Calvinist cop-outs

Those of you who oppose calvinism because of its non-biblical teachings may have noticed that the moment you try to use the Bible alone (sola scriptura) to discuss issues with a calvinist, he or she usually tries to avoid open and frank discussion. So I’m proposing some of the more common ways that calvinists use to avoid having to defend their heresies. After all, most calvinists know that they will lose any debate on calvinism using the Bible alone. And fear of losing drives them to avoid the truth of the Bible alone.

1/. “I’m not a calvinist.” or “I don’t believe in calvinism.”

Yet so many who say this will then say that they don’t have any issues with it. Often they will end up defending calvinism, which is rather weird for people who do not believe in it. Sometimes they will add that they don’t want to talk about it, either (see No.2 below). This is “calvitalk” for “I know calvinism is right but I don’t know how to justify it from the Bible alone.” Many calvinists “know” that they are right but do not know “why” they are right, and will try to avoid confrontations by denying that they are calvinists. Yet, if they are right, then why hide the truth (if it indeed be truth) from others? That’s certainly not very Christian, is it?

2/. “I don’t want to talk about it.”

Most calvinists realise that their beliefs cannot be fully supported by the Bible alone. They may try to quote from their favourite calvinist authors, but if you demand to discuss it using the Bible alone, they will say that they do not want to talk about it (or a number of variations on this theme). Most calvinists know that the Bible cannot actually demonstrate the alleged truth of their beliefs and do not want to be drawn into an argument that they know they cannot satisfactorily defend from the Bible alone. They are certain in their minds that they are right and therefore can justify manipulating the Bible to defend their “truths”. However, they also know that if taken in a perfectly straight-forward way, without any explanations from calvinist authorities, the Bible can easily be used to prove them wrong. In this they have the same outlook as JWs: calvinists “know” they are right because their calvinist teachers have said so! They will claim to be so biblical, but run away at the first sign that someone might actually use the Bible alone to oppose them. They fear the truth of the Bible! (Is there a word for Bible-phobia?)

3/. Go silent and ignore the nuisance!

A common variation on No.2 above is to go silent, turn their backs and stay away from those who threaten their teachings through the use of the Bible alone. Such people are so scared that their beliefs will fail the test of the Bible alone that they avoid anyone who appears to know the Bible well. They may even call them names, accuse them of bigotry, or use all manner of put-downs in an effort to divert attention from their inability to properly defend calvinism from the Bible alone. Their policy is that if you throw enough mud, some of it might stick, and then people might just not notice their failure to defend calvinism from the Bible alone.

4/. “I’ve been to an approved Bible college and you haven’t.”

They clearly don’t realise that Calvin had no formal theological training at any Bible college, approved or otherwise. He initially studied Latin, then philosophy (especially Plato, whom he quoted in his Institutes) and then went on to study law. “He was intrigued by Andreas Alciati, a humanist lawyer. Humanism was a European intellectual movement which stressed classical studies.” (Wikipedia)
And, like all good lawyers, he knew the value of verbal gymnastics, or, as the Bible defines it. “with feigned words” (2 Peter 2:3), or “with carefully sculpted words”.

5/. They cannot defend calvinism using the Bible alone!

On this website we have challenged over and over again the false teachings of calvinism. A few have responded with wild accusations, including that we are of satan, or non-biblical, or lacking respect for great calvinist teachers, and so on. Name-calling occurs, although it isn’t usually recorded on our Comments page. Some make accusations about what I’ve written but don’t quote what it is that has offended them, or they incorrectly quote me, or, as is most often the case, don’t actually quote anything that they have disagreed with (yet still disagree with it!), nor do they explain why they disagree (especially using the Bible alone!).
If I explain factually and biblically why their statements are inadmissible or even false, they will not reply to defend themselves from my biblical facts. The reason is clear! They know they cannot defend themselves from the Bible alone and so, once the Bible is used to demonstrate their false teachings, they refuse to say any more about it. This in itself proves that they do not believe the Bible alone is able to defend their beliefs. As I say in some documents, silence is interpreted as their inability to defend from the Bible alone.

A challenge most calvinists can’t afford to take up:

Most calvinists know that they cannot successfully defend their beliefs against the straightforward truths of the Bible. Therefore most calvinists will avoid writing genuine comments to this website. I know calvinists disagree greatly with what I say, yet they are also afraid to get involved in a debate here because they fear the probability of losing, especially if using the Bible alone. Some calvinists still do write in, but they are usually the ones who do not realise (yet?) that the Bible alone does not support calvinism. These naïve ones usually are not great thinkers and rarely present their thoughts in any coherent fashion. They do occasionally use the Bible alone (but without much understanding of its meaning) and almost always parrot off the teachings of their false calvinist teachers to explain the Bible. They obviously do not know any better.

However, here’s the challenge (which has been presented before but never taken up). If calvinists believe that their teachings are supported from the Bible alone, then take up the debate with me. If you believe you are right, then what have you to lose? Of course, you are risking calvinism being demonstrated as non-biblical, but if you are so sure you are right, then you should have nothing to lose. You must use the Bible alone of course. But, if I am right, then you will refuse to take up the challenge because you know that the Bible alone does not teach calvinism. (You just don’t want too many people to know it, though, do you?)

I have added an addendum at the bottom of this post with 3 examples of calvinist “silence” when faced with serious questions that require an answer Sola Scriptura (the Bible alone).

*************************************

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

Calvinist heretics & heresies

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

An addendum to Calvinist Cop-outs. Two examples of calvinist “silence”.

Example 1

Earlier this year (2020) I had a series of emails from someone who was apparently calvinist.
His initial comment (18^th April) concerned my alleged treatment of Todd Friel. He wrote (in part): “You are willing to stand up in your pride, and slander Mr.Friel and gossip about other Brothers and Sisters in Christ.”

He also wrote a second comment that same day in which he proposed some Bible verses and suggested how they should be interpreted. It was indeed a pleasant surprise to actually have someone try to use the Bible to explain things, so I commended him for this.
“Thank you for being brave enough to at least try to defend your beliefs from the Bible. It makes a pleasant surprise from the standard calvinist fare of name-calling and failure to use the Bible when making a point.”

I certainly did appreciate his efforts here, so I wrote a comment reply to politely explain my views here and asked some questions for him to research for himself.
One of his questions was: “Do you really think that mere man can determine their eternal salvation?” and he quoted John 15:16. In my reply I said: “John 15:16 does say that Jesus chose the disciples to bear fruit. Please note that Judas would have been among this group. Jesus also said that He had chosen (as one of the 12 disciples) Judas who was a devil (John 6:70-71). Was Judas therefore one of the elect?”

The next email received from him (15^th May) tackled not even one of those questions I had raised. Instead he raised some unrelated issues. I was disappointed that he had not considered it possible to reply to my questions.

He also asked at that time if he could have our website email address for more private communications. “Also, I would like to get your email in order that we could have further conversations. I do not have a phone number, and would like to talk privately.” I gave him our website communications email address.

In my reply to that email I noted that “Of course, there are some non-biblical issues that do affect the credibility of Bible-teachers. These include such as the foul-mouthed statements of Mark Driscoll, the unacceptable personal activities of some such as R C Sproul Jr, the refusal of MacArthur to deal with the freemasonry problem in his ancestry, etc.”

On 16^th May 2020 I received an email from him in which he said: “So, you mentioned John Macarthur’s Great-Grandfather’s freemason stuff. What relevance do you think that has to Macarthur’s ministry? I would also like to hear more of what you have to say about Macarthur and Piper’s ministries. What are your biggest issues with them?”

I replied with the following email.

In answer to your question regarding MacArthur, I’ll present some material for you to assess and consider.

1/. MacArthur says that freemasonry is “a Satanic false religion”. (https://www.gty.org/library/print/sermons-library/2006) This is definitely a true assessment.

2/. MacArthur’s great grandfather (Thomas Fraser Fullerton) was a Presbyterian minister and a 32-degree freemason who held the office of Provincial Grand Master. (https://peifreemasonry.com/thomas-fraser-fullerton-pgm/)
(Note that both John MacArthur and his father have Fullerton as their middle names. Why is the Fullerton name so important?)

3/. John MacArthur praises the spiritual harvest of his great grandfather and claims that his own ministry results from the spiritual crop planted by Thomas Fullerton.
The good news is, when the soil is prepared by God, there’s going to be an explosion of spiritual fruit and the harvest will go on and on and on and on and on and on. A nice young man in our church was recently in Prince Edward Island and I had said in the church service that my great grandfather was a pastor of St. James Kirk Presbyterian Kirk in Prince Edward Island back in the 1800’s. So when he was up there, he started digging around and found all kinds of things about my great grandfather. Thomas Fullerton was his name and he was pastor there at the main church in Charletown(?) (Charlottetown) for about twenty-eight years. He was a chaplain in the Canadian Military and he went to the Bower(?) (Boer) War in South Africa and fought and did ministry among the troops. And you look back and that and you say, “Okay, there’s a…his father was also a pastor who had been in Scotland and then gone to Australia and come there and at some point the Lord plowed the heart of that family and it just kept going and it just kept going and it kept going and it came down through my…from my great-grandfather to my grandmother, his daughter, and then through her to my father and then through me and this is the explosion and we’re all in this process somewhere.
(https://www.gty.org/library/print/sermons-library/41-18)
So, what exactly is MacArthur’s spiritual harvest? Is this not relevant to MacArthur’s ministry?

4/. MacArthur wrote in A Father’s Legacy in 2005:
My Dad, Dr. John “Jack” MacArthur, was born March 30, 1914, in Calgary, Alberta, to Harry and Olivia Fullerton MacArthur. His mother’s father was a Presbyterian minister on Prince Edward Island, and his father, who dedicated his life to Christ as an adult, served as a pastor and an example for his young son. …….
My grandfather took over the church’s pastorate in 1943 as Dad moved to Fountain Avenue Baptist Church in Hollywood, California. At Fountain Avenue, Dad helped establish the Holly wood Christian group, an outreach to people in the film and television industries. He counted Roy Rogers and Dale Evans, who came to Christ under his preaching, as close personal friends.
(https://www.voiceofcalvaryradio.com/legacy3.htm)
(Note that Roy Rogers – real name Leonard Franklin Slye – was a 33-degree freemason. While this doesn’t implicate John MacArthur directly, it does raise questions. It is claimed that Jack MacArthur led Roy Rogers to Christ in 1948, yet Rogers rose to the 32^nd degree in 1950 and 33^rd degree in 1979.)

So I’ll let you consider these points. See what you think. Why does MacArthur seem to avoid the issue of the high-ranking freemasonry of his great grandfather, yet praises the spiritual harvest of his ancestors including his great grandfather? Doesn’t it raise serious doubts concerning his alleged Christian ministry? (Especially when he declares freemasonry to be “a Satanic false religion“.)

I have not received any communication from him since then.
Stop News: As of 9/03/21 I have now received a reply which I have placed on my Comments page. I have also removed my other comments here regarding his non-reply up until now. I appreciate his reply even though it has taken a while to arrive. All who make genuine efforts to respond should be treated with respect, whether or not I actually agree with them. It is not about winning arguments but instead is about determining the truth.

Example 2

We had a family friend who was a good calvinist. A few years ago he commended his current pastor as someone whom he could fully agree with, and offered to have him send us this pastor’s newsletter. That pastor was Terry Arnold who was aggressively calvinist. We told our friend that Terry Arnold didn’t believe in free will and that his calvinist doctrines were false. Our friend has been ever-ready in the past to explain anything else using the Bible, but in this case he just cut communications with us. He replied that “I don’t think it would be profitable for us to continue in correspondence.” And we haven’t heard from him since. Again, it is likely that he knew that the Bible actually opposes calvinism unless the explanations of calvinist writers are added to “explain” their apparent non-biblical skew. We would like him one day to give biblical reasons for his disagreement with our beliefs but it doesn’t seem likely that he will do so. We have simply honoured his request that we do not continue in correspondence, realising that we may offend by causing further conflict if we write at this time. It is in God’s hands now and we can only pray that God will open his eyes to the truth one day before it is too late.

Example 3

A comment in 2018 said: “Calvinism simply quantifies many passages of the bible, and the doctrines of Calvin or doctrines of the Bible. He merely helps to magnify theology.” This is exactly the point I am making: that calvinism is an esoteric belief system (that is, only those initiated into its belief system can understand its full knowledge). Therefore only calvinists may be permitted to understand the deeper theology of the Bible, and therefore only calvinists are qualified to assess true doctrine. Non-calvinists can thus be rejected as lacking the higher knowledge that only a calvinist is permitted to know. This is a satanic esoteric knowledge belief system. Most calvinists are afraid to dig too deeply into their doctrines in case they find something truly abhorrent!

Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6

Calvinists won’t answer straightforward questions
Calvinists can’t answer straightforward questions
Calvinists can’t answer any questions
But they can say, “It’s a mystery!“

Calvinism is a cleverly disguised heresy pretending to be Christian. But it is non-Christian because it denies mankind the right to choose this day whom they will serve.
God says: I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life (Deuteronomy 30:19)
The Bible also says: And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that [were] on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. (Joshua 24:15)

Calvinism teaches the heresy that all mankind is unable to choose life, or to choose this day whom they will serve. Why would God ask them to choose life, or to choose whom they will serve, if they were unable to choose? Yet calvinism demands that their God chooses everything for us. The calvinist God tells us to choose, yet prevents man from obeying him? Calvinists, is your God sadistic? Does he delight in preventing man from obeying him?

Every calvinist doctrine is forced to assume no free will for mankind especially in matters of salvation. Yet the Bible teaches free will to choose to obey or disobey God. If you were to accept the truth of free will as a basic biblical doctrine (which it is), every calvinist doctrine becomes a terrible heresy. If man has free will, no calvinist doctrine can stand. This is why calvinists have to teach no free will for man. Can you refute this (sola scriptura), calvinists? At least try, or is it the impossible question for you?

In Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions? I have asked so many questions with only one response so far (as of 20/04/20). The list just kept on growing exponentially; currently it stands at 50 questions plus Nos. 51-70 added below.

For Questions 1 – 10 go to Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
For Questions 11-20 go to Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 2.
For Questions 21-30 go to Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
For Questions 31-40 go to Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 4.
For Questions 41-50 go to Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.

So calvinists, here’s the challenge! Can you answer any of these questions sola scriptura, or will you by your silence admit your inability to answer them? The choice is yours!

51/. Calvinists repeatedly say that the sinners’ prayer is not in the Bible. Then is not the following in the calvinist Bible? Luke 18:13-14a – ¹³And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as [his] eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to (or “propitiate me”) me a sinner. ¹⁴I tell you, this man went down to his house justified [rather] than the other: Calvinists, isn’t this a sinners’ prayer? Calvin says of this: “All that is said is, that after obtaining the pardon of sins he was regarded in the sight of God as righteous.” (Institutes, Book 3, Ch.11, Section 3!)
And how can whoseover call upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13) if one is not permitted to pray?

52/. Calvinists teach that Jesus died only for the sins of those whom the calvinist God chose for heaven, and absolutely no-one else (= limited atonement). They teach that Jesus died to save man, not to make man saveable. For example, gotquestions.com says that Christ died not simply to make justification a possibility but to actually justify those He died for. He died to save them, not to make them savable.
But the God of the Bible died to make all mankind saveable. Romans 10:13 says For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. God has stated that whosoever shall call ….. Whosoever means anyone!
Calvinists say that only those chosen for heaven may call …. but Romans 10:13 clearly means anyone at all who calls upon the name of the Lord. The calvinist God only died for his elect, not for whosoever! Calvinists teach that only the elect may call upon the name of the Lord to be saved; and that anyone else who calls upon the name of the Lord to be saved will not be saved!
Can calvinists please explain why their God did not die for “whosoever” but only for his chosen ones? Jesus certainly died to make all mankind saveable. Any saveable person (that is, all mankind – 1 John 2:2) who calls upon the name of the Lord will activate that “saveability” in his life. (see Romans 3:23-26)
Calvinists, your God is clearly not the God of the Bible, is he?

53/. Boettner (in “The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination” P 172) says: “And since the plan of redemption is thus traced back into eternity, the plan to permit man to fall into the sin from which he was thus to be redeemed must also extend back into eternity; otherwise there would have been no occasion for redemption.“ That is, establishing the plan of redemption then required that Adam must fall into sin in order to not waste that plan! It’s like putting in an alarm system and then making sure someone breaks in so that the expense of the alarm system can be justified. How can calvinists explain this absurdity?

54/. Boettner also says on P 173: “Yet God in no way compelled man to fall. He simply withheld that undeserved constraining grace with which Adam would infallibly not have fallen, which grace He was under no obligation to bestow.“ That’s like the calvinist God throwing Adam over the cliff and ordering him to fly, yet withholding the wings with which he could fly! Calvinists, is your God sadistic? Does he delight in preventing man from obeying him?

55/. Boettner also writes (P 30): “Common sense tells us that no event can be foreknown unless by some means, either physical or mental, it has been predetermined.“ That is, unless the calvinist God predetermines all things, unless he writes the script out beforehand, then he cannot know the future. Boettner says that if man has a free will, then God has to wait until that choice is made before he can act. Furthermore, if the acts of free agents are in themselves uncertain, God must then wait until the event has had its issue before making His plans. (P 31) But the God of the Bible knows all things! Calvinists, why doesn’t your God know the things that the God of the Bible knows?

56/. Piper says (in “What kind of Jesus do you worship?”): “Or if you’re playing Scrabble at home and stick your hand into the bag and pull out your letters, God decides what letters you get.“ So now Piper is the spoil-sport! No more games, for the calvinist God has played them all already and you won’t do anything unless he has written it into the script from the beginning. In fact, you’ll only be playing because the calvinist God ordained that you should play, and even if you feel like playing, if God hasn’t ordained that you should, then you can’t. Piper’s website also says that the calvinist God “even brought about the Nazis’ brutality at Birkenau and Auschwitz.“ But then, the calvinist God can do whatever he wants to do, according to those disillusioned calvinists. His followers will believe anything, if only because their God has ordained from the very beginning that they should be created in order to make everyone else look intelligent. Calvinists, can you think for yourselves or do you passively let your God do all your thinking for you?

57/. A W Pink said (in “The Total Depravity of Man”) that “though God does not esteem evil to be good, yet He accounts it good that evil should be.“ Can any calvinist explain rationally what he is talking about??

58/. Al Mohler said “If you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going end up basically being Reformed, basically something like this new Calvinism, or you’re going to have to invent some label for what is basically going to be the same thing, there just are not options out there“
In other words, Al, you are claiming new calvinism to be the only right option, aren’t you? That only those who agree with you are theologically correct? Then demonstrate it by answering the previous 57 questions sola scriptura! Not one calvinist so far has tried even one question yet! Can you defend your statement above or admit defeat by your inability to answer? Can you demonstrate from the Bible alone (sola scriptura) that calvinism is the only theologically correct doctrine? Remember that silence is the greatest compliment a calvinist can ever pay to those who oppose him.

59/. Calvin calls satan God’s minister (or servant) (Institutes Bk 1, Ch.18, Section 2) and says that “Satan cannot possibly do anything against the will and consent of God and that Satan is under the power of God, and is so ruled by his authority, that he must yield obedience to it.” (Institutes Bk 1, Ch.14, Section 17) Calvin also teaches that satan is completely under the command of God: “even Satan when he is the instrument of divine wrath, is completely under the command of God, who turns him as he will in the execution of his just judgments.” (Institutes Bk 2, Ch.4, Section 2)
So, calvinists, what is the point of satan as an enemy if what he does is by the command of God? Does this mean that the calvinist God is also the enemy of his elect by ordering satan to oppose his elect as their enemy?

60/. Augustine, whose teachings are the basis for Calvin’s teachings, said (in his “Enchiridion”) that, “since every being, in so far as it is a being, is good, if we then say that a defective thing is bad, it would seem to mean that we are saying that what is evil is good, that only what is good is ever evil and that there is no evil apart from something good. ….. Now, if a man is something good because he is an entity, what then, is a bad man except an evil good? ….. if there were no good in what is evil, then the evil simply could not be, since it can have no mode in which to exist“
Can any calvinist please explain what Augustine is talking about?  How is it biblical? Is Augustine rational? This appears to be based on Augustine’s Manichean Gnostic roots where salvation depended upon man obtaining ultimate knowledge free from corrupting evil. It also seems to relate to occult Yin and Yang beliefs. Can any calvinists give any support for Augustine’s irrational thinking here (sola scriptura!)?

61/. Terry Arnold (with Mike Claydon) of taministries teaches (in “Arminianism, Hyper-Calvinism, Strawmen…and The Truth”) that “‘free will’ in salvation is never shown in the Bible after the fall of man.” He quotes John 6:44 (‘No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him’). But this verse does not say anywhere that all who are drawn must come! Instead it is saying that all who come must have been drawn! This verse cannot deny the free will of man to resist such drawing, noting that all are drawn to the cross in John 12:32. So, Terry, John 6:44 does not teach that no free will exists; instead you rest your teachings here upon a mere assumption that no free will exists. On its own, an assumption cannot be stated as fact. And such an assumption here is false. Your teaching here is inconsistent with the biblical truth that man has free will to choose.
Arnold (with Claydon) also uses Romans 3:11 to defend his teachings here. However, not seeking after God is an act of the will. Man will not seek after God. It does not say that man can not seek after God! Can you prove (sola scriptura) that Romans 3:11 can not mean “will not”? If you can’t, then you cannot disprove the free will of man!
And how do you make this agree with Jeremiah 29:13? Why would God say: And ye shall seek me, and find [me], when ye shall search for me with all your heart, if He knew they couldn’t do so?
For further information see Questions 6, 47, 50 of Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions?

62/. Calvinists teach that God’s will cannot be influenced in any way by any free will decisions of man. Calvinist Slick says “Saying that He simply knows what free will choice they’re going to make is problematic because it means that God is then contingent upon the choices of individuals. ….. what you’re saying is that His choices are contingent upon the so-called free will choices of man, and that violates the doctrine of God’s aseity.“
So it didn’t influence God’s will at all when the king of Nineveh repented after being told that Nineveh would be destroyed?
And did the calvinist God foreordain (or decree) the sin of mankind in order to justify the bringing of a flood upon them to destroy them? Then such a God is sadistic. Or did the sin of mankind influence God’s decision to destroy the world in a flood?
And the ultimate question: If the calvinist God’s will cannot be influenced by man, then doesn’t that prove that all sin and wickedness are created by the calvinist God?
Can you explain how God’s actions here can possibly be independent of (not influenced by) any choices that man made??
See Questions 63 and 64 below for further notes on this topic.

63/. Calvinists teach that the will of their God is the only independent will that may exist in the universe. No other will may ever oppose or influence God’s will at any time. They also teach that the calvinist God is incomplete if he cannot demonstrate his wrath against sin ( calvinists teach that wrath is an attribute of their God). Therefore the calvinist God must create that sin in order to be angry at it and thus be fulfilled. According to calvinism, man cannot influence the calvinist God’s will by choosing to sin because man would then be manipulating the calvinist God to react. Calvinists, did your God create sin so that he could be wrathful against those who sin? The God of the Bible didn’t!!

64/. Likewise, the calvinist God must demonstrate his grace to be fulfilled. If his elect never sinned, then he could show no grace in forgiving them. Therefore the calvinist God must decree that his elect sin in order to be able to forgive them by his grace. Because no other will may influence the calvinist God in any way, he must decree that the elect fall into sin so that he may rescue them. They themselves cannot choose to sin because that would be influencing the sovereign calvinist God’s will. Calvinists, does your God make you sin in order to reveal his sovereign grace in you, his “elect”?

65/. If a non-calvinist Christian opposes calvinism, does he do this by his own free will or by the decree of the calvinist God? Calvinists have to deny both options. (And opposing calvinism certainly cannot be a random event!) Calvinists have to deny that the non-calvinist could have free will to choose salvation and to also choose to not believe in calvinism, yet also have to deny that their God would choose to save someone yet decree that person to oppose him. So how can calvinists accept non-calvinists as Christian brethren without compromising their beliefs?

66/. Calvinists often overuse a small number of verses to teach their heresies. One of their more over-worked misused verses is Romans 9:16 (So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.) They claim that it proves that man has no free will to ask God for mercy because their God does all the choosing. But, the context of this chapter is the rejected nation of Israel (who used to be God’s elect nation but had been replaced by the Gentile church). So calvinists, where does it say that people have no free will to plead for God’s mercy unless God has willed it first? What about the publican in Luke 18:13 who chose to pray, “God be merciful to me a sinner.”?? Didn’t God show him mercy because he pleaded for mercy (clearly by his free will choice)?  So how does Romans 9:16 deny free will?

67/. Why do calvinists base the assessment of their beliefs on how well they evangelise? After all, if the level of evangelism is the measure of your biblical correctness, then the JWs and mormons would have you beaten hands down! Does that make them more biblical than you? False religions also evangelise! It’s the converts you produce who determine your biblical correctness! Calvinists, isn’t it true that your evangelism produces puritans, and not necessarily saved Christians?

68/. On Sept. 5, 1536, Calvin began his rule of Geneva by giving lectures at the Church of St. Peter. Schaff (History of the Christian Church, Vol 8) wrote: “On July 29, 1537, the Council of the Two Hundred ordered all the citizens, male and female, to assent to the Confession of Faith in the Church of St. Peter. ….. On Nov. 12, the Council even passed a measure to banish all who would not take the oath. The Confession was thus to be made the law of Church and State. This is the first instance of a formal pledge to a symbolical book by a whole people. It was a glaring inconsistency that those who had just shaken off the yoke of popery as an intolerable burden, should subject their conscience and intellect to a human creed; in other words, substitute for the old Roman popery a modern Protestant popery. Of course, they sincerely believed that they had the infallible Word of God on their side; but they could not claim infallibility in its interpretation.” Doesn’t this make Calvin a dictator? Isn’t it clear that Calvin was a bully-boy? Can calvinists explain how Calvin’s protestant rule was any different to the catholic rule? Isn’t it apparent that Calvin merely took the place of the pope of Rome?

69/. Calvinists, was King David one of the elect of God? If you say he was, then please answer this: Did the calvinist God ordain that King David should commit adultery and murder? Remember, calvinism cannot permit King David to have chosen of his own free will to commit such sin.
And how could you say King David was not one of the elect of God, when God had said, “I have found David the [son] of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.” (Acts 13:22)???

70/. Why do reformed churches try to hide the truth about some pastors who commit adultery? I personally know of a Presbyterian minister who ran off with another woman and no-one in the church wanted to talk about one of their guaranteed elect committing adultery. And I was acquainted with a Lutheran pastor who likewise ran off with another woman. I was told that he was not dismissed for doing so, but instead was transferred to another position. Why is it so hard for reformed pastors to be removed from their pastoral position for serious sin? Is it because they have been declared elect when ordained, and are required to persevere until the end?

Some of you reading this may not be calvinists but instead may be reading this through curiosity, or maybe you have a problem with calvinist conflict at your church, so please note that not one single calvinist has presented (on this website) a logical and biblical challenge to my forthright statements about their heresy. Are they so afraid of losing that they dare not commit themselves? Surely this alone tells you the quality (or lack of it!) of their arguments when challenged to defend them from the Bible alone – sola scriptura. Also note that just being a calvinist doesn’t necessarily make you lost. Many good Christians have been corrupted by false calvinist heresies, and merely need to get out of those false teachings to come back to biblical doctrines. But, if you are relying on your calvinist gospel to save you, then be aware that only the biblical gospel can save: Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved! Without the application of the biblical gospel, you are lost! You must choose this day whom you will serve! The God of the Bible will not force you to go to either heaven or hell against your will; He asks you to choose life through Jesus Christ or you will be condemned to hell for refusing to call upon the name of the Lord to be saved.

So, is there any calvinist sure enough of his beliefs to argue them from the Bible alone? Remember, no comment means no opposition! Silence is always taken as agreement. If your calvinism is worth defending, then defend it. But no defense means nothing worth defending! Does your belief in calvinism dissipate like so much hot air in the face of any reasonable opposition?
So far the silence has been deafening, spurring me on to accuse more and more simply because no reason has been presented to me to not do so. By your silence you are hereby found guilty as charged! If I accuse and no-one defends, then I am free to accuse further. Calvinists, it is in your hands to defend or to acknowledge your guilt!

There are just so many questions calvinists cannot answer that it would be far quicker (and shorter, too) to list all the questions calvinists can answer!

Go to the complete list of questions Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions?

OR
For Questions 1 – 10 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
For Questions 11-20 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 2.
For Questions 21-30 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
For Questions 31-40 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 4.
For Questions 41-50 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.

For further reading also please try the following:
Calvinisms
1/. The calvinist gospel in a nutshell.
2/. Calvinists teach universal salvation.
3/. Calvinists teach that God’s elect have eternal life before they can come to Christ to receive eternal life.
4/. The calvinist god cannot be eternal.
5/. Calvinist salvation is not a gift of God.
6/. Calvinists teach that if we willingly receive this gift of salvation, then that makes the gift imperfect.
7/. The calvinist unconditional election is really a conditional election.
8/. Calvinism does not teach assurance of salvation.
9/. The calvinist god is a dictator.
10/. The calvinist god is the only willful sinner in the universe.

The Oxymorons of Calvinist Doctrine
Oxymoron No.1 – God created sin and then punished Adam for it!
Oxymoron No.2 – Merciful, loving and gracious God predestined most of mankind to go to hell without any other option!
Oxymoron No.3 – Calvinism is the gospel!
Oxymoron No.4 – Be born again before you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ!
Oxymoron No.5 – Evangelize the world without the gospel?
Oxymoron No.6 – Calvinists claim to be Christians yet are not saved by Christ.
Oxymoron No.7 – The calvinists cry “Christ Alone”, yet leave Him out of the picture until after a person is “saved”.
Oxymoron No.8 – The calvinists cry “The Bible Alone”, yet ignore its truths in favour of Calvin’s teachings.
Oxymoron No.9 – The calvinists cry “Faith Alone”, yet faith is not part of their salvation until after they have been born again.
Oxymoron No.10 – God chose Israel as His special nation, and then ordained that it sin and be rejected.

And here’s another post to check out with a lot of good reading about the bad logic of calvinism and the god they serve.
Try When Calvinism’s “Bad Logic” Traps Good Christians
The author of this post speaks from first-hand experience in defining the evil deception in the calvinism that caused her to leave her church of many years. Why does calvinism (which proclaims the loving goodness of their allegedly sovereign god) cause so much division and heart-ache?? It’s those who have escaped this vile deception who can speak most authoritatively about it. But, be prepared for a long read! Calvinism has so much deception that it just cannot be dealt with in a few sentences!

*************************************

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

Calvinist heretics & heresies

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

Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 4
Calvinists won’t answer straightforward questions
Calvinists can’t answer straightforward questions
Calvinists can’t answer any questions
But they can say, “It’s a mystery!“

Calvinists just won’t answer simple straight-forward questions! Why? The answer here is simple: they can’t! These questions have been online for a while now and only one response has been received. (And I have defended my accusations – see Comments.) It’s clear that calvinists just do not have the sola scriptura answers to even one of  these questions. It proves my point: that calvinists tell a bunch of lies, claiming them to be biblical, and hoping everyone listening to them is as gullible as they are. But sola scriptura (the Bible alone) proves them wrong! In Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions? I asked so many questions with one response after 8 months. The list just kept on growing exponentially; currently it stands at 50 questions. So now I am presenting 10 questions at a time; here I present Questions 31 – 40.
Read Questions 1-10 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
Read Questions 11-20 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 2.
Read Questions 21-30 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
Read Questions 41-50 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.
And continue with Questions 51-670 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6.

31/.  Calvin taught (in his Institutes Book 3, Chapter 2, Section 11) that his God gave some a temporary faith which he described as “an inferior operation of the Spirit“. Such people could even think they were of the elect, and other elect people could believe they were saved. But they are not of the elect and never will be. Calvin says: “Hence it is not strange, that by the Apostle a taste of heavenly gifts, and by Christ himself a temporary faith, is ascribed to them.” But their sins are not forgiven and they will not be permitted to go to heaven. Their faith is only temporary! Can calvinists please explain where the Bible alone teaches any of this or else admit that Calvin was a hopeless liar who made up doctrines as it suited him?
Try reading The living-dead calvinist zombies – as taught by Calvin

32/.  Here’s an interesting question that calvinists avoid like the plague. How do you know you are going to heaven? They cannot say that they called upon the name of the Lord to be saved, because they say this is works and therefore not permitted. In fact the only evidence that a calvinist can have of assurance of heaven is that their works define them as puritans, therefore they are of the elect of their God. Ask a calvinist for his testimony and he can only say that he is one of the elect because his works demonstrate this to be so. He might say that he was regenerated (born again) by the Spirit. Then ask him when that happened. How long has he been one of his God’s elect? Did his God send him a letter? Or maybe a telegram or email or SMS? How does he know he is actually regenerated? His testimony is his works, nothing else! (And good works alone is insufficient evidence of a new life!) I can say that on a particular day in my life I called upon the name of the Lord to be saved; therefore I know I have eternal life, and I know I am going to heaven (1 John 5:12-13). Calvinists, how do you know you have eternal life, and how do you know you are going to heaven? For further on this, please read How does a calvinist know he has eternal life?

33/.  Calvinists claim the perseverance of the saints (that is, God’s elect people are guaranteed entry into heaven for eternity). This is the letter “P” in TULIP. But is there even one calvinist out there who is prepared to claim right now that he or she is guaranteed eternal life in heaven? What if you fall away before the end? Note that calvinism teaches that one must persevere to the end in order to enter heaven. If you fall away before the end, then you were never saved in the first place. This is what Calvin taught, that you could be given a temporary faith, an inferior operation of the Spirit (Institutes Bk 3, Ch.2, Section 11). Is any calvinist brave enough to guarantee that he will not (absolutely not) fall away before the end? John Piper admits the possibility of falling away! (https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/when-is-saving-repentance-impossible) If a calvinist falls away he was never saved in the first place; his God has given him a temporary faith! So how sure are you, calvinist, that you are one of your God’s elect? Can you prove it??

34/.  Calvinists teach that their God created/decreed/ordained sin and then blamed Adam for it. They all must agree that Adam could not have sinned of his own free will because that would have required free will and the calvinist God refuses to permit man to have any free will to choose between good and evil. Therefore, if Adam effectively had no free will to choose to obey God, then neither can his disobedience be considered an act of his free will against God! Adam is originally commanded not to disobey God by eating the forbidden fruit, yet it is the calvinist God’s will that Adam should sin by now eating that forbidden fruit. If Adam refuses to eat the fruit because God has previously forbidden it, then he becomes guilty of disobeying God’s command to now eat the fruit. On the other hand, if Adam now obeys God’s command to eat the forbidden fruit, then he is doomed by his disobedience to God’s original law that forbade him to do so. Poor Adam! He just can’t win! The deck is literally stacked against him! Calvinists, why is your God so vindictive? And where in the Bible does it teach this garbage? No-one has ever been able to answer this without depicting the calvinist God as a dictator who can’t take responsibility for his own mistakes.
Try reading Calvinists declare their God to be a liar! and Calvinists teach that their God is the only wilful sinner in the universe!

35/.  Calvinists teach that their God requires evil in order to be perfect, according to Jonathan Edwards whom Piper declares “to be the greatest religious thinker America has ever produced.” Edwards says that the calvinist God ordains evil for the perfecting of His glory. He says that evil is necessary for the highest happiness of man who is only truly happy when his perception of God is perfect, and that God can only be perfect when evil is present (so that He can reveal His wrath against sin!). Without sin and evil, God cannot be complete! (https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/is-god-less-glorious-because-he-ordained-that-evil-be) If this is America’s greatest religious thinker, then …..?? Following this logically as any thinker should do requires evil to be as eternally present as God is eternally present. That is, God cannot be God without evil! This therefore makes evil an attribute of the calvinist God. Calvinist, your God is evil, isn’t he?

36/.  Calvinists who teach limited atonement are clearly non-biblical (1 John 2:2). It is so absurd that some calvinists declare that they are 4-point calvinists; that is, they can’t accept limited atonement! However, why would the calvinist Jesus die for all people if he has only chosen a limited number for heaven? So, 4-point calvinists, do you realise that an unlimited atonement is ridiculous unless the election is likewise unlimited? Why die for all if only 1% are on the list for heaven? Isn’t that a waste of the calvinist Jesus’ payment? Why pay for all and then prevent most from using it? Isn’t it like buying a meal for 100 people yet only letting one of them actually eat? Don’t you realise that being a 4-point calvinist is stupid?
The Bible teaches that Jesus died for all the sins of all mankind for all time without exception. All are offered the gift of salvation, yet only those who accept by their own free wills may be saved. Free will to choose is biblical!

37/.  Calvinists often say that Jesus’ payment was sufficient for all, yet efficient for the few. But, isn’t it the height of absurdity to be able to pay for all yet refuse to do so simply because he didn’t want to? MacArthur says that “God did not intend to save everyone.  He is God.  He could have intended to save everyone.  He could have saved everyone.  He would have if that had been His intention.  The atonement is limited.” (The Doctrine of Actual Atonement,  Part 1) So, calvinists, if your God could have paid for all, then why didn’t he? Is he a cruel despot, a sadist, or was he just unable to raise the finances?

38/.  Calvinists, why does your God only choose some for heaven when you claim that he could have paid for the sins of all people. He created most of mankind unable to go to heaven, so he sends them to hell by the good pleasure of his sovereign will. Why does the calvinist God only love his elect, yet hate the rest of the world? How could anyone serve and worship the calvinist God for eternity, knowing that so many had gone to hell simply because he hated them too much to die for them?
Calvinist, would your God rather die than give you what you justly deserved? My God, the God of the Bible did, and not just for a chosen few; He died for all mankind!

39/.  Christians are supposed to love their enemies, yet the calvinist God can’t love his enemies. The calvinist God commands Christians to do this, yet disobeys his own commandment? How is it possible that mere man could out-love God? Can a man be more loving, more merciful than God? How does this agree with the Bible which says that God is love?

40/.  Because the calvinist God’s will is the only will in the universe, then all things are according to his will, even sin (as calvinist writers affirm). They say that it is for his glory, yet fail to understand that their God is the only one who can choose to sin by his own free will! Doesn’t this mean that in a calvinist world, the only one who must go to hell for his sins is the calvinist God? After all, isn’t he the only one responsible for all sin for all time? How can man without a free will to choose between good and evil be responsible for that which he was ordained (decreed; made) to do?

So, is there any calvinist sure enough of his beliefs to argue them from the Bible alone? Remember, no comment means no opposition! Silence is always taken as agreement. If your calvinism is worth defending, then defend it. But no defense means nothing worth defending! Does your belief in calvinism dissipate like so much hot air in the face of any reasonable opposition?
So far the silence has been deafening, spurring me on to accuse more and more simply because no reason has been presented to me to not do so. By your silence you are hereby found guilty as charged! If I accuse and no-one defends, then I am free to accuse further. Calvinists, it is in your hands to defend or to acknowledge your guilt!

There are just so many questions calvinists cannot answer that it would be far quicker (and shorter, too) to list all the questions calvinists can answer!

Go to the complete list of questions Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions?
Read Questions 1-10 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
Read Questions 11-20 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 2.
Read Questions 21-30 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
Read Questions 41-50 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.
And if you haven’t read enough impossible calvinist questions, try Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6.

For further reading also please try the following:
Calvinisms
1/. The calvinist gospel in a nutshell.
2/. Calvinists teach universal salvation.
3/. Calvinists teach that God’s elect have eternal life before they can come to Christ to receive eternal life.
4/. The calvinist god cannot be eternal.
5/. Calvinist salvation is not a gift of God.
6/. Calvinists teach that if we willingly receive this gift of salvation, then that makes the gift imperfect.
7/. The calvinist unconditional election is really a conditional election.
8/. Calvinism does not teach assurance of salvation.
9/. The calvinist god is a dictator.
10/. The calvinist god is the only willful sinner in the universe.

The Oxymorons of Calvinist Doctrine
Oxymoron No.1 – God created sin and then punished Adam for it!
Oxymoron No.2 – Merciful, loving and gracious God predestined most of mankind to go to hell without any other option!
Oxymoron No.3 – Calvinism is the gospel!
Oxymoron No.4 – Be born again before you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ!
Oxymoron No.5 – Evangelize the world without the gospel?
Oxymoron No.6 – Calvinists claim to be Christians yet are not saved by Christ.
Oxymoron No.7 – The calvinists cry “Christ Alone”, yet leave Him out of the picture until after a person is “saved”.
Oxymoron No.8 – The calvinists cry “The Bible Alone”, yet ignore its truths in favour of Calvin’s teachings.
Oxymoron No.9 – The calvinists cry “Faith Alone”, yet faith is not part of their salvation until after they have been born again.
Oxymoron No.10 – God chose Israel as His special nation, and then ordained that it sin and be rejected.

And here’s another post to check out with a lot of good reading about the bad logic of calvinism and the god they serve.
Try When Calvinism’s “Bad Logic” Traps Good Christians
The author of this post speaks from first-hand experience in defining the evil deception in the calvinism that caused her to leave her church of many years. Why does calvinism (which proclaims the loving goodness of their allegedly sovereign god) cause so much division and heart-ache?? It’s those who have escaped this vile deception who can speak most authoritatively about it. But, be prepared for a long read! Calvinism has so much deception that it just cannot be dealt with in a few sentences!

*************************************

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 2
Calvinists won’t answer straightforward questions
Calvinists can’t answer straightforward questions
Calvinists can’t answer any questions
But they can say, “It’s a mystery!“

In Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions? I asked so many questions with just one response after 8 months. The list just kept on growing exponentially; currently it stands at 50 questions. So now I am presenting 10 questions at a time; here I present Questions 11 – 20.
Read Questions 1-10 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
Read Questions 21-30 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
Read Questions 31-40 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 4.
Read Questions 41-50 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.
And continue with Questions 51-70 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6.

11/. Why do calvinists teach limited atonement (that Jesus only died for the sins of those chosen for heaven) when the Bible says His sacrifice was for the sins of the whole world?
1 John 2:1-2 – ¹My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: ²And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
Some calvinists teach that the whole world only means those who will be saved, yet it must be a larger group than the ones for whose sins Christ is a propitiation! “not for ours only, but also for….” Please study this carefully! If “the whole world” means only Christians, then who are that smaller group who have been promised an Advocate in 1 John 2:1?
Some say that “our sins” are the sins of Israel and that it was the recipients of this letter (Christian Jews) who are meant at first. Then only those Christian Jews could be promised an Advocate (1 John 2:1) and just 2 verses earlier in this letter only those Christian Jews could confess their sins and be forgiven? (1 John 1:9 – If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.) Can you explain this huge inconsistency?
Try reading When does the whole world mean only Christians? and 1 John 2:2

12/. If God’s will is that all men should be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-4 – ³For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; ⁴Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.) then why would He choose to save some and reject the rest, also by His will according to calvinists? Does the calvinist god have 2 wills? (Some teach that he does indeed have 2 wills, a will of desire and a will of command, or similar terms, although Calvin himself rejected this by saying that what God willed in a right way, man did in a wrong way!) Other calvinists illogically say that “all men” means only Christians! How can they believe such folly? Why do calvinists so often grossly misrepresent the truth of the Bible?
Try reading Does the calvinist God have a dual personality?

13/. If Israel were God’s elect nation (which indeed they were) then how can God then reject them for disobeying Him if the calvinists teach that such rebellion had to be by God’s decree? Did God choose them and then decree that they should rebel such that He would have to reject them? Truly the calvinist god vacillates between one idea and another! And if the calvinist election is explained by Israel’s election as a nation (Romans 9), then what is stopping the calvinist God from also decreeing that the elect today should sin and be rejected like Israel? Truly the calvinist election is untrustworthy indeed!
Of course, the Bible does teach an election of God’s people, a choosing which is recorded in the Book of Life written from the foundation of the world (Revelation 17:8) but it is not unconditional; instead it is an election conditional upon the foreknowledge of sovereign God who sees all things and knows all things from the beginning to the end (1 Peter 1:2; Romans 8:29).

14/. Why did Jesus cry on the cross to His Father to forgive them for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34) yet that good calvinist MacArthur says that Jesus didn’t die for the mob that screamed for His blood (sermon code 62-10)? So just who did Jesus pray forgiveness for? Or did Jesus somehow pray to forgive them but the Father didn’t agree? Calvinists, please explain why your Jesus couldn’t have prayed for the mob that screamed for His blood? What would have been the point of praying for those whom he was not prepared to die for??
Of course, MacArthur does strongly support the heresies of calvinism.
“Today Calvinism is being subjected to constant attack. Several recent, popular, published critiques have tried to discredit John Calvin the man, or they have unfairly blamed Calvinism for the dubious politics of the Reformation era. But the doctrines of Calvinistic soteriology must stand or fall by the test of Scripture, period.”
(John F. MacArthur Jr.; quoted from, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended and Documented; 2nd Edition: David Steele, Curtis Thomas, and Lance Quinn.)

15/. Why does MacArthur condemn freemasonry as a Satanic false religion yet praise the spiritual harvest of his great grandfather Thomas Fullerton who was a high-ranking freemason? In this link MacArthur even acknowledges the spiritual harvest as his inheritance!
How can a calvinist condemn satanism yet praise the spiritual outreach of his ancestor who by MacArthur’s own description worshipped a Satanic false religion?
For more information please read “Is MacArthur a Freemason”.

16/. If the Bible describes eternal life as a gift of God (Romans 6:23), then it cannot be imposed upon anyone but must be received by the person’s free will. Then why do calvinists teach that such a gift must be imposed upon people against their will? Note what MacArthur says (The Doctrine of God’s Effectual Call) that “No one is ever saved without being willing. ….. There’s nothing in the sinner to make him willing.  …..  It is only when the power of God makes him willing that he becomes willing. …..No sinner has the capacity to be willing. ….. This is what we mean by “total depravity,” the utter inability of the sinner to be willing. ……. When the gospel comes, the sinner is so eager to respond.” Either you are willing or else you are made to do it. If you are made to do it, then it is an imposition! How can this imposition of willingness be described as a gift? And how can you force someone to be willing? That’s an oxymoron!
Try reading MacArthur teaches works salvation

17/. Why do calvinists claim sola scriptura (the Bible alone) yet rarely if ever use the Bible to defend their heresies when directly challenged from the Bible?

18/. Calvinists love to use John 10:24-28 to “prove” that the sheep that Jesus died for are the elect of God, unconditionally chosen by Him from the foundation of the world. That is, if you are not one of those elect, you cannot be one of His sheep, and therefore the calvinist Jesus did not die for your sins. So, just how can calvinists say that it is only the elect who hear God’s voice and follow, yet Jesus came to His own (His elect sheep of Israel, obviously) and they didn’t receive Him!
John 1:11 – He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
Yet, aren’t these “His own”, of whom it says: All we like sheep have gone astray (Isaiah 53:6)? Obviously the calvinist god can dispose of his sheep even after declaring them his elect!?? How does this biblical truth apply to the calvinist?
Try reading Oh, the persistent inconsistencies of calvinists!

19/. And while we are looking at this topic, why do calvinists claim that the election of Israel as God’s nation somehow “proves” the unconditional election of the Church? For, if God could simply reject Israel after choosing her, then where does it guarantee the calvinist elect the right to be able to sin (as long as they confess, repent and are restored to fellowship) and still claim guaranteed entry into heaven. In fact, this is what Romans 9 is all about, the condemnation of Israel who thought that because they were God’s chosen people, then they were somehow above the condemnation of the law. They demanded mercy and God simply said that He, not them, would choose to whom He showed mercy. Jeremiah’s potter and the clay picture (Jeremiah 18) clearly explains what Paul is saying in Romans 9. So why do the calvinists ignore such connections? Is it because they, like Israel, think they can sin and still be guaranteed eternal life in heaven?? What arrogance is this!? So, how can Israel’s failed election as a nation prove the unconditional election of the calvinists?
Try reading Romans 9 condemns calvinism to rejection by sovereign God and Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

20/. Why do calvinists, when faced with a difficult question that they cannot answer, either claim that it is a mystery hid in the secret counsels of their god or else just refuse to answer? Why does it seem impossible for calvinists to give a straight honest answer when challenged on questions like the ones above. They claim to be so educated, so scholarly, yet cannot come up with simple answers to these simple questions! However, by their fruit they may be known! I have asked such questions (and more) in the past and have often challenged calvinists to take me on, but they seemingly refuse, probably because they just don’t have a clear biblical answer in the first place! Of course, there may be calvinists out there who believe they do know some of the “difficult” yet simple answers! If so, please feel free to comment on our Comments page. I will be fair and objective as long as the explanations are likewise fair and objective. Genuine scholarship should never be rejected without thorough analysis of points raised, as long as they are supported from the Bible, for that is our measuring stick, our sure foundation in the face of so much trivial comment in the world today.
Try reading Esoteric beliefs and mystery religion and Favourite calvinist defense tactics

So, is there any calvinist sure enough of his beliefs to argue them from the Bible alone? Remember, no comment means no opposition! Silence is always taken as agreement. If your calvinism is worth defending, then defend it. But no defense means nothing worth defending! Does your belief in calvinism dissipate like so much hot air in the face of any reasonable opposition?
So far the silence has been deafening, spurring me on to accuse more and more simply because no reason has been presented to me to not do so. By your silence you are hereby found guilty as charged! If I accuse and no-one defends, then I am free to accuse further. Calvinists, it is in your hands to defend or to acknowledge your guilt!

There are just so many questions calvinists cannot answer that it would be far quicker (and shorter, too) to list all the questions calvinists can answer!

Go to the complete list of questions Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions?
See Questions 1-10 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
Read Questions 21-30 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
Read Questions 31-40 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 4.
Read Questions 41-50 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.
And if you haven’t read enough impossible calvinist questions, try Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6.

For further reading also please try the following:
Calvinisms
1/. The calvinist gospel in a nutshell.
2/. Calvinists teach universal salvation.
3/. Calvinists teach that God’s elect have eternal life before they can come to Christ to receive eternal life.
4/. The calvinist god cannot be eternal.
5/. Calvinist salvation is not a gift of God.
6/. Calvinists teach that if we willingly receive this gift of salvation, then that makes the gift imperfect.
7/. The calvinist unconditional election is really a conditional election.
8/. Calvinism does not teach assurance of salvation.
9/. The calvinist god is a dictator.
10/. The calvinist god is the only willful sinner in the universe.

The Oxymorons of Calvinist Doctrine
Oxymoron No.1 – God created sin and then punished Adam for it!
Oxymoron No.2 – Merciful, loving and gracious God predestined most of mankind to go to hell without any other option!
Oxymoron No.3 – Calvinism is the gospel!
Oxymoron No.4 – Be born again before you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ!
Oxymoron No.5 – Evangelize the world without the gospel?
Oxymoron No.6 – Calvinists claim to be Christians yet are not saved by Christ.
Oxymoron No.7 – The calvinists cry “Christ Alone”, yet leave Him out of the picture until after a person is “saved”.
Oxymoron No.8 – The calvinists cry “The Bible Alone”, yet ignore its truths in favour of Calvin’s teachings.
Oxymoron No.9 – The calvinists cry “Faith Alone”, yet faith is not part of their salvation until after they have been born again.
Oxymoron No.10 – God chose Israel as His special nation, and then ordained that it sin and be rejected.

And here’s another post to check out with a lot of good reading about the bad logic of calvinism and the god they serve.
Try When Calvinism’s “Bad Logic” Traps Good Christians
The author of this post speaks from first-hand experience in defining the evil deception in the calvinism that caused her to leave her church of many years. Why does calvinism (which proclaims the loving goodness of their allegedly sovereign god) cause so much division and heart-ache?? It’s those who have escaped this vile deception who can speak most authoritatively about it. But, be prepared for a long read! Calvinism has so much deception that it just cannot be dealt with in a few sentences!

*************************************

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

Calvinist heretics & heresies

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

 

The greatest missionaries are not calvinist

(Or try these recent posts: Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions Not a single calvinist has been clever enough to be able to answer even one of these questions. What a conundrum! Can you answer them? Also have a look at the satanic occultic background of calvinism as it relates to freemasonry in Calvinist connections with freemasonry) Remember, silence is the greatest complement a calvinist can pay to those who oppose the heresies of calvinism!

Why are the greatest missionaries not calvinists? The simple answer is that, like the JWs, calvinists can never know if they are truly one of the chosen ones until the end. So, also like JWs, they show great zeal for evangelism, not because it might save others, but because it might score more points with the calvinist God and better demonstrate their own salvation, that is, making sure of their election. Read on!

So many calvinists get caught boasting about how they are the greatest of evangelists. They do this whenever anyone accuses calvinism of being non-evangelical. But when we look at the plain facts, it is clear that biblical evangelism is a complete waste of time in calvinist theology. Calvinism teaches that the calvinist God has already chosen from the beginning of time those who will go to heaven and those who will go to hell, and that not one person can ever have any personal say in the matter. Nothing anyone can say or do can ever make any difference to that choice made by the calvinist God. Calvinism teaches that no-one is able to do anything to change the choice that the calvinist God has made for them.

Some calvinists teach that the calvinist God uses the gospel to draw people to himself, yet that, too, is impossible according to their doctrine. They teach that those chosen for heaven (the “elect” of God) must be regenerated (born again, made alive) before they can respond to the calvinist God in any way. They must be regenerated before they can hear and respond to the gospel. Regeneration (being born again) has to occur before anyone may respond to anything to do with the calvinist God.

Therefore, according to calvinism, the gospel is irrelevant to those who have been chosen for hell, for they can never be saved anyway. It is likewise irrelevant to those who have been chosen for heaven, for they must be given new life (regenerated or born again) before they are able to respond to the gospel. In fact, the elect of the calvinist God will go to heaven regardless of whether they hear the gospel or not. In the end, they will go to heaven because the calvinist God has decreed this, and the rest will go to hell because the calvinist God has decreed this also. The only thing that determines your eternal destiny is whether the calvinist God has chosen you for heaven or for hell! There is no other factor at all! Wherever the calvinist God ordains for you is your destiny. Get used to it. You have absolutely no say in the matter and never will have any say. You will do as you are told; end of story.

So why do calvinists try to portray the image that they are such great evangelists? One reason is that they are trying to look like genuine Christians who are called to evangelise the lost. However, calvinists are not called to evangelise the lost because that would be a total waste of their precious time. But they must be seen to evangelise the lost if they want to have the appearance of being biblical. Accuse a calvinist of lacking a desire to preach the gospel and he will react. He will vehemently cry that he is very evangelical. He’ll tell you how he hands out tracts, and prays for the lost. (Never mind that he is forced to believe that tracts are useless according to his doctrines, nor that praying of any sort is irrelevant to a calvinist because the calvinist God has already decreed all things that are to come to pass.) He will tell you of all the great calvinist “evangelists” and “missionaries” who have gone before. (Never mind that if they were calvinists, then they also had to believe that their ministry was irrelevant, for unless the calvinist God had already chosen the converts, none would ever be truly converted. And those who had been chosen would still be saved even if the missionaries never went out! Such is the calvinist doctrine.)

But there’s another reason why calvinists make such a big deal of their evangelistic endeavours. You see, calvinists teach that no-one may choose by his own free will to be saved. Only the calvinist God may choose and nothing you can do will ever change that. So how does a calvinist know he is one of the elect of God? That is probably the most difficult question you can ask a calvinist, because the simple answer is that he can never truly know until he dies. He has to persevere to the end in order to demonstrate his elect status. If a calvinist falls away before the end, they have to teach that he was never one of the chosen ones in the first place.

Genuine Christians who have responded to the biblical gospel have called upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13). They know when they did this, and they know that they have been born again. They are saved by Jesus, born again by God’s Spirit and given eternal life; this is their salvation. They know they have Jesus the Son of God in their lives and therefore they are assured that they have eternal life (1 John 5:11-13). They have a point of reference that defines their salvation. At any time they feel unsure of their salvation, they only have to look back to that point of reference (when they called upon the name of the Lord to be saved) to be reassured. They do their good works because they are saved. Their good works are the consequence of their salvation, not the cause.

But not so with the calvinist. He can have no point of reference demonstrating the time when he chose to call upon the name of the Lord, for he is not permitted to believe in the use of his own free will to choose to be saved. He is not permitted to call upon the name of the Lord to be born again, for he must be born again before he is able to call upon the name of the Lord. Even if a calvinist calls upon the name of the Lord to be saved, he is still heading for hell unless the calvinist God has already chosen him as one of his elect. Calvinists teach that you must be on the list to go to heaven or else calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved cannot save you.

So the question remains: How can a calvinist know that he is one of the ones chosen for heaven? The simple answer is, as stated above, that he cannot know for certain until the day he dies. What defines whether or not a person is one of the calvinist elect, then? It’s simple; he has to demonstrate by his good works that he is one of the elect. No works means no election. I know that James 2:17 says that faith without works is dead. And this is very true. However, for the genuine Christian, works are the consequence of his faith. The calvinist also claims that his works are the consequence of his faith, yet, because he has no point of reference such as calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved, then his works are his only point of reference to demonstrate his elect status.

Take away a Christian’s works and he remains a Christian because he recalls his personal choice to call on the name of the Lord to be saved. (If he continues without works then his decision to be saved might not have been genuine, though.) But, take away a calvinist’s works and he can no longer be one of the elect. He claims his works are the result of being chosen by the calvinist God, but if those works disappear, then there is no other way to define him being one of those chosen for heaven. If he is chosen for heaven, he will do those works as naturally as breathing. (The calvinist God will ensure this!) But a calvinist without works is like a calvinist who has stopped breathing. (No works means no God in his life and therefore he can’t be alive.) So he must have works or else he cannot demonstrate in any way his elect status.

What works demonstrate a calvinist’s elect status? Chiefly, he must do those things that he is required to do; that is, he must demonstrate obedience to the laws and commands of the calvinist God. These include being good, avoiding such things as swearing, adultery, greed etc. In past days it was the seven deadly sins that had to be shunned in order to be one of the elect of the calvinist God. They called themselves puritans and they took pledges against those deadly sins, especially the temperance pledge. Evangelism then was mainly designed to produce more puritan people, people who lived good clean “pure” lives. (The English version of the “Snakes and Ladders” game was originally designed to encourage puritan living. The snakes represented the evils and the ladders represented the virtues.)

Originally calvinists were never big on evangelising the lost with the biblical gospel. Their gospel was more to do with living pure lives including going to church; this defined those of elect status. But today the calvinists have made a huge marketing push to build acceptability among the more evangelical churches. If they wanted to be portrayed as genuine Christians, then they had to be seen as great evangelists for the sake of the biblical gospel (even when they were not).

When calvinists are asked why they carry out the Great Commission, they will generally reply something along the lines of: “Because we are commanded to do so.” They can’t truthfully reply that it actually might save the lost, because the calvinist God has already decided who the lost will be from the beginning. According to calvinism, the Great Commission cannot ever make any difference to who gets saved and who gets lost.

So why have so many calvinists apparently been such active preachers and missionaries? The answer is simple. If works are the measure of your elect status, then more works means a more certain elect status, especially if you are not permitted to claim your free will decision to be saved as evidence of your elect status. The greater your works, the greater your esteem among the calvinists, and the greater your own self-esteem. If you could be a great preacher or evangelist then this would help greatly to portray you as one of the elect.

However, if evangelistic zeal were the measure of your salvation, then the JWs would be first in the line waiting to get into heaven, and the mormons would be close behind. Evangelistic zeal therefore is not the measure of your salvation.

You must remember that Calvin taught that his god could give a temporary faith, an inferior operation of the spirit, and that even those who appeared to be very good calvinists could fall away one day. Such people were then never actually one of the elect of the calvinist God. (See Calvin’s Institutes Bk 3 Ch 2 Section 11) And the fact is that there is not one calvinist today who can ever be sure that he is truly one of the elect of the calvinist God. They may only be assured if they reach the end of their lives not having fallen away first. Not one may be assured that he has not been given a temporary faith!

It’s not hard to see now why calvinists are so keen to be seen as great men and women of their calvinist God. It’s only their works which give them some right to be called the children of the calvinist God. The Bible says But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: (John 1:12) but the calvinist cannot accept that we can receive Christ, nor may we be permitted to choose to believe on His name. Therefore they must do the works to assure themselves and others that they are the sons of the calvinist God.

Therefore, calvinists need to do works to ensure their elect status continues to exist, for without such works, they are at risk of being declared lost by the calvinist God who might have given them a temporary faith. Calvinists have to have great preachers and missionaries of whom to boast. The truth is that they have nothing else to demonstrate their elect status. They are forced to boast of their works, their zeal for evangelism, their puritan behaviour, in fact, their life is their only testimony they can have. Without that, they still may not be saved, even though they have done some works and are considered one of the calvinist elect today.

John Piper spells out very clearly just how important it is to maintain your good works or else be deemed never saved in the first place.
I’ll be very personal, to give it it’s sharpest point. If in the coming years I commit apostasy and fall away from Christ, it will not be because I have not tasted of the word of God and the Spirit of God and the miracles of God. I have drunk of his word. The Spirit has touched me. I have seen his miracles and I have been his instrument for a few.
But if, over the next ten or twenty years, John Piper begins to cool off spiritually and lose interest in spiritual things and become more fascinated with making money and writing Christless books — if I buy the lie that a new wife would be exhilarating and that the children can fend for themselves and that the church of Christ is a drag and that the incarnation is a myth and that there is one life to live, so let us eat, drink, and be merry — if that happens, then know that the truth is this: John Piper was mightily deceived in the first fifty years of his life.
His faith was an alien vestige of his father’s joy. His fidelity to his wife was a temporary passion and compliance with social pressure. His fatherhood was the outworking of natural instincts. His preaching was driven by the love of words and crowds. His writing was a love affair with fame. And his praying was the deepest delusion of all — an attempt to get God to supply the resources of his vanity.
(https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/when-is-saving-repentance-impossible)
Clearly Piper is not assured of eternity in heaven unless he endures to the end without falling away!

If the calvinist couldn’t boast of calvinist missionary zeal and endeavour, then the calvinist cannot boast of being one of the calvinist elect. He is only one of the elect as long as he is able to boast of his works. Without such boasting he is lost, and can never be saved. And if he cannot boast of great calvinist missionaries, then his whole doctrine is lost and he can never be saved. “The life we live, not the words we speak, determines our eternal destiny” is the true gospel of the calvinist.

JWs do their evangelism because their salvation depends on it. They don’t know how much is needed, so they strive hard to achieve the works that will ensure their full salvation. Those who work harder will be ahead of them in the queue; others who work less will be behind them. There is great incentive to do as much evangelising as possible. It’s like studying for an exam; you keep on studying because you can never know if you have studied enough until you get your exam results.

And the same applies to the calvinist. His works are the only justification of his faith, the only evidence that defines his faith. He has to work hard, for who knows how much is considered sufficient to be declared one of the elect? He has no certificate saying he is chosen for heaven, no proofs at all, and if he has no works, he is probably lost. And unlike the genuine Christian, he cannot even claim his testimony to have called upon the name of the Lord to be saved. He claims that his works are the consequence of his election, yet effectively his works have to be treated as the cause of his election. As one calvinist has said, “The life we live, not the words we speak, determines our eternal destiny.“

Calvinists work as if their life depended upon the work they do, and indeed it does, according to their doctrines. And the JWs are the same; they must work until they drop for the sake of their salvation. At least I have my testimony of having called upon the name of the Lord to be saved. I know I have eternal life and I know I am going to heaven. I do my works because I know I am saved. The calvinist does his works in case he is not saved!

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

(Or try these recent posts: Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions Not a single calvinist has been clever enough to be able to answer even one of these questions yet. Considering that their theology depends on being able to answer them does make them look like fools, doesn’t it! They have a theology that they can’t explain! What a mystery! What a conundrum! Can you answer them? Can you be more intelligent than a calvinist? That doesn’t appear to be hard, judging by the inability of calvinists to respond to my challenges put online 4 months ago.
Also have a look at the satanic occultic background of calvinism as it relates to freemasonry in Calvinist connections with freemasonry)

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

`

Why are calvinists afraid to answer simple straightforward questions?
Read “Calvinists won’t answer straightforward questions”
Read “Calvinists can’t answer straightforward questions”
Read “Calvinists can’t answer any questions”
But they can say, “It’s a mystery!“

Questions for calvinists! Questions for calvinists! So many questions for calvinists – there are just so many questions for calvinists yet it took eight months before just one calvinist finally took up the challenge. Calvinists generally just won’t answer simple straight-forward questions! Why? The answer here is simple: they can’t! I know calvinists read this page – or else the only Christians are non-calvinists – so why not have a go? What have you to lose? The debate maybe? There are 50 question headings below, 50 problems for calvinist heresies. And this is only the tip of the iceberg! (Go to Question 1/. now.) (Note that there are so many questions that calvinists cannot answer that I have now broken up this post into smaller sections.) (And continue with Questions 51 and more at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6.)
Read Questions 1-10 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
Read Questions 11-20 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 2.
Read Questions 21-30 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
Read Questions 31-40 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 4.
Read Questions 41-50 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.
Or try even more at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6.

I have asked so many straightforward questions and challenged calvinists to come up with suitable biblical answers but so far only one calvinist has ever been able to be straight-forward concerning their answers. They accuse me of misrepresenting them (but are never able to quote me doing so), or not knowing enough about calvinism (I know more about calvinism than most calvinists) or that I should read more of their calvinist writings (I have read more of their writings than most calvinists, including Calvin who most of them don’t know much about at all). And the challenge yet remains: If I’m wrong, then demonstrate it, or else admit freely that I am right!

Some of you reading this may not be calvinists but instead may be reading this through curiosity, or maybe you have a problem with calvinist conflict at your church.Why not try these questions on them? Also note that just being a calvinist doesn’t necessarily make you lost. Many good Christians have been corrupted by false calvinist heresies, and merely need to get out of those false teachings to come back to biblical doctrines. But, if you are relying on your calvinist gospel to save you, then be aware that only the biblical gospel can save: Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved! Without the application of the biblical gospel, you are lost! You must choose this day whom you will serve! The God of the Bible will not force you to go to either heaven or hell against your will; He asks you to choose life through Jesus Christ or you will be condemned to hell for refusing to call upon the name of the Lord to be saved.

But the questions concerning the inconsistencies of calvinism persist. I note that in many of their documents they claim that many answers are just not forthcoming; instead they are mysteries, hid in the secret counsels of their allegedly sovereign God. But the God of the Bible has straightforward answers, so how can He know more than the so-called sovereign God of the calvinists? The answer is so simple I’m left wondering why the calvinists themselves just cannot see it. Their God doesn’t know everything but hides instead behind the statement, “I won’t tell you everything!” That is, calvinists don’t know all the answers because their God himself doesn’t know all the answers. Otherwise they’d know more, wouldn’t they? Unless their God knows all things, then he cannot be the God of the Bible – end of story! 
If the calvinist God gives eternal life to his elect before they can hear the gospel and be saved by Christ, and the biblical God uses the gospel to bring people to Christ in order that they would receive eternal life, then there are two separate gospels, only one of which can be correct! What does John 5:39-40 say about this order? Is it life through regeneration before salvation through Christ, or salvation through Christ bringing life? And if only one of these gospels is biblically correct, then only one of these Gods is likewise biblical! Which one, calvinists??

It is interesting to observe that the Roman Catholic church for many centuries required that only its priests and leaders be permitted to teach from the Bible. Anyone else who dared read the Bible in order to find out what it really said was deemed a heretic and likely to be tortured and/or burned at the stake. Only the priesthood was permitted to know many of the mysteries of their religion. Other “lesser beings” were to not question them at all. The catholic church used their “mysteries” to control the common masses of their religion. Their beliefs were esoteric (on a need-to-know basis where the more initiated were permitted to know more) much like satanic beliefs such as the freemasons today. So why do calvinists claim so many mysteries that only the more “spiritual” or more “qualified” may understand, if not for the purposes of controlling their congregations? That is, “I’m the pastor and I say so, so don’t argue!” Give me one good reason why I should not accuse calvinism of being an esoteric belief system!
And remember: Silence is the greatest complement that a calvinist can pay to those who oppose him!
However, if they have answers, then explain them to me – from the Bible, of course – after all, that is our standard, isn’t it? The Bible alone – sola scriptura – the catch-cry of all good calvinists! So now to the questions!

1/. Please explain how God can truthfully ask what more could He have done in His vineyard if He has already ordained that they should sin and be rejected? Or else, if He didn’t ordain their sin, then how can they choose to sin without a free will to sin?
Isaiah 5:2-4 – ²And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. ³And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard. ⁴What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?
There are only 4 options: (a) God is not telling the whole truth concerning His best efforts to obtain a choice crop. (b) God is a liar. (c) God is incapable of producing what He has promised. Or (d) God, while desiring a better outcome, nevertheless allowed Israel to have a free will to determine for themselves what they would do?
Only (d) is acceptable so why won’t calvinists won’t accept this? It’s because then calvinists would have to accept that man has a free will to choose between good and evil, isn’t it??
For further reading, please try The Oxymorons of Calvinist Doctrine, Point 10.

2/. Jeremiah 32:35 – And they built the high places of Baal, which [are] in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through [the fire] unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
It never came into God’s mind that they should do such a thing? That is, He never considered such a thing?  If God has foreordained their rebellion, then it has to have been in His mind that they should do such a thing, so either (a) God is a liar, or (b) He has forgotten what He foreordained, or else (c) He is sovereign God who has given Israel a free-will to choose between serving Him or other gods! (c) is clearly the only biblical option. Can you explain this otherwise?

3/. Here’s another one for you to try to explain. How can God ask His people to choose between life and death, blessing and cursing, if they don’t have free-will? Is God then going to foreordain that they sin and rebel against Him? Then why would He go through the parody of asking them to choose when such a choice is nonsensical?
Deuteronomy 30:19 – I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
Try reading So you think free will isn’t in the Bible? and The free will of man and Foreknowledge and the free will of man

4/. How can a person have eternal life before he believes in Christ, if he cannot see life without Christ?
John 3:36 – He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
And yet calvinists have to teach that a person cannot believe in Christ until after he has been quickened (made alive, born again, regenerated) by the Holy Spirit. How can a person have life before he comes to Christ when the Bible clearly says he cannot have life without Christ?
By the way, Spurgeon (who is greatly favoured by calvinists) taught that you had eternal life before you came to Christ for eternal life. He says (in his message “Free Will – A Slave” under the heading “Eternal Life is Given to All Who Come for It”) – There never was a man who came to Christ for eternal life, for legal life, for spiritual life, who had not already received it, in some sense.
For further information, try reading Can you have eternal life before you can get eternal life?

5/. Why do calvinists insist that John 3:3 (Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.) teaches that we must be born again before we can believe in Christ? They say it means “Except a man be born again, he cannot believe in (or “have faith in”) the kingdom of God.” They have to make “believe in” or “have faith in” mean the same as “see”, yet 2 Corinthians 5:7 says we walk by faith, not by sight, thus making faith and sight opposites here. But the Bible says we must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved (Acts 16:31) yet the calvinists say we must be born again before we can believe. How does the Bible support this?
For more, try reading Calvinist heresy using John 3:3 and John 3:3

6/. Why do calvinists teach that John 6:44 proves that all who are drawn by the Father must come, yet Jesus said in John 12:32 that when He was lifted up on the cross, He would draw all (men) to Himself? If all are drawn to Christ on the cross, then why do calvinists teach that only some are drawn by the Father who is of one mind with the Son (John 10:30)? And, if all who are drawn come to Christ and are saved (as calvinists teach), then calvinists have to be teaching universal salvation! But John 6:44 doesn’t actually say that all who are drawn must come, but rather that all who come must have been drawn. All are drawn, therefore all are able to come, but many resist the drawing. Only those who do not resist the drawing of the Father will be saved.
So please explain why you teach that all who are drawn must come and therefore be saved, noting that all have been drawn on the cross! Do you teach that all are drawn and therefore all are saved? Are calvinists universalists?
Also try reading John 6:44 – Does it really prove calvinist teachings? and John 6:44

As a matter of interest, a comment on our church Facebook account says this:
I am a Calvinist and understand why you are offended by this view, but I don’t understand why you feel the need to attack through ignorance. The Bible is very clear to me on this. God ‘draws” all men to Himself and not the other way around. You are very hateful and I don’t see any fruit in your ministry. You may want to work on that.
It is interesting to note that we teach that God indeed draws all people through the cross (John 12:32), not just the saved (as calvinists teach), and that there are many who are drawn yet refuse (by their free wills) to come. However, now here is a self-confessed calvinist actually saying that God draws all men to Himself, and that apparently we are at fault for teaching the other way around (whatever that might be?). But we teach clearly that God does draw all mankind! I fear, though, that this “calvinist” doesn’t know that calvinists are not supposed to believe this. The above writer is a calvinist who opposes calvinist theology because we teach it??? Calvinism says that all who are drawn must come in faith, so if all are drawn (as the above writer states), then will all mankind be saved?

7/. Why do calvinists teach that we must be born again (regenerated) by the Spirit to newness of life before we can believe in Christ if Christ is the only way to the Father (John 14:6)? How can we approach the Father before we approach Christ?

8/. Also, why did Jesus say that He had chosen the 12 disciples and one of them was a devil? If this choosing represents the unconditional election to life and heaven, then do calvinists really believe that devils go to heaven? Or perhaps that not all those chosen actually go to heaven?
John 6:70-71 – ⁷⁰Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? ⁷¹He spake of Judas Iscariot [the son] of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.
And if Jesus should not lose one of those given to Him (John 6:39), how did He lose Judas in John 17:12?

9/. Calvinists love to teach that we did not choose Christ but He chose us in order to bring forth much fruit.
John 15:16 – Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and [that] your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
So why did Jesus choose Judas as one of these who should bring forth much fruit?

10/. If God did not use His perfect foreknowledge to determine who would choose to be saved in the future, then why does the Bible clearly say that we are elect (chosen) according to the foreknowledge of God the Father (1 Peter 1:2) and that whom God foreknew He also predestinated to conform to the image of Christ (Romans 8:29)? Why do calvinists deny the clear biblical teaching that both the election and predestination are dependent upon God’s foreknowledge? Note that “foreknowledge” is the Greek word prognosis which a doctor gives as an assessment of your future health. It was used in this way by Hippocrates 2400 years ago and is still used the same way by doctors today. What else can it mean than God’s perfect knowledge of the future before it happens? Then the calvinists will say that foreknowledge is like God peering through the corridors of time into the future. What? Don’t they know that God is present at all points of time simultaneously? (Can they understand “simultaneously”?) God is in the future and the present and the past all at the same time, because He is the eternal I AM. So, calvinists, is your God not eternal, then?? (Read Point 4 of “The calvinist god cannot be eternal“)
Also try reading How does a calvinist know he has eternal life?

11/. Why do calvinists teach limited atonement (that Jesus only died for the sins of those chosen for heaven) when the Bible says His sacrifice was for the sins of the whole world?
1 John 2:1-2 – ¹My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: ²And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
Some calvinists teach that the whole world only means those who will be saved, yet it must be a larger group than the ones for whose sins Christ is a propitiation! ! “not for ours only, but also for….” Please study this carefully! If “the whole world” means only Christians, then who are that smaller group who have been promised an Advocate in 1 John 2:1?
Some say that “our sins” are the sins of Israel and that it was the recipients of this letter (Christian Jews) who are meant at first. Then only those Christian Jews could be promised an Advocate (1 John 2:1) and just 2 verses earlier in this letter only those Christian Jews could confess their sins and be forgiven? (1 John 1:9 – If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.) Can you explain this huge inconsistency?
Try reading When does the whole world mean only Christians? and 1 John 2:2

12/. If God’s will is that all men should be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-4 – ³For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; ⁴Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.) then why would He choose to save some and reject the rest, also by His will according to calvinists? Does the calvinist God have 2 wills? (Some teach that he does indeed have 2 wills, a will of desire and a will of command, or similar terms, although Calvin himself rejected this by saying that what God willed in a right way, man did in a wrong way!) Other calvinists illogically say that “all men” means only Christians! How can they believe such folly? Why do calvinists so often grossly misrepresent the truth of the Bible?
Try reading Does the calvinist God have a dual personality?

13/. If Israel were God’s elect nation (which indeed they were) then how can God then reject them for disobeying Him if the calvinists teach that such rebellion had to be by God’s decree? Did God choose them and then decree that they should rebel such that He would have to reject them? Truly the calvinist God vacillates between one idea and another! And if the calvinist election is explained by Israel’s election as a nation (Romans 9), then what is stopping the calvinist God from also decreeing that the elect today should sin and be rejected like Israel? Truly the calvinist election is untrustworthy indeed!
Of course, the Bible does teach an election of God’s people, a choosing which is recorded in the Book of Life written from the foundation of the world (Revelation 17:8) but it is not unconditional; instead it is an election conditional upon the foreknowledge of sovereign God who sees all things and knows all things from the beginning to the end (1 Peter 1:2; Romans 8:29).

14/. Why did Jesus cry on the cross to His Father to forgive them for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34) yet that good calvinist MacArthur says that Jesus didn’t die for the mob that screamed for His blood (sermon code 62-10)? So just who did Jesus pray forgiveness for? Or did Jesus somehow pray to forgive them but the Father didn’t agree? Calvinists, please explain why Jesus didn’t pray this for the mob that screamed for His blood?
Of course, MacArthur does strongly support the heresies of calvinism.
“Today Calvinism is being subjected to constant attack. Several recent, popular, published critiques have tried to discredit John Calvin the man, or they have unfairly blamed Calvinism for the dubious politics of the Reformation era. But the doctrines of Calvinistic soteriology must stand or fall by the test of Scripture, period.”
(John F. MacArthur Jr.; quoted from, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended and Documented; 2nd Edition: David Steele, Curtis Thomas, and Lance Quinn.)

15/. Why does MacArthur condemn freemasonry as a Satanic false religion yet praise the spiritual harvest of his great grandfather Thomas Fullerton who was a high-ranking freemason? In this link MacArthur even acknowledges the spiritual harvest as his inheritance!
How can a calvinist condemn satanism yet praise the spiritual outreach of his ancestor who by MacArthur’s own description worshipped a Satanic false religion?
For more information please read “Is MacArthur a Freemason”.

16/. If the Bible describes eternal life as a gift of God (Romans 6:23), then it cannot be imposed upon anyone but must be received by the person’s free will. Then why do calvinists teach that such a gift must be imposed upon people against their will? Note what MacArthur says (The Doctrine of God’s Effectual Call) that No one is ever saved without being willing. ….. There’s nothing in the sinner to make him willing.  …..  It is only when the power of God makes him willing that he becomes willing. …..No sinner has the capacity to be willing. ….. This is what we mean by “total depravity,” the utter inability of the sinner to be willing. ……. When the gospel comes, the sinner is so eager to respond. Either you are willing or else you are made to do it. If you are made to do it, then it is an imposition! How can this imposition of willingness be described as a gift? And how can you force someone to be willing? That’s an oxymoron!
Try reading MacArthur teaches works salvation

17/. Why do calvinists claim sola scriptura (the Bible alone) yet rarely if ever use the Bible to defend their heresies when directly challenged from the Bible?

18/. Calvinists love to use John 10:24-28 to “prove” that the sheep that Jesus died for are the elect of God, unconditionally chosen by Him from the foundation of the world. That is, if you are not one of those elect, you cannot be one of His sheep, and therefore the calvinist Jesus did not die for your sins. So, just how can calvinists say that it is only the elect who hear God’s voice and follow, yet Jesus came to His own (His elect sheep of Israel, obviously) and they didn’t receive Him!
John 1:11 – He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
Yet, aren’t these “His own”, of whom it says: All we like sheep have gone astray (Isaiah 53:6)? Obviously the calvinist god can dispose of his sheep even after declaring them his elect!?? How does this biblical truth apply to the calvinist?
Try reading Oh, the persistent inconsistencies of calvinists!

19/. And while we are looking at this topic, why do calvinists claim that the election of Israel as God’s nation somehow “proves” the unconditional election of the Church? For, if God could simply reject Israel after choosing her, then where does it guarantee the calvinist elect the right to be able to sin (as long as they confess, repent and are restored to fellowship) and still claim guaranteed entry into heaven. In fact, this is what Romans 9 is all about, the condemnation of Israel who thought that because they were God’s chosen people, then they were somehow above the condemnation of the law. They demanded mercy and God simply said that He, not them, would choose to whom He showed mercy. Jeremiah’s potter and the clay picture (Jeremiah 18) clearly explains what Paul is saying in Romans 9. So why do the calvinists ignore such connections? Is it because they, like Israel, think they can sin and still be guaranteed eternal life in heaven?? What arrogance is this!? So, how can Israel’s failed election as a nation prove the unconditional election of the calvinists?
Try reading Romans 9 condemns calvinism to rejection by sovereign God and Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

20/. Why do calvinists, when faced with a difficult question that they cannot answer, either claim that it is a mystery hid in the secret counsels of their god or else just refuse to answer? Why does it seem impossible for calvinists to give a straight honest answer when challenged on questions like the ones above. They claim to be so educated, so scholarly, yet cannot come up with simple answers to these simple questions! However, by their fruit they may be known! I have asked such questions (and more) in the past and have often challenged calvinists to take me on, but they seemingly refuse, probably because they just don’t have a clear biblical answer in the first place! Of course, there may be calvinists out there who believe they do know some of the “difficult” yet simple answers! If so, please feel free to comment on our Comments page. I will be fair and objective as long as the explanations are likewise fair and objective. Genuine scholarship should never be rejected without thorough analysis of points raised, as long as they are supported from the Bible, for that is our measuring stick, our sure foundation in the face of so much trivial comment in the world today.
Try reading Esoteric beliefs and mystery religion and Favourite calvinist defense tactics

21/.  I just received a comment (19th Aug 2019) informing me that I had a problem and that apparently 2 Corinthians 13:15 demonstrated that problem. This was a new one to me, that someone would now invent a verse to make their point, noting that this verse does not exist. Please read further on my Comments page. Is making up verses another calvinist heresy?

22/.  I was reminded recently of a calvinist who said he prayed for his daughter’s salvation every day for many years. As a calvinist, he also believes that the calvinist God unconditionally chose his elect in the beginning of time, and that no-one may change from one group to the other at any time after that. So what is the point of praying for anyone’s salvation? If his daughter is on the list to go to heaven, then nothing can stop her from going to heaven! And if she is not on that list, then no amount of prayer can ever change that. He could pray for her all his life and it would achieve nothing. According to calvinism, she’ll go where God has already determined to send her! In fact, why would calvinists bother with any prayer at all? If everything is already pre-ordained by God from the beginning, then prayer can not change one single thing! 

23/.  Some calvinists teach that their God uses the gospel to draw people to himself, yet they also teach that it is impossible for anyone to respond to their God in any way before they are regenerated (that is, born again). If all are dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1), then the gospel will fall on deaf (dead!) ears until after they have been born again. Calvinists have to teach that you must have eternal life before you can respond to the gospel of Christ. So why do some calvinists preach the gospel to unregenerate mankind? Why bother with the gospel if one must be born again with eternal life from above before being able to hear and respond to the gospel? Doesn’t this make the biblical gospel irrelevant for calvinists?
For further on this, please read How does a calvinist know he has eternal life?

24/.  In Romans 9:3, why does Paul wish that he could be accursed for the sake of his fellow Israelites? If they are lost (that is, non-elect) then Paul would have been giving away his eternal life for the sake of those who could never be saved! And if they were actually of the elect of God, then for what purpose would Paul be throwing his eternal life away if those Israelites were going to heaven anyway? Didn’t Paul know about the unconditional election?? Did the calvinist god forget to explain this to Paul?
Try reading Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

25/.  Boettner’s “The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination” is often quoted by calvinists to justify their heresies. (Why not the Bible, I would ask?) He teaches that if you aren’t a calvinist, then you must be an atheist. Some have declared – and rightly we believe – that there is no consistent middle ground between Calvinism and Atheism. (Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, P 244). Many calvinists also teach that God’s elect would believe in calvinism; therefore there is really no such thing as a Christian who opposes calvinism. Can calvinists please explain further?

26/.  A W Pink, another calvinist writer much quoted by calvinists today, says of the taking of Jericho in “The Life and Times of Joshua” (Studies in the Scriptures) that The forbidding of “the people” to open their mouths signified that the rank and file of Christians are to have no part in the oral proclamation of the truth―they are neither qualified for nor called to the ministration of the Word. Nowhere in the Epistles is there a single exhortation for the saints as such to engage in public evangelism, nor even to do “personal work” and seek to be “soul winners.”
Does this explain why so many calvinist pastors, like dictators, lay down the law and refuse to be questioned on it? If they teach it, then it must be so? The common masses are to not test all things? Only the leaders are to be able to rightly divide the word of truth? Please explain, calvinists!

27/.  If God’s will is the only free will in the universe (as calvinists love to teach), then calvinists must teach that God created / decreed / ordained sin. Calvin in “Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God” said: But the objection is not yet resolved, that if all things are done by the will of God, and men contrive nothing except by His will and ordination, then God is the author of all evils. (P 179) MacArthur wrote in “Vanishing Conscience & Hard to Believe”: Ultimately, we must concede that sin is something God meant to happen. He planned for it, ordained it – or, in the words of the Westminster Confession, He decreed it. (P 113) Piper says in “Does sin have a necessary place in God’s plan for the universe?”: God’s holiness is not the least compromised or impugned by the fact that God wills for unholy acts to take place. And the calvinist Gospel Coalition says in “Why did God allow the fall?”: A world with no fall and no salvation is altogether less God-glorifying than a world with a tragic fall but also a wondrous salvation.
So answer these questions please, calvinists. Did God really create sin / evil, or did man have free will to choose? Is sin a necessary part of God’s plan for the universe? Can holy God will that sin take place yet remain untouched by that sin? Was God’s glory incomplete without sin such that man had to sin and be saved in order for God to be fully glorified? And where in the Bible alone (sola scriptura) does it teach these calvinist beliefs?
Try reading Calvinists teach that their God is the only wilful sinner in the universe!

28/.  And here’s one that calvinists absolutely hate to be reminded of! Note these two Bible passages, both written by Paul.
Romans 9:21 – Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
2 Timothy 2:20-21 – ²⁰But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. ²¹If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, [and] prepared unto every good work.
They teach that Romans 9:21 proves that God foreordains some people to salvation, and the rest to condemnation. Then please explain, calvinists, why Paul says in 2 Timothy 2:20-21 that vessels of dishonour can be purged to become vessels of honour? It proves that calvinists ignore verses that don’t support them, doesn’t it! Or was it just the dishonourable Roman vessels who couldn’t be purged?
Try reading Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

29/.  Calvinists love to claim that they as their God’s elect are the recipients of the grace of their God. This is why they declare their religion to be the doctrines of grace. Then why does Paul teach that God’s grace has appeared to all men?
Titus 2:11 – For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men
Does this mean that all men are the elect of God? Come on, calvinists! Can you explain this from the Bible alone?

30/.  Calvinists teach that no-one is able to respond to the gospel until after they have been regenerated (born again). Only the calvinist elect may hear and respond! Non-elect will never be able to respond. (Unless you accept Calvin’s teaching of a temporary faith which he explained as an inferior operation of the Spirit – please see Question  31 below.) Then study the following verses carefully and answer the questions truthfully.
2 Corinthians 4:3-4 – ³But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: ⁴In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Can any calvinist give any rational reason how satan can blind the eyes of those chosen as the elect of the calvinist God? And why would satan blind the eyes of the non-elect if they can never respond to the gospel, if they can never be saved? Is satan so stupid that he can’t see that he’s wasting his time if calvinism is true? Is satan an irrelevancy in calvinist teaching? Or maybe Satan has converted to calvinism?
Try reading Calvinists born again before they are saved and How does a calvinist know he has eternal life?

31/.  Calvin taught (in his Institutes Book 3, Chapter 2, Section 11) that his God gave some a temporary faith which he described as “an inferior operation of the Spirit“. Such people could even think they were of the elect, and other elect people could believe they were saved. But they are not of the elect and never will be. Calvin says: Hence it is not strange, that by the Apostle a taste of heavenly gifts, and by Christ himself a temporary faith, is ascribed to them. But their sins are not forgiven and they will not be permitted to go to heaven. Their faith is only temporary! Can calvinists please explain where the Bible alone teaches any of this or else admit that Calvin was a hopeless liar who made up doctrines as it suited him?
Try reading The living-dead calvinist zombies – as taught by Calvin

32/.  Here’s an interesting question that calvinists avoid like the plague. How do you know you are going to heaven? They cannot say that they called upon the name of the Lord to be saved, because they say this is works and therefore not permitted. In fact the only evidence that a calvinist can have of assurance of heaven is that their works define them as puritans, therefore they are of the elect of their God. Ask a calvinist for his testimony and he can only say that he is one of the elect because his works demonstrate this to be so. He might say that he was regenerated (born again) by the Spirit. Then ask him when that happened. How long has he been one of his God’s elect? Did his God send him a letter? Or maybe a telegram or email or SMS? How does he know he is actually regenerated? His testimony is his works, nothing else! (And good works alone is insufficient evidence of a new life!) I can say that on a particular day in my life I called upon the name of the Lord to be saved; therefore I know I have eternal life, and I know I am going to heaven (1 John 5:12-13). Calvinists, how do you know you have eternal life, and how do you know you are going to heaven? For further on this, please read How does a calvinist know he has eternal life?

33/.  Calvinists claim the perseverance of the saints (that is, God’s elect people are guaranteed entry into heaven for eternity). This is the letter “P” in TULIP. But is there even one calvinist out there who is prepared to claim right now that he or she is guaranteed eternal life in heaven? What if you fall away before the end? Note that calvinism teaches that one must persevere to the end in order to enter heaven. If you fall away before the end, then you were never saved in the first place. This is what Calvin taught, that you could be given a temporary faith, an inferior operation of the Spirit (Institutes Bk 3, Ch.2, Section 11). Is any calvinist brave enough to guarantee that he will not (absolutely not) fall away before the end? John Piper admits the possibility of falling away! (https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/when-is-saving-repentance-impossible) If a calvinist falls away he was never saved in the first place; his God has given him a temporary faith! So how sure are you, calvinist, that you are one of your God’s elect? Can you prove it??

34/.  Calvinists teach that their God created/decreed/ordained sin and then blamed Adam for it. They all must agree that Adam could not have sinned of his own free will because that would have required free will and the calvinist God refuses to permit man to have any free will to choose between good and evil. Therefore, if Adam effectively had no free will to choose to obey God, then neither can his disobedience be considered an act of his free will against God! Adam is originally commanded not to disobey God by eating the forbidden fruit, yet it is the calvinist God’s will that Adam should sin by now eating that forbidden fruit. If Adam refuses to eat the fruit because God has previously forbidden it, then he becomes guilty of disobeying God’s command to now eat the fruit. On the other hand, if Adam now obeys God’s command to eat the forbidden fruit, then he is doomed by his disobedience to God’s original law that forbade him to do so. Poor Adam! He just can’t win! The deck is literally stacked against him! Calvinists, why is your God so vindictive? And where in the Bible does it teach this garbage? No-one has ever been able to answer this without depicting the calvinist God as a dictator who can’t take responsibility for his own mistakes.
Try reading Calvinists declare their God to be a liar! and Calvinists teach that their God is the only wilful sinner in the universe!

35/.  Calvinists teach that their God requires evil in order to be perfect, according to Jonathan Edwards whom Piper declares “to be the greatest religious thinker America has ever produced.” Edwards says that the calvinist God ordains evil for the perfecting of His glory. He says that evil is necessary for the highest happiness of man who is only truly happy when his perception of God is perfect, and that God can only be perfect when evil is present (so that He can reveal His wrath against sin!). Without sin and evil, God cannot be complete! (https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/is-god-less-glorious-because-he-ordained-that-evil-be) If this is America’s greatest religious thinker, then …..?? Following this logically as any thinker should do requires evil to be as eternally present as God is eternally present. That is, God cannot be God without evil! This therefore makes evil an attribute of the calvinist God. Calvinist, your God is evil, isn’t he?

36/.  Calvinists who teach limited atonement are clearly non-biblical (1 John 2:2). It is so absurd that some calvinists declare that they are 4-point calvinists; that is, they can’t accept limited atonement! However, why would the calvinist Jesus die for all people if he has only chosen a limited number for heaven? So, 4-point calvinists, do you realise that an unlimited atonement is ridiculous unless the election is likewise unlimited? Why die for all if only 1% are on the list for heaven? Isn’t that a waste of the calvinist Jesus’ payment? Why pay for all and then prevent most from using it? Isn’t it like buying a meal for 100 people yet only letting one of them actually eat? Don’t you realise that being a 4-point calvinist is stupid?
The Bible teaches that Jesus died for all the sins of all mankind for all time without exception. All are offered the gift of salvation, yet only those who accept by their own free wills may be saved. Free will to choose is biblical!

37/.  Calvinists often say that Jesus’ payment was sufficient for all, yet efficient for the few. But, isn’t it the height of absurdity to be able to pay for all yet refuse to do so simply because he didn’t want to? MacArthur says that “God did not intend to save everyone.  He is God.  He could have intended to save everyone.  He could have saved everyone.  He would have if that had been His intention.  The atonement is limited.” (The Doctrine of Actual Atonement,  Part 1) So, calvinists, if your God could have paid for all, then why didn’t he? Is he a cruel despot, a sadist, or was he just unable to raise the finances?

38/.  Calvinists, why does your God only choose some for heaven when you claim that he could have paid for the sins of all people. He created most of mankind unable to go to heaven, so he sends them to hell by the good pleasure of his sovereign will. Why does the calvinist God only love his elect, yet hate the rest of the world? How could anyone serve and worship the calvinist God for eternity, knowing that so many had gone to hell simply because he hated them too much to die for them?
Calvinist, would your God rather die than give you what you justly deserved? My God, the God of the Bible did, and not just for a chosen few; He died for all mankind!

39/.  Christians are supposed to love their enemies, yet the calvinist God can’t love his enemies. The calvinist God commands Christians to do this, yet disobeys his own commandment? How is it possible that mere man could out-love God? Can a man be more loving, more merciful than God? How does this agree with the Bible which says that God is love?

40/.  Because the calvinist God’s will is the only will in the universe, then all things are according to his will, even sin (as calvinist writers affirm). They say that it is for his glory, yet fail to understand that their God is the only one who can choose to sin by his own free will! Doesn’t this mean that in a calvinist world, the only one who must go to hell for his sins is the calvinist God? After all, isn’t he the only one responsible for all sin for all time? How can man without a free will to choose between good and evil be responsible for that which he was ordained (decreed; made) to do?

41/. I have a question or two for someone named Phil Johnson who put the following online (“Does Calvinism Make God the Author of Evil?“) in which he claims that God is not the author of sin nor is He the approver of sin. He says that “God is wholly sovereign and has decreed all things according to the sovereign counsel of his own will (Isaiah 46:9-10); yet He is not to blame for the evil His creatures do.“
Well, Phil, if the God who has decreed all things is not to blame, then who is? Or do you think sin is a random event like your unconditional election? (A choice without conditions = random selection!) Only a fool would declare sin a random event. And, if the calvinist God has decreed all things, then man is only doing what the calvinist God decreed that man should do. And if man should refuse the calvinist God’s decree to do evil and instead do good, is he then, by doing good, being disobedient and therefore evil??
Man cannot be held responsible for choosing evil if the calvinist God has decreed that he should commit evil! But Johnson, like a typical calvinist, quotes the Westminster Confession and Calvin to support his views; how is this compatible with the calvinist claim of sola scriptura (the Bible alone)? Are the Westminster Confession and Calvin’s writings more authoritative than the Bible? Is Phil saying that he cannot rely upon the Bible alone to support such heresy?
In fact, doesn’t calvinism make their God the author of evil? Calvin said “that if all things are done by the will of God, and men contrive nothing except by His will and ordination, then God is the author of all evils.” (“Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God”) Or maybe you can’t give a straight answer (sola scriptura!), Phil??

42/. Can calvinists please explain why free will is effectively any different from free agency? They say that man does not have a free will, yet remains a free agent. No free will means no choice. However, being a free agent means that God does not force man to choose something, but permits him to choose only that which the calvinist God has already chosen for him. That is, you may choose whatever you wish, as long as it is what the calvinist God has chosen for you. Calvinists, isn’t this just another case of verbal gymnastics? How is free will any different from free agency? Isn’t denying man’s free will yet permitting him to be a free agent just saying the same thing disguised as something different? Isn’t this a clear case of deception?
For further reading, try Free will Vs Free agency? What’s the difference??

43/. And here’s one for you, John MacArthur. You claim to be so biblical, yet you seemingly cannot understand simple biblical logic. You say in The Doctrine of God’s Effectual Call “when the call of God came on the life of the apostle Paul, it was a sovereign, divine, gracious, and irresistible summons.  He was slammed in to the dirt on the road to Damascus with nothing to do but respond.  He is called as an apostle.  …… Paul understood that he was just grabbed by the neck by God and awakened to the glory of Christ and saved and made an apostle.” Yet Paul says he was obedient: “I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision” (Acts 26:19). You say Paul had no choice other than to respond, but Paul says he was obedient (which requires a choice). Can you explain your logic in this matter? Why does Paul disagree with your highly emotive words (much of it invented because the Bible just does not say most of what you say it says here!). If you are so biblical, MacArthur, then will you defend it, or admit your folly by your silence?

44/. You know the saying: “The devil made me do it.” But calvinists, you believe that your God “from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass” so, logically, shouldn’t you be claiming that “God made me do it!”??

45/. Is the calvinist God double-minded? Is he unstable in all his ways? James 1:8 says that A double minded man [is] unstable in all his ways. So, if God desires that all men should be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) yet the calvinist God did not choose to save all men, then isn’t the calvinist God clearly double-minded according to the Bible? Thus the calvinist God is unstable in all his ways! Try and demonstrate otherwise from the Bible, calvinists! But you can’t, can you, calvinists, because your God is indeed double-minded, unstable, unjust, unloving, vindictive, unmerciful, ungracious ……. Doesn’t sound like the God of the Bible, does it?

46/. On the Internet calvinist Bryan Liftin says “But then why evangelize anyone if God’s decree is already fixed? The mistake is thinking that we evangelize in order to save people. That is incorrect. ….. The right reason to evangelize is to be obedient.” That’s right, folks, calvinists don’t preach the gospel in order to save people because their God has already chosen who’s going to heaven and who’s going to hell. Evangelising makes no difference at all! Can calvinists please explain why they bother to evangelise the lost when the only ones who can be saved will go to heaven without their preaching?

47/. Calvinists teach that man cannot seek after God,  quoting “there is none that seeketh after God.” (Romans 3:11). They ignore the correct interpretation which is that man has no desire to seek after God. They say that because man has no free will to choose to obey God, then it is impossible for man to seek after God.
Then how was it possible for people to choose by an act of their wills to not come to Jesus in Matthew 23:37 – O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I (thelo) have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would (thelo) not! where thelo means to will; intend; to purpose; desire; like to do a thing; be fond of doing; take delight in; have pleasure in. thelo is also used for “willingly” in 2 Peter 3:5a (For this they willingly are ignorant). Calvinists, please tell me how they can refuse to come by an act of their wills if they have no free will to respond to God in the first place?
Also, not seeking after God can mean either you cannot, or you will not, that is, either you are unable to do so, or you do not want to do so. Calvinists, can you prove sola scriptura that Romans 3:11 cannot mean “will not”?? If you can’t, then your whole doctrine of total inability goes out the window with the rest of the rubbish!

48/. Calvinists today teach that their God predestines his elect to eternal life, yet did not predestine the non-elect to eternal condemnation. They say that their God just passes over them and lets them go their own way; thus they choose to go to hell. But calvinists, are you so ignorant that you don’t know what Calvin clearly taught on this? He wrote “By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.” Note that the calvinist God chose what he wanted for “every man“! Calvinists, you don’t like such teaching because it makes your God to be a vindictive ogre, doesn’t it? But Calvin taught it, so stop arguing! And if your God just passes over the lost, then how can he be sovereign over them? So calvinists, do you agree with Calvin here, or are you calling Calvin a false teacher?

49/. A calvinist once told me that James White was an outstanding theologian and scholar. This is hard to believe, considering he has difficulty in understanding basic grammatical logic! White says  (of John 6:44): all who are drawn are also raised up – the Father draws, and the Son raises up those who are drawn. This assumes no free will, yet Question 47 above demonstrates otherwise. The Father draws all through Christ (John 12:32); none may come unless he is invited. However, not all those invited will come (see Matthew 22:1-14). Note well that John 6:44 doesn’t say that all who are drawn must come, but rather that all who come must have been drawn. If man has free will to resist (and he does), then all are drawn yet only those who accept such drawing will be raised up on the last day. Can calvinists please explain why they should listen to White’s grammatically illogical teachings? (Also see Question 6 above)

50/. Calvinists teach that man is unable to seek after God, quoting Romans 3:11. But Romans 3:11 does not say that man cannot come, but that he does not seek after God. (Can’t you read properly?) Jeremiah 29:13 says And ye shall seek me, and find [me], when ye shall search for me with all your heart. Why would God say this if He knew that man was unable to seek Him? Also see Question 47 above. Total depravity of man is true; total inability of man is a lie. Prove otherwise, calvinists, or else admit defeat by your silence. Remember, silence is the greatest complement that a calvinist can pay to those who oppose him!

So, is there any calvinist sure enough of his beliefs to argue them from the Bible alone? Remember, no comment means no opposition! Silence is always taken as agreement. If your calvinism is worth defending, then defend it. But no defense means nothing worth defending! Does your belief in calvinism dissipate like so much hot air in the face of any reasonable opposition?
So far the silence has been deafening, spurring me on to accuse more and more simply because no reason has been presented to me to not do so. By your silence you are hereby found guilty as charged! If I accuse and no-one defends, then I am free to accuse further. Calvinists, it is in your hands to defend or to acknowledge your guilt!

There are just so many questions calvinists cannot answer that it would be far quicker (and shorter, too) to list all the questions calvinists can answer!

Read Questions 1-10 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 1.
Read Questions 11-20 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 2.
Read Questions 21-30 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 3.
Read Questions 31-40 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 4.
Read Questions 41-50 at Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 5.
And if you haven’t read enough impossible calvinist questions, try Impossible Questions for Calvinists Part 6.

For further reading also please try the following:
Calvinisms
1/. The calvinist gospel in a nutshell.
2/. Calvinists teach universal salvation.
3/. Calvinists teach that God’s elect have eternal life before they can come to Christ to receive eternal life.
4/. The calvinist god cannot be eternal.
5/. Calvinist salvation is not a gift of God.
6/. Calvinists teach that if we willingly receive this gift of salvation, then that makes the gift imperfect.
7/. The calvinist unconditional election is really a conditional election.
8/. Calvinism does not teach assurance of salvation.
9/. The calvinist god is a dictator.
10/. The calvinist god is the only willful sinner in the universe.

The Oxymorons of Calvinist Doctrine
Oxymoron No.1 – God created sin and then punished Adam for it!
Oxymoron No.2 – Merciful, loving and gracious God predestined most of mankind to go to hell without any other option!
Oxymoron No.3 – Calvinism is the gospel!
Oxymoron No.4 – Be born again before you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ!
Oxymoron No.5 – Evangelize the world without the gospel?
Oxymoron No.6 – Calvinists claim to be Christians yet are not saved by Christ.
Oxymoron No.7 – The calvinists cry “Christ Alone”, yet leave Him out of the picture until after a person is “saved”.
Oxymoron No.8 – The calvinists cry “The Bible Alone”, yet ignore its truths in favour of Calvin’s teachings.
Oxymoron No.9 – The calvinists cry “Faith Alone”, yet faith is not part of their salvation until after they have been born again.
Oxymoron No.10 – God chose Israel as His special nation, and then ordained that it sin and be rejected.

And here’s another post to check out with a lot of good reading about the bad logic of calvinism and the god they serve.
Try When Calvinism’s “Bad Logic” Traps Good Christians
The author of this post speaks from first-hand experience in defining the evil deception in the calvinism that caused her to leave her church of many years. Why does calvinism (which proclaims the loving goodness of their allegedly sovereign god) cause so much division and heart-ache?? It’s those who have escaped this vile deception who can speak most authoritatively about it. But, be prepared for a long read! Calvinism has so much deception that it just cannot be dealt with in a few sentences!

*************************************

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

Romans 9 condemns calvinism to rejection by sovereign God

Romans 9 is all about Israel! The context cannot be denied at all. In fact, calvinists clearly acknowledge this by claiming the same election as Israel had in being chosen as God’s special covenanted nation. Romans 9:11-13 clearly states that God’s choice of Israel was entirely His, not being based in any way upon the good and evil as yet uncommitted by Jacob and Esau. Thus the election of God’s nation here is unconditional. Jacob was chosen because God loved Jacob more than Esau. (“hated” in Vs 13  – miseo – is a comparative term meaning to have been loved less than the other one.)

But this is the part which calvinists try to avoid having to notice: that this whole passage is about Israel who, after being chosen by God as His covenanted people, rebelled against God, causing God to reject them (for a season) as His covenanted people. Earlier in Romans Paul has stated clearly that just being physical descendants of Abraham did not make them God’s spiritual children. In fact, Paul declared that just being a physical Jew didn’t qualify them as God’s children; the Jew was a spiritual being. Physical circumcision did not make them God’s people; spiritual circumcision did make them children of God.
Romans 2:28-29 – ²⁸For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: ²⁹But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.

In Romans 4, Paul enlarges upon this spiritual circumcision by teaching that all who are spiritually circumcised (by faith) are the children of Abraham.
Romans 4:11 – And he (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
This includes all who believe, Jew or Gentile, for there is no difference (Romans 10:12) as long as they all believe by faith which is then accounted to them for righteousness (Romans 4:5).

This sets the scene for Romans 9. The Jews (Israel) considered themselves to be privileged above all other nations. They despised the Gentiles for not being God’s people. Through Abraham, Israel was God’s covenanted people. God had committed Himself to His people Israel, and therefore they thought they could do whatever they wished, make whatever rules they liked, for they believed that their God would not ever, could never, turn against the covenant He had made with Abraham who they considered as their father. And yet Paul is declaring them rejected by the God they thought could never reject them! Paul is alluding to their lack of spiritual circumcision when he says For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel: (Romans 9:6) & especially noting They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. (Romans 9:8).  

Paul acknowledges that Israel was indeed the nation chosen unconditionally by God (Romans 9:11-13) but then continues on to condemn Israel for daring to presume upon God’s covenant to demand that He carry out His side of the covenant He made with Abraham. They thought that because they were of Abraham, they could never be rejected by God. They were using the Abrahamic covenant to try to force God to agree to their special conditions they had attached to this covenant, the teaching of man’s commandments as the doctrines of God (Matthew 15:9). In particular, this applied to their religious leaders of that day, the pharisees.

They demanded that their God show them mercy, that He continue to grant them all the privileges of being the children of Abraham. As long as they carried out all the appearances of the law, they demanded that their God acknowledge their duty to Him. They demanded (by their arrogant attitude) that God continue to show them mercy (and thus they would continue to be God’s special elect nation forever as they claimed He had promised to them). That is, they would serve their God if he delivered the goods! They demanded the right to tell God what He could and couldn’t do.

But Paul in his usual style cuts them down to size by stating the plain out-in-the-open truth: that God cannot be forced to show them mercy if they reject His truth. They cannot demand mercy; they have no right to demand mercy! It is God alone who determines to whom He will reveal His mercy, and not even the status of being chosen long ago as God’s people can overrule this! They demanded that God be righteous in showing mercy to His chosen nation of Israel. But Paul says that even if God refuses mercy to Israel, He cannot be accused of unrighteousness. What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid. (Romans 9:14) It is God alone who determines who He will be merciful to. Israel cannot demand God’s mercy. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. (Romans 9:15)

Paul then compares Israel with Pharaoh who had decided to greatly oppose God. God then chooses to harden Pharaoh’s heart (literally, in the O.T., to reinforce the position in which Pharaoh had placed himself). From this point onward, Pharaoh was not permitted to change the course of action he had embarked upon. This is the same meaning of the word “hardeneth” in Romans 9:18: skleruno which means to lose its flexibility for change, hence our word “sclerosis”. And if God desires to do this, then who may resist His will here (Romans 9:19). No-one has any right to complain or argue, for the final decision is God’s. Israel has chosen by her free will to rebel, causing God to decide to act in this way. Who may stand before God in judgment and tell Him not to do His will there?

Then Paul (Romans 9:20-23) reminds them of Jeremiah’s message about the Potter and the clay.
Jeremiah 18:6-10 – ⁶O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay [is] in the potter’s hand, so [are] ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. ⁷[At what] instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy [it]; ¹⁰If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. ⁹And [at what] instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant [it]; ¹⁰If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.

God is simply doing what he promised Israel that He would do if they dared presume upon being the chosen people of God and therefore above His law! He would judge them as unfit for His service and reject them as the Potter rejected the clay in Jeremiah. God would show His mercy to those who cried out to Him for mercy as did the publican – or tax collector (Luke 18:9-14), and withhold His mercy from those (such as the pharisees) who demanded His mercy because of their exalted “chosen people” status. Those of Israel who were like the publican in Luke 18 (vessels of mercy – Romans 9:23) would be shown mercy, while those who demanded mercy as their right (vessels of wrath fitted to destruction – Romans 9:22) would be denied it. As in the final judgment, God’s decision is final and none may oppose it. Those who choose to call upon the name of the Lord will be saved (Romans 10:13) and will be shown everlasting mercy, while those who demand to be saved by their position of rank will be denied mercy and judged as fit only for eternal condemnation.

Even then, God would show mercy to those who repented and were purged of their evil. Those vessels of dishonour (Romans 9:21) could become vessels of honour if only they could be purged of their iniquity (2 Timothy 2:20-21). Why do calvinists ignore God’s word here?

And the calvinists love to claim this passage as one of their definitive proofs of their unconditional election??!! What foolishness is this? If this is a picture of their election, then their God will reject them as the God of the Bible rejected most of Israel. How can the calvinists explain this, except to deny that what happened to Israel could ever happen to them. Yet, the moment they take on the election of Israel as a nation as a picture of their own election, then they must accept that their rebelliousness could likewise condemn them to being declared vessels of wrath fitted to destruction.

The calvinism of today is aggressive, arrogant, forceful, in-your-face (like the attitude of the pharisees), often termed “new calvinism” as opposed to the old calvinism of previous generations. New calvinism (which includes names such as Piper, MacArthur, Sproul, Mohler) is a seemingly more evangelical version of the not very evangelical old calvinism of such as Presbyterians. The heresy of new calvinism appeals to the more evangelical denominations such as Baptists.

New calvinism is actually a hybrid doctrine combining both calvinism and elements of seventh day adventism (SDAs). (See the Seventh Day Adventist connection to New Calvinism.) New calvinism is sometimes known by an earlier name of Sonship Theology which claims that there is no sin that one of God’s elect can commit that can ever prevent that person from going to heaven. No matter what sin you commit, if you are one of the calvinist God’s elect, then he will grant you grace for repentance and restoration, thus demonstrating your status as one of his children. The lack of restoration to the church is what defines the non-elect, for the calvinist God’s elect will always be restored to fellowship no matter how serious the sin. God’s sons (children) can never lose their salvation no matter the sin; thus “Sonship” Theology. It has emerged in some areas as sinless perfectionism, a license to sin and still go to heaven, an incapability to ever be anything but holy even in sin.

New calvinists, like Israel of Paul’s day, arrogantly demand of their God that he stick to his side of the agreement: his “promise” or “covenant” that all his elect will go to heaven; they cannot miss out on heaven, ever. Thus, if new calvinists are genuinely the elect of God, they can literally make the rules of man conform to the doctrines of God (as per the pharisees of Matthew 15:9). Those who cannot repent and be restored after sin are not God’s elect for the calvinist God only restores his own. The restoration to fellowship is your ticket to new calvinist heaven!

Romans 9, in condemning God’s elect nation of Israel to the part-blindness of Romans 11, also equally condemns all who would choose the same pathway as rebellious Israel.
Romans 11:7-8 – ⁷What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded ⁸(According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.

If the calvinist election is proven by Romans 9, then we may rewrite Romans 11:7-9 as ⁷What then? Calvinism hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded ⁸(According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.

I defy all calvinists who claim Romans 9 as definitive proof of the election of God’s people to demonstrate clearly to me just where the Bible opposes my teachings here. In order to claim Romans 9 as a foundational passage in support of calvinism, they must (from sola scriptura – the Bible alone) demonstrate that it is not discussing the condemnation of Israel as God’s elect, yet rejected, nation of Israel. If you disagree, then where’s your biblical teaching that refutes? Silence will always be taken as an inability to satisfactorily refute my teachings. But, I think I’ll be waiting a long time; I have waited a long time already for such biblical refuting and not seen one clear statement of such yet!

For further reading try this link Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

Of course, calvinists do not like the truth to be revealed about their doctrine of demons – see Calvinisms.

Other calvinist favourite yet misleading passages include John 6:44 and John 3:3.

Calvinism is incompatible with biblical doctrine, and its gospel is incompatible with the biblical gospel.

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

Calvinist heresy using John 3:3

John 3:3 – Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Calvinists have many times informed me that John 3:3 clearly teaches that one must be born again before one may have faith in Christ (or equivalent wording). So let’s put the calvinists to the test (according to 1 Thessalonians 5:21) to see if their teachings are biblical or not. After all, they claim sola scriptura (the Bible alone). If this is true, then they should be, of all people, outstandingly biblically correct. However, if they can be shown to be deceptive or non-scriptural, then they must be deemed to be opposed to sola scriptura (the Bible alone). On this test they will stand or fall today!

Here are some comments from calvinists defining how they interpret the order of being born again and believing in Christ. (Note that Boettner changes “born again” to “saved”. Biblical Christians recognise that being saved also describes being born again, that they are equivalent terms, while most calvinists tend to separate being born again from being saved, with the order as (a) being born again, then (b) believing in Christ, then (c) being saved. Some will therefore rewrite “being saved” as “being justified” but nonetheless calvinist doctrine requires that they teach that a man must be born again before he is able to believe in or have faith in Christ.)

John 3: 3. (man must be born again first before he can repent and believe.) In this super clear verse our Lord and saviour himself tells Nicodemus that he cannot even see the kingdom of God unless he is born again first, surely that puts to rest that regeneration must take place first and foremost. (email from calvinist 18/01/17)

Further, Christ places regeneration by the Spirit as a requirement before one can “see,” i.e., believe or have faith in the Kingdom of God. He states quite emphatically that a sinner who is born of the flesh cannot believe the good news of the Kingdom until he is born by the Spirit. Thus according to the teaching of Christ, we believe because we are “born again.” We are not “born again” because we believe! (Studies in the Atonement (Robert Morey) Chapter 8)

Boettner who is often quoted by calvinists says: A man is not saved because he believes in Christ; he believes in Christ because he is saved. …… And in accordance with this, Augustine says that “The elect of God are chosen by Him to be His children, in order that they might be made to believe, not because He foresaw that they would believe.”
(The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, Page 75)

So if these calvinists are biblically correct, then their teaching will be consistent throughout the Bible, not just in this isolated verse. Therefore, are there verses which clearly state their teaching without any rewording or explanations? I can think of none at all. In fact, it is clear to me that their interpretation of John 3:3 is faulty to begin with, for they have had to reword the verse before it may support their teachings. If this is so, then their interpretation will be inconsistent with the rest of biblical truth. And, with scriptural teachings, any inconsistency always shows a lie to be present somewhere. Only the truth is consistent across all verses and passages.

Let’s look at 2 Corinthians 5:7 – For we walk by faith, not by sight: While calvinists claim that in John 3:3 “believing or having faith in” is the equivalent of “seeing”, it does appear as if 2 Corinthians 5:7 states that they are opposing terms, that the one denies the other. If it can be shown that “faith” and “sight” in 2 Corinthians 5:7 are equivalent to “believe or have faith in” and “see”, then it would be impossible for “see” in John 3:3 to be reworded as “believe or have faith in”.

The real test is to look at the original wording in the Greek.

Except a man be born again, he cannot see (eido) the kingdom of God. (John 3:3)

For we walk by faith (pistis), not by sight (eidos): (2 Corinthians 5:7)

If “see” in John 3:3 is changed to “believe or have faith in”, then we get
Except a man be born again, he cannot believe or have faith in (pisteuo) the kingdom of God.

pisteuo (believe or have faith in) is the verb form (Strongs 4100) derived from the noun pistis (faith) (Strongs 4102).

eidos (sight) is the noun form (Strongs 1491) derived from the verb eido (see) (Strongs 1492)

It can be seen clearly that pisteuo (believe or have faith in) cannot replace eido (see) because 2 Corinthians 5:7 (which uses the same terms but merely changing each from verb to noun form) actually says that the two terms are opposed to each other. We may either walk by faith or by sight; we cannot do both at the same time. Therefore it is not permissible to exchange “see” (eido) with “believe or have faith in” (pisteuo) in John 3:3. No genuine scholar of Greek could teach such nonsense.

Therefore, anyone who claims that “see” must mean “believe or have faith in” in John 3:3 is either incompetent to the nth degree, or else deliberately lying in order to deceive the very elect of God. Thus calvinists who use John 3:3 to teach that one must be born again before one may believe or have faith in Christ are in great need of someone to teach them the truth. Unfortunately, most of the calvinists who teach their heresy of belief after regeneration (= being born again) will just continue to listen to the lies of their incompetent or lying teachers, and like blind leading the blind, all will fall into the ditch!  

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

Typical calvinist behaviour

For about 5 weeks since the last cowardly hacks occurred on my website, I haven’t put anything new online. Logically I blamed militant calvinists for their use of abusive websites to attack my website; in particular, this includes some that I identified as scam and adult content websites. After all, who else had any incentive to attempt to crash my site? And after my last post accusing those militant calvinists of such, things went very quiet, in fact, much quieter than they have been for quite a while.

However, just 2 days ago I reviewed and re-presented my Calvinisms post of 2 months ago. You see, it was not long after it was first posted that our website was hit with hundreds of attacks spanning a week or more. They didn’t succeed and I went on to post that this could only be seen as militant calvinists who couldn’t defend their heresies any other way. As I said then, violence is the last resort (or refuge) of the incompetent. It’s obvious now that calvinists are taking out their anger on the website because they have no logical means by which they may refute its claims about their lies. And the efforts to attack have increased over 24 hours later, clear evidence of their impotent rage. Biblical people would use the Bible to make their case, but not these incompetents; the violence indeed proves these fools to be more and more incompetent as time goes by! The more they give in to their anger, the more they prove their teachings to be a lie! Even if they crash this site, it will still only prove their incompetence further; and the more encouragement to me to continue to write about their heresies. With every attack they are effectively admitting that they have lost! To God be the glory, great things He hath done!

In the past some calvinists have tried to present their case in Comments on our website, but in spite of accusing me of lack of discernment, misrepresentation, being a problem, not understanding, and so on, not one single one has ever stated exactly what it is that demonstrates my alleged lack of discernment or misrepresentation, or lack of scriptural understanding etc. And without such documentation, every one of their comments can be relegated to the bin as merely nothing more than unqualified opinions. I have, however, printed any genuine comment (including the latest confused opinions of a calvinist), even when I’ve totally disagreed with their statements. (And added my replies to each, of course – that is my right, it being my website, not theirs!)

But, some might have said that it wasn’t necessarily calvinists trying to crash the site. However, as a qualified statistician, I search for patterns in the behaviour of others around me. (It’s what statisticians do: look for patterns in an otherwise random world!) And so, 2 days before first publishing this post, I re-presented my Calvinisms post to see what would happen. The next day a comment came in telling me (unsurprisingly) that I lacked discernment and that I was misrepresenting people. (It seems to be the standard reply for calvinists who cannot otherwise work out how to oppose me!) And, as is common to calvinist opposition, no supporting evidence was presented to back up such claims, leading to me state that he was merely offering unqualified opinions and that as such I could not take him seriously. I also noted that he seemed, like other calvinists, to dislike using the Bible to support any of his claims. (This may be read on our Comments page dated 16^th May 2019. I also intend writing a post on this comment soon, in order to demonstrate the ineffectiveness of calvinist defences.)

Then, after putting what I would term a cutting reply to his uneducated comment, the site was once more attacked by IP addresses that have generally been already reported many times for their abusive activity in the past. That there is a pattern to all these events has been made much clearer by the events of the past 2 days. The most logical conclusion by far is that these responses have been triggered by my opposition to calvinist heresy. After all, given the patterns observed, it has to be people who are upset by what I am writing (and that really is only calvinists!) or else those involved against this website must be raving lunatics without any logical reasoning behind anything they do. And, if calvinists are behind this, then why not argue their case using the Bible alone (remember how the calvinists love to claim “sola scriptura” – the Bible alone?). I have often challenged those who disagree with me to present a logical statement in their defence “sola scriptura” but not one has seriously attempted using the Bible as their defence. Not one! It does seem as if calvinists do not like sola scriptura!

It is interesting to note that the Calvinisms document was posted not long before each of the last 2 efforts to hack into the website. Therefore there must be something about this document that the calvinists hate. And, yes, it does expose as lies 10 of their cherished teachings, such as (a) the calvinist God has chosen from the beginning who will go to heaven; the rest will go to hell without any option to want to go to heaven, and no-one may choose which list he is on, ever, (b) calvinism teaches universalist salvation, (c) the calvinist God cannot be eternal, (d) calvinism does not teach any assurance of salvation for their elect, (e) the calvinist God is a dictator, and (f) the calvinist God is the only wilful sinner in the universe. If anyone disagrees with anything I’ve written on this post, then feel free to comment (using the Bible alone as your defence, of course).

Finally, I’ll note that, like all cults, if they cannot convince you of their heresies, then their ultimate reaction to your opposition is to give you the silent treatment. Like the Jehovah Witnesses who door-knock all the other houses in our street but don’t come to our door now because we tend to say things that their masters haven’t taught them how to answer. Instead they drop a pamphlet in our letterbox and go away as quickly as they can before we catch them. Calvinists do exactly the same. If they cannot confuse you with their mis-use of biblical terminology, or bully you because they’ve been to Bible school or are more spiritual than you, if they cannot convince you by quoting their calvinist heroes such as MacArthur, Sproul, Pink, Edwards, Piper, etc (they tend to not know much about what Calvin taught, though), if they cannot get away with declaring their inconsistencies as mysteries hid within the secret counsels of God, then they’ll give you the final treatment: they’ll not talk about it with you again. That is, they will give you the silent treatment. In actual fact, this is really because they have realised that they cannot defeat you using any of the deceptive means at their disposal.  And, like all cults, from this time on they will avoid you after that because they would be embarrassed by your knowledge and understanding if they continued any further. Their masters haven’t taught them how to answer such truths!

Calvinists will give the silent treatment to anyone whom they cannot overcome in debate of any shape or form. The silent treatment is actually their admission of defeat, a defeat that calvinists never want to have to admit. But if you demand that all their defence be from the Bible alone (sola scriptura) then this cramps their style, especially if you know the Bible well enough to debate their heresies from the Bible alone. They then fear that you might show them up in front of others so, like the cowards that all bullies are, they then just turn away and avoid having to demonstrate their lack of biblical understanding in front of others whom they might be trying to surreptitiously convert to calvinism.

So, if you have been avoided by calvinists, if they have refused to discuss serious biblical matters with you, if they have given you the silent treatment, then you may know that you have won; they have been unable to refute your statements. The silent treatment is clearly reserved for those whom they know they can never convert to their heresies. If you are given the silent treatment and you see these people trying to discuss serious matters with younger or more impressionable Christians, then join the conversation, find out what is being discussed, and give the younger Christian some moral support to stand up to these bullies. Calvinists love to work on individuals; like all bullies they do not like effective opposition, and individuals or small groups are best for such bullying. Most of all they hate interfering Christians who know their Bible well who might show the calvinists up for the deceiving liars that they are. Test all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

Beware of calvinists trying to find common ground

(And the next morning after posting this, another swathe of hit-run lockouts because once again they’ve tried hacking my login page. But we’ll just continue to proclaim the truth about calvinism while we can. Clearly some people (particularly calvinists) do not appreciate my expose of calvinism, and just as clearly I’ve hit some raw nerve of truth in their lies. If they were right, of course, I’d expect some quality Bible study to demonstrate my errors, but no, that appears to be out of their reach. These calvinists do not acknowledge sola scriptura – the Bible alone. So they resort to violence, the last refuge of the incompetent. May God open your eyes to His truth before it’s too late.)

My documentation says that a website alleged to be a scam and adult content business is involved in a number of these lockouts. If this is true (and it does appear to be so), then it certainly puts an interesting label on the alleged calvinist opposition that appears to be harassing our website. If calvinists are behind this lockout harassment, then they should know that this would identify them as anti-Christian, opposed to all biblical principles. No genuine Christian would ever stoop so low! They are welcome to comment on this using the proper channels of communication as presented on this website. And we praise God that we are considered worthy of the enemy’s opposition. To God alone be the glory!

Reading the Bible alone doesn’t produce calvinists. Calvin was probably the only calvinist who ever became a calvinist by reading the Bible, and yet even he acknowledges that it was Augustine’s teachings that greatly influenced his thinking. Calvinism is a false teaching that does not come naturally from the Bible; instead the Bible has to be interpreted according to Calvin’s (and Augustine’s) teachings before calvinism can be understood. It is an esoteric knowledge system, where those who are initiated into the belief system may understand things that the uninitiated cannot understand. And, those who are more qualified in the belief system may have the greater knowledge of the system. In this it is the same as freemasonry and kabbalah.

I have been told by one calvinist that your argument there does not stack up because you have misunderstood the theology of Calvinisim. So I need to understand calvinism before I can fully understand the Bible? I need to understand calvinist theology to be fully discerning? This in itself proves calvinism to be a lie! (For some of calvinism’s blatant heresies, see “Calvinisms”.)

Calvinism is not biblical; it actually denies much biblical truth including the most important biblical truth – the gospel of salvation for all mankind through freewill acceptance of the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ. But the calvinist gospel won’t accept any freewill decision to accept God’s gift of salvation by faith. The calvinist gospel is quite different: the calvinist God has either chosen you for heaven or for hell, and you have absolutely no choice in the matter; end of story! That might be good for those chosen for heaven, but the calvinist God has chosen to send most of mankind to hell simply because he didn’t intend saving any of them.

As MacArthur says in “The Doctrine of Actual Atonement Part 1”: God did not intend to save everyone. He is God. He could have intended to save everyone. He could have saved everyone. He would have if that had been His intention. The atonement is limited. There you are folks. The calvinist God didn’t want to save everyone! Even though the God of the Bible says For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:3-4) It’s funny how God wants all to be saved, yet according to calvinism God doesn’t intend saving most of them!

However, if calvinists taught their doctrines openly and honestly, on-the-ball evangelical Christians would never accept them as fellow-Christians. I mean, when’s the last time you heard a calvinist evangelist preaching to the lost and saying, “God did not intend saving most of you here. Jesus died for some of you and you are going to heaven anyway; the calvinist God will not take “No!” for an answer. The rest of you are going to hell. Your sins were never paid for! The calvinist God couldn’t save you even if he wanted to!”

Calvinists have a doctrine that is alien to the Bible, one that denies God’s salvation to the vast majority of mankind. And the calvinist God also does not offer any gift of salvation to anyone. He forces it upon a small number of people, and never made any such gift available for anyone else. (See “Calvinisms” for further information, plus many other documents on this website.)

If the calvinist taught the whole truth of calvinism, it would come across as heresy much like JW teachings are dismissed by Christians as unbiblical. For, like the JWs with the Watchtower Society, calvinists have a false doctrine that can only be explained satisfactorily by using Calvin’s teachings as a guide. All the cults have extra-biblical “revelations” that “explain” the “truths” of their heresies. The SDAs have the teachings of Ellen White, the Mormons have the writings of Joseph Smith, the JWs have their Watchtower Society, the Catholics have Augustine, and the calvinists have Calvin’s Institutes (which are based upon Augustine’s teachings anyway).

So why do so many Christians accept calvinism as an acceptable yet opposing way of believing biblical doctrines? It’s because calvinists will never start by telling you the whole truth concerning their false doctrines. Like tares among the wheat, they desire to be accepted by the Christians in the churches they infiltrate. And like tares they will tell you just enough for you to think they are Christians just like you. Like tares they will research the doctrines you hold strongly to and seek to find common ground upon which both you and they will agree. This is basic activity for tares, to find the common ground upon which you both agree, and then to use that common ground to stretch it a bit further and further toward eventual full agreement with their doctrines.

Tares are satan’s followers who infiltrate the church to destroy it from within. They are most effective when the church thinks they are genuine Christians. They will always build common ground of agreement and then seek to extend that common ground, always toward their heresies. Bit by bit, the common ground grows, and only the discerning Christian who tests all things has a hope of standing firm on scriptural high ground.
Ephesians 6:13 – Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
The only way to recognise tares is by their fruit. They can say what they want, but what they do will eventually reveal them. (See Matthew 13: 24-30 and 36-43)

Of course, not all who believe in calvinist doctrine are necessarily tares among the wheat. Many Christians hold the truth in high regard and merely need to test all things (as per 1 Thessalonians 5:21 – Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.) in order to sift out the lies from the truth. Genuine Christians should use biblical truth to assess their beliefs.
It is those who do not hold fast to that which is true that are likely to be the tares. Such people are likely to see non-calvinists as lesser Christians, or even lost. They see those non-calvinist believers as a mission field, seeking to convert them to calvinist heresies. These calvinists see themselves as the only on-the-ball Christians around. This includes such as Al Mohler who says If you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going end up basically being Reformed, basically something like this new Calvinism. https://www.newcalvinist.com/albert-mohler-and-hip-hop-culture/ That is, according to Mohler, only calvinists are fully right! But, if calvinism is a doctrine of devils, then Al Mohler is a tare among the wheat.

Jesus taught that these tares (sons of the wicked one) would be planted in the church among the Christians, and that they would often be hard to pick out from the real Christians. And because tares will be trying hard to look like real Christians, they are hard to recognise. (Like good spies, good tares can deceive many Christians!) Satan wants his tares to destroy the church, and to do this they need to be accepted as real Christians. They also try to work toward leadership responsibilities because that is how they will destroy the church: by leading the gullible Christians to destruction. Tares may often be found in positions of leadership in the church.

So briefly, a tare is a false teacher who has to look like he is a genuine real-deal Christian (or else he’ll be caught out). He will appear to teach good doctrine while really encouraging false doctrine. He will seek to establish common ground for agreement in order to build upon and extend that common ground with Christians into heresy. For example, the calvinist aggressively pushes the doctrine of the election of God’s people. Now the election (the choosing) is biblical, but once they have established that Christians should believe in the election, they will then tell you that the election is unconditional, which is the false extension of this teaching. God does choose an election; 1 Peter 1:2a says we are Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father but note that it is through the use of God’s foreknowledge (God’s perfect knowledge of the future). God offers salvation as a gift, and those who accept this gift by faith are foreknown by God who then puts them on His list of chosen ones (His elect ones).

The calvinist election lie is that God chooses his elect ones without foreknowledge, that God just selects a few for heaven and the rest for hell unconditionally. That is, there’s nothing you can do to change God’s choosing in any way. The Bible teaches an election conditional upon God’s foreknowledge of your choice; calvinists teach an election unconditional upon any decision you can ever make. The common ground is the election; the extra calvinist lie added on is that God does not use foreknowledge to determine your election.

Why do calvinists claim that calvinism is the gospel, yet preach the biblical gospel to the lost. Why don’t they preach the actual truth of calvinism to the lost until after they are saved? Calvinism teaches that you cannot respond to the gospel until after you are born again with new life by the Spirit (they call it “regenerated”). So why bother being saved if you already have eternal life before you can respond to the gospel and be saved? Why do calvinists hide from non-calvinists their teaching that the calvinist God decreed sin? Why are calvinists reluctant to admit that if their God’s will is the only will in the universe (and that man has no free will to choose good or evil), then their God has to have (ordained / created / decreed) all (evil / sin).

As MacArthur teaches (in his book The Vanishing Conscience)
Page 112 – Scripture clearly teaches that God is utterly sovereign over all things. Or, as the Westminster Confession says, “God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy Counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass.” (Chap.3 Sec 1)
Page 113 – Ultimately, we must concede that sin is something God meant to happen. He planned for it, ordained it – or, in the words of the Westminster Confession, He decreed it. (Emphasis MacArthur’s)

You see, if calvinism is right, then man has been created incapable of choosing between good and evil. Man can not be permitted to have a will that may oppose the calvinist God’s will at any time. Therefore if sin exists, then the calvinist God must have created it. Calvinism cannot deny that this is their clear teaching. Therefore they are forced to teach that the calvinist God created sin in order to increase his glory, and that without sin God’s glory would have been less God-glorifying!
A world with no fall and no salvation is altogether less God-glorifying than a world with a tragic fall but also a wondrous salvation.
(https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/why-did-god-allow-the-fall/)

When is the last time you heard a calvinist teach the blasphemy that God created sin for His glory? And yet they have to either tell lies to deny this, or preferably just not mention it and hope you don’t ask awkward questions. And, if all mankind has been chosen for either heaven or hell before the beginning of the world, then what is the point of claiming to be so evangelical when their teaching is that no amount of evangelism can ever change the end-result? How often do you hear calvinists claim to be the most evangelical of all Christians, preaching the gospel to all mankind? And yet, if they are to be truthful, they must admit that they cannot preach to the lost that Jesus loves them when the calvinist Jesus probably didn’t die for any of their sins. As MacArthur says (in The Sacrifice that Satisfied): Jesus didn’t pay for the sins of the mob that screamed for His blood.
So the calvinist Jesus didn’t die for the sins of those whom He asked the Father to forgive for they knew not what they did? Clearly the calvinist Jesus didn’t think it was his responsibility to be the means of their forgiveness. Sounds like the calvinist Jesus and the calvinist Father are not in agreement with each other!

If a calvinist tries to convince you of his doctrines, he will often commence by establishing common ground. Beware of calvinists who say that we agree in some areas, or have some common ground for agreement. They are softening you up for the kill! Any common ground established will then be used to build lies upon. The common ground will be truth to which lies are added. It’s often difficult to deny the lie when it has some measure of truth in it, and the calvinist, like all cult-believers such as JWs, will know this well. Never be tempted to believe something because it has some measure of truth. Sift out the lies first. This requires that you know your Bible well for yourself and are able to discern lies from truth. If you do not understand what is said, do not agree but instead go away and meditate upon it. Ask God to give you clarity of thinking to determine His truth. But don’t ever be tempted to tentatively agree because they have established some measure of common ground.

Like all tares and cults, the establishing of common ground is essential in gaining the attention of non-cult members. JWs do it all the time. SDAs also will usually say they are Christian before admitting that they are SDA. It’s like getting a foot in the door. But don’t let them get a foot in the door. Don’t let their talk of common ground or “we have some agreement on this” or “even non-calvinists should affirm this much of this doctrine” or “for we both surely agree” or (an actual quote from an email) You say that man is totally unwilling to come to God (we agree there) but that it cannot be translated into total inability, you also say that no man can come to God unless God intervenes (we agree there as well) and you say that the intervention is through the gospel of Christ. But then the lie gets added on to the common ground: I say that scripture clearly states that man is also unable to come to Christ and that the intervention is through the Holy Spirit.

Calvinists can only really effectively teach their lies if they have established some measure of credibility, generally through the formation of common ground areas of agreement. Their lies cannot make sense unless attached to some truth that you have already agreed to. They will then agree to that truth of yours before building their lies upon it. This is calvinist tactics at their most devious. Be warned, be alert! Or as the Bible puts it: Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world. (1 Peter 5:8-9)

For a brief expose of calvinist lies, please go to this link at “Calvinisms”.

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

Is the Karl Faase gospel a rehash of the corrupt Lausanne gospel?

Before we start, just a note to say that the efforts to crash our website (see the last 2 posts) have failed so far; they appear to have given it up as a lost cause. Without any other viable suspect I continue to look at militant calvinist interests as the cowards behind it all, throwing a temper tantrum because of my outline of some of their basic doctrinal heresies as noted in “Calvinisms”. It seems that if they can’t “hack” the opposition, then they’ll hack their websites! Clearly those who are incapable of arguing on biblical grounds do have limited options! Violence is the last resort of the incompetent!

Research suggests that Karl Faase (of Olive Tree Media) teaches a non-biblical gospel based upon the politically-correct social false gospel of the Lausanne Movement (ecumenicalism as per the World Council of Churches). This should be checked out thoroughly before touching any of his materials, such as Jesus the Game Changer.

The saga here all started at least as early as 10th August 1846, when the Evangelical Alliance was formed by a meeting of 800 delegates from 50 denominations held in the Freemasons’ Hall (United Grand Lodge of England), London. Later the Evangelical Alliance was to become the World Evangelical Alliance in Britain in 1923, known as WEA. However, despite its name, it was more of an alliance for church solidarity than an evangelical outreach for the sake of the gospel. It was formed mainly with the desire that as many churches as possible band together for solidarity, especially involving Presbyterian and reformed denominations (most notably in America).
In England the progress of the Tractarian Movement led many distinguished Evangelical Nonconformists to desire “a great confederation of men of all Churches who were loyal in their attachment to Evangelical Protestantism in order to defend the faith of the Reformation” (Dale, History of Eng. Congregationalism, 637). At the annual assembly of the Congregational Union held in London, May, 1842, John Angell James (1785-1859), minister of Craven Chapel, Bayswater, London, proposed the scheme that ultimately developed into the Evangelical Alliance. He asked: “Is it not in the power of this Union to bring about by God’s blessing, a Protestant Evangelical Union of the whole body of Christ’s faithful followers who have at any rate adopted the voluntary principle? … Let us only carry out the principle of a great Protestant Union and we may yet have representatives from all bodies of Protestant Christians to be found within the circle of our own United Empire” (Congregational Magazine, 1842, 435-6).
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05641a.htm
And the fact that this 1846 meeting was held in the hall of the most influential English freemasonry lodge does strongly tend to deny the presence of Almighty God with their deliberations! 2 Corinthians 6:14a – Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

The following also supports the political and social agenda of such a gathering of churches, rather than for actual evangelical purposes.
From the onset of Evangelicalism in Great Britain in the 1730s to the United States in the nineteenth century and now as a global phenomenon, Evangelicals have had great influence in many spheres, most notably religion and politics. Throughout the twentieth century a series of gatherings and movements converged into the Lausanne Movement and the World Evangelical Alliance, arguably the two most active global bodies of Evangelicals today.
https://www.lausanne.org/lgc-transfer/number-of-evangelicals-worldwide
In fact, the various Council of Church groups worldwide today mostly stem from that meeting in Freemasons’ Hall in 1846.

In 1974 the WEA would help bring about the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization (commonly called the Lausanne Movement) through a partnership between Billy Graham and John Stott.
The Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, more commonly known as the Lausanne Movement, is a global movement that mobilizes evangelical leaders to collaborate for world evangelization. …. The Lausanne Movement grew out of the 1974 International Congress on World Evangelization (ICOWE) and promotes active worldwide evangelism. The Lausanne Covenant provides the theological basis for collaborative work in the area of mission and evangelism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lausanne_Committee_for_World_Evangelization

The evangelist (Billy Graham) partnered with John Stott on the Lausanne Movement and helped revive the World Evangelical Alliance.
In 1974, Billy Graham convened an enormous conference in Lausanne, Switzerland. Graham wanted to assess the way political, ideological, and theological world issues affected evangelism, and to bring evangelical leaders to a common vision for both evangelism and social justice. He invited about 2,400 evangelical leaders from 150 countries. The meeting turned out to be outrageously important. Not only did the participants make up “possibly the widest-ranging meeting of Christians ever held” and signal the rising strength of conservative Christians worldwide, it also delivered unity on the most divisive issue of the day—whether social justice should be as highly prioritized as evangelism.
And it kicked off the Lausanne Movement.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2018/february/billy-graham-lausanne-wea-evangelism-social-justice.html

The Lausanne Covenant is a July 1974 religious manifesto promoting active worldwide Christian evangelism. One of the most influential documents in modern evangelicalism, it was written at the First International Congress on World Evangelization in Lausanne, Switzerland, where it was adopted by 2,300 evangelicals in attendance.
The drafting committee for the 15-point document was chaired by John Stott of the United Kingdom.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lausanne_Covenant

Stott was the main contributor to the Lausanne Covenant …
The Lausanne Covenant is widely regarded as one of the most significant documents in modern church history. Emerging from the First Lausanne Congress in 1974, with John Stott as its Chief Architect (It sounds almost freemason, doesn’t it?)
https://www.lausanne.org/content/covenant/lausanne-covenant
… and his emphasis was more in line with the social and political priorities of the World Council of Churches, a group more known for politics than the gospel.
The year was 1974.
2500 evangelicals from 150 countries and 135 denominations were in Lausanne, Switzerland for the International Congress on World Evangelization. In his biography of John Stott, Godly Ambition, Alister Chapman describes the background for the confrontation:
The central purpose of the congress was to galvanize evangelicals to finish the task, to ensure that the gospel finally reached every corner of the earth. Its theme, emblazoned above the podium, was “Let the Earth Hear His Voice.”
By the time of Lausanne, Stott had come to the conclusion that God called his people to care about society and politics as well as evangelism. Many at Lausanne agreed with him, especially people from churches associated with the WCC (World Council of Churches), where social and political issues were high priorities.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevin-wax/when-john-stott-confronted-billy-graham/

The gospel of Christ has always been in conflict with the world. We are to love not the world as per 1 John 2:15-16. Many who lived godly lives would be persecuted (2 Timothy 3:12). Paul would suffer all things that the gospel might not be hindered (1 Corinthians 9:12). And Christians are called to suffer, as per 1 Peter 2:21.
Preaching the gospel has always been fraught with danger, trials and testing. Many have been martyred for their faithful teaching of the Biblical gospel. But the Lausanne gospel was to be more conformed to the world such that it didn’t force conflict with those hearing it. This is the “positive” gospel without any “negative” ideas in it, like sin, evil, condemnation etc. Conforming the gospel to the world does mean less conflict, but it also involves much compromise concerning the truth. Paul warned us against being conformed to the world (Romans 12:2), thus defining the Lausanne gospel to be false. Jesus said so clearly that we had to forsake the world before we could be considered worthy of being His disciples. We were to take up our crosses daily, leaving the world behind us. The song says “The world behind me, the cross before me”, yet today’s gospel says you can have the gospel without giving up the world.

As Tozer wisely taught (in “Man – the Dwelling Place of God”) All unannounced and mostly undetected there has come in modern times a new cross into popular evangelical circles. It is like the old cross, but different: the likenesses are superficial; the differences, fundamental. From this new cross has sprung a new philosophy of the Christian life, and from that new philosophy has come a new evangelical technique – a new type of meeting and a new kind of preaching. This new evangelism employs the same language as the old, but its content is not the same and its emphasis not as before.
The new cross encourages a new and entirely different evangelistic approach. The evangelist does not demand abnegation of the old life before a new life can be received. He preaches not contrasts but similarities. He seeks to key into public interest by showing that Christianity makes no unpleasant demands; rather, it offers the same thing the world does, only on a higher level. Whatever the sin-mad world happens to be clamouring after at the moment is cleverly shown to be the very thing the gospel offers, only the religious product is better. The new cross does not slay the sinner, it redirects him. It gears him into a cleaner and jollier way of living and saves his self-respect. The Christian message is slanted in the direction of the current vogue in order to make it acceptable to the public.
The old cross is a symbol of death. It stands for the abrupt, violent end of a human being. The man in Roman times who took up his cross and started down the road had already said goodbye to his friends. He was not coming back. He was going out to have it ended. The cross made no compromise, modified nothing, spared nothing; it slew all of the man, completely and for good. It did not try to keep on good terms with its victim. It struck cruel and hard, and when it had finished its work, the man was no more.

The biblical gospel teaches the old cross; the Lausanne Covenant teaches the new cross. The gospel was now to become more user-friendly, more world-friendly. You could be a Christian without giving up your enjoyment of the world. No more “love not the world, neither the things that are in the world” of 1 John 2:15-16, for now you could have both your salvation and love the world at the same time.

So let’s take that next step in our narrative here. From evil hearts come evil thoughts; likewise from evil beginnings comes evil fruit. The Evangelical Alliance in 1846 spawned an apostate gospel that is with us today under the guidance of the Lausanne Movement and the World Council of Churches. Evil surely begets evil. Stott was the “Chief Architect” of the Lausanne Covenant, and, true to form, Stott was truly corrupt. The whole movement commenced under the watchful eye of the freemasons in 1846, and is still in the hands of satan and his demons.

For a start, Stott is in favour of meaningful dialogue between muslims and Christians.
An event which tells us much about Stott’s theology occurred in October of 2007 when a large number of Muslim clerics signed a letter calling for peace between Muslims and Christians. A Common Word urges the followers of the two faiths to find common ground between Islam and Christianity. A Christian Letter of Response entitled ‘Loving God and Neighbor Together’ drafted by scholars at Yale Divinity School was featured in the New York Times in November of 2007. The Christian Letter of Response was signed by John Stott, Brian McLaren, Robert Schuller, Rick Warren, and about 300 other Christian leaders (see https://faith.yale.edu/common-word/common-word-christian-response). It affirmed that what is common between Christians and Muslims lies in something absolutely central to both: the love of God and love of neighbor.
https://watch.pairsite.com/macarthur-12-evangelical-druids.html
Yet what common ground is there between such opposed belief systems? Isn’t this just an example of the Lausanne’s compromise so that we may preach a gospel without offense? That the gospel must be conformed to the world to remove its offense to the world? Truly it is a doctrine of demons.

Stott also taught non-Christian, non-biblical attitudes toward our relationships between one another, especially sexual relations.
(The following is based on John Stott’s book: “Same-sex partnerships” in which Stott refers to the Kinsey report as his authority for his conclusions drawn.)
John Stott refers to the American zoologist Alfred Kinsey’s famous investigation into human sexuality as the authority on sexual orientation.
But how can a Christian quote from someone who is as anti-Christian and perverted as Kinsey? Kinsey had a special interest in the sexual nature of children. He concludes that children are sexual beings, capable of enjoying sexual contacts with other children and adults. He implies that it is unfortunate that natural childhood sexual activity is being suppressed by a moral code which prohibits sex with children. He argues that it is natural for children to enjoy sexual contact with adults, and that it is only cultural conditioning that prevents children from enjoying genital sex. These views represent an open encouragement to paedophilia.
Kinsey saw it as at great problem that Christian teaching on sexual morality had influenced the whole of society.
https://www.therealjohnstott.com/?page_id=225

And this is the same Stott that MacArthur says is one of the most influential authors in his life with his book – John R. W. Stott, The Preacher’s Portrait ???
https://www.gty.org/library/Questions/QA84
MacArthur also has at least 65 documents on his website that either mention or quote from Stott.

So we continue our paper trail toward Karl Faase, now heading to Australia where the Lausanne movement held a conference to extend the Lausanne ministry to the training of new leaders for the cause. It was called Arrow Australia, and Karl Faase was one of the leaders of this conference, becoming its director in 2002. (It’s one thing to participate in a conference; it’s another to actually lead the conference. The latter does strongly imply agreement with Lausanne policy.)
History of Arrow Australia
In July 1994 the Australian committee of the Lausanne movement held a conference for emerging Christian leaders in Melbourne. It was led by the Rev Stephen Hale and the Rev Karl Faase. The conference brought together 300 key emerging and senior leaders from around Australia.
Our statement of faith is the Lausanne Covenant.
https://www.arrowleadership.org.au/content/history/gjendk
Well, well! It’s a bit like a family tree with all the descendants listed under the family patriarch, only the patriarch here is the ecumenical Evangelical Alliance and the line of descent goes down here to Karl Faase who seems to be the consequence of that which was given to him by his forebears in this “family tree”. Concerning the gospel, can we assume that Faase is of the same mind as Stott who was the “Chief Architect” of the Lausanne Covenant? Does Faase have the same “progressive” views on Islam that Stott apparently has regarding the common ground of love of God and neighbour?
Does MacArthur, in quoting Stott so much, realise that he is giving at least tacit approval to Stott’s clearly non-biblical standpoints?

So finally, I decided to take a look at the Olive Tree Media website (of which Faase is CEO). https://www.olivetreemedia.com.au
The olive tree itself is an interesting choice of symbols, for it represents the offer of submission to another for the purposes of keeping the peace. In effect, the olive tree depicts a gospel which must be subject to the world in order to avoid conflict with the world. This is eminently in keeping with the Lausanne Covenant (of John Stott!). The gospel is to conform to the world so that Christians may not offend that same world and thus in this way they may avoid the persecution and suffering that is unavoidable when preaching the true biblical gospel. (This is the Seeker Friendly church model as presented by Rick Warren. Warren’s seeker friendly model has good intentions but an unbiblical basis for most of its practices. https://www.letusreason.org/Popteac25.htm)
The true gospel, however, refuses to conform to a sinful world, but instead condemns a wicked world (with consequent conflict!). The true biblical gospel is certainly no olive branch to the world!

So where might Faase be found in the church scene today? He produces a number of documents and DVDs that churches may purchase; is this an effort to spread the false gospel of Lausanne even further? He has produced such titles as Towards Belief and Jesus the Game Changer. The latter has the following topics: Jesus, Equality, Forgiveness, Women and Children, Democracy, Care, Leadership, Education and Health, Wealth, Reason and Science, all of which could fit in admirably with a politically-correct social gospel. It is therefore likely that churches which use his materials could be steadily pushed toward an acceptance of the values of Lausanne and its false gospel, a goal that I’m sure Stott and his forerunners in the “family tree” would find very acceptable. Certainly social justice is an admirable and commendable cause to seek; this in itself is not a matter for condemnation. However, it must not subordinate the biblical gospel of salvation to a lower level than social justice; the biblical gospel of salvation must never be made to conform to the social requirements of the day.

I also checked the Olive Tree Media website to see what they believed in, but could find nothing concerning the actual biblical gospel of salvation; this might be expected from people who apparently work on conforming to the world’s gospel, thereby avoiding any conflict that might arise from having any definite point of view on biblical doctrine. If I wanted to check out his materials before using them, how would I assess their suitability? I would at the very least desire to see a statement of his doctrinal beliefs, but perhaps Faase does not appear to want people to test his doctrines too much. And to me the biggest danger seems to be the Lausanne connection.

So who would choose such teachings for their church? Such people may either be totally lacking in discernment, or desire that their church members fall into the apostasy of the ecumenical gospel. It comes as no surprise at all to find that it includes Living Springs Baptist Church as per https://www.lsbc.org.au/calendar. Discernment has not been one of their strong points in the past!  Discernment may not be one of their strong points here!

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

 

Just another day at the office!

So this website seems to be attracting some attention from people who do not wish it to say such nice things about their beliefs? I say some lovely home-truths about calvinism and they want to hack my site? Well, it does confirm one thing: that some people just do not appreciate my writings. You know, if they really wanted to defend their doctrines, they’d get out their Bibles (yes, that’s right, sola scriptura – the Bible alone – as the calvinists so love to boast about) and they’d find all those teachings that consistently demonstrate the truth of their doctrines, wouldn’t they! (Or would they find that the Bible could even deny their “truths”? Possibly calvinists do not want to look too carefully at the Bible as it might just prove them wrong and that’s something they couldn’t face at all. It is said that the calvinist is always right, and you can always tell a calvinist – but not much!) It’s only those who cannot debate rationally that have to resort to bullying tactics. As the saying goes, violence is the last resort (or refuge) of the incompetent. But, hey, what better way could you have to increase awareness of this website!

Before we continue, here’s the real truth, the real issue of any conflict regarding this website. We who are Christians may be assured that we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us (Romans 8:37), and that all things that sovereign God permits into our lives will work together for good (Romans 8:28). Our response to these great promises (through our faith in the One who promises) is to give thanks always for all things to God in the name of Christ our Saviour (Ephesians 5:20), and, like Jesus’ disciples, rejoicing that we are called by our sovereign God to a ministry that the enemy persecutes. And they (the disciples) departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. (Acts 5:41) It is truly a blessing to be called to such a ministry. We praise God for His faithfulness and we pray for those who, greatly misled, consider it necessary to spiritually oppose us. May God bless them with an understanding of His love that sent Christ to die on the cross for all mankind (1 John 2:2) that those who call upon the name of the Lord can truly  be saved (Romans 10:13).
Romans 5:8 – But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Over the past few days we have had a large number of IP addresses trying to hack into our website. Why would it be so important to do this, you might wonder. After all, we mainly discuss the problems of calvinist doctrines and that surely cannot be matter of great concern to the average person in the street. How many people would you have to talk to on the street before you got one who could actually converse intelligently on the topic of calvinism? This website really largely exists to inform those who might be considering calvinism as a belief system, to assist them to make a biblical decision concerning the claims made by calvinists. And because our website offers nothing of value other than advice on certain biblical issues, it is clear that only those offended by such biblical issues should have any logical reason to seriously oppose our website. After all, who else other than those interested in the calvinist debate are likely to have any interest in hacking our site?

Of course, I don’t expect the perpetrators to confess openly about their attacks on my website. That would be too much to expect of those who hide behind anonymity, those who are too afraid to come out in the open and face issues honestly. I would be ultra-surprised if someone were to actually admit to this activity, for in general such people tend to prefer to wear white feathers than to be openly truthful with those they attack. There are just too many chickens in this world! So unless someone confesses to this otherwise cowardly activity, then I’ll just have to assume that it was someone who has a gripe about the views of this website. And that logically suggests that calvinists are the most likely to be involved somewhere here.

But why would calvinists choose to do this now? Well, just over a week ago I put another post online – “Calvinisms” – after which the number of visitors and visits to the website increased significantly. Many of those are likely to have been calvinists who would, no doubt, have got hot under the collar at some of the home truths I mentioned concerning their incompatibility with biblical doctrines. I did expect some calvinists to attempt to assist me to see the error of my ways through good sound biblical exegesis. Or, at the very least, some irate comments depicting me as the lowest of low people, someone who cannot believe in calvinism because I cannot understand it (or so they say!).

But no, their silence was deafening indeed. I did say in that document that silence would be taken as a sign of agreement with my statements, and that if any disagreed, they should then demonstrate the error of my ways through sound teaching from the Bible alone (sola scriptura). However, calvinists cannot be told that they are wrong in any way. If they do teach something that is demonstrated to be totally illogical according to biblical truth, then they immediately claim that it is a mystery hid within the secret counsels of sovereign God. In other words, anything they cannot explain becomes a mystery that we are not to probe; calvinists certainly do come up with a lot of mysteries!

So I was not totally surprised when our website began to be hacked by a large number of outside sources, all of them being acknowledged (listed) as abuse sites, and most of them serious repeat offenders in the abuse and hacking of websites. (Something similar happened in January, although then it wasn’t quite as obvious who might have been behind it all.) Someone is organising the hacking attempts, because otherwise why would there be so many white feathers flying around just by coincidence? So no wonder I start pointing the finger at those who have so totally failed to defend themselves against my statements that they appear to have resorted to cowardly aggression! But, all things work together for good (Romans 8:28) so I just praise God for His victory and keep on with the ministry He has called me into.

No-one hacks like that for legitimate reasons – after all, if they were legitimate, then they’d knock on the front door. But these are more like the low-life house invasions of today,  often in gangs so they can ensure they have the numbers; such people are not brave enough to take people on one-on-one! Therefore the only logical assumption here is that some people do not like what I am saying. Like road rage, these people just try to see if they can cause some damage to those who oppose them. My website has no intrinsic value, nothing to steal that would encourage anyone to crash for logical reasons or financial gain. No-one can gain anything of value except, like a bully, to regain some measure of lost self-esteem. This is more of a statement that if I say something they don’t like, they’ll hurt my site so that I cannot say it. It is an effort to remove freedom of speech from those who speak against them. It is a statement from those who demand freedom of speech only as long as it agrees with them.

And, because they do not have any way of opposing what I say from the Bible (for if they did, then logically they’d do so), they must resort to violent and aggressive behaviour. The only thing I am doing that could possibly seriously offend anyone is to demonstrate the lies and deceitfulness of the teachings of calvinists. Thus, it is safe to assume that this hacking was done by people who do not like what I say, and therefore the only people who are likely to feel offended by my writings are those calvinists who cannot be told that they are wrong, yet can only hit back with aggression and violence.

Other websites have been hacked and crashed in the past and no doubt there’ll be more hacks and crashes in the future. Those who have enough money and/or influence will sometimes use their “power” to “squash” the little guy. There will always be Goliaths who want to put down their Davids. I also don’t blame calvinists in general for this aggressive behaviour, as hopefully most of them would respect my freedom of speech as I respect their freedom of speech. I have no intention of crashing another site just because I cannot believe their views, and I am sure this is also generally applicable to those who oppose me. But someone caused this hacking and for some reason perhaps only known to them. (Or else such people are irrational, not in full control of their senses, commonly described as insane.)

But, by the grace of our sovereign God we’re still online. While we are here we’ll continue to teach the truth of the Bible, and that it cannot support the false teaching called calvinism (or reformed, or doctrines of grace, or whatever they like to call it, it’s still the same heresy). (See “Calvinisms” for a summary of their false teachings.) It’s likely that these same aggressive people would vigorously defend their own right to freedom of speech, yet they cannot understand why they should also defend the right of others to that same freedom of speech. Perhaps it’s because they are unable to effectively argue for their calvinist beliefs using the Bible alone, but whatever the reason, calvinists do appear to believe that they are the only ones who have the truth and therefore the only ones who may have the freedom to share this with others. (Maybe I should have said to impose their dogma upon others.)

Are calvinists so insecure concerning their beliefs that they have to put down everyone else for merely opposing them? Do they realise that such behaviour is usually the consequence of low self-esteem, an effort to feel more “empowered” against those who threaten that self-esteem? They claim that they believe in the doctrines of grace, yet show little or none of that alleged grace to others around them who might disagree with them.

Therefore such activities only serve to give me evidence of the spiritual battle we are in and that there can be no victory without a battle and no battle without a cost! If God is in this ministry, then victory will not only result despite the cost but because of the cost.

So here’s the challenge! If you are a calvinist and you disagree with what I have written, then try writing back with your point of view, including support from the Bible (sola scriptura) to demonstrate your arguments. I will always respect those who try to properly debate, even when they oppose me. And, finally, I praise God for His promises that all things work together for good and that in Christ we are more than conquerors.

And on that line here’s the real message of today! We who are Christians may be assured that we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us (Romans 8:37), and that all things that sovereign God permits into our lives will work together for good (Romans 8:28). Our response to these great promises (through our faith in the One who promises) is to give thanks always for all things to God in the name of Christ our Saviour (Ephesians 5:20), and, like Jesus’ disciples, rejoicing that we are called by our sovereign God to a ministry that the enemy persecutes. And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. (Acts 5:41) It is truly a blessing to be called to such a ministry. We praise God for His faithfulness and we pray for those who, greatly misled, consider it necessary to spiritually oppose us. May God bless them with an understanding of His love that sent Christ to die on the cross for all mankind (1 John 2:2) that those who call upon the name of the Lord can truly  be saved (Romans 10:13).

Thus, I am emboldened to pursue even more vigorously the heresy of calvinism. It will only be by God’s permission if they mange to crash this site, and therefore the victory will be God’s victory and His alone. His truth will triumph, not in spite of the attacks, but because of the attacks.

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

“Calvinisms”

(And the challenge to calvinists, as always, is to prove me wrong, or accept what I say. So far the silence from calvinists has been deafening. They will tell me I’m wrong but completely fail to properly support their debate in any way.)

1/. The calvinist gospel in a nutshell.

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

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

2/. Calvinists teach universal salvation.

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

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

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

4/. The calvinist God cannot be eternal.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8/. Calvinism does not teach assurance of salvation.

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

9/. The calvinist God is a dictator

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

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

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

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

10/. The calvinist God is the only willful sinner in the universe.

This is a shocking heresy against holy God! But calvinists cannot deny that they clearly teach that their God’s will is the only will permitted in the whole universe. No other independent will may be permitted! Thus the calvinist God is the only one who can take responsibility for all sin and evil in the whole universe! Calvin said: But the objection is not yet resolved, that if all things are done by the will of God, and men contrive nothing except by His will and ordination, then God is the author of all evils. (“Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God”, Page 179) MacArthur wrote: Ultimately, we must concede that sin is something God meant to happen. He planned for it, ordained it – or, in the words of the Westminster Confession, He decreed it. (“The Vanishing Conscience & Hard to Believe” Page 113)

In fact, all calvinists, when forced to tell the plain truth, must confess that their God decreed (ordained, authored, created) all sin, all evil. They teach that man is unable to choose between good and evil, and therefore the calvinist God chooses for all mankind whether they will be good or evil. This is the calvinist gospel in a nutshell, after all: that the calvinist God has chosen to send a small group to heaven and therefore has chosen to send the rest to hell. Man has absolutely no say in the matter because the calvinist God has given man no free will to choose between good and evil. The calvinist God therefore chooses some to be good (and go to heaven) and the rest he has chosen to be evil (and go to hell). You get no say in the matter because the calvinist God’s will is the only will permitted in the universe.

For further information, please go to Calvinists teach that their God is the only wilful sinner in the universe!

If you have any questions or comments about this information, please feel free to say it or give advice, by using the Contact page. Genuine comments will be recorded on the Comments page.

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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

Romans 9 proves the heresy of calvinism

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The truth about this is that Israel, being God’s chosen nation, thought that they were automatically the beneficiaries of God’s mercy. They believed that it was their right to be shown God’s mercy, and that God’s covenant with them meant that they couldn’t be denied this mercy. Paul is simply saying that even God’s chosen nation couldn’t demand mercy of God, that it remained God’s right to choose to withhold that mercy if He so desired. You cannot gain God’s mercy by demanding it as your right. Israel had chosen to reject their Christ when He came to them (John 1:11 – He came unto his own and his own received him not.), and after the resurrection they had continued to reject their Christ (Acts 13:44-48), and God had rejected them by turning instead to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46-48). Israel had chosen to break their covenant with God, not the other way around!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

List of all my posts on this site.

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

Sermons and Messages

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