[I'm sharing this post from my other blog, but after this I'm going to take a long break from writing here for awhile. I'm completely drained. I will eventually work on and publish some of the series and posts I already have in the works, but until then have a great Autumn, Winter, Holidays, and 2027!]
Here is the tiniest-I-could-make-it version of "Fending Off Calvinism (a.k.a. Destroying Calvinism in 28 Easy Steps)" - which itself is the second half of a post called "Calvinism's Systematic Theology (and how to fend it off)" - about the fundamental errors of Calvinism that trap well-meaning Christians into a very bad, very deceptive, very tricksy theology. I cut out as much as I could here, so check out the longer posts in the links above if you want a fuller picture and more information.
[Despite the title of this post, I know there's nothing easy about defeating or debating Calvinism. It's such a tangled web of errors, with a cult-like vice-grip on people's minds, that it can't be defeated with just a few verses or rebuttals. Its errors are so complex, interconnected, and deep-rooted that it needs to be completely dismantled idea by idea, wrong definition by wrong definition, misinterpreted verse by misinterpreted verse, false dichotomy by false dichotomy, etc. And this takes lots of time and patience, with grace, compassion, and respect for the struggling Calvinist. It took lots of time and effort for them to get sucked into Calvinism (see "The 9 Marks of a Calvinist Cult"), and it's going to take lots of time and effort to get them out.]
If you can understand just a few of these - how Calvinism gets it wrong and what the Bible really says - then you are on your way to resisting and destroying the strong grip Calvinism has gotten on so many churches and good Christian's minds.:
1. Predestination/election/choosing: Biblically, these are not about God predetermining which individuals go to heaven, as Calvinists wrongly think. Predestination is actually about what God has planned for anyone who believes, after they believe (and anyone can). Everyone who believes is predestined to be holy and blameless, to have their bodies redeemed, to get an inheritance (see Ephesians 1:4-5,11 in the KJV, cross-referenced with Romans 8:23 which defines "adoption" as "the redemption of our bodies"), and to be conformed to the image of Jesus (Romans 8:29). And election is about God's choice about how to use people in His plans, which roles/blessings/tasks to give them. God elects people and nations to service, to certain roles in His plans, not to salvation. And just because God and Jesus talk about "choosing" people - such as when Jesus chose His disciples, or God chose Paul as an apostle or chose Israel to bring Jesus and the gospel to the world - it doesn't mean God chooses who gets saved. That's an unbiblical leap Calvinists make.
2. Romans 9: Romans 9 is not about God predetermining the salvation or damnation of individuals, as Calvinists wrongly think. It's about God choosing Israel to be Jesus's bloodline and to bring the gospel to the world. But when they rejected Jesus, God turned His attention to the Gentiles, offering them the salvation, gospel, and job of spreading the gospel that the Jews rejected. But the Jews didn't think it was fair or right for Jews to be punished and for Gentiles to be shown favor. Romans 9 is God's response to those Jews. He's saying that He can punish anyone, even Jews, if they reject Him and that He can extend salvation/blessings to anyone, even Gentiles, if they accept Him and will obey Him. That's what Romans 9 is about. (And so "Who are you, O man, to talk back to God?" cannot be used to defend Calvinism's "doctrine of election/predestination" - which are really two different things anyway - because that's not what Romans 9 is about.)
3. Hardens: Calvinists think this means that God decides who doesn't believe in Him and that He hardens them to make sure they can't believe in Him so that they go to hell just like He predestined (even though Calvi-god created them already unable to believe, and Calvi-Jesus never died for them anyway😕).
But according to the concordance (Strong's Concordance with Vine's Expository Dictionary), hardens is retribution, a punishment for first hardening your own heart against God, resisting His patient longsuffering with you. Such as how, in Exodus 7-10, Pharoah hardened his own heart against God in the first five plagues... and then as a consequence, God hardens Pharoah's heart in the sixth through ninth plagues (which God foreknew and told Moses would happen, in Exodus 7:3), solidifying Pharoah's self-chosen resistance.
Being hardened is the response to and result of our self-chosen unbelief/resistance, not the cause of our unbelief/resistance, as Calvinists wrongly think. (Also see John 12:37,39, 2 Kings 17:14-15, Romans 1:18,28, Zechariah 7:11-13, etc.)
[Sidenote: This idea of potentially being further hardened as punishment for our self-chosen hardness/rejection of God helps explain a verse like 2 Timothy 2:25: "Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth..." This isn't saying that God causes certain people to repent and believe. It's just saying that instead of hardening people as punishment for their resistance - or maybe after a time of being hardened as punishment - God can grant them the option of/opportunity for repentance, but they decide what to do with it: accept it or reject it. See Soteriology 101's post on this verse: "Does God grant repentance to some and not others?"]
4. Jacob and Esau: "Jacob and Esau" is not about God choosing whom to save and whom not to save, as Calvinists think. It's about God choosing whom to use in His plan to bring the Messiah and the gospel to the world. God chose that Jacob, not Esau, would be Jesus's bloodline. Chosen for service, for a role in God's plans, not for salvation.
[Sidenote about God using Assyria in His plans: Calvinists think that the story of God bringing the wicked nation of Assyria against Israel but then punishing Assyria for its wickedness proves that it's okay for God to decree, orchestrate, cause all of our wickedness, sin, and evil - "for His glory," of course - but to then punish us for it, as if it's true justice.
But it's not that God preplanned/caused Assyria to be wicked or orchestrated their wickedness; it's that He orchestrated a way to use their self-chosen wickedness, incorporating it into His plans to discipline Israel before punishing Assyria for being the wicked people they chose to be. We choose how to be and act, and then God chooses how to use us and our decisions in His plans. This makes people truly responsible for their wickedness... unlike Calvinism which makes God truly responsible, which makes it unjust to punish us for it. (C'mon, Calvinists, you know it's true, no matter how much you try to deny it or spin it.)]
5. Faith: Faith is not the gift in Ephesians 2:8-9, as Calvinists think. It's not something God gives to only prechosen people to make them believe. (I would say that faith is the believing, putting our trust in Jesus. It's not something that needs to be injected into us to make us believe.)
In the Greek, words have genders, and (from what I've read) when certain words refer to another word, it must match its gender. "Faith" and "grace" are both female, but "this/gift" is neuter, meaning that it cannot be referring to either faith or grace specifically. So what it's referring to is the whole idea as one: the offer of salvation by grace through faith. Eternal life. Salvation/eternal life is the gift (confirmed in Romans 6:23) that God graciously offers to all, to be accepted by faith - and we choose whether to accept it or reject it.
[Note: The spiritual gift of faith in 1 Cor. 12:9 is not about the kind of faith that leads to salvation. That passage is about spiritual gifts that are given to believers - after they believe - to help them do kingdom work. Some believers are given an extra measure of faith to do the bolder, harder things. (Think about it: If it did mean the faith to believe, then note that 1 Cor. 12:9 says that God only gives it to some believers. How would that make sense?)]
6. Believe and Receive: The words "believe" and "receive" (in verses like Romans 10:4, Ephesians 1:13, and Romans 1:5, 5:11, and 5:17) are not passive, not something that God causes to happen or that He does to us (as Calvinists would say), but they are active, done by us.
According to Strong's Concordance with Vine's Expository Dictionary: “Believe” is active, not passive. It involves a conscious and willing action on our part. It's about being persuaded by something, choosing to commit to it, and placing our confidence and faith in it, which can only happen if we have the free-will ability to reason through things and make real decisions. And "receive" involves the idea of deliberately grabbing ahold of something, of consciously accepting what is offered. Like the word “believe,” it’s active, not passive. Done by us, not to us.
7. Similarly: Ignorance and Blindness
“They are darkened in their understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardening ["blindness" in the KJV] of their hearts. Having lost all sensitivity, they have given themselves over to sensuality so as to indulge in every kind of impurity, with a continual lust for more.” (Ephesians 4:18-19)
Calvinism teaches that God decrees and causes certain people to be born spiritually blind and to have hard hearts - to be insensitive to God, separated from Him, hardened in sin, unable to see, understand, or accept the truths about God - and this leads to their rejection of Him and His truth, so that they end up in hell just like He predestined.
But this is different from what the Bible actually teaches. Because according to Strongs-and-Vine's: "Blindness" involves the idea of being callous toward something, and it comes from a word which is used of the Israelites who deliberately refused God’s ways and His Will. And “ignorance” is not just “not knowing” or “being unaware,” as if God never revealed Himself or the truth to them, never gave them a chance - but it is a deliberate, willful decision to be blind.
The people chose first to be deliberately blind to God and His truth, and it led to their hard hearts, darkened understanding, insensitivity to God, separation from Him, and to them being hardened in sin - a biblical truth and pattern that's confirmed in other passages, like 2 Thess 2:10, Psalm 81:11-12, Hosea 5:4-7,10 (KJV), and Psalm 14:1,3, as well as the ones referred to in #3 earlier, about "hardens."
And it's even this way in Mark 4:12/Matthew 13:14-15, which we often seem to think is teaching that Jesus spiritually blinds and deafens the people because He's afraid that if they truly understood then they would believe, that He wants to keep them from believing. But what it's really teaching is that the people themselves are the ones who don't want to believe, who are afraid that they'll believe if they truly understood - and so they make themselves blind and deaf, to keep from having to truly see, hear, understand, and accept the truth.
Deliberately refusing God’s way. Willfully blind. Our choice to be blind and to refuse God is what leads to our hard hearts, spiritual insensitivity, and depravity... not the other way around, as Calvinism teaches.
[Are you starting to feel some of the scales fall from your eyes yet?]
8. God's Will: Calvinists wrongly think that God's Will is everything that happens, that everything He wills happens, and that everything that happens does so exactly as He willed, preplanned, orchestrated, and caused, even sin, evil, and unbelief.
[And so to explain how sin happens, Calvinists came up with their unbiblical concept of "the two Wills of God": Calvi-god has a spoken Will (his verbal commands, such as that we seek Him, believe in Him, obey Him) but also an unspoken Will (whatever happens; the things he causes us to do, even sin and unbelief and disobedience to his commands). They say that both are his Will. (But I say that a god who decrees that people disobey his decrees - who is double-minded, self-opposing, deceptive, dishonest, who plays both sides of the chessboard, and who is secretive about which one is his primary Will - cannot be trusted and should not be worshiped.)
However, Dr. Tony Evans, one of the pastors whose theology I trust most, also says that there are two Wills of God, but his are biblical: God has unconditional Wills and conditional Wills. There are some things God does unconditionally, totally not based on anything we do... but then there are other things God has planned to do based on conditions, on if we do our part first, which explains all those "If you... then I..." verses (such as when it comes to salvation and free-will: "If you repent and believe, then I will save you and give you eternal life"). This is a biblical understanding of the two Wills of God, one that isn't illogical and contradictory, one that protects the integrity of God's character and the trustworthiness of His Word. Unlike Calvinism.]
But biblically, according to the concordance, God's Will is about His preferred plans for us. And He tells us in His Word what His Will is (the things He wants us to do, the ways He wants us to live), but He has given us the choice of whether or not we obey Him. And this is why God's Will doesn't always happen and why not everything that happens is God's Will.
Yes, God can work whatever we choose - our obedience or disobedience - into His plans and bring good out of it, but that doesn't mean that our disobedience was His Will or that it was destined to happen. It just means that we freely chose to resist His Will when we could've chosen obedience to His Will instead. He lets us decide... and then He lets us face the consequences that go with our choice.
9. Total depravity/spiritual death: Calvinists believe that total depravity and spiritual death are about "total inability," that people are so dead and depraved inside that they are unable to - that they cannot even want to - seek or believe in God, or even desire salvation, unless He causes them to (and, of course, He will only cause the Calv-elect to).
But "inability" is unbiblical, going beyond what Scripture teaches. Biblically and simply, depravity/spiritual death are really just about how sin has separated mankind from God and how we cannot close that gap on our own, and so we need Jesus's sacrificial death for our sins so that we can go to heaven.
But turning depravity/spiritual death into "total inability" completely changes God's Word, the gospel, man's responsibility, and God's character, and it inevitably leads you right into Calvinism.
[Actually, I would say that Calvinists misapply the word "depravity." They use it to describe the condition we're born in, as if we're born in some sort of extremely wicked condition that's so sinful we can't believe in God unless He causes us to. But biblically, we are simply born with a sin nature, and our sins separate us from God (although I believe there is an age of accountability and that babies/young children are not held guilty of sin before that). It seems to me that, biblically, depravity is actually about the condition man gets himself into when he gives in to his sin nature and hardens himself against God (Romans 1:18,28).
And, fyi, the word "depraved/depravity" isn't in the KJV anywhere, and so it's not defined anywhere in the Bible the way Calvinists say it is. It's a Calvinist concept stemming from their compilation of other verses which are totally twisted or taken out of context to teach "inability." But if someone is going to build their whole theology on "total depravity is total inability," then shouldn't they be able to find the word depravity clearly defined that way in Scripture? I'm just sayin'.]
And to make an even bigger mess of it all (to the detriment of the true gospel): When sharing the gospel, Calvinists totally overemphasize total depravity, claiming that we need to understand how terribly wretched and evil we are before we can come to Christ. Here are just two examples:
From my ex-pastor's February 2016 sermon: "All people, all cultures, all generations are universally evil, spiritually ignorant, rebellious, wayward, worthless, morally corrupt, evil-mouthed, deceitful, full of bitterness, violent, miserable, and have no fear of God in their eyes... We're dead in sin, slaves to sin, unable and unwilling to seek God ["unable" is a Calvinist addition to Scripture and to the ideas of depravity and spiritual death] ... No one is righteous... We are depraved down to the core... utterly saturated, permeated, and consumed by corruption... No one is righteous.... Why does nobody seek God? Because no one is able to seek God on their own. And the reason goes back to total depravity... We are born slaves to sin, wickedness, depravity.... You don't understand the gospel until you realize you're the worst sinner you know."
And the Founders Ministries article The Depth of Depravity says this about total depravity (thanks to Sallie at A Quiet Simple Life for bringing this article to my attention in her post A Calvinist Couple Explains Salvation to Their Children. I took out the references to Bible verses to save space):
"There is a third aspect that is not discussed as often. It is what may be termed the depth of depravity. The Bible describes sinners as far more evil than they realize. Just as Calvinism portrays a higher [and totally wrong] view of the sovereignty of God than other theologies, so it presents a far lower view of the sinful state of fallen mankind. [Yeah, we know. Hooray for you.] In sum, fallen man is corrupt through and through, rotten to the core, and in desperate need of salvation.
... Fallen men are dead trees that deserve to be cut down and thrown into the fire. They are useful only as firewood for hell. The lifeless stump of fallen man is rotten.... Fallen man is a maggot that feeds on filth and dead bodies... Men are worms whose hunger is never satisfied, as Jonathan Edwards said, 'They are like a filthy worm that never feeds so sweetly as when feeding on carrion or never has its nature so suited as when crawling in the most abominable filth.'... [Man is] a filthy and disgusting sinner.
... [Man is] Worse than animals... because of sin, man is worse than any beast... Thomas Watson said, 'The sinner is a swine with a man’s head,' a kind of half-man half-beast like a centaur. George Whitefield popularized the analogy of man as half-beast and half-devil. Spurgeon said that analogy is an insult to beasts and devils. We are worse than both.
... Sinners are mad dogs foaming at the mouth with spiritual rabies... Worse still, we are like disgusting vermin. Calvin said we are worse than 'worms, flies, lice and vermin. For there is more worth in all the world’s vermin than there is in man.' The worst, vilest animal is an angel compared with the best man.
... Calvin said, 'To hear us tell it, we are angels, but if someone looks closely, he will find we are worse than devils.'... Jonathan Edwards preached that there is a 'mutual loathing' between God and man. Calvin said we deserve to have the angels spit on us... Man is bad—very bad. And God is mad—very mad [about what he supposedly decreed and caused!?!😕].
... The Bible is a mirror that shows how evil we really are by nature. We must hold it up to lost sinners so they will be convinced and convicted."
So humans, according to Calvinism, must realize and admit that we're absolutely evil, disgusting, violent, worthless, God-hating, worse-than-vermin, worst-sinner-we-know worms before we can understand the gospel, be convicted, and be saved.
Does this sound biblical to you!?! (And aren't some of these descriptions from the Bible talking about people who've embraced their wickedness and rejected God, not about the condition of all people in general from birth?) Is extreme depravity the reason we are separated from God and on our way to hell, the reason we need salvation? Does God ask us to admit to extreme rotten-to-the-core depravity and worthlessness before we can be saved?
No. According to Scripture, all it takes is one sin to keep us out of heaven, to make us sinners (James 2:10). Biblically, our need for salvation, for Jesus, has nothing to do with the depth of our depravity, just with the fact that even one sin separates us from God.
Romans 3:23: "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"
It doesn't take falling to extreme depths of depravity and wretchedness to be separated from God, to be in need of Jesus's sacrifice for us. It just takes falling short of God's glory, missing it by even one sin.
But Calvinism has raised the bar God set for forgiveness and salvation, making it about the extreme depth of our "depravity," demanding that we admit not just that we're sinners... but that we're the most extremely wretched, depraved, evil, worthless, violent, God-hating sinner there ever was (essentially insisting that we lie or exaggerate the truth about ourselves in order to be saved). But how many people will or can honestly admit to something like this? The demands Calvinists make of sinners to be saved goes far beyond what God demands of us. And the value they place on God's creation - human beings - goes far below the value God places on people.
How little God asks of us in order to be saved, asking us to simply admit that we're sinners (because of at least one sin) who need Jesus and can't save ourselves!
But, oh, how much Calvinism asks of us! Raising the bar that God set, demanding more from us than God does, reducing the value of people lower than God does, repelling more people than it wins.
And I wonder who's behind a switch like this, who's behind raising the bars God set, switching the goalposts, devaluing what God values?
10. "Only evil all the time" (but what about evanescent grace?): To support their doctrine of total depravity/total inability, Calvinists often refer to Genesis 6:5 "And the Lord saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time."
"See, only evil all the time," they say. "Unable to believe in God unless He regenerates us to make us want to and able to believe in Him."
But, in context, this is not a generalized statement about humans (and it doesn't necessarily imply inability, as Calvinists wrongly think). It's about the people of Noah's day, a mixed human-demon hybrid of people who were so wicked that God had to flood the earth to start over again. (But Noah was spared because his bloodline was pure, uncorrupted by demonic genes.) This extreme historical situation cannot be used to prove Calvinism's doctrine of "total inability." That's reading something into the text that isn't there and misapplying Scripture.
[Note: If people's hearts are "only wicked continually" (as Calvinists constantly hammer on and on about) and if Calvi-god gives some reprobates "evanescent grace" (a Calvinist concept: a temporary non-saving faith that makes them think they are truly one of the saved Calv-elect, when they're really not), then how can any Calvinist ever trust their Calv-election, their Calvi-regeneration? Can a Calvinist ever be sure that their heart isn't deceiving them into thinking that they're Calv-elect when they're really not? Isn't that exactly what an "only wicked continually" heart would do: trick people into thinking they're saved when they're not? Is there really any security of salvation in Calvinism when security is not based on trusting in God's promise to save anyone who believes (and anyone can believe at any time)... but when it's based on the hope that Calvi-god gave you real faith instead of fake (but there's nothing you could do about it anyway if you were reprobated to hell, if Calvi-Jesus didn't die for you, and if you got evanescent grace instead of saving grace)?]
11. "No one seeks"/Romans 3: Calvinists also insert "inability" into Romans 3:11 ("There is no one who seeks God"), using it to support their idea that people are totally unable to seek God unless and until He regenerates them to cause them to. But the verse doesn't say "no one can seek God" or "we are unable to seek God unless He causes us to." It just says that we don't.
And it's important to know that Romans 3:10-18 is a reference to Old Testament verses, such as Psalms 14 and 53. And these Psalms clearly explain why people don't seek God: Because they have turned away from Him and claimed that there is no God. Those who turn away from God and cling to their wickedness won't seek Him and can't understand spiritual things. God didn't cause or predestine them to be the way they are; they chose it.
Romans 3 is not about inability, as Calvinists teach. But, in context, it's about Paul teaching the Jews that everyone is separated from God by sin (Gentiles and Jews)... that everyone needs Jesus because no one can work their way to heaven on their own (even Jews)... that God is just in punishing everyone (even Jews) for their sins and unrighteousness... that no one will be declared righteous just because of their bloodline, good works, or law-keeping (Jewish people don't get a free pass just because they're Jewish and follow the Jewish Law)... and that the Jewish people can't hoard God and salvation for themselves because God is the God of all people, and salvation is offered to all people, and anyone who believes will be saved, even Gentiles. That's what Romans 3 is about.
12. Lydia: To "prove" Calvinist election and irresistible grace, Calvinists quote Acts 16:14 - "The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message" - and then they say "See, God opened Lydia's heart to believe the gospel. God predestines who believes and then causes them to believe."
But first off, the text does not say that God opened her heart "to believe." "To believe" is an assumption, added by Calvinists. And it does not say that Paul's message was the gospel message. In fact, it doesn't say what the message was. And so it very easily could have been - as I believe it is - a message about the need for believers to be baptized... because that's the very next thing she does in the next verse. (And this is the same thing that happened in Acts 19 when Paul preached to believers about the need to be baptized in the name of the Lord instead of just in John the Baptist's "baptism of repentance.")
This is not a case of God causing certain unbelievers to believe, but it's about God leading a believer to know the next step of obedience they need to take, which in Lydia's case was baptism.
13. Works: Calvinists think that having the free-will ability to choose to believe in Jesus should be considered a "working for our salvation" thing. And so since we all know we can't work our way to heaven, they convince us that it means that we cannot believe on our own either, because that would be "works."
But biblically, God does not define belief as works. In fact, He makes a distinction between faith/belief that saves and the righteous things we do to try to work our way to heaven that don't save.
See Romans 4:3-6, about "a man who does not work but trusts God...", where God is contrasting Abraham's belief in Him with those who "work" for their justification, who try to earn their salvation. God is saying that "belief/faith" is not the same thing as "working for your salvation," and that belief/faith is what we must do to be saved.
But even if you wanted to call belief a "work," the Bible is clear that it's the one "work" God says we must do to be saved, our one responsibility (see John 6:28-29).
Believing in Jesus is not "working" for salvation. It's merely opening our hands and accepting the salvation He bought for us and offers as a gift. And accepting a gift someone else paid for is not work... unless you're a Calvinist.
14. Born again/regeneration/belief: Calvinists wrongly equate being born again/regenerated with belief, teaching that if the Holy Spirit makes us born again/regenerated then it must also mean that He makes us believe, too. And they believe that the Holy Spirit regenerates people first - makes them born again first (because they've already been saved way back in eternity past) - so that they can and do believe. In Calvinism, salvation results in regeneration which results in belief.
But biblically, we choose to believe first, and then - in response to our free-will belief* - we are saved and the Holy Spirit regenerates us/makes us born again, sealing us for the day of redemption (Acts 2:38, Ephesians 1:13).
Calvinism has reversed the order of salvation, turning it into a different way to be saved: saved by election, not by belief in Jesus and the gospel.
[And when John 3:8 talks about spiritual birth by the Spirit being like the invisible wind going wherever it wants to, it doesn't mean (as Calvinists teach) that the Holy Spirit chooses whom to regenerate. But it means that spiritual birth is an invisible thing that happens on the inside, contrasted with physical birth which we can see on the outside. That's all it's saying - that it's a spiritual heart-thing instead of a physical thing - not that God picks whom to save and whom to not save. A total Calvinist corruption of another verse.
(*FYI: Calvinists will also use the terms "free will" and "freely choosing," but what they really mean is that Calvi-god has predestined what we want to choose and what we do choose, and that's the only thing we can choose. Not so "free," is it? Not really a choice at all.)]
15. Foundations of the world: Calvinists believe that God decided before the foundation of the world who would believe and who wouldn't and that He causes it to work out the way He planned.
But this is based on a mistranslation/misunderstanding of Revelation 13:8, usually from Calvinists' favored translation, the ESV, which says "... everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain." "Names written before the foundation of the world" sounds very Calvinist-predestinationy, right?
But here's the King James, which I think is the most reliable and most accurate version: "... whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Very different, isn't it?
And two possible ways to understand it according to the KJV are:
1) "From the beginning" could refer to the Lamb being slain. If so, I would suggest it means that Jesus was foreordained to be slain for our sins from the very beginning. This would be confirmed by 1 Peter 1:19-20 and Acts 2:23.
2) Or if "from the beginning" really does refer to names being written in the Book of Life, notice that it's "from" in the KJV, not "before." This would mean that names started being added to the Book of Life from the beginning, meaning that new names are added as each new person comes to Christ, which would be confirmed in Rev. 17:8 and Eph. 1:13. (Or maybe it's about the Book of Life itself being created from the beginning.)
Either way, it contradicts Calvinism.
And, furthermore, Calvinists also misunderstand Ephesians 1:4 (NIV): “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight …”
Calvinists think this means that God chose which individual people would be saved, before the creation of the world. But that's not what it says or means. Basically and biblically, Ephesians is not saying that God predestined which individuals to save, but it's saying that God planned from the beginning that there would be an "in Him" group and that anyone who becomes “in Him” (and anyone can, through our free-will belief, Ephesians 1:13) will be saved, will become "holy and blameless" in His sight, and will get the benefits and blessings He planned to give all those who are "in Him." [See this post for more on this.]
16. "Sinful at birth": Calvinists always use Psalm 51:5 - "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." (NIV) - to "prove" their idea of "total depravity," that from birth we are all wicked, rebellious, God-haters who could never come to God unless God makes us do it.
But here's the KJV: "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." It does not say that David was sinful from birth but that he was conceived in sin. It is not a comment about our "total depravity from birth," but it's about David's mother's sin which led to his conception (or at least his belief that she sinned) or about the sin-filled world that babies are born into. Big difference!
(My husband read of an old belief people used to have back in the day, which was that people were born on the same day of the week that they were conceived. And so if a baby was born on the Sabbath, it meant the parents conceived the baby on a Sabbath, which meant they would have violated Sabbath rules about not having sex on the Sabbath. Who knows, but maybe David is referring to a "sin" along those lines. It's an interesting thought.)
17. Potter and the clay: Calvinists use Romans 9:21 ("Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?") to support Calvinist predestination, to "prove" that God has the right to create some people for heaven and some for hell.
But that's not about Calvinist predestination because that's not what Paul is talking about in Romans 9. That verse/passage is about how God chooses to use people, not save people. God has the right to give some people noble jobs and others common jobs, often based on how we live, on whether we obey or disobey. And God has the right to incorporate our decisions into His plans however He wants, and we have no right to say that He's wrong or unfair because He's just responding to what we chose first.
And don't forget that there are at least two other places in the Bible that talk about the potter and the clay or about vessels for noble or ignoble use - and neither have to do with God predestining someone's salvation.
Jeremiah 18: God shows Jeremiah a potter who was shaping a pot, but the clay was marred (notice that the potter didn't mar the clay) and so he shaped it into a different pot that would better fit the clay's condition. Likewise, God says that He can plan something for people, but then He can change His plans for people based on what they do or don't do. We chose first how to live and how to be, and then God chooses how to use us in His plans.
2 Timothy 2:20-21: Like Romans 9:21, this also talks about some vessels in a house being used for noble purposes and some for ignoble purposes. Not only is this also not about salvation but about God using people for different purposes/jobs, based on what kind of people they are, but it also contradicts Calvinism because it says "If a man cleanses himself from [being ignoble], he will be an instrument for noble purposes, made holy..." This shows that the decision to be how we are - to be fit for noble or ignoble purposes - lies with us, not with God, as Calvinists would say. And we can be used for noble purposes if we cleanse ourselves from being “ignoble.” God doesn’t do it for us and hasn’t pre-decided it. He responds according to our choices.
18. "Fitted to destruction": Calvinists also use Romans 9:22 to teach Calvinist predestination/the doctrine of election (NIV): “What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath – prepared for destruction?”
They use this to "prove" that God predetermined who would go the hell, that He prepared certain people for destruction from the beginning of time.
But in the King James, the word is not “prepared” but “fitted.” And according to Strong's-and-Vine's, “fitted” indicates a strong correlation between someone’s character and their destiny, and it’s written in such a way as to imply that the objects of wrath prepared themselves for destruction by how they chose to live and be. (This goes along with the potter and clay verses above.)
Romans 9 is not a Calvinist chapter!
19. Salvation belongs to the Lord: Calvinists always use Jonah 2:9's "salvation belongs to/comes from the Lord" to support their idea that God determines who gets salvation and who doesn't. But according to Strong's-and-Vine's, "salvation" in the Old Testament never refers to eternal soul salvation from sin, but it refers to God delivering people from any earthly evil, enemy, distress, or trouble that they need deliverance from. I'm just sayin'.
20. God removes hearts of stone and replaces them with hearts of flesh: Calvinists also use Ezekiel 36:26 - "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh" - to try to prove that God causes people to believe (and that He chooses who believes).
But to remove someone's hardness (the hardening God put on them as punishment for their self-chosen resistance; see #3 about "hardens") doesn't mean causing them to believe. It just means that the punishment is over, and God is now giving them the option to repent and believe again (see the sidenote in #3)... but they decide what to do with it.
Plus, God doesn't give "a new heart and new spirit" arbitrarily or with no influence from people, but He does it when they are turn away from their sin and turn toward Him (see Ezekiel 18:30-32). If God removes our punishment-of-hardness and allows us to choose to repent and believe again, then we have a decision to make: Turn to God and get a new heart/spirit... or resist Him more and die in our sins. It's our choice.
Calvinists say that God alone decides whom to give a new heart to and whom to seal in their sin/predestined damnation... but the Bible tells us to get a new heart and spirit from God, and it even tells us how to do this (and God pleads with us to do this) so that we can avoid judgment and eternal death. It's our choice.
21. Likewise is Remnant People: Calvinists would say that God chooses (basically arbitrarily) whom to save out of a wicked nation/wicked humanity - remnant people - without any choice from them, with no relation to anything they did or did not do.
But this is a reversal of what the Bible teaches - because God says that He chooses remnant people based on what the people choose, on whether they choose to turn to Him or away from Him (for examples, see Ezekiel 9:4, Romans 11:4-5, and Malachi 3:16-17).
First, the people chose how they lived and whom they worshiped, and then God chose those who grieved over sin, didn't bow to Baal, and who feared/honored Him.
We see this pattern over and over again in God's Word: We make our decision first, for or against God, and then the Lord responds accordingly, giving us what we chose.
God doesn't choose who chooses Him, but He chooses - gives Himself to - those who first choose Him.
Luke 11:13 (KJV): "... how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?"
22. Foreknowledge/"God allows our free-will choice": In Calvinism, "foreknows" isn't just about Calvi-god "knowing beforehand" what will happen and merely "allowing" it to happen, as most of us see it.
But Calvi-god only "foreknows" and "allows" what happens because he first preplanned, orchestrates, causes it to happen, even our sins and unbelief... and nothing different could have happened. But then he holds us responsible for it, as if we truly "deserve" it, as if it's "true justice".
In Calvinism, we "freely choose, with our free-will" to do only what Calvi-god predestined us to do because those are the only desires he allowed us to have (desires that he built into our nature/Wills which we cannot resist or change but must obey and carry out), the only thing we have the ability to choose.
It is so dishonest for Calvinists to use words like these because it's a total violation of the real, proper, and biblical definitions of...
foreknowledge (which is really just "to know beforehand," not "plan beforehand")
allows (which does not essentially include preplanning, orchestrating, causing)
freely choosing/free-will/choice (which should include the ability to make our own decisions among two or more options that are truly available to and possible for us)
and justice/deserved punishment (for it to be true justice - for someone to truly "deserve" to be "justly" punished - they had to have been able to voluntarily make their own decisions among options, to have been able to choose to do right instead of wrong but they chose to do wrong instead).
So deceptive! Calvinists totally mean something very different from what they want to sound like they're saying.
23. Bad Analogies: Another thing to watch out for - besides Calvinism's deceptive and unbiblical use of words - are the bad analogies they use which are very effective at tricking and trapping unsuspecting Christians into Calvinism.
The most classic one is the "100 people on death row" analogy: "There are 100 people on death row for murder, and God graciously chooses to save 10 of them, but He lets the other 90 go to their punishment. Was He unjust to save some but not others? No. None of them deserves to be saved. They all deserve to be punished. So it's not unjust to graciously rescue some but let others pay the penalty they deserve."
At first, it seems to fit, to make sense (even if we don't like the sound of it), to be gracious and fair and just, right?
Wrong!
Because the critical, inherent flaw in this analogy is that those people are only on death row in the first place because Calvi-god "ordained" their crimes and created them to have their murderous desires - desires they did not get to choose and had no ability to resist or change. He preplanned, orchestrated, directed, caused them to want to/choose to commit those crimes - crimes he predetermined - giving them no option or ability to do anything differently, but then he punishes them for it. That's not true grace for the 10 or true justice/deserving the punishment for the 90. Not unless you're a Calvinist.
[Always remember that if and when Calvinism sounds good, it's because Calvinists are presenting only part of it - the good-sounding/biblical-sounding surface parts, or the parts that relate to only the Calv-elect, not the non-Calv-elect. So when they wax poetic about God's great love and grace, ask them what happens to "the non-elect"... and then watch them squirm, deflect, evade, and turn the questions back on you.]
24. False Dichotomies/Strawmen Arguments/Unfair Accusations: These are other tricks meant to trap people in Calvinism, and if you can recognize them when you hear them, you can more easily resist them.
False Dichotomies are when Calvinists present you with a choice between two options, as if they are the only two options possible: The Calvinist one meant to lead you deeper into Calvinism and an obviously-wrong one that you will inevitably reject. But what most people don't realize is that these contain inherent flaws and built-in Calvinism from the very beginning which, if we don't realize it and expose it, will trap us into siding with Calvinism.
Such as...
"Either God is sovereign/in control... or you (or Satan) are sovereign/in control." [But what we don't realize is that they have an unbiblical definition of sovereign and that their idea of "in control" doesn't just mean being in authority over everything, watching over everything, and working everything together for good, but it means preplanning, orchestrating, causing, controlling everything that happens, even sin, evil, and unbelief. A very different view of "in control."]
"Either He controls everything... or He controls nothing." [So they make us feel like if we believe in true free-will - that God doesn't control all our decisions but lets us decide - then we're saying that He controls nothing.]
"Either He fully saves us... or we save ourselves." [But this is based on Calvinism's faulty idea that having the free-will ability to choose to believe would be "working for salvation."]
"Either God chooses who gets saved/elects some people to heaven... or else no one would go to heaven (or He must elect all people)." [But this is built on the incorrect Calvinist beliefs that God chooses who gets saved, that people are unable to believe unless God causes them to, and that election is about being chosen for salvation.]
And Strawmen Arguments/False Accusations are essentially when Calvinists accuse you of saying things you're not saying in an effort to tear down your side or discredit you, to force you onto their side - such as making you feel like if you believe there's one thing God doesn't control, even one piece of dust, then you're saying that God is not omnipotent and sovereign. Or if you say that God doesn't control all sin and evil then you're saying that He's weak and helpless, that evil controls Him and is more powerful than Him. Or is you say that people have free-will, then you're saying we're stronger than God and that God can't work out any of His plans. Or if you don't believe God chooses certain people to be saved then you're a Universalist who thinks He must save everyone, as if He "owes" salvation to all people, just because. Or they make you feel like disagreeing with Calvinism is disagreeing with the Bible, as if you're rejecting God's truth and His authority when you reject Calvinism.
These false dichotomies, strawmen arguments, and false accusations are built on Calvinism's own faulty ideas and philosophical reasoning, NOT on a proper understanding of Scripture. And yet, sadly, they are one of Calvinism's greatest tactics to lure many good naive Christians into accepting the Calvinist way of thinking, their bad logic.
[Also see "Don't answer Calvinist questions. Dismantle them".]
25. Sovereign/Omnipotent: Biblically, sovereignty and omnipotence are about the position God is in: the highest authority and power there is. But Calvinists have made it about God's behavior, how He must act in that position, and what He must do as God: He must use His power and authority all the time to preplan, control, orchestrate, cause everything that happens (even sin, evil, and unbelief), or else He's not God. Calvinism essentially tells our sovereign and omnipotent God how He must be and act in order to be a sovereign, omnipotent God. (😕)
But God can still be (and is) the highest authority and power there is, even if He has chosen (as the Bible teaches) to voluntarily restrain Himself and His ability to control all things, to create free-will beings with the ability to make real decisions on their own, even to reject Him and disobey Him. This doesn't change or limit the position of power and authority He is in (His omnipotence and sovereignty); it's just a different idea of how He behaves in that position.
And did you know that the word "sovereign/sovereignty" is never defined in the Bible the way Calvinists define it - and it isn't even in the King James Bible anywhere - despite the fact that Calvinists build their whole theology around their definition of it? (I think the KJV is the most reliable, least corrupted translation.) And in other translations like the NIV, it's used mostly in a title like "the Sovereign Lord": King Jesus. But nowhere does it define sovereignty as being about how God must act, how He must decree, ordain, predetermine, control, orchestrate, cause all things. Those are Calvinist additions to "sovereign/omnipotent" and to God and the Bible - additions resulting from bad theology, bad philosophizing, and bad presuppositions they've read into the Bible.
[Question: If Calvinists are correct that sovereignty means that God preplans, orchestrates, controls all things that happen, then how are verses like Hosea 8:4, Isaiah 30:1, 1 Kings 20:42, Jeremiah 19:5, and Ezekiel 13:22 to be understood?]
26. Proverbs and Psalms: Calvinists often use Proverbs or Psalms to try to support/prove Calvinism, such as (for one example) Proverbs 21:1: “the kings’ heart is in the hand of the Lord, he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases”, quoting it as literal, hard-core theology in order to prove that sovereignty means God controls our thoughts, desires, actions, and eternal destinies.
But they fail to realize that Proverbs are wise sayings and general principles and that Psalms are songs, prayers, some prophecy, and the desperate cries of a hurting heart. They are not meant to be taken as literal, hard-core theology or absolute promises that you filter the rest of your theology through, as Calvinists do.
[The next time a Calvinist quotes a Psalm or Proverb to try to support/prove Calvinism, tell them that if they are going to take a Psalm or Proverb as literal, hard-core theology or as absolute promises, then they can't pick and choose which Psalm or Proverb to do that with but must do it with all Psalms and Proverbs, including ones like Proverbs 12:21, 16:7, 16:31, 21:9, 23:2, 23:14 and Psalm 6:6, 73:13, 115:16, 115:17. Ask them if they would take these Psalms and Proverbs as literal, hard-core theology or absolute promises? Would they filter the rest of the Bible and their view of God through Psalms or Proverbs like these, using them as the foundation of their whole theological system? No? Then why would they do it with Proverbs 21:1?
And if they still want to insist that Proverbs 21:1 is literal, hard-core theology so that they can cling to their idea that God controls everything we think and do, then tell them "Okay, but then notice that the verse literally specifies that the king’s heart is in the Lord’s hand. And no one else’s."]
27. Mercy, grace, justice, and wrath: Calvinists believe that Calvi-god extends saving mercy/grace/love to only the Calv-elect. But the Bible says that God's saving mercy, grace, and love is for all people (but we decide to accept it or reject it), see Romans 11:32, Titus 2:11, 1 Timothy 2:3-5, Romans 5:8 (aren't we all sinners?), and John 3:16.
And Calvinists believe that Calvi-god shows off his justice and gets glory by creating reprobates (people he predestined to hell and created as unrepentant slaves to sin and depravity) whom he can punish for their sins and unbelief. But the Bible says that God shows His justice and gets glory by sending Jesus to the cross for our sins (see Romans 3:25-26 and John 12:27-28). And it does not say that people were created as unrepentant slaves to sin/depravity, but it says that we become slaves to sin when we yield ourselves to sin but that we can become slaves to righteousness if we choose to yield ourselves to righteousness, to Christ (Romans 6:16-18 KJV, 2 Peter 2:19).
And Calvinists believe that Calvi-god showers reprobates with some temporary "common grace" (non-saving grace in the form of breath, food, water, and sunshine while they're alive) so that he can show them a little kindness, a little pseudo-love before they die and go to their predestined damnation. But the Bible says that the real reason God is kind to wicked, resistant, depraved people is not to merely show them a little fake grace/love before they are sent to their predestined damnation, but He shows them kindness "to lead [them] to repentance" (Romans 2:4). Calvinism teaches a very different purpose and goal for God's grace and kindness to unbelievers.
[Sidenote: As I said, Calvinism teaches that Calvi-god was full of wrath and justice from the very beginning and needed to be able to demonstrate it for his glory, and so he created sinful reprobates so that he had someone to punish, someone to pour out his wrath and justice on. (So Calvi-Jesus's death was not enough, not sufficient to fully satisfy Calvi-god's wrath and fulfill justice? Calvi-god also needed multitudes of reprobates to punish? And Calvi-god's glory is dependent on sin and sinners? So then how lacking in glory was he before the creation of sinful reprobates?)
But I believe this puts the cart before the horse, reversing the order of cause and effect - because the Bible shows that our sin and unbelief precedes, causes, results in God's wrath and justice, that His wrath and justice are His responses to our self-chosen sin, not that His wrath and justice are the precursor to and cause of our sin and unbelief, as Calvinism teaches it. See Ephesians 5:6, John 3:36 KJV, Romans 1:18,2:5-8, Deut. 29:24-28, Ezekiel 36:17-18, etc.]
Calvi-god sacrifices most people for himself, for his pleasure and his need for more glory.
But the God of the Bible sacrificed Himself for all people, out of love, for their good, their salvation, so that whoever believes in Him will be saved (and anyone can).
These are two very different Gods. And only the second One is worth trusting, worth worshiping, worth living for in gratitude, worth loving.
28. And finally, The Gospel:
Although it seems like Calvinists believe in and spread the same gospel as non-Calvinists, they don't.
Non-Calvinism: "Repent and believe in Jesus in order to be saved and born again - and anyone can, because Jesus died for everyone, and God wants everyone to be saved, and He offers the free gift of eternal life to everyone, but it's up to us if we accept it or reject it." This is why we share the gospel and plead with people to believe it - because it's for everyone, and anyone can believe it and be saved.
Calvinism: "You don't repent and believe in order to be saved and born again, but you repent and believe if you are already saved and born again. And no one gets a real choice about it because God has predetermined whom He will save and regenerate, and everyone else is predestined to hell and can't do anything about it. Oh, and by the way, Jesus died only for those predestined to heaven."
In Calvinism, first the Calv-elect are chosen for salvation, then they are regenerated/born again by the Spirit... and then, lastly, they are able to understand and respond to the gospel, repent, and believe in Jesus.
And so, therefore, belief in Calvi-Jesus and the Calvi-gospel does not and cannot save anyone - it has no effect on whether someone is saved or not - because it is the result of already having been saved and born again... meaning that, in Calvinism, people are saved by election, not by faith in Jesus or the gospel.
Loraine Boettner (The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination): "A man is not saved because he believes in Christ; he believes in Christ because he is saved."
Arthur Pink (The Sovereignty of God): "A man is not regenerated because he has first believed in Christ, but he believes in Christ because has been regenerated."
And yet, time and time again, the Bible says that when we repent and believe in Jesus and the gospel, then we are saved, sealed with the Spirit, and born again. See John 20:31, John 3:16,36, Acts 16:31, Romans 10:9, John 5:24, John 1:12, Acts 2:38, Acts 11:18 (“… So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto [that leads to] life.” God gave the offer of salvation, the ability to repent, even to the Gentiles, not just the Jews. And notice that repentance leads to life, to being born-again, contradicting the Calvinist idea that being born again and brought to life leads to repentance), John 7:39, Ephesians 1:13, etc. Believing in Jesus leads to being saved and born again, not the other way around as Calvinism teaches.
How much clearer could God have been?
How much more wrong could Calvinism be?
[Note: Calvinism appears at first - and to the untrained eye - to teach the same things as non-Calvinism, to believe the same gospel, because Calvinism has a biblical surface layer that fits non-Calvinism (and because it uses the same concepts just in a reversed order), while hiding a deeper layer that's purely and uniquely Calvinist - a Calvinist layer that contradicts, alters, overrides, or negates the biblical surface layer once you really understand it. This is why Calvinists can claim things like "We're saying the same thing you are" and why they say things like "You don't understand Calvinism" when we object to the contradictions that their deeper layer creates. They're speaking on and flopping between multiple layers; we just don't know it.]
And so when Calvinists share their gospel, their goal is not really to reach everyone, to save everyone... but it's merely for the Calvi-elect, to make the Calv-elect realize that they were always saved from the beginning of time and that all they have to do is wake up one day and realize it (without making any personal, conscious, deliberate decision for Jesus on their own).
And, unbeknownst to many Christians, Calvinists have a secondary goal besides making the Calvi-elect realize they are Calv-elect: The Calvi-gospel is also meant to seal the non-Calv-elect in their predestined damnation when they inevitably reject it, just as Calvi-god decreed. (See this post for more about Calvangelism.)
Jenny Manley ("Evangelists, let the doctrine of predestination batter your heart"): "The doctrine of double predestination corrects the faulty assumption that the goal of evangelism is always conversion or that the highest good to come from sharing the gospel is the salvation of sinners. Something better and more important is at stake—God’s glory. If God is glorified both in showing mercy to sinners ["the Calv-elect"] and in the just judgment of their sin ["the non-Calv-elect"], then every time the gospel is faithfully shared, it’s a success."
Heidelberg Theological Seminary ("The Doctrine of Limited Atonement..."): "It is inaccurate to say that we 'offer' salvation to all men... The non-elect person will never have ears to hear this and obey. Yet, the call of the gospel must be sincerely given, allowing God to gather his people by the power of His Holy Spirit. ["The Calvi-gospel is only for the Calv-elect."]
... It is precisely through this preaching of the gospel that God has determined to save His elect for whom Christ died ["Calvi-Jesus died only for the Calv-elect, and Calvi-god wants to save only them."].... God will also use the preaching of the gospel to condemn those who reject it and continue in their unbelief [by Calvi-god's decree]. The success of preaching is guaranteed, for none of the sheep will be lost... Others do not hear the voice of Jesus and will not believe, because they are not His sheep whom He died for... Success is not determined by how many become Christians, but it is a matter of faithfulness in bringing the true gospel of salvation to the ends of the earth.
... When we say that we 'freely proclaim' the gospel we must not think that all men are equally capable of receiving it in faith... It should be remembered the purpose of preaching the gospel is two-fold. It is a message of salvation to all who believe, and a message of condemnation to all who reject it. But all men need to hear it..."
Calvinism cannot and does not rescue anyone from hell - the Cav-elect were never at risk of hell and the non-Calv-elect can never be saved from hell - and so all it does is convince those who are already saved that they're saved, while sealing those who can never be saved in their damnation. And yet Calvinists call this "successful evangelism."
If this doesn't make you righteously angry, then (I wish I didn't have to say this, but I do) it has to be because you don't really understand the gospel or the biblical order of salvation or God's heart/character or what Jesus accomplished on the cross or how people are saved - and so you can't see how wrong Calvinism is, how much it destroys the gospel and God's Word and God's character and Jesus's sacrifice, and how it slams the door of heaven on most people, denying most people the ability to believe, the chance to be saved, while calling it "good, successful, God-pleasing, and God-glorifying." Ugh.
Steven Lawson ("Salvation is of the Lord"): "... Jesus died a substitutionary death in the place of God’s elect.... Jesus’ death did not merely make all mankind potentially savable. Nor did His death simply achieve a hypothetical benefit that may or may not be accepted. Neither did His death merely make all mankind redeemable. Instead, Jesus actually redeemed a specific people through His death, securing and guaranteeing their salvation. Not a drop of Jesus’ blood was shed in vain. He truly saved all for whom He died... With oneness of purpose, the Father and the Son sent the Holy Spirit into the world to apply this salvation to those chosen and redeemed."
Translation: "Jesus, the gospel, and salvation are only for the Calv-elect. Jesus wouldn't waste His blood on those predestined to reject Him."
John MacArthur (The Doctrine of Actual Atonement, Part 1): "God did not intend to save everyone... God does limit the atonement.... I just can’t bring myself to believe that hell is full of millions of people whose sins were paid for in full by Christ on the cross.… I don’t feel very special if you say to me, 'Christ died for you, He loves you just like He died for the millions in hell.' That doesn’t make me feel very special.
And so although Calvinists claim that "salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone," what they're really teaching is that faith (belief in Jesus) is by salvation alone, that being saved comes before and leads to belief in Jesus. And that it's only intended for some prechosen people, the only ones Calvi-Jesus died for.
A very different gospel, way of salvation, reason for and result of Jesus's sacrificial death, and reason for evangelizing!
Calvinists are not believing, teaching, or spreading the same gospel as non-Calvinists, the same gospel as the Bible. They are believing, teaching, and spreading something very different, but something that's been dressed up to appear like it's right from the Bible. So sneaky, stealthy, and deceptive (just like its author:😈).
Is it any wonder why those of us who understand what Calvinism really teaches fight against it so hard, willing to be called "divisive troublemakers"? (Some things cannot be tolerated and are worth a harsh rebuke, worth dividing over. Just read Galatians 3.)
These are just some of Calvinism's foundational errors and how it traps people. And if you can understand just these few, you are well on your way to fending off the powerful, hypnotic pull of Calvinism's Systematic Theology!
[A word to Calvinists: If you're still desperate to keep clinging to your Calvinist theology in spite of all this evidence against it, then maybe you should ask yourself why? Why are you so determined to hold onto Calvinism? So resistant to correction? So unwilling to believe that Jesus really did die for all people, that God really does offer the gift of salvation to all people (and all people have the ability to accept it), and that God has decided to give people real free-will and to voluntarily restrain Himself (His ability to control all things and His power to force whatever He wants to happen) so that people could make real decisions (because that's the way He wanted it to be, because forced love isn't really love)?
And take some time in prayer over the next days and weeks to ask God if you've been believing wrong things all this time, if you've allowed unbiblical beliefs to be taught to you, if you're resistant to admitting you've been wrong. And see what happens.
(Note: If you find yourself running to Calvinist theologians/pastors for support for your beliefs, for arguments against the things I presented here, then it's a good sign that you don't want to consider you might be wrong, that you want to cling to your beliefs no matter what.)]
Oh, and if all that isn't enough to convince you that something is very wrong with Calvinism, very unbiblical, then consider again this long Calvinists quote (which I call "Calvinism in a nutshell") and see if you think it sounds biblical, like it's accurately reflecting God's character and the plain commonsense teachings of the Bible:
Mark Talbot/John Piper (editor) (from Suffering and the Sovereignty of God): "It isn’t just that God manages to turn the evil aspects of our world to good for those that love him; it is rather that he himself brings about these evil aspects… This includes God’s having even brought about the Nazi’s brutality at Birkenau and Auschwitz as well as the terrible killings of Dennis Nadar and even the sexual abuse of a young child... God's foreordination is the ultimate reason why everything comes about, including the existence of all evil persons and things and the occurrence of any evil acts or events. And so it is not inappropriate to take God to be the creator, the sender, the permitter, and sometimes even the instigator of evil.
... In summary, this means that we should affirm the age-old Christian doctrine of God’s complete providence over all. God has sovereignly ordained, from before the world began, everything that happens in our world... It should be beyond all doubt that no one suffers anything at anyone else’s hand without God having ordained that suffering.
During his first hour or so in Birkenau, Elie Wiesel saw the notorious Joseph Mengele...casually directing [people] either to his left, so that they went immediately to the gas chambers, or to his right to the forced-labor camp. In seeing Mengele, Wiesel was seeing a very evil man whom, nevertheless, God was actively sustaining and governing, nanosecond by nanosecond, through his evil existence. And we can be sure that, from before time began, God had ordained that at that place those moments would be filled with just those persons, doing and suffering exactly as they did... that he actually brought the whole situation about, guiding and governing and carrying it by his all-powerful and ever-effectual word to where it would accomplish exactly what he wanted it to do.
[Footnote: Mengele was a medical doctor who was nicknamed 'The Angel of Death.' He carried out unspeakable experiments on some of his prisoners, including injecting chemicals into children's eyes in an attempt to change their eye color from brown to the preferred Aryan blue. He would visit the children, acting kindly and bringing them candy and clothing in order to keep them calm and happy, and then transport them in what looked like a Red Cross truck or in his personal vehicle to his laboratory beside the crematoria where he would perform his horrible experiments and then burn their bodies. He specialized in experiments involving identical twins. He was intrigued to see if he could make them differ genetically by, among other horrors, performing sex-change operations on one of them or removing one twin’s limbs or organs in macabre surgical procedures that were performed without the use of anesthesia and that had no scientific basis or value.]
... Even though he ordains all of our free sinful choices ["Free" that's not free is not free. Duh!], those sinful choices still 'count' and we are held responsible for them.... In ordaining the evil works of others, he himself does no wrong, 'upright and just is he.'... We can be sure, as Scripture confirms, that God has made everything for its purpose, even evil persons like Joseph Mengele or Dennis Rader. We can be sure that God has made our lives’ most evil moments as well as their best....
... I myself find it very difficult to understand how [God can ordain evil for our good] with some of the worst things that human beings do, like sexually abusing young children or raping or torturing someone mercilessly.
And, of course, something much less horrible than these sorts of things can happen to us and still leave us wondering how God could be ordaining it for our good. I have seen marriages break apart after thirty-five years and felt to some degree the grief and utter discombobulation of the abandoned spouse. I have watched tragedies unfold that seem to remove all chance for any more earthly happiness.... Many of us have tasted such grief....Yet these griefs have been God’s gifts.... [And in the end, when we see Jesus face-to-face] we will see that God has indeed done all that he pleased and has done it all perfectly, both for his glory and our good..."
If Calvinism isn't biblical - if it's a complete corruption of the Bible and God's character, as I believe it is - then who do you think is really behind it, if it's not God? And what might the consequences be (regardless of the good intentions of Calvinists) for spreading such a corrupted theology and view of God? I shudder to think.
[A second word to Calvinists, to those who are starting to realize they've been led astray (from a previous post called "A Word to Worried Calvinists"):
If you're a Calvinist who's getting worried right now because you're thinking "Oh no! I've been believing a lie all this time! What do I do? What should I think?", let me just say this: Don't worry, because the true biblical truth is even more beautiful than what you've been told by Calvinists. What God did for you, He can do for anyone.
... No one is beyond God's reach, beyond His love, grace, forgiveness, healing, salvation, etc. It's for all people, not just "the elect." And so no one is hopeless. No one is predestined to hell, unable to be saved. God loves all, Jesus died for all, and God offers salvation to all (but He leaves it up to us to accept it or reject it).
... The true biblical truth of the gospel is so much more wonderful, hope-filled, gracious, loving, etc., than what Calvinism teaches... It's so much more beautiful and hope-filled and life-giving and "for all people" than Calvinism ever could be. And so don't worry. When you give up Calvinism for the plain teachings of the Bible, you get something so much better!
(And if you're a Calvinist who's saying "You don't understand Calvinism! It's not as bad as you say!", then I'd respond with "Not that bad? Check out "But Calvinists don't say God causes sin and evil!" and "As evil as it gets: Calvinism on babies and the unreached".)]
Recommendations:
Here are some videos from Soteriology 101 with Leighton Flowers that I recommend - taken from my post Calvinism for Beginners - to further help you see what's wrong with Calvinism and what the biblical truth really is:
Sovereignty: In Control or Controlling (2 minutes long)
Sovereignty de-Calvinized (11 minutes)
The gospel is for everyone (9 minutes)
I was a Calvinist until... (13 minutes)
How Calvinists get God's sovereignty wrong (11 minutes - and I just gotta say, the pastor in the clip looks like what you'd get if Matt Walsh from The Daily Wire and Eddie Munster from The Munsters had a baby. I'm just sayin'.)
Provisionists believe in Predestination and Election (11 minutes)
What Calvinist reprobation actually entails (17 minutes)
The damaging effects of theistic determinism (8 minutes)
The reason we continue to push back against Calvinism? (11 minutes)
How John Piper gets God's sovereignty wrong (31 minutes)
How John Piper's Calvinism implicates God in sin (32 minutes)
Total depravity proof-text dismantled in 10 minutes (13 minutes)
John Piper attempts to comfort a grieving woman with determinism (18 minutes)
Does God decree whatsoever comes to pass? (80 minutes)
Calvinism vs. Determinism: Is there a difference? (25 minutes)
How sovereignty impacts our daily lives? Responding to John Piper (49 minutes)
Why reject Calvinism? (with Jordan Hatfield) (110 minutes)
Is God sovereign or do we have free will? Yes! (77 minutes)
(a bit more in-depth) "Rebutting Calvinist proof texts" (91 minutes)
And "Provisionism: A brief overview" (15 minutes) and "Calvinism, Arminianism and Provisionism defined" (18 minutes)
And some book recommendations from Dr. Tony Evans (one of the pastors whose theology I trust the most):
The Tony Evans Bible Commentary (everyone should have this)
Theology You Can Count On (A must read for all the basics! Everyone should have this one as their basic theology book. It's easy to read, practical, and - trust me - when you read it, you'll go "Wow, that makes sense and reflects the Bible's plain, clear, commonsense teachings and upholds God's good, righteous, just, trustworthy character." Unlike confusing, convoluted, contradictory Calvinism which must always resort cult-like tactics, deflection, gaslighting, and manipulation to get you to set aside your doubts and accept it.)
Our God is Awesome: Encountering the Greatness of our God (This one was really healing to my soul after feeling it suffocating for 6 years under the Calvinism that the new pastor brought in.)
The Promise: Experiencing God’s Greatest Gift – The Holy Spirit
The Battle is the Lord’s: Waging Victorious Spiritual Warfare
Totally Saved: Understanding, Experiencing, and Enjoying the Greatness of Your Salvation (This is the book that helped me realize I was on the right track to keep questioning the preaching of our Calvinist pastor, that helped me realize I was understanding the commonsense teaching of Scripture just fine, and that the pastor was teaching something completely different. You see, when the pastor began teaching his stealth Calvinism and I began getting very confused and disturbed, I took lots of time to figure out what I thought the Bible said before I looked up what other pastors/theologians said the Bible said. I wanted to understand it for myself first. But then when I finally began looking up what theologians said, I was horrified to see that all of them - every single one - sounded just like my pastor, saying the same things, teaching the same garbage. And so I began to worry that maybe I was the problem, that I had been misunderstanding God's Word all along, that I was unable to understand Scripture on my own - and it made me doubt my ability to think clearly, to understand Scripture and truth and God's character, to judge right and wrong. And this made me terrified that my only two choices were to accept the Calvinist god as god and the confusing and contradictory Calvinism as truth... or give up my faith altogether because I couldn't trust a god like that. But then as a last resort - the absolutely final pastor/theologian I would research before I gave in to Calvinism or gave up my faith - I read Totally Saved by Dr. Tony Evans... and for the first time in years, I felt my soul relax. I breathed a sigh of relief. Because he was saying things the same way I always understood them, the plain commonsense understanding of God's Word and God's character. And it gave me the hope and encouragement I desperately needed to keep going, to keep doubting and questioning my pastor's teachings, and to find out what the truth really is, what the Bible really says, and how different and wrong my pastor's theology was. This book is a major reason for why my blog even exists, for why I'm not a Calvinist or an apostate today.)
And I also totally recommend Just Give Me Jesus by Anne Graham Lotz, which was very healing to my soul, too. It was just what I needed when I really needed it.
