To begin with, let us understand that five point Calvanism is not false Gospel. It does, however, contain unbiblical tenents in its doctrine. Those who adhere to the doctrine of la Sola Scriptura - as did the Berean's (see Acts 17:10-12) - can argue at length with fine evangelical Calvanist friends without any change to anybody's views.
Nevertheless, I feel compelled to weigh in on the issue of whether man is totally depraved or can through the wooing of the Holy Spirit make valid moral and spiritual choices; whether God wants only a a select few called the elect to be saved or whether He wants all men to be saved (see 1 Tm 2:4; 2 Pt 3:9); whether Christ died for the sins of the elect only or for the sins of the whole world (see Jn 1:29, 1 Jn 2:2) It would be necessary for some misconceptions to be cleared up in that regard.
Foremost, is that those that reject Calavinsim aren't necessarily Arminian. There are many non-Calvanists that believe in eternal security, but object to Calvanism on some grounds. Next, one must not question God's sovereignty, God is the potter, we are the clay, and the clay can not complain about God's use of it (see Ro 9:17-28). What is at stake is the answer to whether God in his sovereignty has given man the power to make genuine moral and spiritual choices or whether man is totally depraved and cannot choose God or good. It is biblical that we cannot come to God or Christ unless He draws us by His Spirit. But when He does draw us, do we truly respond, or is our response in receiving Christ imposed on us by irresistable grace? Do we really love God from our hearts (love requires choice) or are we deluded to think we love him?
The issue is not whether mankind deserves hell. We all deserve hell and God would be fully justified in sending everyone there eternally (see Ro 2:1-13, 3:19-31). What is at stake is whether God actually wants anybody to go to hell. To the contrary, God "is not willing that any should perish..." and that He prepared "everlasting fire" not for humans but "for the devil and his angels" (see Mt 25:41). In contrast the God of Calvanism wants many to perish. If He did not, He would extend irresistable grace to all and all would go to heaven. Which God is the I am that I am according to scriptures?
Adam and Eve surely were not depraved, much less than totally depraved according to Calvanistic doctrine - it would be absurd to consider that God in his omnipotent majesty would create such beings; it is not depravity that caused Adam and Eve to rebel in sin. If so, then why would God not extend to them Calvanism's irresistable grace so that there wouldn't be the ensuing sin, sickness, suffering, etc. Also, it is curious to me why those Christians who believe in Christ as a result of irresistable grace don't live perfect lives. Is it that some giants of the faith - such as Paul - are that way because it was God's will, but its His will that others are failures and therefor God doesn't dispensed sufficient enough grace? If so, then what is the purpose of the Great White Throne of Judgement? What are the rewards God gives to believers if He is the one who causes some to live more fruitful lives while withholding that grace from others who are then destined to live less fruitfall lives (see Mt 16:27, 1 Co 3:10-15)? Is there no responsibility on man's part? Are we mere automatons? Did God fate Adam and Eve's decendents to be robots?
OF COURSE God is sovereign, always has been and always will be. However, His sovereignty did not prevent Satan's rebellion in heaven nor Adam and Eve's in the Garden. Choices are the foundation of all creatures possessing free-will, and choices were made that went against God's will. It would be ludicrous for any to purport that God's will is for his creation to be filled with corruption, abortion, murder, lust, wars, etc. Such abominations are allowed to be in accordace to His will, but their existance is not as a result of His perfect will. It would appear then, that Calvanism overstates God's sovereignty by pointing to God as the source of all evil. It is their contention that depraved man can do nothing but sin unless God keeps him from it, which He could (if He would) for all mankind with irresistable grace
Certainly the God of all creation, maker of heaven and earth, ruler of all kingdoms and domains - both seen and unseen, can do what he wants. However, should an innocent reader of the scriptures take them at face value, giving their words ordinary meaning, and not be led to believe that God genuinely wanted to save the whole world and that Christ came to die a propitiatory death for the sins of the whole world and to offer salvation of all? There are multiple verses that contain phrases such as: "which taketh away the sin of the world...For God so loved the world...that the world through him might be saved...I came not to judge the world, but to save the world...to be the savior of the world...", etc. that would lead such a reader to think so (see Jn 1:29, 3:16-17, 4:42, 12:47; 1 Jn 4:14) Moreover, verses with phrases such as "whosover heareth these sayings of mine...whosover will come to me...that whosoever committeth sin...whosoever believeth on me...whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord...whosoever believeth on him...whosoever will, let him take the water of life...," etc. (see Mt 7:24; Lk 6:47; Jn 3:15-16, 8:34, 12:46; Act 2:21; Rom 10:11; Rv 22:17), should surely lead a reader to believe that whosoever means anybody without limitation, and not a special class of people called the elect. Furthermore, should our innocent reader take entirely on face value (without horrendous contortions of interpretation) statements such as: "Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden...who will have all men to be saved...who gave himself a ransom for all...the Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance...," etc. (see Mt 11:28; 1 Tm 2:4-6; 2 Pt 3:9) come to the conclusion that "all" means all and that "any" means any, and that the inescapable fact of the matter is that God lovingly and freely offers salvation to everyone.
Calvanists on the other hand, arrive at an esoteric understanding. They conclude that these same verses making references to "all", "any", "world", "whoseover", etc. almost always mean their face value, except when they mean the elect. When is that? Whenever the Calvanist requires it.
It would seem then, to our innocent reader that such interpretation is imposed on, rather than derived from scriptures. Our innocent reader should begin to object at the violence being done by the Calvanists to the ordinary meaning of words. In utter amazement at their position, the reader points to God's repeated pleading with men, "choose ye this day whom ye will serve," what is this choice, if but for the dispensation of irresistable grace causing them to choose the Lord. Over and over, time and time again, the Lord begs His people of Israel through the prophets to repent and turn away from their sin so He won't judge them. He weeps over Israel, defers His judgement, sends more prophets to warn and finally - with reluctance - He pours out His wrath; God is righteous and just, He must do so. But the Calvanist would have our reader believe that this whole time he's pleading with people who are depraved, unable to repent unless He forces his irresistable grace upon them. Yet He witholds it, all the while condemning them for doing the only thing they can do - as He made them - which He alone could prevent, but doesn't.
Jesus weeps over Jerusalem: "How often would I have gathered you together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but ye would not." The Calvanist would have our reader believe that would I and ye would not means "I would not" and "ye could not"! A thinking person would shudder at such unnatural imposition on understanding to support dogma.
Let me draw an analogy. Suppose you were in a well that was 50' deep. And I yelled down to you I was going to save you, and threw down a 30' foot long rope. Then I commenced to beg, plead, cajole, implore you to grap a hold of it so I could earnestly pull out of what I tell you will be certain death. Would you not think that I was mocking you? Moreover, if I began to berate you for you failure to fullfill your end of the deal, would you not wish you could grab me by the throat? How could I maintain to any reasonable person that I really wanted to bring them out of the well but it is they are the one not willing? It should appear to our innocent reader of scripture that Calvanist doctrine is really a libel on the character of God.
The Calvanist doctrine presents a God who does not love everyone enough for all to go to heaven, a God who sent his only begotten Son to die only for special individuals. Yet no basis can be given for such a God (who is impartial), who would play such games of favoritism (nor is there anything inherently special in any person that would compell God to elect anybody).
There is at least one verse where the Calvanist's depraved reinterpretation of scripture could absolutely not hold: "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world (see 1 Jn 2:2). It should appear that this verse alone, would shatter Calvanist doctrine; the use of words are mutually inclusive (both the elect and everybody else).
Anybody who is in hell for eternity is not there because God could have but did not save them by irresistable grace, but because they rejected to grab the 100' rope in their 50' well. God provides and freely offers salvation to all. Your brother in Christ, amen.
Lie #1. There were some things before this, but here is the first outrigh and blatant lie.
Don't you realize that the same charge can be made against your belief, with very little modification of your statement:
In contrast the God of Arminianism wants many to perish. If He did not, He would ensure the preaching of the Gospel and "Damascus Road" experiences to all and all would go to heaven. Which God is the I am that I am according to scriptures?
You don't answer the "Limited Atonement" of your position. Why do millions die and never hear the name of Jesus? Why doesn't God direct the circumstances of everyone's life in the same way that He did for Saul of Tarsus? Doesn't your God care enough to do enough to make sure that everyone gets the message of salvation? Why don't the birds sing it every morning in every place? Why don't the "rocks cry out" and proclaim His excellence? Why has He concealed Himself from such a great part of His creation? If He really wants to save all without exception, then why isn't He trying harder?
Notice that we have the answer: God has chosen, by the good pleasure of His will, to save those whom He has chosen to save from the punishment that all deserve. He has done everything that is required to carry out the salvation of His elect, and will never lose even one of them. He extends His salvation to the whole world, and will save from every people, tribe, and tongue. He will not be frustrated in carrying out His salvific work, and will be glorified in all that he does. This is the I am that I am of the scriptures.