I was like most non-calvinist Christians, accepting calvinism as an alternative view of Christianity that I couldn’t agree with, while still regarding them as Christians. However, it was the calvinist-influenced aggressive takeover of one of our local fundamentalist churches that made me start seeing it in a totally different light altogether.

I now label calvinism (especially neo or new calvinism) a demonic heresy full of lies, for the more I study it, the more I see that it is absolutely incompatible with what I understand to be biblical Christianity. Either they are right (and therefore I am wrong) or I am right (and therefore they are wrong). Of course, we could both be wrong, but it is certain that calvinism and non-calvinism cannot both be right! The two doctrines are incompatible.

For example:

(a) Calvinists refuse to accept the free will of man, especially in matters of salvation. In all matters of choice, especially in salvation, God alone chooses. You don’t choose God; He chooses you! They teach that lost man is absolutely incapable of seeking God in any way because lost man is dead in sins and trespasses. Man in this dead state can neither hear nor respond to the gospel. You must be spiritually alive to respond to God in any way. Therefore you must be born again (calvinists call it “regenerated”) before you can hear the gospel, believe in it and be saved by Christ. You cannot do this before you are born again, only after! In calvinism, being born again is not the same as being saved. This means that while the Bible teaches that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life, calvinists must teach that you have to be given life (born again by the Spirit) before you can believe in and respond to Jesus and be saved and receive eternal life. That is, you must be born again before you can believe in or have faith in Christ, according to the calvinist interpretation of John 3:3.
By denying the free will of man in salvation, calvinists have to teach another gospel, one that is incompatible with the biblical gospel.

(b) This calvinist lack of free will leads directly to a serious problem between calvinists and non-calvinists. Calvinists cannot accept any notion at all of free will in your salvation. If you claim to be a Christian because of any decision of your will to repent and be saved, or pray the sinners’ prayer, or ask Jesus into your life as Lord and Saviour, or anything else that relates to choosing today whom you will serve, then calvinists have to reject your testimony as invalid. “You do not choose God; God chooses you!” is their catchy-cry. If your claim to salvation is based in any way upon some sort of free will decision you made to be saved, then calvinists cannot accept it, telling you that your free will input is a work of yours that renders your salvation imperfect and thus you cannot really be saved.
If they are being honest, they will inform you that it is the life you live, not the words that you say, that determines your eternal destiny. Therefore, to be a Christian acceptable to calvinists, you have to demonstrate that you have forsaken all your sin, and are now living a life worthy of a good puritan. Otherwise they cannot truthfully accept you as a Christian brother or sister. It’s the puritan life that determines the saved status of the calvinist elect of God. (Do some research today to check this one out if you doubt what I say!)

(c) Another incompatibility caused by the calvinist insistence on no free will for man is that God’s will must be the only will in the universe. No other will may exist in opposition to the calvinist God’s will. Thus Calvin’s statement: But the objection is not yet resolved, that if all things are done by the will of God, and men contrive nothing except by His will and ordination, then God is the author of all evils. (“Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God” P 179) Calvinists have no way of explaining sin and evil without making God the only cause or origin of sin and evil. For if Adam had no free will to choose concerning sin, then God must have chosen it for him. This is a huge dilemma for calvinists. And utterly incompatible with the God of the Bible who is so holy that He cannot even look upon sin, let alone decree or ordain it.

(d) Calvinists believe that Jesus died for the sins of only the few that their God selected to go to heaven. To do this they must reword verses such as 1 John 2:2 (“the whole world” means only those who believe), Hebrews 2:9 (“taste death for every man” was only for those who believe), 1 Timothy 2:4 (“who will have all men to be saved” is described as God’s will of desire but not His will of command, or else “all” means only the Christians), John 3:16 (“the world” is reworded as “the elect”), John 12:32 (“will draw all [men] unto me” becomes “will draw all believers unto me”), and so on. Calvinists refuse to accept Jesus as the Saviour of the world (inclusive of all men), teaching that Jesus did not die for the sins of any who have not been chosen by God go to heaven. Calvinists have to teach limited atonement (by Jesus on the cross) because without free will of man, only those chosen by God may go to heaven, and therefore why would the calvinist Jesus bother to die for those whom God had decided to send to hell anyway.
But Jesus died for the sins of all mankind without exception. All mankind must choose to either accept or reject this sacrifice made for them. The calvinist and non-calvinist teachings here are incompatible with each other.

(e) Calvinists make a big deal about the election or predestination of God’s elect to salvation. For example, Ephesians 1:5Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will
They say that this proves the predestination of God’s elect to salvation. Well, yes, that is not disputed, anyway, is it? What is really disputed is how God chooses His elect. You see, every passage that calvinists claim to support their doctrine of unconditional election can also just as easily (and more biblically, too) support an election conditional upon God’s foreknowledge. It’s not whether there is an election, but how God chooses His elect people. Without free will, calvinists have to teach that God chose them (without any condition at all) from the beginning of the world. But, if man has free will, then God may choose His elect according to His foreknowledge of what decision they will make with that free will. That is, an election conditional upon the foreknowledge of God. In fact, this is what 1 Peter 1:2 says! Romans 8:29 also makes it clear that the predestining of Christians to conform to the image of Christ is dependent upon God’s foreknowledge.
Foreknowledge depends upon the free will decisions of man to foreknow. Therefore without free will of man, foreknowledge becomes irrelevant. What’s the point of foreknowing decisions that could never be made? For calvinism, man’s free will and the foreknowledge of God stand or fall together. Foreknowledge demands that there be decisions to be foreknown.
Once again, though, it’s that denial of the free will of man in salvation that makes calvinism again incompatible.

(f) Because calvinists cannot teach that man can believe (or have faith) in Christ unless they have firstly been born again (regenerated), they are forced to make alterations to a number of verses or else be seen as liars. These altered verses include (i) altering “opened” to “opened and caused to believe” (Acts 16:14) – That is, belief is something God gives to you (avoiding the free will explanation!), and (ii) “see” becomes “believe in” or “have faith in” (John 3:3) – In this way they attempt to “prove” that faith comes after being born again, yet still fits in with the requirement to believe before being saved. Of course, this means that, to a calvinist, “being born again” cannot be the same as “being saved”!

In all these examples and many others, calvinists desperately try to show that man cannot have free will especially unto salvation, and therefore God’s foreknowledge cannot have anything to do with God’s perfect knowledge of future free will decisions to be saved, if no such decisions exist. In all calvinist doctrine, if you add in the free will of man unto salvation and consequently God’s foreknowledge to know such free will decisions, then calvinism ceases to exist.

If calvinists could show that God’s foreknowledge is not His perfect knowledge of the future, then they could demonstrate that God could not know any future free will decisions, thus rendering free will unworkable. Calvinists therefore redefine God’s foreknowledge as the special loving relationship God places upon his elect people. But this then introduces another big problem: such foreknowledge may only apply to God’s elect people. Therefore the actions of the non-elect must be completely foreordained or else God wouldn’t be able to control them. They also claim God is totally sovereign, so therefore the calvinist God would have to write the complete script for the lives of all non-elect people from beginning to end. In fact, Calvin taught that God (from the foundations of the world) wrote the complete script of actions for all mankind from the beginning to the end.

Calvinists would like the foreknowledge of God to be redefined as the fore-ordination of God. That is, it would be very useful for calvinists if they could show that God’s foreknowledge was foreordained. That would remove foreknowledge from having to be God’s perfect knowledge of the future. That is why some calvinists make impossible claims such as the “determinate counsel” and the “foreknowledge” of God (Acts 2:23) being synonyms (having the same meaning). That is, what God foreordained became God’s foreknowledge. They misuse a little-known rule of Greek (the Granville Sharp rule) to bend the truth to their lie here.
Calvin had another angle on the problem of foreknowledge. He said that discussion of foreknowledge was irrelevant (futile) because God had already foreordained everything anyway.

Each defence of their doctrines introduces more and more twists and turns to cover up the non-biblical nature of calvinism. Ultimately, because their doctrines are incompatible with biblical doctrines, then either calvinists are lying, or the Bible is lying. And, if the Bible is truth, then there’s only one alternative remaining: that calvinists are liars. And, because all lies ultimately stem from the devil as the father of lies, and because calvinism is full of lies, therefore it is full of the devil’s doctrines. And therefore I as a biblical Christian, after testing all things calvinist, must reject it as a doctrine of devils.

Many calvinists claim that non-calvinists are either lesser Christians or not Christians at all. They reason that if a person is a Christian, then he’d believe in the calvinist election. They see a conflict in being a Christian yet not being calvinist. You should be both calvinist and Christian, or else neither calvinist nor Christian! In fact, this is how Calvin saw it. You agreed with him, or else you were lost. Those who disagreed were either thrown out of the city, thrown into prison, or executed. Calvin ruled!

The major area of incompatibility is in the proclamation of the gospel. The Bible tells man to call upon the name of the Lord to be saved, while calvinism says that no-one may be saved unless and until after God first calls them to be born again. Calvinists teach that man cannot choose to accept salvation in Christ Jesus unless he has already been born again by the Spirit. The Bible teaches that God has given a gift of salvation to all men, and that man must accept it by faith to partake of it. “No free will” versus “free will” of man. One or the other. Either by your free will you choose or reject salvation in Christ, or by God’s will alone you will or will not be chosen for salvation in Christ. For one it is your responsibility to choose this day whom you will serve, and for the other God will choose and you will have absolutely no say in the matter of your eternal destiny. These two doctrines cannot exist together. Each doctrine denies the other. They cannot both be right! They are absolutely incompatible!

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Please feel free to comment. However, my replies won’t be on this page. Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

Oh how the calvinists twist and pervert the Bible!

Oh how the calvinists twist and pervert the Bible!

I happened to read a post on www.bereanbiblechurch.org and immediately noticed that they are far from being like the Bereans of Acts 17:11 who were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
These modern “Bereans” are giving those noble Bereans of Paul’s day a bad name! I will be quoting excerpts from http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/acts/salvation_by_choice.htm unless otherwise noted.

Using Acts 16:13-14, they proceed to “prove” that God gives faith to enable sinners to believe the gospel. However, this is a blatant example of the twisted verbal gymnastics that so many calvinists go through in order to “prove” their lies, especially the lie that free will in salvation does not exist. It’s impossible for them to prove the lack of free will, so they are forced to use confused “interpretations” in order to demonstrate their lies to be truth. And this example here is no exception to that rule!

“Acts 16:13-14 (NKJV) “And on the Sabbath day we went out of the city to the riverside, where prayer was customarily made; and we sat down and spoke to the women who met there. 14 Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She was a seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.”
This is the only place in the New Testament that uses the phrase “opened heart,” and the Bible gives the whole credit for this “opening” to God’s power and not to man’s will.”

Well, you say, what’s wrong with that? Nothing so far. It is certainly true that God (and not man’s will) must take the credit for this opening of Lydia’s heart. (“opened” should be seen as causing her to understand what is being said. This is what the original Greek word means.)

“Obviously, “the things spoken” by Paul were the gospel facts concerning the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. ….  God also brought the message of His provision to Lydia. He sent a preacher to tell her about this great plan of salvation. God went to a lot of trouble to provide such a gospel-He gave His only begotten Son up to death. He went to great ends to provide such a preacher as Paul.”

Yes, this is still exactly what the Bible has to be teaching. Paul had clearly been preaching the gospel to Lydia (and the other women as well – Acts 16:13). So far the truth is still clearly taught. But see where we get to next in this document. (It doesn’t take long before calvinists are forced to add lies to the equation or admit that they are wrong.)  The opening of Lydia’s heart now means she is made to believe!
“God must open Lydia’s heart (or give her faith) so she will be able to believe.”

Yes, God must certainly be given all credit for the opening of Lydia’s heart, but nowhere does the verse even imply that God gave her faith so that she would be able to believe. Absolutely nowhere! This is the beginning of the addition of extra non-truth information in order to ultimately present their blatant lie. They have equated the opening of Lydia’s heart with being able to believe. The Greek word translated “opened” means “to cause to understand a thing”. But they have now turned “understanding” into “believing”, a meaning not permitted by the original Greek word. This is a false (and apparently deliberate) effort to prove a lie to be the truth. It is impossible to translate opening her heart as believing in what Paul said. To attempt to state such is ridiculous!

Clearly I can understand something without committing myself to believing in it. I can have understanding yet disagree. Understanding (without extra qualification) can never imply agreement, and therefore understanding does not automatically assume belief in that which is understood. I may understand the other person’s point of view yet remain unable to agree and believe in it.

Let’s look more carefully at Acts 16:14And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard [us]: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.

“opened” should be seen as causing her to understand what is being said, and the word translated “attended unto” means to turn her mind to or to get her attention. The gospel is preached, God uses the preaching of the gospel to give her understanding of His salvation, and consequently she heeds or pays attention to that preaching of the gospel. God uses Paul’s preaching of the gospel to get her attention to what’s being said and to understand what it means. This is the power of the gospel unto salvation as per Romans 1:6For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

bereanbiblechurch.org also add “Notice that the Bible explicitly gives God alone the credit for Lydia’s heart being opened. It is impossible not see that in this text, unless you simply refuse to accept what God clearly says.” They now revert to the actual truth to make it look more convincing. After having already stated the lie that God also caused her to believe, they now challenge the reader to accept the truth, yet leave out the believing. This mixing of lies with truth is often done by calvinists when they have little truth to play with: present the truth but add the lie to the truth to somehow give some credibility to the lie. But, it only takes the addition of just one lie to turn the whole truth into a lie! (For example, take the truth of the election of God, and add the lie that it is unconditional. But the election is actually conditional upon God’s foreknowledge – 1 Peter 1:2.)

Then the document now quotes the lie (that man has no free will here) as the concluding truth. If you disagree with their statements here, you are consciously corrupting the Word of God. In fact, this whole document appears to be an ineffectual effort to try to demonstrate the lack of free will of man for salvation. The following accusation is based on their clam that God caused Lydia to believe, but that claim can only be valid if she had no free will to choose for herself, yet they claim that this verse somehow demonstrates the lack of free will. Think carefully: this is circular logic, using the non-existence of free will to prove the lack of free will!

“Look at the words carefully: ….whose heart the LORD OPENED… If you try to deny that the one single reason that Lydia understood and believed the gospel was because God deliberately opened her heart and enabled her to believe, you are fighting God’s Word. If you try to get man’s “free will” as the one determining factor into this text, you are consciously corrupting the Word of God.”

While it is clear that God opened Lydia’s heart to understand the gospel, where does that even imply that God deliberately enabled her to believe? Yes, the gospel is certainly the means by which God got Lydia’s attention. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation (Romans 1:16) and God’s power is working through Paul’s faithful preaching of His gospel. When the gospel is preached faithfully according to God’s word, things will happen, for that preaching is God’s power unto salvation for all who believe in it (Romans 1:16). That power breaks open the blindness that satan places upon man’s thinking (2 Corinthians 4:3-4), and it is that power that caused Lydia to understand and pay attention to what Paul was preaching.

It is because of this power of the gospel unto salvation, that satan blinds the minds of the world so that the light of that gospel will be hid from those who need to hear it.
2 Corinthians 4:3-43 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Just think on this: why does satan blind the minds of man from hearing the gospel if God’s elect are made to believe in it? Why would satan waste his time and energy if God just overruled satan in all His elect? Satan could then effectively blind the eyes of only those who could never be saved anyway! If there is no free will unto salvation, why does satan oppose the gospel so much?

But satan’s deceptions cannot prevent the access of the gospel into the minds of man. Satan cannot prevent the gospel from getting the attention of all to whom it is preached. Not all will believe the gospel, but it will certainly get their attention, whether they believe or not. Man is surely incapable of responding favourably to God unless God should intervene, to seek and to save that which is lost. And the gospel is exactly that: God’s intervention that opens the hearts (the understanding) of people and gets their attention focused upon their need for God’s salvation. Romans 10:17So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Paul’s preaching of the gospel to Lydia certainly got her attention, and God also gave her understanding of that gospel, but it was still up to Lydia to respond to it. God uses the gospel to override satan’s blinding, to get our attention, and He gives understanding with it. But God never forces man’s hand at any time to have to believe. It is possible for God to make the gospel so powerful that it is difficult to reject even (note Paul on the way to Damascus), but He will never force a person to accept it against his will (Paul still had to respond favourably).

MacArthur tries to teach the lie that Paul was forced to become a Christian.
He’s a good one to look at for this kind of call because when the call of God came on the life of the apostle Paul, it was a sovereign, divine, gracious, and irresistible summons.  He was slammed in to the dirt on the road to Damascus with nothing to do but respond.  He is called as an apostle. …..
Paul understood that he was just grabbed by the neck by God and awakened to the glory of Christ and saved and made an apostle.
(The doctrine of God’s effectual call)
Yet where does the Bible actually say this? This is fanciful thinking at best, blatant lies at worst. Just another example of emotive twaddle!

So all who read this, just study the relevant passages from the Bible and decide for yourselves just what God is actually saying in His word. If the Bible doesn’t actually say it, then how can it be truth? See for yourselves that these self-proclaimed Bereans of today have used a lot more than just poetic license to twist biblical meaning so much. Read what the Bible says without all the extra added lies. Just read the clear truth that the Bible presents; let the Bible define the truth for itself, and therefore everything that is not truth (as per the Bible) has to be a lie.

And those who declare themselves to be Bereans should be more respectful of the legacy left by those Bereans of Paul’s day who searched the scriptures daily to determine the truth for themselves.
Acts 17:11These (Bereans) were were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Please feel free to comment. However, my replies won’t be on this page. Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

Is choosing to be saved a work of that salvation? God says, “No!”

Is choosing to be saved a work of salvation? God says, “No!”

How many times have you had a calvinist get in your face with the claim that if you, by your own free will, accept Jesus Christ as Saviour, then that is a work of your salvation, thereby rendering your salvation imperfect. They claim that you don’t choose God; God chooses you! The truth is that this is not biblical, and that God, through His word the Bible, says otherwise.

Calvinists are guilty many times over of twisting the truth to fit in with their spurious doctrines. Whenever they are pressured to demonstrate biblically their devious doctrines, they usually resort to taking verses out of context, adding to or taking away from the words in a verse, and even saying that something is a biblical truth without giving the slightest shred of evidence from the Bible (because they can’t!). They must think that because they are so arrogant and forthright that no-one will really take them on.

But when things are really desperate, and someone does take them on where they are weakest (that is, when they try to demonstrate doctrines from the Bible), the calvinist will come out with the most inane statement of all: that if we accept salvation by our own free will, then that is a work of our salvation. They then say that this renders our salvation imperfect because it is not all of God. This is their final desperate attempt to salvage some credibility with a doctrine that is about as credible as flying elephants! They say that our decision to accept Christ is adding 1% (or 5% or 10% or 50% – the number is seemingly plucked out of the air) to our salvation and therefore we will get an imperfect salvation.

Calvinists make these bold claims without any biblical evidence at all to support them. However, this is not in the Bible anywhere in any shape or form. In fact, the Bible says they are wrong, and therefore God declares them to be liars. Firstly, God tells us that whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved (Romans 10:13). The calvinists can declare it a work with as much hot air as they can muster but it doesn’t change the truth: that to be saved we must call upon the name of the Lord.

And secondly, God has offered salvation through Christ Jesus as a free gift to all mankind who are under the penalty of death (Romans 6:23). Now that’s as clear as clear, for no-one can add to a gift in any way or else it becomes a work for the sake of that gift and no longer can be a gift, but instead wages for services rendered. And no-one can ever add to (or take away from) the value of a gift in any way by just receiving it.

So let’s look at those two issues in greater detail.

(a) Our personal decision to accept God’s salvation cannot downgrade that salvation in any way.

As mentioned above, God’s word tells us to call upon the name of the Lord, and so that’s what we must do. This must assume the free will to call upon the name of the Lord. Nothing at all denies free will in this verse or in the passage in which it is found. And, if this is what God says we must do in order to be saved, then this is what we do to be saved! Is it a work of our salvation to call upon the name of the Lord? No, but that’s not really the point, is it? It’s what God asks us to do if we desire to be saved. Who are you (calvinists) to contend with the Almighty? (See Job 40:2Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct [him]? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.) Take your argument up with Almighty God concerning what a person must do to be saved. If God says we must call upon the name of the Lord to be saved, then that’s what we have to do. Calvinists, listen to what God says for once!

Calvinists have a problem with free-will decisions to accept God’s salvation through Jesus Christ. They refuse to accept that man has a free will to choose salvation (despite no biblical evidence to support this). Of course, God must intervene with the preaching of the gospel before man may respond.
Romans 10:13-14; 17 – 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
17 So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Just ask: why does satan work so hard at blinding men to the preaching of the gospel if it isn’t God’s intervention in the lives of mankind.
2 Corinthians 4:3-43 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4 In whom the god of this world (satan) hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Why does satan fear the preaching of the gospel so much if, as the calvinists teach, a person must be born again before he can hear the gospel, respond and believe in Christ?

(b) The gift of salvation is complete and perfect when offered and cannot be added to in any way.

For something to be a gift,

(i) it must be fully paid for by the giver. That is, there must be no requirement that the receiver pay for it in work or money, for then it would be something given for such services rendered, and no longer a gift. There is nothing at all anyone can do to add to that gift in any way or else it would not be a gift! In fact, to receive this gift from God, a person is required to call upon the name of the Lord. This cannot prevent it being a gift [because God tells us to do it (Romans 10:13) and says it is His gift to us (Romans 6:23)] and therefore our response cannot be described as work or services in any way. It is impossible for the value of a gift to be increased or decreased simply by accepting it, for the value of the gift must already have been paid in full before being offered.
Of course, once a gift is offered and received, it then becomes a possession, and then may increase or decrease in value as a possession, but not while it was a gift.

(ii) it must be available as promised. That is, in order to offer a gift to someone, it must be available. If a gift were offered yet not available, then the giver has not told the whole truth. It must be available for the receiver to accept it. Otherwise it is not a gift. You cannot offer a gift when you are unable to give it.

(iii) a person must accept that gift of his own free will. That is, willingly, because something that is forced upon a person as a requirement for some duty (such as a uniform for employees) cannot be legally defined as a gift but a provision.

Therefore, if God offers eternal life as a gift (Romans 6:23), then nothing anyone can do can add to it in any way. Such a gift can only be accepted or rejected or else it is no longer a gift.

Calvinists, by teaching that free will acceptance of Christ as Saviour is a work of that salvation and therefore imperfect, you are misleading those lost souls who might be genuinely desiring to respond to the gospel of Jesus Christ. If you persuade them that making a free will response to the gospel is wrong, then you may be guilty of sending that needy sinner to eternal condemnation in hell. Every person you prevent from accepting salvation in Christ is another one you will have sent to hell because of your lies and deceptions.

You teach that a man must be born again before he can hear the gospel, believe in Christ and be saved, but it is the gospel that God uses to reach out to the lost. It’s the gospel that man responds to that enables him to be born again of the Spirit of God. If you teach that the gospel is only applicable after one is born again, then how many more will you send to hell with your lies and deceptions? How many of your “converts” to puritanism will sit there in church smugly believing your lie that they are the elect, the chosen ones of God, and never get around to calling upon the name of the Lord because you said it was an imperfect work of salvation? Calvinists, you with all your lies and deceptions have already sent countless lost souls to hell, and you continue to send great numbers to hell. You give them false hope that will evaporate away when they stand before God in judgment with their names not written in the Lamb’s book of life. Have you really honestly read the Bible? Do you know what it says? What if you are wrong? How many will greet you in hell with the accusation that you sold them out to satan?

Here is what calvinist Paul Washer says about this. He mocks the traditional evangelist who says that you have to open the door.
The question is not whether you would like to pray this prayer and ask Jesus to come into your heart — (He mocks traditional evangelists here) after all, you know, the handle to your heart is on the inside and if you do not open it Jesus cannot come in.
My friend, Jesus is Lord of your heart and if He wants to come in, He will kick the door down. ….. And ….
The greatest heresy in the American evangelical and protestant church is that if you pray and “ask Jesus Christ to come into your heart,” He will definitely come in.

http://www.triviumpursuit.com/blog/2010/10/13/paul-washer-quotes/
And Todd Friel says People who ask Jesus into their hearts are not saved and they will perish on the Day of Judgment. (“Ten reasons to not ask Jesus into your heart”)

Ignore those calvinists for once and think for yourselves! If they are wrong (and they are most definitely wrong), then both you and they will end up in eternal condemnation. Don’t listen to their lies and deceptions. Read the Bible instead. And it will tell you to call upon the name of the Lord to be saved, and that this salvation is a gift of God to you.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Please feel free to comment. However, my replies won’t be on this page. Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.

Free will Vs Free agency?

Free will Vs Free agency? What’s the difference??

I fail to understand why so many consider calvinists to be intellectual people! Over and over I come across such inane explanations from them as they try to justify their impossible biblical interpretations. Talk about claiming sola scriptura! That’s the biggest lie on the calvinist agenda, for they cannot abide defining anything biblical from the Bible alone.

And here’s yet another one! I have read many calvinists attempting to deny the free will of man, yet upholding man as a free agent. They claim that being a free agent is not the same as having free will, yet I fail to see any logical difference! But, as is my habit, I don’t just accuse; I research the subject thoroughly first to see if my criticism is justified. Many calvinists just quote their rhetoric about the free will and free agency of man, yet, also like most calvinists, give no reasoning for their statements. Of course, if they are trying to justify the unjustifiable, then avoiding clear explanations will help them, for how may one attack a shadow. (And “shadows” is the best way to describe much calvinist rhetoric.)

But I do read widely, especially calvinist literature; I can never be accused of not trying to understand what they are trying to say. And I find that much of this free will versus free agency is taught by Loraine Boettner (The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination), a much-quoted (yet confused) calvinist author.
P 154 – The problem which we face here is, How can a person be a free and responsible agent if his actions have been foreordained from eternity? By a free and responsible agent we mean an intelligent person who acts with rational self-determination; and by foreordination we mean that from eternity God has made certain the actual course of events which takes place in the life of every person and in the realm of nature. It is, of course, admitted by all that a person’s acts must be without compulsion and in accordance with his own desires and inclinations, or he cannot be held responsible for them.

He admits two conflicting views: God determines all things, yet man can only be responsible for that which he chooses to do without compulsion. Of course, if man has free will to choose, then there is no problem at all, for he then will be judged one day for all his free will choices (2 Corinthians 5:10). Yet, Boettner claims, no-one will be forced to consent to God’s government, because God will influence them to make them willing to accept the gospel and delight to obey sovereign God.
Boettner says on P 155 – Heaven will be truly a kingdom, with God as the supreme Ruler; yet it will rest on the consent of the governed. It is not forced on believers against their consent. They are so influenced that they become willing, and accept the Gospel, and find it the delight of their lives to do their Sovereign’s will.

Even MacArthur is a bit confused on this issue, saying No one was ever saved against their will. yet also says No sinner has the capacity to be willing. Both are from “The doctrine of God’s effectual call”.

But Boettner insists that this certainty of God’s will is consistent with the free agency of man. He explains that a father may make his son a doctor by controlling the circumstances of his education.
P 156-157 – A father often knows how his son will act under given circumstances and by controlling these he determines beforehand the course of action which the son follows, yet the son acts freely. If he plans that the son shall be doctor, he gives him encouragement along that line, persuades him to read certain books, to attend certain schools, and so presents the outside inducements that his plan works out.
However, the only way this could be certain in real life is to force the son to do so!

And then Boettner explains that God doesn’t actually decree the event, but instead makes sure that it will happen anyway. (What great verbal gymnastics, though!)
P 157 – In the same manner and to an infinitely greater extent God controls our actions so that they are certain although we act freely. His decree does not produce the event, but only renders its occurrence certain; and the same decree which determines the certainty of the action at the same time determines the freedom of the agent in the act.

That is, God doesn’t decree what man may choose, yet makes it certain that man will choose according to God’s will. God doesn’t decree man’s actions, yet ensures that man can do nothing else than what God desires of man. For example, Boettner’s God didn’t decree that Adam should sin, yet made it impossible for Adam to be able to choose any other course of action. God told Adam to obey Him, yet left Adam with only one option: to disobey God! Free agency, according to calvinists, means that man must choose according to God’s will at all times. Thus, literally, being a free agent (according to calvinists) means only being able to choose what God has decided that you will choose. They say that the calvinist God doesn’t choose for you, yet makes it impossible to choose anything else. So how are these different from each other??

The calvinist free agency of man means to be able to choose the only pathway that God has left open for you. No other pathway is an option. So, tell me, just how is free agency free in any way at all? If free agency means being able to take the only pathway God leaves open for you, then that makes it the equivalent of a slavery imposed by the calvinist God. If God rendered it certain that Adam would sin, then where is Adam’s freedom of choice here, and why would Adam be responsible for the choice that the calvinist God has clearly made? (Of course, Boettner would say that Adam actually made the choice to sin, but what other choice did he have if God had removed all other options?)

It is said that Henry Ford once said that you could choose any colour car you wanted, as long as it was black. Of course, whether or not Ford actually said this is irrelevant; his cars were all black so there was no choice possible of any other colour. You didn’t get black because you chose black; you got black because you had no other option. And likewise, Boettner is teaching that his God has made certain that you may choose the only option which the calvinist God has left available to you. “His decree does not produce the event, but only renders its occurrence certain.

Come now, calvinists, is this the most intellectual you can get? Shame on you! Your teaching on this matter is helping to lead many people away from the God of the Bible and toward the gates of hell. But, man does indeed have a free will. Man must choose this day whom he will serve. God has reached out to mankind with the gospel of the cross of Christ, and man must choose what he will do with the Saviour. It is not God who chooses whether you go to heaven or hell! God has sent His Son to die on the cross for the sins of all mankind, and He commands people everywhere to respond to the gospel and repent of their sins and be saved.

The choice you make will determine your eternal destiny; God will not make that choice for you. When you stand before God in judgment, either your name will be written in the Lamb’s book of life, or it won’t be written in the Lamb’s book of life. When you respond to the gospel and repent, calling by faith upon the name of the Lord to be saved, then God will be faithful to His promise to save you. By His foreknowledge He will know this and will have then written your name on the list of elect (1 Peter 1:2) from the beginning of the world. He will then save you to the uttermost, all because you responded and chose by faith to trust in the promises of God.

Calvinists, stop taking this choice away from those who may end up in hell because you told them they cannot choose; that God would make the choice for them, and with fatalism they believed your lie that if they weren’t chosen by God, then they could never be saved. But, God will not make this choice for you. You must make this choice for yourself, and God will indeed honour the choice you make, whether for life, or for death.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Please feel free to comment. However, my replies won’t be on this page. Comments and replies are recorded on the Comments page.