My God Is Not A Five Point Calvinist

(FIRST PART OF THIS SERIES)

I decided to divide My God Is Not A Five Point Calvinist article in two series. We will together, in this first part, study Total Depravity, and Unconditional Election and in brief discuss the doctrine of predestination. Before accusing me of hasty generalizations, when I say Calvinism or Calvinist, I, refer, of course, to Hyper or the Extreme form of Calvinism unless stated otherwise.

These series aren’t meant to thoroughly debunk or refute the system of Calvinism. There will be another time and another place for a thorough critical examination of this system.

My propensity to write this subject hasn’t been actualized until only recently. The reason for this is lack of understanding of this controversy surrounding the theology of John Calvin in particular and Calvinism in general. I do not think for a minute that I have totally grasped the central issues of Calvinism to the extent of proficiency. Yeah, I still have a lot to learn concerning this debate.

I have read and studied both side of the controversy but none of these two competing theological views (Arminianism and Calvinism) comes close to what I read and understand within the passages of my holy Bible. So I have been thinking, rethinking, studying, restudying Calvinism in particular for a long period of time.

While Calvin was a theological genius, nonetheless, some of his theological propositions especially soteriological exegesis (and Calvinism) are unbiblical in my point of view. More about this later.

I may not be an expert in Calvinism, this does not make me an ignoramus about this subject. My comprehension of Calvin’s theology and those who proposes and argues for his views maybe limited, but enough to argue my case about why I REJECT the God of Calvinism.

An acknowledgement: This article is not a rant or diatribe toward Calvinists personally. My intention is far more sublime. In addition, let it be known that my reasons for writing this interesting subject is not because I hate Calvinists. I love and care for my brothers and sisters in Christ (whether he or she is a” five point,” less, or none), even if I disagrees with their system of enquiry.

Most of my favorite Christian authors are Calvinists. Most books I read and studies are MOSTLY written by Calvinists. Most systematic theology books that I have been studying for a couple of years now are written by Calvinists also. Mind you, books concerning church history, philosophy and even within the fields of apologetics that I have in my private library are mainly written by those who adopts Calvinistic point of view. Most of of these gifted authors and servants of God have tremendously given me a positive impact in my mind and in my spiritual growth in Christ. For this, I thank Calvinists for their contributions for the Christian community.

But, why is it that I reject Calvinism? Why is it that I find Calvinism’s theology unpersuasive and even unbiblical? Why is it that most Calvinists arguments for their views are not found wanting in my point of view. Am I a heretic because I reject Calvinism as biblically corrupt? These and many other questions can be properly answered as we read along.

Soteriologically speaking, Calvinism, in my point of view, and as I understand it, is not what I use to read within the pages of my holy Bible. The God of Calvinists, if taken to its logical conclusions, is not the God I would be willing to praise and worship! For me, or from what I have come to comprehend of who God REALLY is, is a God of mercy, compassion, love, etc, In summary, the God of Calvinism is very disturbing and I’m very concerned for lots of reason.

What Is Calvinism?

Before we continue with this controversial issue let me first briefly explain what I mean “Calvinistic theology” or Calvinism (or sometimes refered to as Augustinianism) and what it stands for. The theological propositions of Calvinism is derived from an exegete and systematic theologian called John Calvin (1509-1564),  who is known for his role during Reformation. Calvin was one among those who opposed (rightly so) Roman Catholicism with such rancor. He wrote voluminous biblical commentaries. Yet, Calvin is best known for his magnum opus the Institutes of the Christian Religion (Institutio Christianae religionis) and is hailed, and is very influential among Reformed theologians as his greatest masterpiece.

Since I’m a slow reader, It took me two years to read Calvin’s Institutes.

Deriving from his Institutes, Calvinists emphases his theological stance in which can be summarize as the” Five Points,”  Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and finally the Perseverance of the Saints. These five categories do not, of course, comprise Calvinism in totality. They simply represent some of Calvin’s main points. Although, I must add that there are discrepancies about whether or not Calvin himself was a particularist or deductively argued for “limited atonement.”

So basically the famous” five points of Calvinism” as shown above is also known among its adherents as the famous acronym TULIP. In short, Calvinism, or mostly refered to as Reformed theology, is a system of biblical interpretation that focuses and underscore the Sovereignty of God, His majesty, and His holiness, Justice, so on and so fort.

A Closer Investigation of  T. U. L. I. P

Believe me, I have no qualms against plants in general and tulips in particular! Though I’m not much into flowers, I still admire its beauty and splendor by which God has created for a reason. Now let us continue with our discussion namely, Why my God is not a Calvinist. I have explained, briefly, what Calvinism is and we’ll now proceed to examine the famous acronym–the TULIP principle, or as commonly known as Five Points of Calvinism, much closer and why I reject most of it and why it is unlikely that God was or is a Calvinist.

Let us take a closer look at the acronym and study it one by one for all its worth right after we have discussed one of the five points of Calvinism, namely, the doctrine of the Preservation of the Saints.

I vehemently disagrees with some form of Arminianism that a person can lost salvation after one has RECIEVED Christ’s salvation. This doctrine, I must say, is totally unsupported by the holy Scripture.

While most of the acronym of TULIP or the Five Points are highly questionable, I agree along with the Calvinists when it comes to the perseverance of the saints. I do not for a moment believe that a GENUINE believer who has been GENUINELY saved will ever lost his/her salvation or will ever fall into apostasy. The belief that a TRUE believer will someday lose salvation is just as unbiblically and erroneous in believing the dogma of the five points. One does not become a child of God ( 1 John 3:2) only then to become a bastard of God!

As it is written, “For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, SHALL BE ABLE TO SEPARATE US from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom. 8:38)

Moreover, it is clearly stated in the scripture that God will PRESERVED those who belongs to his Son, Jesus Christ, and that he will preserve us unto his heavenly abode (Jude 1;2 Timothy 4:18). Of course, their are those who claims that they have been saved ONLY to behave quite the contrary. It is therefore important that he/she is sure if one is REALLY saved after all NOT everyone who says, “Lord, Lord” will enter unto the kingdom of heaven but ONLY those who DO the will of his father (Matt. 7:21-23)! I still have more to say about this particular issue in a different article.

The Origin of Sin And Its Consequences

Contrary to what secular humanists tells as about humans being “essentially” good, Calvinists on the other hand teaches and emphasizes humanities sinful nature (and rightly so) and how it was imputed to us from our first parents: Adam and Eve. They, also emphasizes the universality of sin (again, I agree). ALL humans are marred with sin and NONE of us are able to do God’s standard of goodness.

The apostle Paul wrote,

“There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.” (Rom. 3:10-12)

The consequences of the first sin or as technically known as the doctrine of the Origin of Sin is that we have inherited the sin of Adam and therefore in Adam we are all condemned. This is inevitable (Rom. 5:15;17;18-19 also 1 Cor.15:22)! In his magnificent book, Reformed theologian, James Montgomery Boice, explains the consequences of Adams sin,

The universality of sin is the result of God’s judgment upon the race because of Adam’s transgression. Adam was the representative of the race. He stood before God for us so that, as Paul says, when we fell we fell and were caught up inevitably in the results of his rebellion. [p.206]

As far as the Original Sin, universality of sin, and humans sinful nature is concerned, I’m in TOTAL agreement with Calvinists! This is biblically correct and should be preached along with God’s redemptive plan for mankind. Without God’s provition for the forgiveness of sin ALL are doomed. It is because of God’s mercy and love that He sent His unique, One and Only SON Jesus Christ (Jhn. 3:16) to be the perfect, sinless sacrifice, and to die as a ransom for our sins in order for us to be forgiven and reconciled with God. Regarding Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross for us, John W. Stott explains,

Moreover this ministry of reconciliation is itself in two stages. It begins as a proclamation that God was in Christ reconciling and that he made Christ to be sin for us. It continues with an appeal to people to “be reconciled to God,” that is,” avail yourselves of the offered terms of reconciliation with God” (cf. Mt 5.24), or simply “recieve it” (cf. 5:11)…Propitiation underscore the wrath of God upon us, redemption our captivity to sin, justification our guilt, and reconciliation our enmity against God and alienation from him. [John R. W. Stott, The Cross of Christ, 20th Anniversary Edition, IVP, pp.198-99.]

Calvinists, I’m sure are correct, when they claim that humans are in dire need of salvation and without the forgiveness of sin by which Christ demonstrated on the cross, we are all our way to eternal perdition. From the first Adam (from where we inherited our sinful nature), to the last Adam (Christ) where we can be forgiven by His Son’s provision of his sacrificial blood that was shed on the cross on Calvary. Thanks to Christ’s precious blood we are now in the position (if we are willing to believe in His Son) to be reconciled and have loving and personal relationship with God.

Total Depravity (or Total Inability?)

But, besides from the doctrine of the original sin to atoning death of Christ, what does Total Depravity really teaches? Let us start with the first point of the TULIP system. According to this doctrine, total depravity really means that we are in and out corrupted that we are no longer able to know and do good. Now, there is a difference between Total and Absolute depravity. Total depravity means that man is depraved in every part of his being. This, of course, doesn’t mean that we cannot do morally good toward our neighbour i.e. helping aunt Mae cross the street and be a good Samaritan. Total Depravity tells us that whatever goodness we chose to do is insufficient to satisfy the holy God. Man’s goodness isn’t enough to elevate him to salvation.

Absolute depravity, on the other hand means that every part of his being is wholly bad. Calvinism doesn’t teach absolute depravity. This distinction between total and absolute depravity must be emphasized. Concerning man’s Total Inability, staunch Calvinist, John Piper, wrote, “When we speak of man’s depravity we mean man’s natural condition apart from any grace exerted by God to
restrain or transform man.”

The Bondage of the Will, which argues that man’s will is bound as a result of the fall of man and its effect, Martin Luther said that man is born with a “total inability to will good.” (p.199) In his book, The Five Points of Calvinism, Edwin H. Palmer, describes:

Not only is the non-Christian unable to do anything that is truly good, not only is he unable to understand the good, but, worse still, he is not even able to desire the good. It is one thing to have a good goal and not be able to reach it. This inability to reach a good goal is part of the depravity of man. It is another thing to have a good goal, but not even be able to understand what that goal is. This lack of understanding is also a part of man’s depravity. But the pit of total depravity is that natural man does not even desire a good goal. (italics mine p.16)

There is indeed a lot to say about how Luther, Piper and Palmer describes for us concerning the total depravity of man or shall I say “Inability” of man since, according to him, is part of the depravity of man?

First there is the total depravity and now total inability (incapable). When it comes to man’s depravity, does the word “total” or “inability” appears in the Bible? Or is it just a man made INTERPRETATION? Are we really “inable” to KNOW and DESIRE God’s salvation as Palmer says? When Calvinist says total depravity does this equal to total inability? Deprave (morally corrupt) yes but, totally enable?

Let us continue.

Man has a sinful nature and born with a propensity to sin (Rom. 3:9-12) says the Calvinists and I TOTALLY AGREE. But, what about the inability to act and to chose and refuse God’s atonement? This is here where I separate from my Calvinist friends. You see, when the Calvinist say’s total depravity what he really means is total inability to chose as if these where synonyms. Laurence M. Vance wrote concerning the real meaning of Total Depravity within the Calvinist mind,

When a Calvinist says Total Depravity, what he really means is Total Inability, which has nothing to do with Total Depravity at all, but is rather the supposed result of it.¹

Likewise, dead to sin is not at all the same as dead to will or incapable to will or to choose. Dead to sin doesn’t necessarily mean that man is entirely deprived from his will in choosing his salvation. For instance, in Matthew 23:37 we read,

“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.” [italics added]

And in the book of Joshua 24:15-22 we read,

But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.”  Then the people answered, “Far be it from us to forsake the Lord to serve other gods! It was the Lord our God himself who brought us and our fathers up out of Egypt, from that land of slavery, and performed those great signs before our eyes. He protected us on our entire journey and among all the nations through which we traveled. And the Lord drove out before us all the nations, including the Amorites, who lived in the land. We too will serve the Lord, because he is our God.” Joshua said to the people, “You are not able to serve the Lord. He is a holy God; he is a jealous God. He will not forgive your rebellion and your sins. If you forsake the Lord and serve foreign gods, he will turn and bring disaster on you and make an end of you, after he has been good to you.” But the people said to Joshua, “No! We will serve the Lord.” Then Joshua said, “You are witnesses against yourselves that you have chosen to serve the Lord.” [emphasis mine]

There should be no doubt, as you read above cited passages of Matthew and Joshua,  that these passages undisputedly demonstrates for man’s free will to choose from willing to NOT WILLING. Note that Jesus did not say, you “COULD not” or ENABLE to!” If a person do not will this mean that a man have free will to will and NOT to will this is simple commonsense.

Again, what Total Depravity really shows us, according to Calvinists means, is that, man, doesn’t have a free will thereby destroying the ability to hear and to receive God’s salvation. In other word, Calvinism teaches us that humans are simply dead. A dead person cannot do or will anything!

There are two questions that comes in mind.  Why would God demolish our ability and constrain us from knowing him and His offer for salvation? This just doesn’t add up.

My second question is, if a deprave man, who is dead in sin can’t do anything apart from God’s mercy, how can he then be able to respond to God’s redemptive act in Christ? Calvinists do have a solution. According to Calvinism, A sinful person (let’s say the elect) whose will is in bondage must first be regenerated in order for him to be able to believe. Thus, regeneration is preliminary to belief and faith, saith Calvinism. Calvinists, if I understand their doctrine correctly are “saved therefore they believe,” in contrasting with, I believe therefore I’m saved.

God regenerates certain individual in order for him to be able to exercise repentance and faith thereof.² But is the doctrine of regeneration preceding faith scriptural? Or is it faith that precedes regeneration? Isn’t being regenerate means being saved or is saved? If this is true that regeneration proceeds faith then God must at first save the person before that person knows what he is being saved from! How can God declare a person “born again” without being aware of his state of depravity?

First, of course, when a Calvinist say that man is incapable he doesn’t mean enable to do, as mentioned earlier, what is morally good toward his neighbour, but what Calvinist do really mean when he speaks of total inability is that man is spiritually dead and incapable in believing the gospel without the regenerating power of God. This teaching is totally in contradiction to what the Bible tells us! Baptist, Charles Spurgeon, commented,

If I am to preach in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man being regenerated is saved already, and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerated. But you will tell me that I ought to preach it only to those who repent of their sins. Very well; but since true repentance of sin is the work of the Spirit, any man who has repentance is most certainly saved, because evangelical repentance never can exist in an unrenewed soul. Where there is repentance there is faith already, for they never can be separated. So, then, I am only to preach faith to those who have it. Absurd, indeed! Is not this waiting till the man is cured and then bringing him the medicine? This is preaching Chris to righteous and not sinners.³

In Acts 16:31 we read, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.”

“But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.” (1 Tim 1:16)

“For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” (1 Cor.1:21)

“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Eph. 2:8,9)

Contrary to Calvinism, the most biblical ordo salutis (or the order of salvation) is simple: Believe and be saved. Looks like quoted passages above strikes the false doctrine of regeneration before believing!

In Mark 1:15, Jesus of Nazareth tells his audience that, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.” This admonition would not make any sense if God already granted a person repentance before knowing his need to repent from sin, and believe the gospel! Again, Christ warned us, “but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish (Lk. 13:3).”

Christ’s invitation to repent means nothing to a sinner who cannot understand the good news and doesn’t have the will to respond not unless God intervenes, and regenerate the elect to salvation! Again, this doctrine goes against the Bible.

Believe and repent then comes regeneration is the TRUE gospel of the Bible! Besides, WHERE does it declares in the Scripture that God convicts (reprobate) to eternal hell and convinces ONLY a particular group (elect) to heaven?

Despite what Calvinist thinks, the gift of salvation through His Son, Jesus Christ, is for all humanity who are condemned because of their sins. This doesn’t mean, however, that all whereby will be saved and goes to heaven. Christ blood and death on the cross is the ONLY way to pay for our sins, and is an OPEN invitation to everyone who wants to will and accept this free gift of eternal life. In short, Christ’s atonement was an inclusive act for an exclusive few.

If we read the often quoted and beloved verse of John’s Gospel;

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life (Jn. 3:16 [emphasis mine]).

The verse in itself speaks clear that, “whoever believes” is an attestation if not a confirmation to all men who are dead to sin to believe in Christ or likewise perish in hell. It is totally unnecessary reading something that doesn’t exist in the given text i.e. that contrasts between reprobate and the elect in John 3:16.

So, please don’t come up with an odd interpretation of “For God so loved the world…” really means elect! There is NO WAY for Calvinism to justify with their rendering of the “world” for “elect.” Nope, John 3:16 is clear that my God’s love is global, and His gift for salvation wasn’t exclusive but inclusively free for all who wills to believe and accept.

Let say, for the sake of the argument that the “world” in John 3:16 is indeed speaking exclusively for the elect, does this mean that the elect are in danger in perishing too?

If you’re a Calvinist reading this article, let me ask you a simple question. Would you please provide me a scriptural passage(s) that states that a man is incapable believing the gospel of Christ unless that person is one of the elect and has been given that faith by a sovereign act of God.

Unconditional Election

Now, let us turn to the second TULIP system, namely, Unconditional Election. The doctrine of Unconditional Election (UE) is intertwined along with the doctrine of Total Inability.  It is said that if the system of T is debunked then it logically follow suits that UE will eventually crumble along with the rest of the famous acronym. Whether or not it’s true let us now proceed with our examination of UE. Unconditional Election accordingly means that if a man is going to be saved, God, totally independent of any foreknown choices man will make, chooses him to salvation.

John Calvin in his “Institutes,” Book III, chapter 23,”….Not all men are created with similar destiny but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or the other.”of these ends, we say, he is predestined either to life or to death.”

The elect who has been chosen by God to salvation is an inevitable doctrine that proceeds from his total incapability to choose since the elect is void from his emotion, action and will. What else can a miserable person (elect) can do but wait for the saving grace of the Sovereign God to regenerate him first from his present corruption unto eternal glorification and salvation. Calvinists believes that the true and purest gospel is that “man is saved and justified therefore the elect believes,” which is contrary to what the Scripture clearly teaches, namely, that man ought to believe first and then be saved (Acts 16:31).

Calvinist, do have a proof texts in the Bible that supposedly supports their arguments for UE. In Ephesians 1:4, “He hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world. ” and ”Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” (John 15:16) We can then ask Calvinist, “chosen” to what? Does 1:4 have any significance concerning personal redemption and of condemnation? How?

1 Timothy 2:4 says, “Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”

It is a fact that, NOWHERE does the Bible teach that God wills for some to go to Heaven and wills others to go to Hell. No. The Bible teaches that God would have all men to be saved. Peter says, that God is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Pet. 3:9)

In contrast to UE the Bible states loud and clear that men are not going to hell because of God’s eternal decree, but because men in their rebellion reject the gospel, for instance, consider the verses below.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! (Matt. 23:37)

Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said,

“It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.” (Acts 13:46)

“And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2 Thess. 2:10-12)

The teachings of UE reminds me of God favouring exclusively his elect.

Yet, the Bible tells us about God, who doesn’t have any favorite nor favor anybody (Rom. 2:11; Acts 10:34). But there are troubling verse that might argue for soteriological particularism such the verse in Romans 9:1 where God firmly said,

“As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” So what do I say in response to this particular passage? Does Romans 9 teach that God arbitrarily chooses some sinners to be saved and the rest to be lost? Let us be productive and try to answer the question, shall we?

Again, upon closer examination of Romans 9, we find that, Paul wasn’t at all referring about election pertaining to personal salvation but to election pertaining to nations. Romans 9 is an analogy for what is coming to be. Paul was explaining God’s right to predetermine and use the nation of Israel to produce the Messiah. In overall, this passage does not teach that Esau was sovereignly predestined to be reprobate (condemned). What it DOES teach is that God sovereignly chose Christ’s heritage.

Predestination

In other words, predestination, to a Calvinist, means, God has DECIDED for some to be in heaven and others to be in hell for all eternity (double predestination). But is this what the God of holy, just and love is all about? Has God already predestined and determined according to His foreknowledge most of us to hell while the elect to heaven? Has God decided whose going to live and whose going to die?

Is the God of Calvinism really the God of the Bible or the god of the fallible human mind? If I get to answer this question at hand, I believe that God, with all his mercy and grace wouldn’t predestined two camps of saved (elect) and condemned (reprobate) aforetime. But this is exactly what Calvin, Luther and the majority of Calvinists teaches that God who is Sovereign, has from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whosoever and whatsoever.

Is this true that, deriving from their interpretive conclusions, God, who is all-powerful, all-knowing and sovereign, has ordained men to salvation and others to reprobation? I do not think so. For now, suffice it to say that there must be a better way in interpreting the Bible. An interpretation that is more align with the holy Scripture and that glorifies more the  true nature of a merciful God. Let us continue.

If I understand Calvinism’s representation of predestination aside from being predestined for eternity (heaven or hell), this means that my thoughts and deeds are predestined too. So all my actions and thoughts vice or virtue, good or evil are manipulated by God then how can I be accountable for something I couldn’t help? This doesn’t sound reasonable at all. How can God judge me for what He has already predestined/ordained me to do? And yes, the Bible does teach that we are ALL accountable in everything we say and do!

My accountability (of just about everything) toward the holy God seems arbitrary because how can I be accountable or even responsible with my actions that aren’t really my own since it was willed by God? If God, in eternity, has willed me to disobey and rebel against him, how can God justifiably accuse me of being rebellious and disobedient? Punishing me for all eternity in hell, because of my past, present, and future actions sinned against the holy God, who in reality willed my actions, is pretty much a caricature of God. This God of Calvinism isn’t really the God of the Bible.

Dave Hunt, in his controversial book, What Love Is This?: Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, asked similar question,

How can that which God foreordained and causes man to do be condemned as sinful rebellion against God’s will? How can it be disobedient to do what God has willed? How could God complain when man does what He predestined him to do? And how could man then be justly punished for doing what he has no capability of not doing? [p.243]

How can a God of logic and perfectly morally good and holy be so illogical and immoral in dealings with the souls of men?

What injustice is there in a God who has preordained man to sin only to punish him for doing what God has willed aforetime? Honestly? I really can’t identify myself with the God of Calvinism. The God of Calvinism is no better that the God of Islam. Should you and I be in hell for all eternity because we did what we could not avoid doing? Picture this scenario.

God sitting on His White Throne Judgment: Reeves, What do you have in defense for rejecting my Son’s salvific passion? You do know that you’re going straight to hell-fire for your depravity right?

Reeves (a reprobate): Lord, how could this be? How can I be accountable for my own actions since you’re the one who has, according to your foreknowledge, predestined my thought, my will and even my sin? Plus, tis’ not that I really had a choice, and yes I’m spiritually dead but you disabled my responsibility to hear and to do good without your regenerating power to believe in your Son and be saved! Besides, you have already condemned me from eternity.

God: Silence!

This is ludicrous! The teachings of Predestination according to Calvinists is contrary to the Bible because the Scripture tells us that men has fallen from God’s mercy and grace because of his rebellion not because they were God’s private puppets.

Sources_______________

1. The Other side Of Calvinism, L.M. Vance, Vance Publications, p.187
2. Whosoever Will, Editor, David L. Allen and Steve W. Lemke, p.135
3. Whosoever Will p.35

• The Five Points of Calvinism, Edwin H. Palmer,
• What Love Is This?: Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, Dave Hunt