100% Bible Based Teaching
Provides in Depth teaching from the Word of God
Clear distinction between worldly and Christian music
Aim to fulfill the great commission as commanded by Jesus
Seeking to find answers to your faith based questions from God’s Word
Four-point calvinists believe in a universal salvation for all mankind
Yes, that’s right! Calvinists who believe that Jesus died for the sins of all mankind without exception actually believe in a universal salvation for all mankind, because:
(a) Four-point calvinists do not believe in limited atonement; they believe that Jesus died for all mankind without exception.
and (b) calvinism teaches that no-one whose sins have been paid for will ever be sent to hell to pay for their sins.
Therefore (c) if the atonement is for all mankind, then no-one will ever go to calvinist hell; they will all go to calvinist heaven.
Limited atonement is impossible to defend biblically
You see, of the five points of calvinism (commonly referred to as TULIP), limited atonement (“L”) is the most difficult to swallow. Full 5-point calvinism teaches that Jesus only died for the sins of those whom their God has chosen for heaven; the calvinist Jesus didn’t die for any others at all. However, the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus died for all the sins of all mankind without exception (1 John 2:1-2). It is therefore impossible for calvinists to biblically defend their heresy of limited atonement for the elect only.
Many calvinists reject limited atonement
Because the Bible clearly teaches full atonement for the sins of all mankind without exception (1 John 2:1-2), many calvinists, sick of trying to defend their non-biblical “limited atonement” belief, accept the biblically correct “full atonement for all sins”. They thus reject the calvinist limited atonement (while continuing to accept the other 4 points (T, U, I, P). Consequently they declare themselves to be “Four-point calvinists”.
No-one ever goes to hell to pay for their sins
MacArthur (that false teacher so beloved by calvinists) says: “If Jesus actually paid in full the penalty for your sins, you’re not going to go to hell, that would be double jeopardy.” But MacArthur is so wrong here! No-one at all ever goes to hell to pay for their sins. You go because you refused the free pardon for sin offered by God by not calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13).
It is impossible to pay for even one sin in hell, ever
Just think it through carefully! If you could pay for even one single sin in hell, then, given enough time, you could pay for every one of your sins. There’s no time limit; you will have eternity to pay for those sins. But there is no escape from hell, no matter how many works you achieve to pay for any number of sins. Your sins are not infinite, but your time in hell is indeed infinite. Not one person will ever pay for even one single sin in hell, ever.
No escape from hell even if you did pay for your sins
Even if it were possible to pay for your sins in hell (you do have eternity to do so!), you could never escape from hell and go to heaven. What then would be the point of paying for your sins in hell? Hell is a place of torment, not redemption. Redemption is what you seek in this life, not the next!
No amount of works will ever permit you to escape hell
Romans 4:4-5 makes it very clear that you go to hell because you decided to trust in your works to get you off the charge of sin. It is those who trust in Christ for their righteousness who will be admitted to heaven, none other at all.
You must choose in this life to trust in your works, or in Christ, for salvation
Romans 4:4-5 gives mankind his two options in this life for his eternal future:
(a) to trust in your own works (and be found in debt before God as Judge – Vs 4). You will go to hell.
or (b) to believe on him that justifies the ungodly (and your faith will be accounted as your righteousness – Vs 5) You will be admitted to heaven.
The catholic purgatory permitted payment for sins
Keep in mind that Calvin never left the catholic church. He taught that the catholic baptism (and no other) was necessary for salvation, and that salvation could only be found within the walls of the Mother Church (which he defined as the catholic church). He wished to see reform in the catholic church, thus the term “Reformation”. Catholicism teaches that those of the church who die with unforgiven sins will enter purgatory before being permitted to enter heaven. Those outside the catholic church would all be sent straight to hell for eternity with no option at all for purgatory.
Purgatory (from a word meaning to cleanse or purge) was where you paid for those sins yet unpaid for, a purification process; and only the pure could enter heaven.
Calvinism has its own purgatory
Calvinism redefines purgatory as a place (the calvinist hell) where the non-elect go to pay for their sins. It’s like purgatory and hell combined. You go there to pay for your sins, yet also exist there in torment for eternity.
It is clear that calvinism has drawn much of their false teaching from the catholic church, and no wonder, for both Calvin and the catholic church built much of their teachings upon Augustine’s writings.
However, the catholic purgatory never has and never will exist. It is not in the Bible anywhere; instead it is an invention used to control the members of their church.
MacArthur says that full atonement in calvinism means universal salvation
That “hero of the faith” MacArthur says: “If you believe that Jesus paid in full the penalty for all the sins of all the people who ever lived, then you have to be a universalist.” Of course, he vehemently teaches that the atonement is limited. His reasoning is that the atonement could not have been for everyone or else we’d all go to heaven. Therefore, he says, there must be a hell for those who still need to pay for their own sins. “So the Bible promises there is a hell. The only way to avoid it is to not die in your sins. And to not die in your sins, you have to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. And if you don’t, you’re going to pay the penalty of eternal destruction. That proves that the atonement is limited. It does not apply universally. God did not intend to save everyone. He is God. He could have intended to save everyone. He could have saved everyone. He would have if that had been His intention. The atonement is limited. Now we all have to accept that or be universalists.”
For MacArthur, an atonement for all mankind without exception would result in all mankind going to heaven and not one soul lost in hell.
Five-point calvinism teaches that Jesus only died for the sins of their God’s elect
Therefore, if Jesus died for the sins of all mankind without exception, then all mankind without exception are on the calvinist God’s list of his elect. Again MacArthur says: “Is the death of Christ a work that potentially saves willing sinners or is it a work that actually provides salvation for unwilling sinners who by God’s sovereign grace will be made willing?” MacArthur then teaches that it is an actual salvation for all whom Jesus died for, saying: “Jesus’ death then is to be understood as a full satisfaction to God’s holy justice on behalf of all whom God will save.”
Therefore four-point calvinists must believe in universal salvation
They reason correctly that Jesus must have died for all sin of all mankind exactly as the Bible teaches. But in calvinist teaching, this would mean that no-one would go to hell, and therefore everyone would go to heaven. In fact, a four-point calvinist must believe that no-one actually goes to hell, and that all mankind ultimately goes to heaven.
A challenge to calvinists
If you consider my statements here to be biblically and logically incorrect, then are you brave enough to be willing to challenge me concerning my argument re four-point calvinists? Or, if you are not able to challenge my reasoning here, then do you accept the charge that four-point calvinists must accept the doctrine of universal salvation for all mankind?
(All quotes from MacArthur are from “The doctrine of actual atonement”, Pt 1)
Addendum: Some extra points to consider for those less than five-point calvinists.
(a) If Jesus died for all mankind without exception (1 John 2:1-2), then why does the calvinist God choose only a few of them for heaven. What is the point of paying for the sins of all mankind if most of them cannot ever benefit from such payment? It is clear that calvinism must rely upon those of the elect being exactly the same group who have had their sins paid for. Why would Jesus need to die for anyone who wasn’t chosen to go to heaven (as one of the calvinist God’s unconditional elect)? Why pay for anyone’s sins if they have been foreordained by the calvinist God to go to hell to pay for their sins there? Why give all mankind a free ticket to calvinist heaven while at the same time sending most of them to hell to pay for those “free” tickets?
There is no logical nor scriptural answer to these questions.
A doctrine of full atonement for all mankind would destroy the heresy of a calvinist elect unconditionally chosen by their God. And because full atonement is biblically correct, then doesn’t this therefore destroy calvinism? Truly, all it takes to demonstrate that calvinism is a doctrine of devils is to reveal the heresy of limited atonement. Take away limited atonement and calvinism falls like a house of cards!
(b) The biblical truth is that Jesus died for the sins of all mankind without exception to make all mankind potentially saveable, and that to be actually saved one must call upon the name of the Lord to be saved, as per Romans 10:13. The free will of mankind to choose this day whom he will serve is what determines who actually goes to heaven and therefore who goes to hell. Those who do not choose to call upon the name of the Lord to be saved are condemned already until they do so call (John 3:18). It is your free will in this life that will determine your destination in the next.
************************************
If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments may be recorded on the Comments page. However, I may choose to reply to reasonable comments via email.
List of all my posts on this site.
If you wish to read other documents on the heresies of calvinism, please use this link.
Please feel free to comment on the Comments and contact page
Reasonable comments and replies may be recorded on the Comments page.
However, due to the lack of logical comments, most comments will not be recorded.
Review of Living Springs Baptist Church, Rockbank, Victoria
Once upon a time, Living Springs Baptist Church used to be a conservative biblical church in the western suburbs of Melbourne. That now seems to be a long way in the past. It was bad enough that over the years it should develop an unhealthy preference for Hillsong-type music over standard godly music. (Hillsong is a huge music-producing industry that is seemingly totally focussed upon (even obsessed with) making money rather than making and building Christians. Those churches who flock to the support of Hillsong music should be more discerning regarding the actual Christian witness – or lack of it – at Hillsong itself.) This slide of Living Springs into apostate music was certainly a put-off for the genuine Christian who sought to worship God and Him alone.
But when Living Springs permitted reform belief (calvinism) (via local calvinist church: GraceWest Bible Church) to permeate its beliefs, it crossed that line in the sand that divided Christian from non-Christian. It was apparent that GraceWest exerted a significant calvinist influence on Living Springs. One look at the Living Springs Facebook page makes it clear what side of that line in the sand they now occupy.
They trumpet forth the calvinist dogma of the “solas”. Along with other calvinists they say that salvation is “In Christ Alone”, yet calvinism requires that a person be born again (they call it being regenerated) before one may call upon the name of the Lord to be saved. But how may one be born again “In Christ Alone” before responding to Christ’s call to be saved? I quote from an email from a member of Living Springs church (18/01/2017): “John 3: 3. (man must be born again first before he can repent and believe.) In this super clear verse our Lord and saviour himself tells Nicodemus that he cannot even see the kingdom of God unless he is born again first, surely that puts to rest that regeneration must take place first and foremost.” And yet, doesn’t 2 Corinthians 5:7 teach that faith is in opposition to sight?
I had a number of email discussions with this person who just couldn’t see the wood for the trees! I note that the Living Springs Facebook page regularly quotes from MacArthur, Sproul, Lawson, Spurgeon, etc, all of whom are considered calvinist heroes of the faith. This email-writing member was especially enamoured with the perfection of MacArthur’s teachings. When I pointed out (with much documentation) that MacArthur had misquoted and misused a Greek rule known as the Granville Sharp rule (see link to “MacArthur is Wrong!” at end below), he wrote the following: “I must admit I am not too familiar with the Granville sharp rule (obviously!) and you have certainly done your research which I thank you for. (Note that he correctly admits his ignorance of the subject.) I should do some researching myself when I get the opportunity, (True, he certainly should research a subject before he condemns it as false!) I’m thinking perhaps the rule itself can be interpreted in a way to suit one’s belief in whatever point one is trying to get across. (Really? This does seem to be a basic rule of calvinist Bible study: that with enough twisting of Bible verses you can make them appear to teach non-biblical doctrines! If you want a Bible verse to support your false doctrine, then, hey, find a rule and interpret it such that it supports the “point one is trying to get across”!) There is one thing I am certain of and I have no reason to think otherwise and that is that I see no evidence that Macarthur would purposely mis-interpret anything to make his point. (What? No evidence? After I have documented MacArthur’s misinterpretation? This email-writer just did not research this topic seemingly because he has already determined that as MacArthur must be right, therefore I must be wrong – all this without even reading properly what I have written about it!) I have read and listened to probably six or so different teachings from Macarthur (What, he’s read only six or so teachings from MacArthur? I’ve read much more than that. It does seem that the more I read of MacArthur, the more non-biblical teachings I come across.) and I see no error in his sermons or lectures (If he read them as thoroughly (ha ha!) as he read what I wrote, then he’s never going to see any error, ever!), he is a widely respected scholar theologian world wide (To calvinists maybe.) the only criticism seems to come from free will believing Christians which is fine but some of the criticism is out of line and I know we will find out the truth one day. But until someone can show me hard facts about some of the things Macarthur has supposedly said or done I will dismiss them. (And yet, after presenting him with these “hard facts”, he, according to his own admission, failed to research the subject sufficiently in the first place. Hard facts become irrelevant if they are ignored like this.)” (20/01/2017)
This email-writing member showed his calvinistic interpretative style a number of times. (He was foolish enough to put it in writing!) When I raised the topic of the foreknowledge of God (and presented biblical support), he took the typical calvinist viewpoint that denies God the right to foreknow future decisions of any kind being made by mankind. Piper, another calvinist, says: “God does not foreknow the free decisions of people to believe in him because there aren’t any such free decisions to know. …. As C.E.B. Cranfield says, the foreknowledge of Romans 8:29 is “that special taking knowledge of a person which is God’s electing grace.” Such foreknowledge is virtually the same as election: “Those whom he foreknew (i.e. chose) he predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son.” (from “What We Believe About the Five Points of Calvinism” Piper, 1998)
1 Peter 1:2 says that we are “Elect (chosen) according to the foreknowledge of God the Father”. Calvinism defines the election as those who are chosen from the beginning of time by God to live with him forever in heaven. But if they are chosen by God’s foreknowledge (as the Bible teaches), then this must be based upon those decisions which God knows will be made by man in the future concerning his salvation. This is the most straight-forward interpretation of 1 Peter 1:2. But God using His foreknowledge to determine future decisions for salvation denies calvinism’s teaching that it is God alone who chooses who gets saved. Calvinism teaches that where you go when you die has been predetermined by God from the beginning and that nothing you can do or say can ever change that, ever!
MacArthur re-interprets this foreknowledge as a predetermined relationship God has with his people. Therefore, to MacArthur, God’s foreknowledge can only apply to God’s people? Clearly MacArthur does interpret the Bible “in a way to suit one’s belief in whatever point one is trying to get across”!
When I quoted 1 Peter 1:2 to demonstrate that God chose His elect according to His foreknowledge of future decisions, this email-writer said: “You have misinterpreted 1 Pet 1:2a the word foreknowledge (foreknown) does not refer to awareness of what is going to happen (for God never learned anything, he already knows all things) but it clearly means a predetermined relationship in the knowledge of the Lord. …… Now if you can find me one verse where it can be emphatically proven that God predestined his chosen elect because He first saw that we will choose him first, I will surrender in defeat.” (6/07/2018)
And yet the word “foreknowledge” in the Greek is prognosis which literally translates as “a knowing (of the future) beforehand”. Even today a doctor gives a medical prognosis which is literally a knowing beforehand what your medical condition might be in the future. In fact, the word prognosis was used as such by Hippocrates (known as the father of medicine) over 400 years before it was used in the New Testament.
Note that this email-writer probably got his false teaching from MacArthur who pushes this idea of foreknowledge being a relationship that God establishes with his people. Calvinists do strongly tend to mirror the teachings of their false-teaching “biblical heroes”!
As I noted earlier, the Facebook page of Living Springs clearly defines its doctrines as calvinist (or reformed). As such they will believe in the false doctrines of calvinism which claims “sola scriptura” (the Bible alone), yet uses so many other non-biblical sources to support its teachings. Note that according to the Bible alone, calvinism is a false doctrine, a doctrine of devils which removes all options for mankind to choose to call upon the Lord to be saved. Calvinism removes the need for the gospel, for evangelism in general, for missionaries, for outreach of any kind, because all these involve decisions that their God has already made from the beginning of time without any option for change, ever.
If any from Living Springs would like to debate this with me, then feel free to do so. Any discussion must be based on the Bible alone, of course. And (here’s a big problem for calvinists), there must be no changing the topic if the debate gets too uncomfortable. When I visited the above-mentioned email-writer at his home, he had a long list of topics to discuss. He introduced each topic in order, and, whenever he was unable to discuss a topic (that is, he had no satisfactory answer), he deftly (and sometimes not so deftly) changed to the next topic on the list. (It was likely that someone from GraceWest had carefully groomed him for this meeting.)
I remember introducing one topic: I asked him what he understood by 1 John 2:2 where it teaches that Jesus died, not only for the sins of all those who would be saved, but also for the sins of the whole world. This verse alone destroys any idea of an atonement limited only to those who would be chosen by the calvinist God. Calvinists are unable to defend their doctrine of limited atonement without openly denying the biblical truth of 1 John 2:2. So, I was curious to find out how he would deal with this verse.
He said that he didn’t know enough about this verse to give a satisfactory answer and immediately changed the topic to the next on his list. Like the JWs who come visiting with a prepared agenda, it was clear that this verse was not on his prepared list of discussion points, and just as clear that it had been purposely left off this list. That is, he was avoiding any discussion on this verse like the plague! So much for the Bible alone (sola scriptura)! If he had been any sort of genuine Bible student, he would have at least said he knew insufficient on this verse and would have offered to do some study on it so that we could continue discussion on it at some future date. But calvinists never like to promise to study and research a topic that they do not think they could defend satisfactorily if it has to be based upon the Bible alone. They prefer to change the topic to another that feels more comfortable to them. Calvinists are known for their ability to change the topic whenever they feel they might be losing the debate. And, if they can’t change the topic, then they will either challenge your credentials as a Bible teacher, or else refuse to discuss things any further with you. Anything that would get them out of the firing line! This Living Springs member was simply being a good calvinist. Like those JWs at the door, he knew how to change the topic, and how to move to an acceptable topic when an unacceptable topic was introduced. He was learning fast!
After many fruitless emails attempting to demonstrate the false teachings in calvinism, I gave up. You just can’t rescue everyone from heresy! In fact, to adapt a saying, you can always tell a calvinist ….. but not much! They are such know-it-alls that they “know” you are wrong even before you open your mouth! In the end I wrote him a final reply, which I also published on the website: “Final reply to a calvinist who just won’t listen” (see further down for the link)
At that time I also pointed out to a number of the Living Springs members (via email) some of the truths concerning MacArthur’s teachings on evangelism. There was no response; hearsay did suggest that the members had been warned by the “leadership” to avoid any discussion with me on the matter. It is clear, though, that the members were either not as biblical as they claimed to be, or else they didn’t want to get involved with any dissension. Their website soon after that stated that they were a like-minded sister church to GraceWest Bible Church, a local reformed (calvinist) church with whom they shared a number of facilities by then, including the pulpit. (The doctrinal statement of GraceWest was, at that time, almost identical to that of MacArthur’s church.)
After this adoption of calvinist heresy, Living Springs then taught some doctrinally questionable material from Todd Friel / Steven Lawson (both calvinists); Friel teaches the calvinist heresy that people who ask Jesus into their hearts are not saved and they will perish on the Day of Judgment. And Lawson is a calvinist who managed to significantly reduce the membership of a church in Mobile, Alabama, when he tried to force his calvinist doctrine upon those who would rather believe the Bible.
Then, if that weren’t enough, they committed the unforgiveable sin of using material by Gary Thomas which contained unacceptable blasphemies (is any blasphemy acceptable?). Thomas’ book “Sacred Marriage” quotes favourably from “Conjugal Spirituality” (by Mary Anne Oliver), a book that teaches how to use kundalini yoga and tantric sex, both of which involve demonism. Thomas also quotes from Friedrich Nietzsche (who teaches nihilism, and that God is dead). Gary Thomas elsewhere also advocates heresies such as contemplative and centering prayer (which is little more than crying out endless mantras to demons, a very un-Christian practice). He also wrote that “a healthy look at sex can provide fruitful meditation on our need and desire for God”! How is this Christian in any way?
It is apparent that Living Springs went downhill fast after they joined forces with GraceWest. I’m not suggesting that GraceWest advised on these ungodly teachers, but it is clear that the calvinism that Living Springs now embraces is not afraid to dabble in demonic teachings and sinful doctrines. A biblical doctrine should teach one to avoid the teachings of the world, to deny the world, not to love it.
Today’s Living Springs is very much resting upon the calvinist heresies of the Reformation. Keep in mind that Calvin never left the Catholic church, never renounced his Catholic membership, and that at all times he was merely trying to reform his church that he was yet a member of. Calvin also taught that it was his Catholic baptism that was the foundation of all salvation (which is why he persecuted the Anabaptists), and that there was no salvation to be found outside the walls of his Mother Church (which he defined as the Catholic church). Calvin remained a Catholic all his life!
If you are looking for a biblical church in the western suburbs of Melbourne, you would be well-advised to steer clear of Living Springs Baptist Church. If, however, you do decide to attend this church, please be very discerning in what you accept of their teachings. Read your Bibles and, like the Bereans of Acts 17:10-11, test all things and hold fast to that which is true (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
Any who think that MacArthur is an honest god-fearing, biblical Christian should make up their own minds after reading the information contained in the following documents (in which I ask a number of questions concerning MacArthur).
MacArthur teaches works salvation
And as far as sola scriptura (the Bible alone) is concerned, reformed belief (calvinism) would rather quote the Westminster Confession and/or one of their false teachers such as MacArthur. All I have to do to scare off calvinists is to request that they discuss issues with me from the Bible alone. They never do! Try The Westminster Confession – A Scholarly Critique.
For further information, also read Gary Thomas – New Age Teacher.
Link to “Final reply to a calvinist who just won’t listen”.
************************************
If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments may be recorded on the Comments page. However, I may choose to reply to reasonable comments via email.
List of all my posts on this site.
If you wish to read other documents on the heresies of calvinism, please use this link.
Please feel free to comment on the Comments and contact page
Reasonable comments and replies may be recorded on the Comments page.
However, due to the lack of logical comments, most comments will not be recorded.