Is Calvinism True?
NOTE: The post you are about to read is adapted from Chapter 3 of my book The Flower Falls: A Careful Examination of Calvinism’s TULIP. The entire book is available here in blog format, but you can find it in print form on Amazon and Barnes & Noble, or ask for it at your favorite bookstore.
Calvinism, Illusory Truth, and the Scriptures
One of the first things many of us learned in the American church is the simple, yet profound truth of John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that He Gave His only begotten Son…” We believed it. We memorized it. And we banked on the fact that “…whoever believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life.”
Later, we learned of the apostle Paul’s words to Timothy that God desires all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth, and we were thankful for his words to the Romans that whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved. Then, somewhere along the way, many of us were introduced to the ideas of Calvinism and told that God had unconditionally chosen and predestined us to be saved before the foundation of the world.
This sounded great — at first. It didn’t take long, however, for some of us to ask whether God had chosen everyone to be saved. When we were told he didn’t, we couldn’t help but think of the times we lined up alongside our classmates while designated captains called the names of those they wanted on their team. Relief came when we heard our name called, but, for many of us, the relief of being chosen was coupled with sadness as we looked at the faces of those left standing when the teams were full.
While we were encouraged by well-meaning pastors and teachers to be thankful that we were chosen, the idea that God chose some people to be saved while not choosing others brought turmoil rather than peace. What about our friends, family, the disabled boy down the street, or the millions of people around the world who have never heard of Jesus? Are they chosen too?
Soul Damaging
The ideas of Calvinism are indeed difficult to swallow. In Determined to Believe? British scholar and apologist Dr. John Lennox uses the example of Ivan in Dostoyevsky’s The Brother’s Karamazov to suggest that at least some “atheists” aren’t really rejecting God, but the view of God presented in deterministic theism. He then tells of conversations with people who became atheists for that reason, and of the concern of parents whose children have rejected the God who fixes eternal destinies saying, “If I am going to be saved I will be saved and there is nothing I can do about it in either direction.”(1)
The difficulty surrounding the teachings of Calvinism may be the reason that, in an article entitled How to Teach and Preach Calvinism, John Piper wrote:
Out rejoice your critics. The one who knows and rests in the sovereign grace of God should be the happiest saint. Don’t be a sour or glum or hostile false advertisement for the glory of God’s grace. Praise it. Rejoice in it. And don’t let that be a show. Do it in your closet until it is spilling over in the pulpit and the commons.(2)
When reading those words, I can’t help but wonder how many people, after responding to the gospel of Jesus Christ and having the weight of sin lifted from their shoulders, found it necessary to go into their closet to convince themselves that it was something they should rejoice in. Joy can be expressed several ways, from a stunned silence or a quiet smile, to laughter and tears, but knowing that the God of the universe loves you, that your sins have been forgiven, and that you have the promise of eternal life brings about incredible joy that needs no prompting by any man. If Calvinism is truly good news, why would those who believe it be sour or glum when thinking of it? And why would anyone feel the need to encourage them to rejoice in it?
Pride Inducing
The problems surrounding Calvinistic ideas about God choosing people aren’t limited to angst and confusion. Too many Calvinists who started with an attitude of humility, gratitude, and concern for the salvation of others around the world, eventually come to a place where their attitude becomes one of pride, impatience, and sometimes even contempt for those they believe are not in the “chosen” category. Many Calvinists are humble and respectful. Others are not. Joshua Harris, a former leader of the current Calvinism movement is quoted as saying: “I remember some of the first encounters I had with Calvinists, I’m sorry to say that they represented the doctrines of grace with a total lack of grace. They were spiteful, cliquish, and arrogant. I didn’t even stick around to understand what they were teaching. I took one look at them and knew I didn’t want any part of it.” (3)
When teaching about believers being chosen and predestined, John Piper is quick to warn about the very real dangers of arrogance and pride that tend to subtly creep in, both corporately and individually. He, like Joshua Harris and many others has likely experienced the arrogance of some Calvinists firsthand. This arrogance shouldn’t surprise those who have read the Bible. After all, Paul wrote about some of God’s chosen people Israel who, seeking to establish their own righteousness, did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God (Romans 10:3). And, John the Baptist suggested that some of them were trusting in their heritage as the chosen sons of Abraham to save them (Matthew 3:7–9). It seems they didn’t understand the nature of being chosen. Neither, it seems, do Calvinists today.
Amos 3:2 records God’s words to Israel, “You only have I chosen among all the families of the earth.” And, writing to Israelites, Peter said they were chosen to “proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness and into His marvelous light” (1 Peter 2:9). Neither passage speaks of salvation. In fact, Amos records the Lord speaking judgment against Israel: “Alas, you who are longing for the day of the LORD, For what purpose will the day of the LORD be to you? It will be darkness and not light…even gloom with no brightness in it…” (Amos 5:18–20). Peter also had words of caution for God’s chosen people, warning them that men would arise from among them who would secretly introduce destructive heresies, deny the master who bought them, forsake the right way, and be destroyed (2 Peter 2:1).
The apostle Paul seemed to have no illusion that being “chosen provided an unconditional guarantee of eternal life. After all, he not only mourned over his Israelite brethren and prayed for the salvation (Romans 9,10:1), he wrote to Timothy, “If we deny him, he will deny us” (2 Timothy 2:12). Remember these words were written by a man who was not only chosen by virtue of his heritage, but a man whom the Lord said was “a chosen instrument…to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the sons of Israel” (Acts 9:15).
People associate being chosen with an unconditional guarantee of eternal life seem to forget that John 8:44 records Jesus calling chosen people sons of the devil, he called them whitewashed tombs in Matthew 23:27, and just a few verses before that he said, “You shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in” (Matthew 23:13).
Please understand, I have no animosity toward any descendants of Israel. Rather, I have great wonder and thankfulness for their role as the people through whom God displayed his power and glory, who were entrusted with the oracles of God (Romans 3:2), and who brought forth the Savior of the world. Like Paul, I have great love for them and pray for their salvation, because, though the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are referred to as chosen throughout both the Old and New Testament, there is not a single passage of Scripture that says God unconditionally elected them for eternal salvation. In fact, just before Paul told Timothy “If we deny Him, he will deny us” he said, “I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory” (2 Timothy 2:10).
Paul’s words “so that they may also obtain the salvation…” suggest that there was no guarantee that the chosen would be saved. The words translated “may also obtain” are in the subjunctive mood which speaks of possibility rather than actuality. The reality that no unconditional guarantee of eternal life was given to God’s chosen people helps explain Paul’s mourning over his Israelite brethren in the first few verses of Romans 9 and his prayer for their salvation in 10:1.
Conditional Promises
Many of us have been taught otherwise, but the promises God made to chosen Israel were conditional “if-then” promises. One of these is the covenant he made with them after they came out of slavery and were headed to the Promised Land. Exodus 19:4–6 records:
You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Myself. Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine; and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.
The condition is simple: “If you will indeed obey My voice…then you shall be My own possession…” Yet, Israel’s history reveals that not everyone obeyed. The New Testament writer Jude confirmed this in verse 5 of his brief letter saying: “Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that the Lord, after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, subsequently destroyed those who did not believe.” In pointing this out, I am not attempting to dishonor God’s chosen people in any way, but rather to ask, if the chosen people of old did not have an unconditional guarantee of eternal life, then why do Calvinists, whose status as “chosen” is nebulous, think that they are unconditionally elected to eternal life?
You may be able to come up with a better word than nebulous but, based on comments I have heard, it seems appropriate. I imagine few pastors would tell you they haven’t spoken with at least one person who has questioned whether they are chosen or not. After all, we’re not able to point to our ancestry as Israel did, nor do we have a big “E” for “elect” stamped on us to prove we’re chosen. So how can we know? In answer to this question, intelligent, sincere, honest, and humble people often resort to comments like, “Just put your faith in Jesus and then you’ll know you’re chosen.” Or, “If you believe, then you’re chosen.” But is it really that abstract?
Unfortunately, confusion abounds when it comes to what the Bible says about being chosen. While some people agonize over whether they’re chosen or not, others are so convinced they’re chosen and eternally secure that they become very comfortable in ongoing, unrepentant sin. John Piper spoke in a TULIP seminar about two women who seemed quite secure in their salvation while carrying on extramarital affairs. So confident was one of them that when Piper spoke to her about the possibility of being damned if she continued in her sin, she protested that she was eternally secure, and quoted from Romans 8:38- 39 to support her claim. (4)
God’s graciousness in recording the failings of men and women throughout the pages of the Scriptures, and his purposeful mention of some of them in Hebrews 11 as those who have gained approval through their faith, should keep us from daring to judge these women. I am not sharing their story by way of passing judgment. I am merely showing that even Dr. Piper acknowledges the confusion that can result from the ideas of Calvinism’s TULIP.
No Comfort in Contradictions
Most Calvinists acknowledge that they don’t understand how Paul’s words that God desires all men to be saved can peacefully co-exist with the idea that, before the foundation of the world, he chose and predestined some people for salvation and other for damnation. Some timidly acknowledge these “truths” appear contradictory and say they simply can’t explain it. Others give philosophical answers as to why both are true despite the apparent contradictions. And some boldly say that these “truths” do not contradict one another at all — we just can’t understand because of our finite minds. In support of this last idea, some might look to the claim that Jesus was God and man at the same time. The difference is that the claim that Jesus was both God and man is complementary — not contradictory. This is not true, however, of TULIP’s teaching on predestination.
Discomfort with the contradictions between TULIP and the Scriptures might be eased in the mind of some people because they believe the teaching of Calvinism fall within the realm of Orthodox Christianity, but those who find comfort in Christian orthodoxy seem to overlook two important things. One is that what we call Christian orthodoxy has been discussed, debated, and determined by fallible men for almost 2,000 years. The other is that, prior to Martin Luther posting his 95 Theses on the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany in 1517, the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church were Christian orthodoxy.
Like opinions, orthodoxy changes. The Scriptures do not. We should have little concern about whether what we believe falls neatly in line with orthodoxy, but great concern that it falls in line with the Scriptures. The problem with TULIP is that its five points do not. In fact, attempts to fit Calvinistic ideas with the Scriptures have kept well-respected and educated church leaders discussing and debating God’s sovereignty in relation to salvation for hundreds of years without any real resolution. This has led many in the body of Christ to call the discrepancies a paradox, or a mystery that we may never understand. This then often leads to the conclusion that whether Calvinism’s TULIP is true or not doesn’t really matter because it is a non-essential issue. But is it?
If by non-essential one means that a person’s understanding of the subject does not determine their eternal destination, then yes, it is non-essential. However, if by non-essential one means that it makes no difference whether Calvinism is true or not, they could not be more wrong. TULIP compromises the very gospel proclaimed by the apostles. Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:15–16: “For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.” Did Jesus only die for some, as Calvinism claims, or did he die for all as Paul wrote here?
The Emperor’s Clothes and TULIP-colored Lenses
When first confronted with the teachings of Calvinism, many people immediately recognize they are not consistent with the Bible, and, like the lad in the story, proclaim that the Emperor wears no clothes. But the faith of some is radically altered as they are persuaded to embrace Calvinism by people they believe to be wise. Many have been influenced not only by their professors at Bible college, but also by people they and their professors admire; men long dead like Jonathan Edwards and Charles Spurgeon, as well as contemporary Calvinist leaders like John Piper, the late R.C. Sproul, and others who also struggled long before surrendering to TULIP.
In a video interview with John Piper, Matt Chandler (pastor of The Village Church and President of Acts 29 Network) talked about his early experiences with Calvinism. He spoke of being introduced to it in a book by J.I. Packer, further influenced by Dr. Piper at a Passion Conference, and still further while reading books by Dr. Piper and R.C. Sproul. He told of his struggle in coming to grips with Calvinism’s teachings, saying “…now I see it, but I don’t know what to do with it. It’s not a warm blanket to me yet. Um, and I so just wrestle, just wrestle…And now, see once those lenses get put on you, you just can’t read your Bible without seeing it…”(5)
I appreciate Chandler’s enthusiasm and consider him, John Piper, and other leading Calvinists as brothers in the Lord. His candor about the lenses, however, is telling. He is right that once those lenses get put on you, you can’t read your Bible without seeing Calvinism. The problem is that Calvinistic lenses cause people to see things that are not there.
Like Chandler, Dr. Piper has been candid about his struggle with Calvinistic teaching after he was introduced to it as a seminary student at Fuller Theological Seminary. Among other things, he has spoken of going “back to my apartment and sitting down after class and putting my face in my hands and weeping” while attempting to reconcile Calvinistic teaching with the Biblical truths he had grown up with.(6)
Similarly, the late R.C. Sproul wrote of fighting the Calvinistic view of predestination “tooth and nail all the way through college” before his “surrender” during his senior year of seminary, saying, “I resisted for well over a year. My final surrender came in stages. Painful stages… My final crisis came in my senior year. I had a three-credit course in the study of Jonathan Edwards… at the same time I had a Greek exegesis course in the book of Romans. I was the only student in that course, one on one with the New Testament professor… the combination was too much for me…”(7)
Interestingly, once “surrendered” Calvinists sometimes claim their long struggle was the result of their sinful flesh wanting to take credit for their salvation. Therefore, they seem to wear their surrender as almost a badge of maturity. After hearing one of my Calvinist acquaintances say that agreement with Calvinistic teaching is a byproduct of mature faith, I wondered how many others think similarly, but are hesitant to say so. It wasn’t until I watched the highly influential evangelical Al Mohler say Calvinism is the only option for “a theologically minded, deeply convictional, young evangelical…committed to the gospel”(8) that I began to understand how deeply that idea is embedded in the Calvinistic culture, and how strong the pressure is to jump on board with Calvinists.
The idea that Calvinism is the only theological option for mature and committed Christians is intimidating enough, but it is compounded by Calvinists’ use of the terms The Doctrines of Grace and a High View of The Sovereignty of God to describe their beliefs. Attaching these terms to Calvinistic teaching gives the impression that those who aren’t Calvinists don’t have a high view of God’s sovereignty and rely on their own righteousness rather than on God’s grace to save them.
I won’t speak for anyone else in this regard, but nothing could be further from the truth in my life. Calvinists are not the only ones who hold to the doctrine of grace or have a high view of the sovereignty of God. Based on the Scriptures and backed up by real-life experience, I believe that God is absolutely sovereign. And anyone who knows me knows that if I had to rely on my own righteousness to save me then I would be without hope. I knew as a young girl that I could never be good enough to deserve or earn salvation, and it remains obviously true today. I know that it is only because of Jesus’ substitutionary sacrifice and God calling me in accordance with his grace that I can lay hold of the promise of eternal life in Christ. It is not that I and other non-Calvinists don’t believe in God’s grace or sovereignty, it is that Calvinists have attached definitions to those words that are not supported by the Scriptures.
The stories of how Piper, Chandler, and Sproul “surrendered” to Calvinism, along with Mohler’s claim that it is the only option for mature evangelicals might be used to convince those resistant to Calvinism to surrender as well, but it’s important to note that none of these men said the discrepancies between TULIP and the Scriptures were resolved for them. Instead, they were convinced to embrace the discrepancies as “mysteries” and humbly accept that God can do whatever he wants — after all his ways and thoughts are higher than ours.
God ways and thoughts are indeed infinitely higher than ours, and there are many mysteries surrounding the Scriptures, but mystery doesn’t account for Calvinistic ideas about salvation and damnation. Instead, the experiences of Piper, Chandler, and Sproul, combined with Mohler’s suggestion that Calvinism is the only option for mature Christians seem to make a case for the psychological phenomenon known as Illusory Truth Effect. (9)
You’ve probably heard it said that if something is repeated enough times, people will start to believe it. This axiom (or a version of it) is often attributed to Adolf Hitler who wrote in Mein Kampf about the “big lie” which, he claimed, people are more prone to believe than a little lie. There he contended that, even after facts are brought to light that disprove a big lie, people will “doubt and waver.” “For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”(10)
Hitler’s confidence that people believe big lies is supported by thousands of years of history, but it wasn’t confirmed scientifically until 2015 when the American Psychological Association published a study titled Knowledge Does Not Protect Against Illusory Truth. Researchers demonstrated that repetition makes statements easier to process, and therefore easier to believe. This is nothing new. Repetition is a proven method of learning. The interesting thing researchers found is that if a lie was repeated enough times by a trusted voice “illusory truth effects occurred even when participants knew better.”(11)
This phenomenon should be no surprise to those who know the Scriptures. Much of the New Testament was written to those who knew the truth but were susceptible to believing lies. Peter wrote about being born again to a living hope and said that the outcome of faith is the salvation of souls, but he later told his readers that he would always be ready to remind his readers of these things even though they knew them and had been established in the truth. Similarly, James wrote to those who knew the truth, yet he closed his letter expressing the possibility that some would stray from it.
Paul was a little different in that he seemed to know the tendency of people to stray from truth in practice rather than just theory. After expressing his surprise at how quickly the Galatians were abandoning God for a different gospel, Paul said it really wasn’t another gospel, but a distortion of the gospel of Christ. He even went so far as to say that if he, “or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!” Interestingly, the word translated as contrary does not mean opposite or against as we might assume. Instead, he used the word para, which means alongside. This is the root word of our English word parallel. In other words, Paul was concerned about the Galatians falling for a false gospel that was laid alongside the true one.
The nineteenth-century preacher C.H. Spurgeon called Calvinism “the gospel and nothing else” (12) but it contradicts Paul’s assertion that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself and that Christ “died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf” (2 Corinthians 5:14–21). It conflicts with the truth that God desires all people to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4). And it makes a mockery of Paul’s words that God “made from one man every nation of mankind to live on the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, that they would seek God…” (Acts 17:26–27). Is Calvinism the gospel — or is it a teaching laid alongside and masquerading as the gospel?
Illusions of Knowledge and the Power of Influence
Long before Illusory Truth Effect was documented by the APA, the writers of Scripture understood that even those who knew the truth might be persuaded to believe a lie. However, the APA study documented another important discovery. Testing not only showed that people are susceptible to underutilizing their knowledge in the face of an oft-repeated and artfully presented lie, it showed that those who become convinced of the lie do so with high levels of confidence. In fact, researchers found that once people become convinced of the lie, it’s nearly impossible to convince them otherwise. The authors of the study refer to this new “knowledge” as Illusions of Knowledge.
Calvinists look to “mystery” to support TULIP and the idea that God predestined every event in history as part of his will and predestined plan but the Illusory Truth Effect and Illusions of Knowledge might better explain it. What bigger lie is there than that God doesn’t really love the whole world, he doesn’t desire that all people believe and be saved, and that Jesus didn’t really die for the sins of the world?
Matt Chandler, John Piper, and R.C. Sproul all set aside the simple truths of the Scriptures and became convinced of Calvinistic ideas about predestination after they were presented to them by influential and trusted people. Each of them was under 25 years old when they were introduced to Calvinism. Each struggled for more than a year before “surrendering” to it. Each became passionate about the “gospel” of Calvinism. And each is among the most outspoken and influential Calvinistic voices today (Sproul’s influence continues through his writings).
The power of influence is undeniable. Al Mohler has spoken openly about being so influenced by a professor at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary to believe that women should be called as pastors that he led an effort to protest the 1984 Southern Baptist Convention stance that “a woman ought not be a pastor.” In doing so, he said, “We bought an ad in the Courier-Journal and made a statement about God as an equal opportunity employer…I did this while affirming biblical inerrancy, absolutely sure that the Bible was the infallible, inerrant Word of God.” (13)
Mr. Mohler no longer believes women should be pastors. However, while explaining his current stance, he candidly acknowledged the power of influence saying, “I can give firsthand testimony” of the influence of a preacher or teacher to set a course of error, “leading to others…”(14) The problem that is, while offering no explanation other than mystery to explain the inconsistencies between Calvinism and the Scriptures, Mohler now uses his substantial influence to persuade others that Calvinism is the only option for evangelicals committed to the gospel.
John MacArthur also knows the power of influence. As the teaching pastor of Grace Community Church, chancellor emeritus of The Master’s University and Seminary, and host of the Shepherd’s Conference which draws thousands of pastors from around world each year, his influence is vast. And he, like Mohler, Piper, and Chandler, uses that influence to promote Calvinism.
After saying that questions about Calvinism are usually the first to be asked when he hosts question and answer sessions around the world, Dr. MacArthur spoke of introducing the “doctrine of divine election” (Calvinism) to his congregation:
Understand this, that people are the product of their teaching and they’re where they are for a reason. Somebody took them there…I came to a church that…couldn’t have been more opposite than where I am. It took years of transition. They didn’t even know they were being transitioned by the way. They woke up one day and realized they believed in the doctrine of divine election and they embraced it with a full heart. It can be done, but it needs to be done at a leadership level in a gracious, patient way. (15)
MacArthur claims the transition took place by teaching the “Word of God” but when faced with questions about the inconsistencies between Calvinism and the Scriptures, he too claims mystery. During a question and answer at the 2010 Shepherd’s Conference, one of the thousands of pastors in attendance asked about Calvinism’s Limited Atonement: “If it is true, then why witness? How do we tell them that God loves them, and that Jesus Christ did not die for them?” Dr. MacArthur answered that he feels the same tension others feel regarding the atonement and “the doctrine of divine election and predestination” and is “happy to concede that God can resolve things that I can’t.” He even went so far as to say he’s not able to unscrew the inscrutable.” (16)
It’s good and right to concede that God can resolve things we can’t. As we’ve acknowledged, his ways and thoughts are infinitely above ours. However, claiming mystery in the face of inconsistencies has been a tactic used by deceitful salespeople, unethical politicians, and delusional cult leaders for generations. With all due respect, if we don’t allow those people to call inconsistencies “mysteries” without questioning the integrity of their claims, why do we allow Calvinists to do so? Paul told the Corinthians that he spoke God’s wisdom in a mystery among those who are mature, but he went on to caution his readers to not go beyond what was written. Are we to believe John Calvin was the carrier of a Biblical mystery even though his claims go beyond and contradict the written words of the Scriptures?
Grounded in Scripture
The teachings of Calvinism have caused confusion and conflict in the body of Christ for generations, but to refute it based on these things would be to argue from an emotional standpoint — and we all know we can’t measure truth based on feelings. It’s quite possible for people to be confused and conflicted about things that are true and verifiable. However, it is equally possible to be confused and conflicted about things that are presented as truth but are not verifiable.
Paul not only told the Thessalonians to examine everything carefully and hold fast to that which is good, he also urged Timothy to rightly divide the word of truth. The Greek word translated as rightly divide is taken from two words: temno meaning “to cut” and orthos meaning “straight.” In other words, he told Timothy to “cut it straight.” When considering the teachings of Calvinism and the texts used to support them, it’s imperative that we follow Paul’s instructions. To accomplish this, we’ll need to consider the original language of the texts, their grammatical and historical contexts, and the law of non-contradiction. (17) Because, though Paul told the Romans “whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction” (Romans 15:4) he did not say that everything was written to or about the Romans.
The same is true of you and me. The truths of the Bible are timeless, so we might identify with many of the situations and struggles of the men and women mentioned within its pages. We might even find ourselves echoing a Psalm or a prayer uttered by them. And we can certainly apply many of the passages that speak of everyone, whoever, and all people to ourselves. However, it’s important to remember the Scriptures were written to and about specific people in specific situations at specific points in history, so we can’t arbitrarily insert ourselves into passages that make no room for us. Doing so leads to all kinds of confusion.
We’ll begin a close examination of the proof texts for Calvinism’s TULIP here, but, before we do, let’s take a few minutes to review basic interpretation guidelines together here. After all, it’s only right that we hold ourselves to the same interpretation standards that we hold other faith groups to.
Thank you for visiting.
NOTE: This post is adapted from Chapter 3 of my book The Flower Falls: A Careful Examination of Calvinism’s TULIP. You can find it on Amazon and Barnes & Noble, or ask for it at your favorite bookstore.
To read about other passages used to support Calvinism, return to the homepage or follow one of the links below.
Calvinism’s Errors: A Brief Introduction
The Illusory Truth of Calvinism
The Sovereignty and Will of God
Chosen and Predestined Ephesians 1
Redemption, Adoption, and the Seal of the Spirit- Ephesians
Romans 8- Foreknown and Predestined
Romans 8:33- A Charge Against God’s Elect
Romans 9- Love & Hate, Potter & Clay
1 and 2 Peter-Chosen According to Foreknowledge
Acts 13:48, Appointed to Eternal Life
Jesus’ Drawn, Given, and Chosen
Total Depravity and Human Righteousness
Isaiah 64:6- Righteousness and Filthy Rags
Genesis 6- Only Evil Continually
Jeremiah 17 and Ephesians 2- Wicked Hearts and Dead Men
You can connect with me on Twitter with questions and comments, or email me at patti@theflowerfallsoff.com
Notes
- J. Lennox, Determined to Believe? Zondervan, 2017, pgs. 62–63).
- https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/how-to-teach-and-preach-calvinism
3. Collin Hansen, Young, Restless, Reformed: A Journalist’s Journey with the New Calvinists (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008), 121–122.
4. John Piper, “Perseverance of the Saints,” TULIP Seminar, Session 8, video, 9:24, Desiring God, March 15, 2008, https://www.desiringgod.org/messages/perseverance-of-the-saints-session-8.
5. Piper, John and Chandler, Matt. “John Piper Interviews Matt Chandler, Part 3” Video. desiringGod. Feb. 2009. (5/13/13) minute 2:35–4:10
6. Piper, John. “Tulip, Part 1.” Audio. (Minutes 32–41) desiringGod. Mar. 2008. (5/13/13)
7. Sproul, R.C. “Chosen By God.” Tyndale Houses Publishes. 1994. “The Struggle” p. 12.
8. More Aggressive Calvinism in SBC, video, 1:16, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6lRMMvNCn8.
9. Lisa K. Fazio, et al., “Knowledge Does Not Protect Against Illusory Truth,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2015, 144, no. 5, 993–1002. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/xge-0000098.pdf
10. Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, trans. James Murphy, vol. 1, chp. 10.
11. Fazio, 993. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/xge-0000098.pdf
12. 1. C. H. Spurgeon, “A Defense of Calvinism,” http://archive.spurgeon.org/calvinis.php.
13. Trevin Wax, “Al Mohler and Why He Changed His Mind on Women Pastors,” The Gospel Coalition, September 28, 2010,
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevin-wax/al-mohler-on-why-he-changed-his-mind-on-women-pastors.
14. Ibid
15. John MacArthur, “Answering the Key Questions About the Doctrine of Election,” Grace to You, July 17, 2006, accessed August 21, 2019, https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/GTY106/Answering-the-Key-Questions-About-the-Doctrine-of-Election. Note: The wording was changed without notation after I contacted Dr. MacArthur to inform him that I planned to quote him.
You can find a digital image of the quote at
https://medium.com/@pks.tilton/the-flower-falls-links-8edc7f7e29c6
16. John MacArthur on Predestination,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ9KhUMYL2w.
17. 1. “Law of Non-Contradiction,” Dictionary of Philosophy, CARM, https://carm.org/dictionary-law-of-non-contradiction.
