Some parting thoughts (okay, several parting thoughts). I'm not firing on all cylinders today so pardon any typos:
What does the Bible tell us about God? A few things:
The Bible says God is perfectly just, honest, and fair, and cannot lie.
The Bible says God sets Himself up as our example of all that is good and right and just.
The Bible presents the Gospel as being extended to - and valid for - all people, without any distinctions or exceptions whatsoever.
The Bible says God desires that none should perish in Hell, to the extent that He "begs" all to be reconciled to Him (a silly thing to do if all are foreordained).
The Bible promises that all who will believe the Gospel can and will be saved.
The Bible says God will condemn those who reject the Gospel specifically because they chose to reject it.
What does Calvinism tell us about God? A few things:
Calvinism also says God is perfectly just, honest and fair, and cannot lie.
Calvinism also says God expects us to use Him as our example of all that is good and right.
Yet Calvinism says that while the Gospel appears to be extended to - and valid for - all people, in reality it is extended to - and valid for - ONLY those God elected to save in eternity past.
Calvinism says that in eternity past, God reprobated many people (the majority of mankind, presumably) to perish in Hell. Calvinism also says God did not "look forward in time" to see who would believe the Gospel and who would not, and base His elective/reprobative decision on that. Logically, then, this can only mean that while the Bible repeatedly warns of just condemnation for sin, in reality, an individual's sins really has nothing to do with his/her ending up in Hell. Reprobation is the flipside of election - they cannot be separated. So if human choice really has nothing to do with being saved, neither can it have anything to do with being cast into the Lake of Fire.
Calvinism says reprobates who believe the Gospel cannot really believe it, and so cannot possibly be saved by it. EVER.
So, if reprobation/condemnation is PRIMARILY the result of God's will (consistent Calvinists admit this is so), that makes God's will the cause of their condemnation. That makes the reprobate's unbelief nothing but the decreed result of God's will.
Conclusion: The God presented by Calvinism cannot be the God of the Bible because the god presented by Calvinism:
a) extends an apparently universally valid Gospel which SECRETLY was never intended to save all,
b) expects faith from those to whom He SECRETLY has no intention of giving faith,
c) begs to believe and be saved those whom He SECRETLY has already destined for the Lake of Fire,
d) condemns those who don't believe for their lack of faith, even though their lack of faith is SECRETLY nothing less than the result of his reprobative decree in eternity past, and
e) is SECRETLY unjust, untrustworthy, unfair, hypocritical, and is quite capable of deception and lies.
For these basic reasons, I am now more convinced than ever that the deity presented to the world by consistent Calvinism is anything but the God Who reveals Himself to us in the Bible. Calvinists may CALL their god "God," and CLAIM He is the God of the Bible. I believe Calvinists are sincere in this regard. I believe they are sincerely and demonstrably wrong. If Calvinism is true, then it is a matter of simple deduction to conclude that the Bible cannot be trusted, since the Bible doesn't say what God really meant, and doesn't mean what God really said.
If you've never read George Orwell's 1984, please pick up a used copy. The book gets more and more timely every day since our government and media are constantly pressing us toward worldwide socialism. But that's not the reason I bring it up.
In the novel, Goldstein - the alleged leader of the underground rebellion - describes the ability of the brainwashed masses to exercise doublethink: the ability to accept two contradictory and mutually exclusive truth claims as equally valid while ignoring the obvious contradiction they create. Of course 1984 is a work of (eerily prophetic) fiction, but doublethink is a reality. Lots of people do it. Calvinists are not exempt, as these representative quotes from threads on this very board will show:
or this from another Calvinist:
Yet another Calvinist insisted, in a private message, that the earning of eternal damnation comes as a result of an individual's sin. But in other threads, this same person said God decided the condemned would go to the Lake of Fire before he ever sinned...before he was even born, in fact.
These are only a few examples of the doublethink common to Calvinism; I posted others from Sproul and Packer on another thread and you may look them up if you wish. Such statements are plainly self-contradictory, and self-contradiction is a symptom of confusion. Yet these statements are defended as truths consistent with the God who does not author confusion! An impossible situation, but there it is.
Unless the persons saying these things are being deliberately insincere (which I doubt), they obviously see their confusion as clarity no matter how many times the problems are pointed out. That's what makes this so scary.
It bears repeating: the actions Calvinism attributes to God are not evident in - and are inconsistent with - the God of the Bible. So how can students of the Bible come to believe God does the things Calvinism says He does? By becoming a committed follower of Augustinian philosophy (a.k.a. reformed theology), which allows one to see these secret "truths" - the secrets mentioned above. This, very simply, is the construction of doctrine upon unbiblical assumptions. The Reformed thinker denies this, of course, but not because the Bible is read objectively. The denial results from reading Scripture through the distorted lenses of Augustine's pagan-influenced philosophy, which Calvin inherited and passed on to reformed protestantism.
Naturally, conclusions drawn from reading the Bible by such warped means are themselves warped. It's only natural that Reformed apologetics in defense of those conclusions are likewise warped.
And this is precisely where doublethink comes in - the ability to accept and defend contradictory facts (the facts of Scripture and the differing "facts" of Augustinian assumptions) as equally true, even though they cannot be. This, I suspect, is part of the reason for the intellectual pride, arrogance and condescension peculiar to defenders of Reformed theology generally. It is assumed that appreciation of these "doctrines of grace" are given only to a relative few to know; those who oppose are to be pitied (though in Calvin's Geneva, one would have been very fortunate to receive only pity).
But if there is one fact upon which all else rests, it is this: the God of the Bible will not contradict His nature as revealed in His Word. Yet the god of Calvinism does exactly that! It is neither exaggeration nor overstatement, then, to indict the god of Calvinism of the very things the God of the Bible has sworn to condemn corrupt human judges for doing. Can God be perfectly holy and Himself engage in that which He hates and calls sin? No. Thus one ends up with a God who never intended for all to be saved - even though He repeatedly says they can be! And STILL such a God is still defended as perfectly loving, honest, trustworthy and just? How is that possible? Doublethink.
The God of the Bible says He loves the world and begs the world to be reconciled to Him. But how can His secret reprobative decree make that anything but a lie? Yet will the Calvinist insist John 3:16 and 2 Cor 5:14-21 are nonetheless perfectly true? Yes. Doublethink strikes again.
As demonstrated above, the Calvin-god is clearly guilty of things the God of the Bible classified as sin. That means, very simply, that they are not the same Being. The Calvin-god cannot even be trusted to have elected to salvation any Calvinist reading these words...despite claims to the contrary, in his heart every Calvinist knows it. This, too, bears repeat: If you can't know your elect - and you can't - you may be a sincerely religious but deluded reprobate! Calvinism (consistently applied) gives NO GROUND on which to exclude that possibility! If Calvinism is true, NONE OF US can say with 100% certainty, "I, right now, AM saved and eternally safe in Christ and I am CERTAIN of it." The Calvinist can BELIEVE that, or ASSUME it, or HOPE it is true but - to be consistent - he can't KNOW it is true unless he perserveres in faith UNTIL HE DIES. Thus does Reformed theology's lack of objective assurance of election more closely resemble the Roman Catholic gospel ("won't know 'til I get there") than it does the solid, immediate, eternally settled assurance promised in Paul's Gospel of the grace of God. Any secure, confident Calvinist is that way DESPITE his Calvinism, not because of it.
I speak from experience. To the degree that one is an informed Calvinist...to the degree one tries to live in a manner consistent with the logic of Calvinism...to the degree that one actually STOPS and THINKS about his Reformed faith...to that same degree one knows the FEAR of uncertainty...of not being fully able to trust God...of possibly falling away into an eternity reprobated to damnation. No less than R.C. Sproul has admitted to harboring these doubts. The honest, informed Calvinist will not deny having such thoughts and feelings.
The "P" of TULIP is Calvinism's "fail-safe" device. But it gives only the coldest comfort, as it gives no assurance in THIS life that one was elected by God. Instead, it promises only that IF one really is God's elect, God will make him to perservere unto death. In the meantime, what ground of assurance is there? Without knowing I was one of those elected to have Christ die for my sins, can I have real assurance? No. Even the warmest promises of the Bible I hesitate to claim since I can't know if I was elected to be blessed by them!
So what could I do? Cram the mind full of theology and more theology...Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, MacArthur, Sproul, White...engage in endless, pointless chatroom debates that never bear fruit...take the fact that you struggle with besetting sins and often doubt your salvation as evidence you really are elect...strive to keep the Law and do good works to prove your regeneration to yourself, if not to others. And whenever inconsistencies in your theology are pointed out, doublethink will insulate the mind from even the most glaring because - inconsistencies or no - how could ALL those vaunted Reformed thinkers be wrong? I could trust them...I could place my faith in these MEN. And that's what I used to do.
But despite it all, that depressing, dreadful FEAR still hid in the corners of my heart. Some of you know what I'm talking about. Deny it...try not to think about it...sing above it...but it's still there. Stronger sometimes, weaker at others. But short of entirely abandoning reformed theology (a frightening thought!), there is no way to dislodge that fear. Sad, and unecessary, but true. Again, I used to be there. And I feel so sorry for those who are there now but won't admit it. It doesn't have to be that way! But, alas, only the grace of God and a willingness to at least admit the possibility of being wrong can hope to change it.
In the meantime, I'm done. I can't deal with doublethink anymore. It is invulnerable to reasoned arguments. It is blind to its own blindness. After reading numerous statements like those quoted above, fatigue sets in and one finally has to admit there's nothing more to say. One has beat his head on the keyboard long enough. All you can do is back away quitely, and pray. Pray for those who keep up the fight, and those who are blinded to their own doublethink. And that's what I'm doing, as far as the topic of Calvinism is concerned, as of now. I've long since been repeating myself (I know it) because it needed repeating. Such conversations as we've all had here are valuable, but not in this format. I suspect one side or the other would have been converted if we'd all been sitting over coffee at Denny's. I wish we were! But this ain't Denny's, and I'm done, at least on this subject. So until we have it all explained to us in glory and it's no longer an issue,
Grace and (believe it or not) love to you all,
o.
What does the Bible tell us about God? A few things:
The Bible says God is perfectly just, honest, and fair, and cannot lie.
The Bible says God sets Himself up as our example of all that is good and right and just.
The Bible presents the Gospel as being extended to - and valid for - all people, without any distinctions or exceptions whatsoever.
The Bible says God desires that none should perish in Hell, to the extent that He "begs" all to be reconciled to Him (a silly thing to do if all are foreordained).
The Bible promises that all who will believe the Gospel can and will be saved.
The Bible says God will condemn those who reject the Gospel specifically because they chose to reject it.
What does Calvinism tell us about God? A few things:
Calvinism also says God is perfectly just, honest and fair, and cannot lie.
Calvinism also says God expects us to use Him as our example of all that is good and right.
Yet Calvinism says that while the Gospel appears to be extended to - and valid for - all people, in reality it is extended to - and valid for - ONLY those God elected to save in eternity past.
Calvinism says that in eternity past, God reprobated many people (the majority of mankind, presumably) to perish in Hell. Calvinism also says God did not "look forward in time" to see who would believe the Gospel and who would not, and base His elective/reprobative decision on that. Logically, then, this can only mean that while the Bible repeatedly warns of just condemnation for sin, in reality, an individual's sins really has nothing to do with his/her ending up in Hell. Reprobation is the flipside of election - they cannot be separated. So if human choice really has nothing to do with being saved, neither can it have anything to do with being cast into the Lake of Fire.
Calvinism says reprobates who believe the Gospel cannot really believe it, and so cannot possibly be saved by it. EVER.
So, if reprobation/condemnation is PRIMARILY the result of God's will (consistent Calvinists admit this is so), that makes God's will the cause of their condemnation. That makes the reprobate's unbelief nothing but the decreed result of God's will.
Conclusion: The God presented by Calvinism cannot be the God of the Bible because the god presented by Calvinism:
a) extends an apparently universally valid Gospel which SECRETLY was never intended to save all,
b) expects faith from those to whom He SECRETLY has no intention of giving faith,
c) begs to believe and be saved those whom He SECRETLY has already destined for the Lake of Fire,
d) condemns those who don't believe for their lack of faith, even though their lack of faith is SECRETLY nothing less than the result of his reprobative decree in eternity past, and
e) is SECRETLY unjust, untrustworthy, unfair, hypocritical, and is quite capable of deception and lies.
For these basic reasons, I am now more convinced than ever that the deity presented to the world by consistent Calvinism is anything but the God Who reveals Himself to us in the Bible. Calvinists may CALL their god "God," and CLAIM He is the God of the Bible. I believe Calvinists are sincere in this regard. I believe they are sincerely and demonstrably wrong. If Calvinism is true, then it is a matter of simple deduction to conclude that the Bible cannot be trusted, since the Bible doesn't say what God really meant, and doesn't mean what God really said.
If you've never read George Orwell's 1984, please pick up a used copy. The book gets more and more timely every day since our government and media are constantly pressing us toward worldwide socialism. But that's not the reason I bring it up.
In the novel, Goldstein - the alleged leader of the underground rebellion - describes the ability of the brainwashed masses to exercise doublethink: the ability to accept two contradictory and mutually exclusive truth claims as equally valid while ignoring the obvious contradiction they create. Of course 1984 is a work of (eerily prophetic) fiction, but doublethink is a reality. Lots of people do it. Calvinists are not exempt, as these representative quotes from threads on this very board will show:
or this from another Calvinist:
Yet another Calvinist insisted, in a private message, that the earning of eternal damnation comes as a result of an individual's sin. But in other threads, this same person said God decided the condemned would go to the Lake of Fire before he ever sinned...before he was even born, in fact.
These are only a few examples of the doublethink common to Calvinism; I posted others from Sproul and Packer on another thread and you may look them up if you wish. Such statements are plainly self-contradictory, and self-contradiction is a symptom of confusion. Yet these statements are defended as truths consistent with the God who does not author confusion! An impossible situation, but there it is.
Unless the persons saying these things are being deliberately insincere (which I doubt), they obviously see their confusion as clarity no matter how many times the problems are pointed out. That's what makes this so scary.
It bears repeating: the actions Calvinism attributes to God are not evident in - and are inconsistent with - the God of the Bible. So how can students of the Bible come to believe God does the things Calvinism says He does? By becoming a committed follower of Augustinian philosophy (a.k.a. reformed theology), which allows one to see these secret "truths" - the secrets mentioned above. This, very simply, is the construction of doctrine upon unbiblical assumptions. The Reformed thinker denies this, of course, but not because the Bible is read objectively. The denial results from reading Scripture through the distorted lenses of Augustine's pagan-influenced philosophy, which Calvin inherited and passed on to reformed protestantism.
Naturally, conclusions drawn from reading the Bible by such warped means are themselves warped. It's only natural that Reformed apologetics in defense of those conclusions are likewise warped.
And this is precisely where doublethink comes in - the ability to accept and defend contradictory facts (the facts of Scripture and the differing "facts" of Augustinian assumptions) as equally true, even though they cannot be. This, I suspect, is part of the reason for the intellectual pride, arrogance and condescension peculiar to defenders of Reformed theology generally. It is assumed that appreciation of these "doctrines of grace" are given only to a relative few to know; those who oppose are to be pitied (though in Calvin's Geneva, one would have been very fortunate to receive only pity).
But if there is one fact upon which all else rests, it is this: the God of the Bible will not contradict His nature as revealed in His Word. Yet the god of Calvinism does exactly that! It is neither exaggeration nor overstatement, then, to indict the god of Calvinism of the very things the God of the Bible has sworn to condemn corrupt human judges for doing. Can God be perfectly holy and Himself engage in that which He hates and calls sin? No. Thus one ends up with a God who never intended for all to be saved - even though He repeatedly says they can be! And STILL such a God is still defended as perfectly loving, honest, trustworthy and just? How is that possible? Doublethink.
The God of the Bible says He loves the world and begs the world to be reconciled to Him. But how can His secret reprobative decree make that anything but a lie? Yet will the Calvinist insist John 3:16 and 2 Cor 5:14-21 are nonetheless perfectly true? Yes. Doublethink strikes again.
As demonstrated above, the Calvin-god is clearly guilty of things the God of the Bible classified as sin. That means, very simply, that they are not the same Being. The Calvin-god cannot even be trusted to have elected to salvation any Calvinist reading these words...despite claims to the contrary, in his heart every Calvinist knows it. This, too, bears repeat: If you can't know your elect - and you can't - you may be a sincerely religious but deluded reprobate! Calvinism (consistently applied) gives NO GROUND on which to exclude that possibility! If Calvinism is true, NONE OF US can say with 100% certainty, "I, right now, AM saved and eternally safe in Christ and I am CERTAIN of it." The Calvinist can BELIEVE that, or ASSUME it, or HOPE it is true but - to be consistent - he can't KNOW it is true unless he perserveres in faith UNTIL HE DIES. Thus does Reformed theology's lack of objective assurance of election more closely resemble the Roman Catholic gospel ("won't know 'til I get there") than it does the solid, immediate, eternally settled assurance promised in Paul's Gospel of the grace of God. Any secure, confident Calvinist is that way DESPITE his Calvinism, not because of it.
I speak from experience. To the degree that one is an informed Calvinist...to the degree one tries to live in a manner consistent with the logic of Calvinism...to the degree that one actually STOPS and THINKS about his Reformed faith...to that same degree one knows the FEAR of uncertainty...of not being fully able to trust God...of possibly falling away into an eternity reprobated to damnation. No less than R.C. Sproul has admitted to harboring these doubts. The honest, informed Calvinist will not deny having such thoughts and feelings.
The "P" of TULIP is Calvinism's "fail-safe" device. But it gives only the coldest comfort, as it gives no assurance in THIS life that one was elected by God. Instead, it promises only that IF one really is God's elect, God will make him to perservere unto death. In the meantime, what ground of assurance is there? Without knowing I was one of those elected to have Christ die for my sins, can I have real assurance? No. Even the warmest promises of the Bible I hesitate to claim since I can't know if I was elected to be blessed by them!
So what could I do? Cram the mind full of theology and more theology...Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, MacArthur, Sproul, White...engage in endless, pointless chatroom debates that never bear fruit...take the fact that you struggle with besetting sins and often doubt your salvation as evidence you really are elect...strive to keep the Law and do good works to prove your regeneration to yourself, if not to others. And whenever inconsistencies in your theology are pointed out, doublethink will insulate the mind from even the most glaring because - inconsistencies or no - how could ALL those vaunted Reformed thinkers be wrong? I could trust them...I could place my faith in these MEN. And that's what I used to do.
But despite it all, that depressing, dreadful FEAR still hid in the corners of my heart. Some of you know what I'm talking about. Deny it...try not to think about it...sing above it...but it's still there. Stronger sometimes, weaker at others. But short of entirely abandoning reformed theology (a frightening thought!), there is no way to dislodge that fear. Sad, and unecessary, but true. Again, I used to be there. And I feel so sorry for those who are there now but won't admit it. It doesn't have to be that way! But, alas, only the grace of God and a willingness to at least admit the possibility of being wrong can hope to change it.
In the meantime, I'm done. I can't deal with doublethink anymore. It is invulnerable to reasoned arguments. It is blind to its own blindness. After reading numerous statements like those quoted above, fatigue sets in and one finally has to admit there's nothing more to say. One has beat his head on the keyboard long enough. All you can do is back away quitely, and pray. Pray for those who keep up the fight, and those who are blinded to their own doublethink. And that's what I'm doing, as far as the topic of Calvinism is concerned, as of now. I've long since been repeating myself (I know it) because it needed repeating. Such conversations as we've all had here are valuable, but not in this format. I suspect one side or the other would have been converted if we'd all been sitting over coffee at Denny's. I wish we were! But this ain't Denny's, and I'm done, at least on this subject. So until we have it all explained to us in glory and it's no longer an issue,
Grace and (believe it or not) love to you all,
o.
