Most every Calvinist believer I’ve ever confronted has claimed misrepresentation. Their belief system is so multi-colored and in such dire chaos that it is almost impossible to “pin them down” to a specific point. Rarely—if ever—can you find two of them who understand their belief system alike.

The ordinary Calvinist will jump from pillar to post when he sees himself between a theological rock and a creedal hard place, denying this and affirming that—and all in an effort to free himself. The average Calvinist is less than virtuous with his many-sided theology. I’m speaking from experience. There are exceptions, of course, but if my experiences with Calvinists at large embody any validity, the average Calvinist is less than ethical with his Calvinistic perspectives.

I have dealt with various belief systems all of my life, but I must confess that the Calvinistic belief system is among the most perplexing and multicolored I’ve had the experience of encountering. It is not that I have failed to decipher and give fair research into the many-sided facets of Calvinism. I truly have. But irrespective of my efforts through the years to grasp the doctrinal goals and teachings of my Calvinist brothers, I am still at a loss to “tie this belief system down” to a specific order of comprehensible and consistent components.

This belief system is so vast, so detailed, so puzzling, so mystifying, and so cluttered with theological “odds and ends” that hardly any two of its adherents can reach a rational consensus. I know whereof I speak, because a few months ago I joined a Calvinistic Yahoo discussion group on the Internet and remained on it for a lengthy period. I tried my utmost to “pin down” the Calvinistic contributors to this list, but without success. They hardly agreed among themselves. Quite a few of them, when looking for an “escape door,” distorted the very scriptures they professed to uphold—seemingly, as least as I saw it, knowingly and deliberately. Well, to make a long story short, they excommunicated me from the list. Some of them were ugly and rude, mean and disrespectful—and all in the name of the Lord.

Are Calvinists my brothers in the Lord? Of course. However, they truly do need to drop the Calvinistic persuasion and place the totality of their allegiance in Jesus. The main thrusts of the Calvinistic belief system and Jesus’ precepts and principles are truly at odds. Listen, now, as we clarify and explain.

Part 1

Let’s Start With Calvin

One Calvinist brother wrote, “Do we have a will? Yes, of course we have a will. [John] Calvin said, ‘If you mean by a free will a faculty of choosing by which you have the power within yourself to choose what you desire, then we all have free will. If you mean by free will the ability for fallen human beings to incline themselves and exercise that will to choose the things of God without the prior work of regeneration, then free will is far too grandiose a term to apply to a human being.’ ”

Interpretation
As per the mindset of the average Calvinist, man has a free will and can choose to do anything in his natural environment, but his free will and ability to choose ends at that point. He cannot exercise free will and choose to obey God until he is “regenerated.” Hyper-Calvinists claim that he must be born again before he can come to the Lord. If you will compare that sentiment to numerous biblical passages that teach the opposite, you will find that this dogma collides with heaven’s testimony. Jesus clearly says a man may choose whether or not to obey God. But how may he choose unless he is endowed with free will? He cannot. Note, please, Jesus’ words in John 7:17:

“If anyone chooses to do God’s will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God...”

Quickened, Made Alive, Regenerated
But is he quickened, made alive, or regenerated prior to his choosing to obey God? A receptive person is quickened or made alive when he hears the message of salvation. Up to that point, he is “dead”—inactive, dormant—to the things of God. But when he hears the message of salvation, he “comes alive,” is “quickened,” or “regenerated.” However, this does not translate into being born again. It is only the beginning of the new birth process, as “faith comes by hearing the message” [of salvation] (Rom. 10:17). The new birth cannot be experienced without faith, without reformation (repentance), and without complete surrender to the Lord’s injunctions. Listen to the writer of the Book of Hebrews:

“And without faith it is impossible to please God” (Heb. 11:6).

On the birthday of the Christian community, 3,000 people, after being quickened—“cut to the heart”—with the message of deliverance, cried out, “Brothers [that is, brother Jews], what shall we do?” Peter responded, “Repent and be immersed, everyone of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” (Acts 2:37-38).

You will carefully note that, even though quickened or made alive—or, if you prefer, “regenerated”—with the redemptive message, they had not yet been born again or received the forgiveness of sins. Peter informed them how to finalize their initial belief and obedience. One Calvinist brother observed:

“Clearly, Paul intimates that our quickening is done ‘while we were dead.’ If such is the case, and it surely is, then that quickening was done prior to faith and repentance, otherwise it could not rightly be said that we were dead in trespasses” (Name withheld).

True, the unregenerate man is quickened—not born again—prior to faith and repentance, as he is made aware of his need for salvation. This quickening or awareness occurs while he is steeped in sin or “dead in trespasses,” as he has not at this point been delivered or saved. So, again, the average Calvinist confuses quickening with the new birth. They are not the same.

As I equate the new birth with salvation, Calvinists seem to be saying a man is saved, becomes a Christian, a child of God, a member of His household, and has been redeemed prior to his having faith, prior to his repenting, and prior to everything else. This collides with numerous scriptures, which places forgiveness of sins and salvation after faith and repentance, such as Acts 2:38.

Calvinists assert that the new birth occurs prior to faith and repentance. The adherents of this persuasion claim that the new birth is realized when a man’s heart is opened. At this junction, however, we must inquire: How does God open a man’s heart to receive the truth? Is his faith forced upon him? Is he compelled to believe? Is he irresistibly drawn—that is, he cannot resist? The apostle Paul has the answer:

“Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17).

So, yes, a man’s heart is opened prior to his conversion. And, yes, a man is drawn to the Father prior to his conversion. All of this action is the result of a belief in and acceptance of the message of salvation. The biblical expression “born again” is equivalent to being saved, becoming a child of God, experiencing the new birth, becoming a citizen of God’s new reign. It entails being a member of God’s household. It carries no other meaning in scripture—none whatsoever. Being regenerated prior to conversion is not the same as being born again. The two are separate, yet interwoven. Let’s clarify even more.

Further Observations Nowhere in scripture is there any indication that “born again” is employed the way Calvinists use the expression. It is not a question of whether a man’s heart is opened or “quickened”—or is made aware of his need for salvation—prior to faith and repentance. We agree that, indeed, his heart is opened. But how? Through the message of salvation (Rom. 10:17). “Born again” is never used in conjunction with the opening of a man’s heart prior to believing and repenting—never once. “Born again” or “born from above” is used in only two portions of the new covenant scriptures. They are John 3:1-7 and 1 Peter 1:23.

Jesus And Nicodemus
We all know the story of Jesus and Nicodemus. During the course of their encounter, Jesus tells him that “no one can enter the kingdom [reign] of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.” Please keep posted to the truth that to be part of God’s new reign is the same as being in a saved position, for no one can be a citizen of God’s new reign or kingdom without having experienced salvation or redemption from sins.

This being the case, the conclusion follows that Jesus was not talking about the new birth in the way Calvinists describe it. They assert the new birth is the quickening or the opening up of a man’s heart, which in turn prepares him to have faith and change directions. Jesus says the new birth consists of entering or being a part of the new reign or kingdom, which means that faith and repentance have already been experienced, for no one can enter God’s kingdom or domain without faith and repentance. So there’s a wide gap between what Jesus actually said and what Calvinists teach.

Unless Calvinists can validate by heaven’s testimony that their description of the “new birth”—that is, the opening of the heart, a “quickening”—places a man in God’s new reign, they have nothing to stand on. But if they success in placing this man in God’s kingdom who has only undergone their description of the “new birth,” they have in essence placed the man in God’s new reign or kingdom without faith and without repentance!

A Dilemma Indeed!
This places my Calvinist brothers in somewhat of a dilemma, for if their man is in the kingdom at the point of his being “regenerated” or “born again”—as they describe the two terms—we have an unsaved man in God’s kingdom or domain! That won’t work. It is altogether foreign to heaven’s message.

One Calvinist brother with whom I shared these sentiments, responded, “Before one can ‘see’ the kingdom, he must be born again. Yet you have the man being in the kingdom in order to be ‘born again.’ I’m afraid it is my brother who has the sequence confused.”

Nothing I have said would cause any honorable recipient to conclude what this brother has concluded. The saved man is in the kingdom or new reign of God because he has been born again. My Calvinist friend has an unsaved man in the kingdom, because he has been “born again”—as per his portrayal of the new birth—prior to faith and repentance!

This brother, finding himself between a theological rock and a creedal hard place, and unable to free himself from the dilemma he walked into, reversed and distorted the very words I wrote and the solid deduction I reached. Now you know why I said in the Introduction, “The average Calvinist is less than virtuous with his many-sided theology. I’m speaking from experience. There are exceptions, of course, but if my experiences with Calvinists at large embody any validity, the average Calvinist is less than ethical with his Calvinistic perspectives.”

Saved Before Or After?
I will not, at this junction, address whether a man is saved before or after immersion in water. I believe immersion is important, just as I feel repentance is important, and that the two cannot be separated, assuming the candidate’s heart is honest and he understands the command. I will say, however, that the 3,000 in Acts 2:37-38 could not have been saved if they had done less than what the Holy Spirit, through Peter, instructed. I stand on that premise. I have no choice, if I’m to be true to that memorable occasion—the ushering in of God’s new reign.

“Quickened” or Made Alive
The receptive heart who turns his face toward heaven is quickened or made alive. He is, at that point, made aware of his wretched condition and responds optimistically. However, being quickened is not the same as being born anew. The 3,000 on the birthday of the new order were quickened by Peter’s message—“cut to the heart”—but they had not as yet been forgiven of their sins or undergone or perceived the new birth, as noted above.

“None Are Righteous” & “No One Seeks God” Paul is describing the wretched condition of fallen man—all fallen men. They are inherently wicked, wretched, full of bitterness and hatred. Only by God’s revealing Himself to man—through the message of salvation or through creation—are they “enabled” or inclined to come to Him. Paul describes some of this in Romans 1 and in 10:17. But whichever method man uses to approach his God, it is not something he does apart from the working of God. God does His part. Man does his part.

Yes, of course, man is “dead in his sins.” But if dead, how can he revive himself and exercise free will? The man who is spiritually dead retains his senses. He can hear, speak, make decisions, issue judgments, and either reject or accept the Gospel message. And that is because he has free choice, as Jesus said in John 7:17. Being spiritually dead is not like being biologically dead. When biologically dead, the body reserves no senses. When spiritually dead, the body and spirit possess all of them.

Is The Sinner Like A Corpse?
Calvinists claim that the sinner is like a corpse. He can do nothing. If he is of the elect, God works in him “to will and to do.” Leroy Garrett, in his Once More With Love (June 2002), writes:

“In the light of scripture, one can accept the influence of the Spirit in conversion and still conclude that a person is free to accept or reject the Gospel, to believe or disbelieve it. Remove human responsibility from the equation and you have a Bible that makes no sense. If when Jesus said ‘He who has ears to hear let him hear’ they were not free to hear (respond), He would be talking nonsense. He was amazed at the disbelief of some because He well knew they could have and should have believed (Mark 6:6).”

This same brother has an insightful view of Calvinism’s “total hereditary depravity” stance. He writes about the prodigal son who finally returned to his senses and returned home.

“He was in a swine pen far from his father and far from home—lost, which is worse than death. At this point in the story Jesus pays a compliment to the human race in saying that the prodigal ‘came to himself.’ That indicates that Jesus did not believe in total hereditary depravity, with apologies to Calvinists. Jesus believed the wayward lad in the pig pen had enough good left in him that he could do something about his predicament. He could have a change of heart, turn his life around, and return home. This is what he did when ‘he came to himself.’ ”

More On Man’s Ability To Choose God
To extricate the idea that man is incapable of choosing God, Romans, chapter 1, needs to be revisited and appraised. Paul writes about the wickedness of man, apparently the Gentile pagans, and says that “what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them...from what has been made [created things], so that men are without excuse.” He goes on to say, “Although they knew God [His eternal power and divine nature], they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him” (Rom. 1:18-32). Paul continues by saying that “they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God” (v. 28). Here is what we have:

1) These Gentile pagans knew God through the revelation of creation.
2) They were free to either choose God or reject Him through the only revelation to which they had access.
3) They were free to glorify God and offer their thanksgiving.
4) They even retained the knowledge of God, but cast it aside.
5) Had they glorified God and given Him thanks, they would have become part of the elect, but since they refused Him, they remained part of the non-elect.

Clarfying The Above
1. Any competent person upon the face of God’s footstool may seek Him, find Him, and choose Him. “To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor, and immortality, he will give eternal life” (Rom. 2:7). As verse 9 reveals, Paul is talking about “every human being.”

2. If God enables a man to seek Him, He also gives him the ability to choose Him! Here’s another clincher: Paul, in referring to the entire human family, writes, “God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each of us” (Acts 17:27).

3. But how may a man—any man—seek God and find Him if he is void of free will and the ability to choose? So, who is accessible and who does the seeking? God, of course, makes Himself available to every man, everywhere, after which some men choose to accept Him while others choose to reject Him. Those who accept Him are His elect. God knew who they were before the foundation of the universe. On that basis, predestination seems to rest.

4. The scriptures above demonstrate rather strongly that God has not constrained a segment of the population to be saved and arbitrarily by-passed all others. They establish the truth that anyone and everyone may choose to accept God or reject Him. Paul’s words—as well as Jesus’—forever dispels the main thrusts of Calvinism. There is absolutely no way to turn these facts around in an effort to give them a different meaning. Let’s put it like this:

The receptive heart will seek God and find Him. The non-receptive heart will not seek Him. He will remain dead in his sins.

The Calvinist asks, “But how does a man achieve a receptive heart? Who gave it to him? How did he come by it?” And I answer: Each person has been granted the ability to develop either a receptive heart or a non-receptive heart. In other words, God enables us to be receptive or non-receptive. The decision is ours. For if God forces a receptive heart upon those whom he foreknew, He has also forced a non-receptive heart upon those he did not foreknow. This translates into the truth that our God has compelled a segment of the population to be saved and the remainder to be lost. This bit of untruth clashes with heaven’s testimony.

Some of the Calvinists I’ve been in touch with, assert, “Man may choose, but he always chooses to disobey God, because he is so totally depraved.” This runs 100% counter to what Jesus declares. “If anyone chooses to do God’s will...” (John 7:17). The two statements cannot, under any circumstances, be reconciled. Either Jesus is wrong or the Calvinist is wrong. I’ll go with Jesus!

Calvinism’s Multi-Sided Theology

Part 2

More On The Receptive Heart
As noted above, a few months ago I joined a Calvinist discussion group on the Internet. I don’t recall any two of them agreeing on Calvinism’s main thrusts. One would assert one thing, and another would propose a different thought. This helped me to understand why Calvinists and Baptists are so divided and sub-divided.

One Calvinist brother inquired, “But what makes one’s heart receptive over another?” His question seems to imply that God grants some people a receptive heart while denying the same “imputation” to others. If the implication is as I view it, and I’ve dealt with Calvinists enough to know it is, God has created a large segment of the world’s population for the single purpose of banishing them to hell eternally. This is not descriptive of a merciful and loving God. Furthermore, it contradicts heaven’s message of salvation, which entreats all men to be saved.

Each man has the ability to develop either a receptive heart or a non-receptive heart. He is free to choose either. Jesus says as much in John 7:17. Man's ability is granted by God. It is part of man’s creation. The kind of heart he cultivates is of his own choosing. One Calvinist brother wrote, “Our sinful nature means we will always freely choose to rebel against Him, unless He gives us a new heart.”

Yes, even as born-again believers there’s an element of rebelliousness in each of us. As unregenerate sinners initially, we rebelled until God gave us a new creation. The issue here is just how does God give us a new heart? I’m compelled to answer with Paul, who wrote, “Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message...” (Rom. 10:17). When the message is heard, man has a choice to make. “If anyone chooses to do God’s will...” (John 7:17). No, I’m not isolating these passages from others and building a case for my own benefit. All scriptures pertaining to the subject at hand must be reconciled.

Furthermore, if the sinner is incapable of choosing the path he will tread, as Calvinists seem to imply, and if God operates upon his heart to the degree that he cannot resist, we have a Savior who is not issuing an invitation to the sinner, as Jesus did, but a Savior who issues an ultimatum and leaves no alternative but to accept. This is contrary to hundreds of scriptures, particularly Jesus’ invitation to all “those who are burdened.” He said, “Come to me, all of you...” But I see the Calvinist saying, in so many words, “Come to me, because I’m constraining you to come. You have no choice.”

Free Gift Or Obligation?
To me, a loving and merciful God would never create billions of people for the single purpose of condemning and banishing them from His presence forever. Yet, this is what the Calvinist position signals.

God wants all men to be saved. Listen to the Spirit as He writes through the apostle Paul, “This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:4). God, through the sacrifice of His Son, made it possible for all men to achieve a state of salvation. Paul says again, “This is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance—and for this we labor and strive—that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe” (1 Timothy 4:9-10).

God foreknew who would be saved, and these became His elect or chosen ones (Rom. 8:29-30). Tell me, please—and consider this carefully: If God’s elect must accept the offer of salvation, if they must choose to be saved, salvation and eternal life are no longer free gifts but obligations. And if obligations, we work to achieve our salvation, the very opposite of what heaven teaches. “Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation” (Rom. 4:4).

If a believer must accept God’s gracious gift of salvation, if he has no choice in the matter, the “free gift” becomes a forceful act on the part of the giver. A gift that is enforced upon its recipient is not free. And, if required to receive a “free gift,” the gift ceases to be free and becomes a coercive exercise on the part of the giver. If God’s elect must choose to be saved, they are like mechanical robots and lifeless puppets who were arbitrarily programmed before the foundation of the world. They can make no move or author any decision until their creator feeds into them certain commands and codes, or pulls a certain string.

The Calvinist Response
The Calvinist retorts, “True, we have no choice in this matter, but we are not forced into it. We are irresistibly drawn into it by God’s power.” This is a play upon words. For if the elect have no choice in the matter of salvation, if they are irresistibly drawn into it and cannot refuse, they are compelled to accept God’s grace. No tossing of the coin will topple this principle. And if irresistibly drawn or forced into it, the gift is no longer free. To be sure, if a precise number of the human family must choose to be saved, thus in essence condemning all others, or if salvation was addressed only to the elect and not to any other class, someone needs to define the above scriptures—as well as a bushel of others that could be cited.

A Favorite Scripture Of Calvinists
To bolster their creedal stance that man cannot choose to obey God, the Calvinist brother will quote Romans 8:7, which reads:

“The sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.”

There should be no difficulty comprehending Paul’s remarks. The carnal mind—or the mind set on the flesh—is against God. It is under condemnation as long as it remains in that state. Paul is not saying that it is impossible for a wicked man to change his moral and spiritual status, but that such cannot be achieved as long as he retains a carnal, fleshly, immoral mind.

In other words, he need not be mastered by a carnal mind. It is not imperative that he remain its slave. God has granted him the ability—“enabled” him—to redirect his life, should he so choose. As Peter told the 3,000 who were quickened by his message, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation” (Acts 2:40). “Save yourselves”—or make it possible for the Lord to save you—by complying with His conditions. God does His part. Man does his part. If man has no role in his conversion, not only is he a mechanical robot, but the scriptures relating to this matter are incoherent, incomprehensible, mystifying, and meaningless.

God Chooses or Rejects Nations
(Romans, Chapter 9
In this portion of the Roman letter, the great apostle speaks of God’s mercy and compassion, as well as the objects of His wrath. Paul writes that before Esau and Jacob, twins, were born, God elected that Esau would serve Jacob (vs. 10-13). The twins represented two nations or races. One race was loved and the other race hated. God asserted His right to choose or reject nations. Paul does not seem to be addressing the election of some persons to eternal salvation and others to damnation. God’s purpose in election on this occasion related to nations. It was promised—elected—that Jacob should become the father of a great nation.

God And Pharaoh
Then the apostle talks about Pharaoh and how God “raised him up” so that His power might be displayed (vs. 16-18). Again, the election was not of an individual to destruction, but of a man to be king for a special reason—to display God’s glory. Pharaoh’s hardening was at first his own decision. On five occasions, in Exodus, it is said that the king hardened himself. This being the case, God simply helped him along. God’s judgment made it harder for him! God gave him over to his own way (see Romans 1:26).

Compelled To Be Lost?
It should not be argued that God arbitrarily hardens the hearts of some people, thereby compelling them to be lost. Nor should we decipher from Paul’s message that because of God’s mercy, he requires others to be saved. This is not what Paul is advancing. I think it safe to conclude that God will have mercy and compassion upon those who are merciful, compassionate, and obedient, but he will demonstrate his wrath upon those who turn away from Him. Even Jesus taught the principle that God will be merciful to those who show mercy (Matthew 18:33).

But did God prepare some people for destruction and others for glory without giving them a will to contest His decision, as some feel verse 22 implies? If this is what Paul is advocating, we might as well trash our Bibles for they are surely contradictory! In verses 22-24, Paul is saying that the ungodly will receive God’s wrath. The “objects of His mercy”—those who show mercy—will receive His glory.

God’s Preparations
God prepared wrath aforehand for the ungodly, and glory aforehand for the righteous. God foreknew who the ungodly would be. These he “prepared for destruction.” God foreknew who the righteous would be. These He “prepared in advance for glory” (vs. 22-24). To conclude from Paul’s remarks that our Lord is unmerciful by forcing a segment of the world’s population to be lost and the remainder saved, is not the God I personally know. Those who perish will be of their own accord. It will not be forced upon them.

“They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved” (2 Thess. 2:10).

Special Note On The Perseverance Of The Saints
The apostle Paul, in comparing the Christian walk to a race, says, “I beat [discipline] my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize” (1 Cor. 9:27).

Leroy Garret, in commenting about the above passage, writes, “While Paul wasn’t planning for it to happen to him, is not the apostle saying that one might run in the Christian race in such a way as to be disqualified and not receive the prize? This conforms to 2 Tim. 2:5, ‘If anyone competes in athletics, he is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.’ ”

“These passages do not fit well with the Calvinist doctrine of ‘the perseverance of the saints’—that is, that the elect are unconditionally saved. Paul was of the elect and was writing to the elect, and he warned that the undisciplined might be disqualified and not receive the reward. Or as he told Timothy, the race has rules, which are not to be taken lightly, lest one not be crowned. Pray tell me, how could one make it plainer that that!”

Concluding Question
Is Heaven Behind The Calvinistic Persuasion?
It seems to me that if heaven is behind the main thrusts of this belief system, as Calvinists assert, God failed to communicate it in terms that the average man can understand. I like to think of myself as possessing the intellectual capabilities of decoding understandable communiqués. But if God is the author of this theological belief system, He has communicated His will in such a way that I’m incapable of comprehending it. It is a “mess” of jumbled entities. Furthermore, I’m always suspicious of a belief system that takes volumes to explain.

Yes, I know, there are scriptures that are difficult to understand. “His [Paul’s] letters contain some things that are hard to understand” (2 Peter 3:16). The scheme of redemption does not fall into that category, however. But this facet of Calvinism, which relates to the scheme of liberation, is complicated and almost impossible to “put together” in a comprehensible manner. Yes, I am more than suspicious of it.