T.U.L..I.P. and why I disagree with it

The term "Calvinism" is used by some people who do not hold Calvin's teaching on predestination and do not understand exactly what Calvin taught.

Dr. Loraine Boettner in his book, 'The reformed Doctrine of Predestination', says, "The Calvinistic system especially emphasized five distinct doctrines. These are technically known as 'The Five Points of Calvinism.' And they are the main pillars upon which the superstructure rests."

Dr. Boettner further says, "The five points may be more easily remembered if they are associated with the word T-U-L-I-P

T - Total Inability; U - Unconditional Election; L - Limited Atonement; I - Irresistible (efficacious) Grace; and P - Perseverance of the Saints." These are the five points of Calvinism.

I have heard people say, "I am a one-point Calvinist, a two-point Calvinist" and so on. Look at each one of these views as taught by Calvin and then see what the Bible has to say on each point. As with any Doctrine, it is no stronger than the foundation upon which it is built and it'll either be built upon sand or the Rock!

By total inability Calvin meant that a lost sinner could not repent and come to Jesus Christ and trust Him as Savior, unless he is foreordained to come to Christ. By total inability he meant that no man has the ability to come to Christ. And unless God overpowers him and gives him that ability, he will never come to Christ.

The Bible teaches total depravity. But that simply means that there is nothing good in man to earn or deserve salvation. The Bible says in Jeremiah 17:9,

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked." While the Bible teaches the depravity of the human race, it no where teaches total inability. The Bible never hints that people are lost because they have no ability to come to Christ. The language of Jesus was (John 5:40),

"You will not come to me, that you might have life." Notice, it is not a matter of whether or not you CAN come to Christ; it is a matter of whether or not you WILL come to Him.

Jesus looked over Jerusalem and wept and said, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem. . how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, AND YE WOULD NOT!" (Matt 23:37).

Here again notice, He did not say, "How often I would have gathered you together, but you COULD not." No. He said, "Ye WOULD not!" It was not a matter of whether they could; it was a matter of whether they would.

Rev. 22:17, the last invitation in the Bible says, "And the Spirit and the bride say, COME. And let him that hearth say, Come. And let him that is thirsty come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."

If it is true that no person has the ability to come to Christ, then why would Jesus say in John 5:40, "Ye will not come to me?" Why didn't He simply say, "You cannot come to me"?

Some Calvinists use John 6:44 in an effort to prove total inability. Here the Bible says, "No man can come to me, except the Father which has sent me draw him. . ." But the Bible makes it plain in John 12:32 that Christ will draw all men unto Himself, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth will draw ALL men unto me."

All men are drawn to Christ, but not all men will trust Christ as Savior. Every man will make his own decision to trust Christ or to reject Him. The Bible makes it clear that all men have light. (Jn 1:9) Rom. 1:19, 20 indicates that every sinner has been called through the creation about him. Romans 2:11-16 indicates that sinners are called through their conscience, even when they have not heard the gospel.

So in the final analysis, men GO to Hell, not because of their inability to come to Christ, but because they will not come to Him - "Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life."

The teaching that men, women and children are totally unable to come to Christ and trust Him as Savior is not a scriptural doctrine. The language itself is not scriptural. The foundation of this doctrine is very shaky when looked at in light of what the Scriptures say and not what some men have said.

By unconditional election Calvin meant that some are elected to go to Heaven, while others are elected to go to Hell, and that this election is unconditional. It is wholly on God's part and without condition. By unconditional election Calvin meant that God has already decided who will be saved and who will be lost, and the individual has absolutely nothing to do with it. He can only hope that God has elected him for Heaven and not for Hell.

This teaching so obviously disagrees with the oft-repeated invitations in the Bible to sinners to come to Christ and be saved that some readers will think that I have overstated the doctrine. So I will quote John Calvin in his "Institutes, Book III, chapter 23,"

"...Not all men are created with similar destiny but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or the other of these ends, we say, he is predestined either to life or to death."

So Calvinism teaches that it is God's own choice that some people are to be damned forever. He never intended to save them. He foreordained them to go to Hell. And when He offers salvation in the Bible, He does not offer it to those who were foreordained to be damned. It is offered only to those who were foreordained to be saved.

This teaching insists that we need not try to win men to the Lord because men cannot be saved unless God has planned for them to be saved. And if God has planned for them to be eternally lost, they will not come to Christ.

There is the Bible doctrine of God's foreknowledge, predestination and election. Most knowledgeable Christians agree that God has His controlling hand on the affairs of men. They agree that according to the Bible, He selects individuals like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David as instruments to do certain things He has planned. Most Christians agree that God may choose a nation - particularly that He did choose Israel, through which He gave the law, the prophets, and eventually through whom the Savior Himself would come - and that there is a Bible doctrine that God foreknows all things.

God in His foreknowledge knows who will trust Jesus Christ as Savior, and He has predestined to see that they are justified and glorified. He will keep all those who trust Him and see that they are glorified. But the doctrine that God elected some men to Hell, that they were born to be damned by God's own choice, is a radical heresy not taught anywhere in the Bible.

In the booklet entitled TULIP by Vic Lockman, Lockman attempts to prove the five points of Calvinism. Under the point, Unconditional Election, he quotes Ephesians 1:4, but he only quotes the first part of the verse: "He hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world." However, that is not the end of the verse. Mr. Lockman, like most Calvinists, stopped in the middle of the verse. The entire verse reads:

"According as he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love." The verse says nothing about being chosen for Heaven or Hell. It says we are chosen that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.

Under the same point, Unconditional Election, Mr. Lockman quotes John 15:16, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." Again, Mr. Lockman, like most Calvinists, stops in the middle of the verse. The entire verse reads: "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."

The verse says nothing about being chosen for Heaven or Hell. It says we are chosen to go and bring forth fruit, which simply means that every Christian is chosen to be a witness for Him and to practice soul winning. Proverbs 11:30 says,

"The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that wins souls is wise." Nowhere does the Bible teach that God wills for some to go to Heaven and wills for others to go to Hell. NO. The Bible teaches that God would have all men to be saved. 2 Pet. 3:9 says that He is

"not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. "I Tim. 2:4 says, "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." Those who teach that God would only have some to be saved, while He would have others to be lost are misrepresenting God and the Bible. Does God really predestinate some people to be saved and predestinate others to go to Hell, so that they have no free choice?

Absolutely not! Nobody is predestined to be saved, except as He chooses of his own free will to come to Christ and trust Him for salvation. And no one is predestined to go to Hell, except as he chooses of his own free will to reject Christ and refuses to trust Him as Savior. John 3:36 says, "He that believes on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believes not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abides on Him."

Nothing could be plainer. The man who goes to Heaven goes because he comes to Jesus Christ and trusts Him as Savior. And the man who goes to Hell does so because he refuses to come to Jesus Christ and will not trust Him as Savior.

By limited atonement, Calvin meant that Christ died only for the elect, for those He planned and ordained to go to Heaven: He did not die for those He planned and ordained to go to Hell. Again I say, such language is not in the Bible, and the doctrine wholly contradicts many, many plain Scriptures.

For instance, the Bible says in I John 2:2, "He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

The teaching of Calvinism on Limited Atonement contradicts the express statement of Scripture. First Timothy 2:5-6 says, "The man Christ Jesus; Who gave Himself a ransom for all. . . ." The Bible teaches that Jesus is the Savior of the world. Jn 4:42 says, "and said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world."

Again, I John 4:14, "and we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world." The Scriptures make it plain that Jesus came to save the world. John 3:17 says, "For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved."

No man will ever look at Jesus and say, "You didn't want to be my Savior." No! No! Jesus wants to be the Savior of all men. As a matter of fact, I Timothy 4:10 says, "For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, specially of those who believe."

The Bible teaches that Christ bore the sins of all people. Is. 53:6 says, "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.: There are two "ALLS" in this verse. The first "ALL" speaks of the universal fact of sin -

"All we like sheep have gone astray." And the second "ALL" speaks of universal atonement - "and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." The "ALL" in the first part of Isaiah 53:6 covers the same crowd that the "ALL" in the last part of that verse covers. If we all went astray, then the iniquities of all were laid on Christ.

Not only did He bear the sins of us all, but the Bible plainly teaches that He died for the whole world. Look at I John 2:2,

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

If that isn't plain enough, the Bible says His death was for every man; (Hebrews 2:9)

"But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for EVERY MAN" .

Nothing could be plainer than the fact that Jesus Christ died for every man. First Timothy 2:5-6 says, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all. . . ."

Romans 8:32 states, "He that spared not His own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?"

Look at the statements - statement after statement: "that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man"; "Who gave himself a ransom for all"; "delivered him up for us all." John 3:16 has been called "the heart of the Bible." It has been called "the Bible in miniature." "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Jesus died for the whole world. He suffered Hell for every man who has ever lived or ever will live. And no man will look out of Hell and say, "I wanted to be saved, but Jesus did not die for me.

Some argue that if Jesus died for the whole world, the whole world would be saved. No. The death of Christ on the cross was sufficient for all, but it is efficient only to those who believe. The death of Jesus Christ on the cross made it possible for every man everywhere to be saved. but only those who believe that He died to pay their sin debt and who trust Him completely fro salvation will be saved.

Again I quote John 3:36, "He that believes on the Son hath everlasting life. . . ." Everybody is potentially saved, but everybody is not actually saved until he recognizes that he is a sinner, believes that Jesus Christ died on the cross to pay the sin debt, rose from the grave on the third day, and trust Him completely for salvation.

The atonement is not limited. It is as universal as sin. Romans 5:20 says, "But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." Isaiah 53:6 states, "all we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all."

The fourth point of Calvinism is irresistible grace. By irresistible grace, John Calvin meant that God simply forces people to be saved. God elected some to be saved, and He let Jesus die for that elect group.

And now by irresistible grace, He forces those He elected, and those Jesus Christ died for to be saved.

The truth of the matter is, there is no such thing as irresistible grace. Nowhere in the Bible does the word "irresistible" appear before the word "grace." That terminology is simply not in the Bible. It is the philosophy of John Calvin, not a Bible doctrine. The word "irresistible" doesn't even sound right in front of the word "grace."

Grace means "God's unmerited favor." Grace is an attitude, not a power. If Calvin had talked about the irresistible drawing power of God, it would have made more sense. But instead, he represents grace as the irresistible act of God compelling a man to be saved who does not want to be saved, so that a man has no choice in the matter at all, except as God forcibly puts a choice in his mind. Calvinism teaches that man has no part in salvation, and cannot possibly cooperate with God in the matter. In no sense of the word and at no stage of the work does salvation depend upon the will or work of man or wait for the determination of his will.

Does the Bible say anything about irresistible grace? Absolutely not! The Scriptures show that men do resist and reject God. Prov.29:1 states, "He, that being often reproved hardens his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy." Notice the word "OFTEN" in this verse. If God only gave one opportunity to be saved, then man could not complain. But here the Bible says, "He, that being often reproved. . . ." This means the man was reproved over and over again. Not only was he reproved many times, but he was reproved often.

But the Bible says he "hardens his neck" and "shall suddenly be destroyed, and without remedy." That certainly doesn't sound like irresistible grace. The Bible teaches that a man can be reproved over and over again, and he can harden his neck against God, and as a result will be destroyed without remedy.

Again Proverbs 1:24-26 says, "Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would have none of my reproof: I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear comes."

Here the Bible plainly says, "I have called, and ye have refused. . .but ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would have none of my reproof." That doesn't sound like irresistible grace. God calls, and men refuse. Is that irresistible? God stretches out His hand and no man regards it?

Is that irresistible grace? No. The Bible makes it plain that some men do reject Christ, and they refuse His call. John 5:40 says, "Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life." That verse plainly teaches that men can and do resist God and refuse to come to Him.

In Acts 7, we find Stephen preaching. He says in verse 51, "Ye stiff necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye." To these Jewish leaders, Stephen said, "Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost." So here were people; some of whom had seen Jesus and heard Him preach; others who had heard Peter at Pentecost; others who had heard Stephen and other Spirit-filled men preaching with great power. And what had they done? They were stiff necked and uncircumcised in their heart and ears. That is, they were stubborn and rebellious against God. The Bible plainly says, "They resisted the holy Ghost."

Notice the words of Stephen in verse 51, "Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye." Here the Bible teaches that not only were these Jewish leaders resisting the Holy ghost, but that their fathers before them had also resisted the Holy Spirit. Stephen says that all the way from Abraham, through the history of the Jewish nation, down to the time of Christ, unconverted Jews had resisted the Holy Spirit.

God offers salvation to all men. Titus 1:11 says, "For the grace of God that brings salvation hath appeared to all men." But man must make his own choice. He must either receive or reject Christ. John 1:12 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." When Jesus wept over Jerusalem, he said, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Here again the Bible clearly indicates that God would have gathered them together as a hen gathers her brood, but they would not. That certainly shows that they could reject and resist Christ. "I would, but ye would not" does not fit the teaching of irresistible grace. So people do resist the Holy Spirit. They do refuse to come to Christ. They do harden their necks. They do refuse when God calls.

That means that those who are not saved could have been saved. Those who rejected Christ could have accepted Him. God offers salvation to those who will have it, but does not force it upon anyone who doesn't want it.

The Bible teaches, and I believe in, the eternal security of the born-again believer. The man who has trusted Jesus Christ has ever- lasting life and will never perish. But the eternal security of the believer does not depend upon his perseverance.

I do not know a single Bible verse that says anything about the saints' persevering, but there are several Bible verses that mention the fact that the saints have been preserved. Perseverance is one thing. Preservation is another. No. The saints do not persevere; they are preserved.

The Bible states in Jude 1, "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ. . . ."

First Thessalonians 5:23 says, "And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly: and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

The Bible makes it plain that the believer is kept. He does not keep himself. First Peter 1:4-5 states: "To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fades not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

The Bible says in John 10:27-29: "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life: and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." Now that doesn't sound like the PERSEVERANCE of the sheep or the saints. Here the sheep are in the Father's hand, and they are safe - not because they persevere, but because they are in the Father's hand.

Charles Spurgeon once said, "I do not believe in the PERSEVERANCE of the saints. I believe in the PERSEVERANCE of the Savior." To be sure, the Bible teaches the eternal security of the believer. But the believer's security has nothing to do with his persevering. We are secure because we are kept by God. We are held in the Father's hand. And according to Ephesians 4:30, we have been sealed by the Holy Spirit until the day of redemption.

There is a belief that if one does not teach universal salvation, he must either be a Calvinist or an Arminian. In his book, "The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, Dr. Loraine Boettner says on page 47, "There are really only three systems which claim to set forth the way of salvation through Christ [And he names them]: "(1) Universalism, that all will be saved. (2) Arminianism, which holds that Christ died equally and indiscriminately for every individual. . ., that saving grace is not necessarily permanent, but those who are loved of God, ransomed by by God, and born of the Holy Spirit may (let God wish and strive ever so much to the contrary) throw away all and perish eternally; and, (3) Calvinism." He continues, "Only two are held by Christians." That is Calvin's position and Arminius' position."

Calvinists would like to make people believe that if one does not teach universal salvation, he must either be a Calvinist or an Arminian. And since the Arminian position does such violence to the grace of God, many preferred to call themselves Calvinists. But a person doesn't have to take either position.

I am neither Arminian nor Calvinist. I believe in salvation by grace through faith in the finished work of Christ. I believe in the eternal security of the believer. I believe that Jesus Christ died for all men, and I believe what the Bible says,

"That whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." But I disagree with all five points of Calvinism as John Calvin taught it. In conclusion, let me say that Calvin and those who followed him claimed to believe and follow the Bible. They claimed to find at least a germ of the Calvinist doctrine in the Scriptures. But a careful student will find that again and again they go beyond the Scripture, and that Calvinism is a philosophy developed by man and depending on fallible logic and frail, human reasoning, with the perversion of some Scriptures, the misuse of others, and the total ignoring of many clear Scriptures. Calvin did teach many wonderful, true doctrines of Scripture.

It is true that God foreknows everything that will happen in the world. It is true that God definitely ordained and determined some events ahead of time and selected some individuals for His purposes.

It is certain that people are saved by grace, and are kept by the power of God. That far Calvinists may well prove their doctrines by Scriptures. but beyond that, Calvinism goes into a realm of human philosophy.

It is not a Bible doctrine, but a system of human philosophy, especially appealing to the scholarly intellect, the self-sufficient and proud mind. Brilliant, philosophical, scholarly preachers are apt to be misled on this matter more than the humble-hearted, Bible-believing Christian.

Doc, your arguments are weak. You continue to say that we don't understand what calvinism "really" means as opposed to what it says. I simply don't buy a doctrine that explains away something as straightforward, clear and forthright as "whosoever will may come."

I stand by what I said. You misrepresented Calvinism repeatedly in your post. I pointed this out to you every time. And you are still ignoring what I did say in my response.

You see, your conception of the gospel is that Calvinism is not true. That is your presupposition. You think the God of the Calvinists is some kind of unfair monster. You learned this perspective from the same spirit who misled Wesley. You are judging God by your own Adamic-Satanic notions as to what fairness is.

Whitefield was right. Wesley was wrong. Wesley didn't understand any pivotally important thing which Whitefield tried to tell them.

How could that be? Read 1 Corinthians 3. Carnality is murderous. It can make sinners stupidly unteachable. (This is why "Mr. Love" exploded at Whitefield, ignored everything Whitefield said, and started his OWN MOVEMENT. That was a bad idea. The Church is still suffering from Wesley's hypocritically uncharitable attitude. I respectfully submit that Wesleyan's incredibly bad attitude has infested you as a Wesleyan.)

Calvinism DOES teach "not just anyone may come."

No, Calvinism does NOT teach that. Read Spurgeon.

You need to quit making these accusations a la carnal Mr. Wesley. I warned you about this, but to no avail. You don't understand our position. (And you won't heed that warning.)

You might not strain at swallowing that, but a thinking person has to step back when a verse gets twisted upside-down like that.

I have twisted nothing "upside down" like that. Calvinists do believe in the free offer of the gospel. We present it with tremendous energy. Spurgeon makes most of today's Arminians seem cold by comparison.

You ALSO say that the Bible DOES NOT say "God does not show favoritism." The bible most certainly does. Check out Acts 10:34 Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism

The KJV translation is the accurate one in this case. Your idea of "God does not show favoritism" should be rendered as "God is not a respecter of persons."

Why is this a better translation? First of all, it's because God obviously does show favoritism. But He is not a respecter of persons.

To show you what I mean, I would point out that God picked Abraham and a peculiar lineage of Abraham's descendants--i.e., the Hebrews--and refused to reveal Himself to the world as a whole. This is favoritism on an enormous scale. But it was not because God was a respecter of persons. He didn't choose Abraham or Abraham's descendants because He respected them. He favored them with Truth and faith therein because He is SOVEREIGN. This is precisely why He refused to give saving Truth to others. It has nothing to do with the Jews being noble.

Now, when God decided to abandon the very real favoritism which He had shown to the national Hebrews, He used his apostle to emphasize that no one has any excuse for saying "Well, God won't save me because I don't meet the criteria of deservedness."

The Calvinist would respond to that sinner by asserting that there is no such thing as deservedness. God is not a respecter of persons. God's election, although a matter of His sovereign favor (!), does not follow the stupid criteria which Adamic-Satanic sinners would be inclined to put forth.

And since God had changed his approach to include Gentile salvation, it was important in Acts 10 for sinners to be made aware of the fact that He is not a respecter of a person's outer presentation of religious correctness. (The Greek word for "respecter of persons" is actually "acceptor of the countenance, of the surface appearance.") God accepts people of true faith, not people of particular national type or high social position or special religiosity. These things do not impress Him--at all.

The doctrine of election has nothing to do with any of the things which might concern strictly carnal sinners. God does not overlook a person of faith and save a person of special national heritage or important social position or impressive religiosity. ALL persons who repent and believe the gospel are saved. This is the important message of the gospel's universality, of its freeness. "Whosoever will may come."

The question of who winds up getting saving faith within the distribution of peoples across the globe is a different question. God does favor some and not others. And it has nothing to do with respect, because that would speak of pre-conversion deservedness. It has to do with the sovereignty of God's grace.

And if you think that God elects based on foreseeing that such-and-such a person would believe the gospel, you'd better re-think that. God's foreknowledge is not merely precognitive. If you will read 1 Corinthians 2:14 honestly, you will discover that it proves my entire position. God does favor some people with a spirit of receptiveness to the Truth. It is a wonderfully strange display of His sovereignty. And His sovereignty is part of His glory, a glory which you have not yet seen clearly.

You DO fall back again and again on QUESTIONING the salvation of those who disagree with your theology. I can't tell if that's a "debating technique" or a self-esteem issue, but it's inappropriate.

You are being too naive, brother. I say that's inappropriate. Arminianism is the Lie of Eden. You just haven't noticed that.

Most churchgoers really are lost.

We are told to work out our "own" salvation with fear and trembling. It is a weighty thing.

That's one of the Calvinists' favorite verses.

I stand and fall, not to you, but to the Lord.

Good point. But it's not the point of the discussion. I do assume that you are regenerate.

Fortunately, and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. (John 6:37)

That's another one of my favorite verses. It ranks up there with John 3:16 in my theology of God's wonderful grace.

The problem is, a lot of people who claim that they have come to Christ have merely walked an aisle and joined a church. Hypocrisy is an amazing, self-deceiving mess.

Do NOT tell people that every seemingly positive response to the gospel is saving faith. If you disturb them very badly by that warning, it's because they need to be disturbed. The people of true faith will appreciate your warning.

They might also appreciate it if you quote the part of the verse which you left out. The verse actually says "All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out."

That is one of the most strongly Calvinistic verses in the entire Bible. Billy Graham uses it in all of his altar calls. He just never uses the first half of the verse. We Calvinists are right to complain about that, I think!

"post #446: A lengthy explanation is required by all calvinists for the verses that very clearly spell out universal opportunity. In the final analysis, it is found that calvinists have twisted around the very meaning of words. Instead of "whosoever will may come," they have them meaning "not just anyone may come." Your interpretation of text gives us a God who shows favoritism, while the bible says that "God does not show favoritism."

Jean, the above is the statement that started this discussion about God showing favoritism or not showing favoritism. I said that the bible says "God does not show favoritism."

Doc replied in post #464 -- False. The Bible does not say that God does not show favoritism.

The issue was whether or not the Bible SAYS, "God does not show favoritism." It clearly does."

Yes, X, I know this. I have been following this thread.

"I replied with the scripture from Acts 10:34, that shows that the Bible does indeed say "God does not show favoritism."

But the question is, as always, what is the context. This is why I stress interpreting Scripture with Scripture.

If I were to say to you that, as an employer, I do not practice discrimination in my hiring practices -what does that really mean? Does this mean I simply pick whoever wants to work for me? No, obviously I do discriminate when I hire. I look for the best available talent. I look for dedication and loyalty. I look for honesty and integrity. That is discrimination. Rather, when I say that I do not discriminate in my hiring practices, we must understand this in the context of racism. I do not discriminate based on color, sex, creed... Yet I do indeed discriminate.

This is precisely my point when I reference Romans 9. This is a passage which agrees with your Acts passage as well as Galations 3:28 in which it suggests God does not discriminate or more accurately, God is not partial. But how are we to understand this. Romans 9 contains the very words which claim that God chooses not only from Jews but also from Gentiles. When we take Galations 3:28, Col 3:11, Romans 10:11,12 we see that God, indeed, is not partial, but what is meant by "not partial". Certainly, you and I agree (I hope) in the final Judgement in which the unbeliever will be eternally punished. Well, here God is now showing partiality, preference or discrimination -you pick all apply. So we realize that we must understand the context of these claims of impartiality. Back to Romans 9 we see that God chooses certain individuals. How does he choose them? Does He choose men over women, Jews over Greek, free men over slaves...and I may add any other distinctions apply as well -white over black, white collar workers over blue collar workers, smart over dumb... Of course he doesn't discriminate this way. Nonetheless, we know he does discriminate. Ultimately some individuals will be judged to eternal condemnation and punishment. Romans 9 makes clear those God chooses (remember, as much as you don't like it, these are Scripture's words, not Calvin's, not Woody's, not the doc's, not mine. I'm sorry you don't like the implications of this, but I feel compelled to accept these words and not change the definitions. I must interpret Scripture with Scripture. And Romans 9 makes clear that, while God doesn't make His choices on various human distinctions, He does make His choices based soley on His good pleasure and for His own glory.

So, does your proof text show "universal opportunity" or does it simply agree with the rest of scripture and give us comfort that we need not worry about our status in life and that God chooses who He chooses.

"Your question is different. As opposed to asserting simply that the bible doesn't say such a thing, you are asking whether it supports the arminian concept of "universal opportunity" for salvation.

Our answers would be different to that questions if you are a calvinist, wouldn't they?

Acts 10:34 establishes a basic principle: "God does not show favoritism." It's in the context of Peter explaining how the gospel of salvation has now gone to the entire world of gentiles. (That in itself says, "univeral opportunity" because once you've got Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles, then you've covered the entire range, haven't you?)"

To repeat my point in a different way. If we took your statement that God "does not show favoritism" as a "basic prinicple" we must then conclude that all men are saved. Why are all men saved? Well, as X said, because God doesn't show favoritism. I know I am putting words into your mouth, but I'm simply showing what your argument will do when taken to it's logical conclusion. Obviously God does show favoritism -to those who believe. Our disagreement then is on how one comes to belief.

I dare say it is the reformed position to make all scripture agree. When I look at various arminian proof texts they appear to contradict the clear teaching of other passages which teach the fact that God has chosen us. (An arminian friend of mine even admits after a word study that the scriptures do favor determinism over free will) Do we have the right to change the meaning of the word "elect" as some arminians do? Do we have the right to change the meaning of the word "foreknew" to mean God knew who would choose him (this is not its use in Scripture see Acts 26:5, Romans 11:2)

Take a look at 1 Peter 1:20: "Who [Christ] was verily foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times to you." If you check your greek interlinear you will notice that "foreordained" is actually proginosko (Strong's 4267). It is the very same word we find in Romans 8:29 "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." Do we read 1 Peter 1:20 to suggest that God the father knew that Christ the Son would eventually choose him, so God chose him? That's a bit absurd. Rather, we understand this word to mean, as the KJV (THE Bible according to FTD) uses, foreordained. God knew Christ "would choose him"? or God determined before the foundations of the world that Christ will accomplish propitiation for the beleiver? The answer is quite obvious which is why reformed christians cannot ignore these passages and cannot change their meanings. We cannot deny predestination. We must reconcile Scripture with Scripture.

"In this passage Paul connects the same phrase, "God does not show favoritism" to everyone.

Those who deny universal opportunity deny a straightforward interpretation of "whosoever will may come.""

No, we simply reconcile this with scripture's clear teaching of predestination.

Jean

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.