Christians Do Not Sin - 1 John 3:9

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. (1 John 3:9)

This verse is straightforward, clear, and easy to understand. People who are born of God do not commit sin. And who is born of God? The same epistle answers the question:

Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. (1 John 5:1)

Therefore, all believers in Christ do not commit sin. That should settle the matter. Christians don’t sin. Yet, the vast majority of the church today flatly rejects this biblical truth. In fact, most say almost exactly the opposite, that all Christians will sin until they die. Some go so far as to say that all Christians will sin every single day in thought, word, and deed.

How did so many come to reject a biblical truth that is so clearly stated by the apostle John? Perhaps some want to hang on to their sins and still feel secure about going to heaven. Others have simply been blinded by the teachings of others, and since they have never been told about this truth and have seen it denied time and again, they just accept the teachings that contradict John’s clear declaration.

Since those who deny holiness in believers still claim to believe what the Bible says, they have to somehow answer what this verse says. The most common method is to alter the text. This altering has become so ingrained in the church culture that modern Bible translations have incorporated the additions, even though the original language cannot support the alterations.

Here is one example from the New American Standard Bible:

No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

The Greek word for “practices” is prasso, but that word in not in this verse. The word here is poieo, which means “do” or “commit.” Therefore, the verse is not saying that believers don’t practice sin. It says that they don’t commit sin.

The New International Version says:

No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God.

This version adds “will continue to” which is not in the Greek text.

Since John’s intent is to make a statement about the absence of sin in a believer, what good would it do to talk about “practicing” sin or “continuing” to sin? What frequency of sin does it take to “practice” sin? What does it mean to continue to sin? If we try to employ these alterations, what has John said that provides us any useful information? Does he mean that Christians don’t sin more than three times each day? Five times each week? Without a clear definition of what constitutes practice or continuing, he has communicated no information at all. Everyone would draw a different line.

Some people claim that the present tense verb “poieo” indicates ongoing action. It is true that the Greek present indicative can have an ongoing aspect. Some call it “present durative.” The present indicative can have this aspect but certainly not in all cases. There are other possible aspects for this tense: iterative, gnomic, historic, futuristic, among others. In order to determine the proper aspect, we have to examine the context. It is wrong to assign the present durative as a default.

Let's look at the logic to see this. If someone claims that verse nine allows for some sin in a Christian, then we lose the purpose of the passage. In context John uses this statement to give us a way to determine who the children of God are. Here is the verse with it's immediate context:

Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. (1 John 3:7-10)

If any sin is allowed in a believer, how is it manifest who the children of God and the children of the devil are? If Christians sin until they die, how are we to tell them from the children of the devil? Do children of the devil sin more often? How often is that? Do some children of the devil sin less often than brand new Christians? How many sins are allowed in a child of God and with what frequency? With any sin allowed in a child of God, how can their identity possibly be manifest?

The only way the identification is manifest is when we apply the only clearly defined line. Children of God don't sin at all while children of the devil do sin.

That's why poieo in verse nine must be “gnomic” rather than durative, because it creates a postulate by which we can make judgments. That's what a gnomic present tense does. Therefore, we must translate and understand verse nine as the King James version has rendered it – “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.”

Some alter the meaning of the verse to say something like, “Christians don’t sin without feeling guilty about it” or some other qualification. Yet, there is nothing in the Greek whatsoever that says anything about "without feeling guilty." Such alterations are pure fabrications that are added to satisfy a preconceived doctrine.

Even if we were to allow such alterations, the passage would make no sense, because many unbelievers feel an immense sense of guilt after committing a sin, so John wouldn’t be saying anything. We could say, “So what if believers don’t sin without feeling guilt? The same is true of many unbelievers.”

And even if one were to deny that unbelievers feel guilty when they sin, such an idea runs again into the same problem with verse ten. If both groups, children of God and children of the devil, commit sin and the only difference is that the children of God feel guilty, then how is it manifest which group is which? How can you tell which group is feeling guilty? The test John provides would be worthless.

John indicates in other parts of his epistle that Christians have no sin at all, thereby proving that verse nine ought to be interpreted as allowing for no sin. Verse seven is an example:

“Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.”

How righteous? As righteous as Jesus is. That would mean no sin at all.

Look at 1 John 4:17:

Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.

We are as Jesus is in this world. Does that allow for any sin? It cannot.

The righteousness that John teaches for believers is complete. If any sin at all is allowed, then we would not be "as he is righteous." We would not be "as he is."

Summary:

1 John 3:9 sets up a principle: Believers in Christ do not sin. Some claim that since John used the present tense, he had in mind “continuing sin” or some other practice of sin that persists in a durative manner. Actually, the verb “commit” must carry a gnomic aspect and cannot be translated or interpreted with an understanding that any sin is allowed. This principle is used as a test in verse ten to judge who is and who is not a child of God. If any sin is allowed, then the test is worthless. No one would be able to tell who is and who is not a child of God.

John stated that Christians do not sin in a straightforward and clear manner. He used the present tense because that is the only tense he could employ to state the principle as being true in a present sense.

Because of this, and because of the fact that John confirms in other parts of the epistle the idea that Christians don’t sin at all, we must conclude that 1 John 3:9 should be translated and interpreted to mean the same - that Christians don’t sin at all.

(Some claim that this idea contradicts 1 John 1:8 and 10. I have refuted that claim in the following essay - http://oraclesoffire.blogspot.com/2009/02/cleansed-from-all-sin.html)

Misuse of Romans Chapter Three - Part Two

Many people use Romans chapter three to prove that humans are totally depraved and can do nothing good, appealing to verses like "There is none righteous, not even one” (Romans 3:10) and “All have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one." (3:12)

As is always the case, we need to examine the context of verses to determine their meaning. The chapter starts out with a question, "Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision?"

This is Paul's theme question for this section, so he answers the question in the following verses. Yet, to understand the purpose for the question, you have to go a bit further back:

Rom 2:9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
Rom 2:10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
Rom 2:11 For there is no partiality with God.
Rom 2:12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
Rom 2:13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.
Rom 2:14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
Rom 2:15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
Rom 2:16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
Rom 2:17 But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God,
Rom 2:18 and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law,
Rom 2:19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness,
Rom 2:20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth,
Rom 2:21 you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal?
Rom 2:22 You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?
Rom 2:23 You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God?
Rom 2:24 For "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you," just as it is written.
Rom 2:25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.
Rom 2:26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?
Rom 2:27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?
Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

This larger section is about following the Law and/or being a transgressor of it, and Paul teaches that it makes no difference whether you are a Jew or a Gentile. Following God in obedience is a matter of the heart.

So, the question arises, if being a Jew or a Gentile makes no difference, what benefit is there of being a Jew? The answer is that they were entrusted with the oracles of God (3:2).

But that immediately raises another question in Paul's mind: "What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it?" (Romans 3:3)

In other words, although God entrusted the Law to the Jews, if some of the Jews don't believe, does that mean that something is wrong with God's faithfulness? Should He not have entrusted the Law to them?

To which Paul answers, "May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar."

So God is right in what He did. The unbelief is man's problem. They choose to disbelieve. It isn't God's fault.

In verse five Paul raises another question, "But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.)"

How does our unrighteousness demonstrate God's righteousness? Because even though people were unfaithful, God remained faithful. Man's sin shows the stark contrast between man and God, between unrighteousness and righteousness. Righteousness is more clearly seen when compared to unrighteousness. So someone might ask, if man's unrighteousness actually demonstrates and clarifies the righteousness of God, then why would He inflict wrath? Is that unrighteous?

Paul's answer:

May it never be! For otherwise, how will God judge the world?

In other words, if we say that God can't judge, because man makes His light look so bright in comparison with man's darkness, then God wouldn't be able to judge the world, which to Paul is an absurdity.

Then he raises a similar question.

But if through my lie the truth of God abounded to His glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner? And why not say (as we are slanderously reported and as some claim that we say), "Let us do evil that good may come"? Their condemnation is just. (Romans 3:7-8)

So, if a liar makes it clear that God is truthful by comparison, why would God judge the liar? Wouldn't it be good to continue sinning so that God would continue to be shown to be better? No. Paul says that condemning such a thought is just.

Then Paul gets back to his original question and into the meat of the matter:

What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; (Romans 3:9)

If the Jews received the oracles of God, then are Jews better than Gentiles? No, as Paul noted in chapter 2, both groups are under sin. Then Paul goes about proving this through Scripture.

Here is where many people stumble in understanding the purpose of this quoted Scripture. Calvinists use the following verses to "prove" that all people for all time are evil and don't seek God. Such an interpretation is so far from the purpose of this text that it is frustrating even to try to untwist the mess.

Here is the text:

Rom 3:10 as it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one;
Rom 3:11 There is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God;
Rom 3:12 All have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one. "
Rom 3:13 "Their throat is an open grave, with their tongues they keep deceiving, the poison of asps is under their lips";
Rom 3:14 "Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness ";
Rom 3:15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood,
Rom 3:16 Destruction and misery are in their paths,
Rom 3:17 And the path of peace they have not known."
Rom 3:18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

Why is Paul quoting this? To show that Jews have sinned. He has asked the question, "Are we better than they?" Are Jews better than Gentiles regarding sin? Since the answer is no, Paul sets out to prove it by quoting an example showing where Jews have sinned.

He doesn't need to prove to his readers that Gentiles have sinned. That is well known. So his goal is to prove that Jews, too, have sinned. Note the next verse:

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. (Romans 3:19-20)

Paul is saying that this passage he just quoted is from the Law, so it is speaking to people under the Law. Who is that? The Jews. So, by this example, Paul has proven that Jews have sinned.

Paul did not intend to say that all people for all time are like this, as the Calvinists so strangely interpret it. It's just an example of Jews sinning, thereby proving that Jews have sinned, which was Paul's aim in order to prove that both groups are under sin. He wasn't trying to prove that all people everywhere sin. If he were trying to do that, he wouldn't have used this passage from Psalm 14. The passage is describing what fools are like, not all people. But that's fine for Paul's purpose. He merely needed to show that there has been sin among the Jews, and since this Psalm was written to Jews, there are Jews who have been guilty of sin.

And, as verse 20 says, works of the Law aren't going to justify people, for the Law is what exposed them as sinful in the first place.

Moving on to the next part:

But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; (Romans 3:21-22)

As Paul noted earlier, the righteousness of God was manifested by the unrighteousness of man who were exposed by the Law, but now the righteousness of God has been manifested in another way, apart from the Law. What way is that? By the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ. Who demonstrates that righteousness? Those who believe, not those who are under the Law.

At this point, Paul narrows his focus to a specific group, “all who believe” and then talks about their progression, first that they all believers have sinned:

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)

The "all have sinned" must be "all who believe have sinned," a fact that I prove in another essay (http://oraclesoffire.blogspot.com/2013/02/misuse-of-romans-chapter-three-part-one.html). He is not saying that every single individual has sinned, but rather that all believers (both Jews and Gentiles) have sinned.

It is also important to note the second portion, "and fall short of the glory of God." This hearkens back to the earlier part of the chapter where he said, "But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say?" In other words, the sin of mankind demonstrates the righteousness of God. By sinning, mankind has demonstrated the contrast between man's darkness and God's glory. Sinners have fallen short of that glory.

Yet now all who believe have been justified through the second way of manifestation of God's glory, as the passage explains in the next verse:

Rom 3:24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
Rom 3:25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed;
Rom 3:26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
Rom 3:27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith.
Rom 3:28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

Paul's ultimate purpose was to show that righteousness comes through faith, not through works of the law, so it's true for both Jews and Gentiles, as he reiterates:

Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. (Romans 3:29-30)

In conclusion, this entire section is a treatise on how both Jews and Gentiles must be saved through faith in Christ. Why? Both groups are under sin, and following the Law isn't going to get them saved. This section cannot be used to prove the total depravity of man or that all humans are currently in a sinful state, especially believers who have been delivered from sin and its power.

Misuse of Romans Chapter Three - Part One

For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:23)

Many have used this verse as proof that everyone who has ever lived has sinned at some time during their lives. Most people assume the meaning of “all” as being “all people without exception,” yet Paul does not provide such clarification in this verse. If we were to examine the context, we could find what he means by “all,” which we will see in a moment.

One glaring problem with the foregoing assumption (“all” means “all people without exception”) is that carrying this meaning through the rest of the thought creates doctrine that violates other Scripture.

Take note of verse 24—“being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.”

Who is the subject of verse 24? In other words, who is justified as a gift by His grace and who is redeemed? We have to look back in the context to find the subject. It is the very same “all” as in verse 23. Paul does not pause to alter the subject. The “all” in verse 23 is the same group that is considered justified and redeemed in verse 24. If all people without exception have sinned, then all people without exception are justified by His grace.

We know, however, that some people are not justified. "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death." (Revelation 21:8) And the Bible includes many other verses that prove the same.

Yet, in reality, there is no contradiction between Paul’s declaration in these two verses and the rest of Scripture. The simple fact is that Paul did not mean “all people without exception” in verse 23. The preceding verses tell us exactly what he meant by “all.”

“But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction.” (Romans 3:21-22)

Paul was talking about “all who believe” throughout this context. He was saying the following: all who believe (verse 22) have sinned (verse 23) and have been justified (verse 24). This meaning of “all” is in mind through all three verses.

To summarize the point, if someone insists that “all” in verse 23 means “all people without exception,” then he must accept this “all” as the subject of verse 24 and accept universalism, that all people without exception are justified in Christ.

Understanding “all” as “all who believe,” removes the problem. Since all who believe are justified, there is no need to believe in universal salvation, as would be the case if “all” really meant “all people without exception.”

Why does this distinction matter?

First, the popular notion that “all” refers to “all people without exception” has led to problems in some theological circles. Some people have used Romans 3:23 to say that since all people sin, and since babies are people, then even babies sin, thereby using the verse as proof of original sin.

Whether or not you believe in original sin, this verse cannot be used in this way. Since “all” actually means “all who believe,” we exclude babies from Paul’s charge, because they are not of age to believe.

In other words, we should conclude from the passage that if someone is of age to believe the gospel, then he is of age to have sinned. Since babies do not yet have the capacity to believe, they are not included in the “all” in verse 23.

Second, Romans 3:23 is used by nearly all evangelical churches and groups as the foundation of the gospel, the famous “Romans Road to Salvation” being a prime example of such use. Evangelicals quote the verse to prove that their target for evangelism has sinned and is in need of salvation.

Yet, Paul is not talking about unbelievers here, so it is inaccurate to use this verse as proof that all unbelievers have sinned. Any sinner could point to verse 24 and claim forgiveness, which would be counterproductive in the evangelistic effort. There are other passages evangelists can use to prove sin in unbelievers, but not this one.

Another common misuse of Romans 3:23 occurs when applying the verse as proof that Christians still sin. Some say that “all have sinned” somehow means “all are still sinning.” This is not the case. The tense of the verb indicates that all believers have sinned sometime in the past, and Paul’s focus on past sins is reiterated in the latter part of verse 25: “because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed.” In no way does verse 23 indicate that sin continues beyond the point of salvation.

Some might claim that “fall short of the glory of God” indicates present sin, but this is also not the case. Past sin is one reason for presently being short of God’s glory, because God never sinned, either in the past or in the present. There is no way to use this verse to prove present sin.

My hope is that this short essay will help people see the following:

(1)  Romans 3:23 is nearly universally misunderstood and misused in the church today.

(2)  This verse cannot be used to prove original sin.

(3)  This verse cannot be used to prove present sin in anyone.

(4)  It is risky to build doctrine on an out-of-context verse. Always be careful to examine the context.

(5)  Some interpretations that are ingrained and nearly universal in the church are not true.

As Christians we are called to believe and communicate truth, even when most people around us disagree. Let us shine the light so that we can be effective for God and His kingdom.

Perseverance of the Saints - The P in the TULIP

Perseverance of the Saints:

Perseverance of the saints simply means that if anyone comes to faith in Christ, he will always be in a saved position, no matter what he does.

Much of the debate comes from the basic difference between the beliefs of the majority of those who approve and those who object to this doctrine, especially from the extreme poles of the camps. Calvinists hold to a phrase that says, “once saved, always saved,” that is, once you become a Christian, you cannot lose your salvation.

This belief is expressed in a range of ways. Some say that a true Christian will become more and more holy as time progresses, and he will not depart from the road toward holiness, though he will never become completely righteous until he goes to heaven (I have not yet met a Calvinist who believe in the ability to live a sinless life while alive on the earth). Some Calvinists believe that a person who once makes a profession of faith and then falls into a pattern of sin likely was never saved at all. It is difficult, if not impossible, for these Calvinists to draw a line to say how much sin is required before they would claim that such a person was never saved.

Other Calvinists believe that even the vilest sinners are saved simply because they once made a profession of faith. They believe that sin and righteousness are not to be used at all as a sign of salvation.

On the anti-Calvinist side, most believe that a person can “lose” or perhaps forfeit his salvation if he turns from his faith and returns to his former manner of life, that is, a life of sin, though some hold to a hybrid position I will explain soon.

On the anti-Calvinist side, we have a similar range of opinion. Some use the “once saved, always saved” phrase and its acronym (OSAS) as a symbol of heresy, almost as a litmus test to determine a person’s standing in theology. To them, if you believe this doctrine, you are heretical. There is no other option. And it seems to them, when shown any example of a person who once professed faith and then fell into sin, whether in the Bible or in modern times, that person must have lost their salvation. The idea that such a person might not have ever been saved is often foreign.

Other anti-Calvinists allow for the idea that perseverance can be a viable option, believing that real Christians simply won’t fall into sin and that those who once professed faith and fell into sin weren’t ever real Christians, that is, they were never saved. They believe in the theoretical possibility that a real Christian could sin and forfeit salvation, but in practice, they would identify a falling-away person as one who was never saved. This is the hybrid position, a belief in once saved always saved that is lived out in holiness.

And, as in the Calvinist camp, there are people who believe ideas that fall somewhere within the wide range.

There are Scripture passages that might lead a person to believe either one, and we could examine every one of them in detail and still not settle the issue to everyone’s satisfaction. We see several examples of people who claim to have faith and then abandon it, making us think they might have lost salvation, and we also see passages that teach us that perhaps this kind of person never had true faith at all.

This is often the crux of the issue for anti-Calvinists. Was a formerly faith-professing sinner ever saved? We see Jesus saying to those who claim faith, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness. (Matthew 7:23). And John says, “They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be shown that they all are not of us” (1 John 2:19).

At the same time, we see examples in which the text speaks plainly of a fallen believer, and I will give an example in a moment.

I think, therefore, our goal should not be to prove the past spiritual condition of any particular sinner who once professed faith. It simply isn’t important. The important fact is that a sinning person is not currently saved, whether they ever were saved or not. And it is this proposition we will explore, because the Calvinist system has spread more danger through their perseverance tenet than through any other, guaranteeing eternal security to people who have no good reason to possess such assurance.

Why is this issue important? People want to have assurance of salvation, evidence that what is invisible is real. We can’t see our internal salvation with our eyes, so it gives us comfort to have some kind of knowledge that our faith has substance, that God has indeed responded to our cry of faith.

How does a person know he is saved? Is having assurance of salvation important? What does the Bible say?

Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you (2 Peter 1:10).

These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life (1 John 5:13)

And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments (1 John 2:3).

These verses give us reason to believe that knowledge of our salvation (or of our choosing, which isn’t necessarily the same thing) is important. Many Calvinists agree that it’s important to know, as Dr. Sproul says:

Such a person might say, “I don’t know if I am elect or not and I am not the least bit concerned about it.” There can hardly be any greater folly. If you do not yet know if you are elect, I can think of no more urgent question to answer.[1]

Dr. Sproul gives three ways to have assurance, and we’ll discuss each one.

True assurance is grounded in the promises of God for our salvation. Our assurance comes first of all from our trust in the God who makes these promises.[2]

The problem with this point is that it lends nothing to gaining personal assurance. Yes, God’s promises are sure; they never fail. But His promise to save someone doesn’t apply to someone who is not truly in the state of salvation. You can’t say to someone, “You can be sure you’re saved, because God’s promises to save never fail.” The person you’re speaking with may not be truly saved. Therefore, this is not a valid way to gain assurance.

Secondly, our assurance is enhanced by the inward evidence of our own faith. We know that we could never have any true affection for Christ if we were not reborn. We know that we could not be reborn if we were not elect. … I know inwardly that I do not love Christ totally. But at the same time I do know that I love him. I rejoice inwardly at the thought of his triumph. I rejoice inwardly at the thought of his coming. I will his exultation. I know that none of these sentiments that I find in myself could possibly be there if it were not fore grace.[3]

Is that so? Can someone have internal good feelings about Christ without being saved? What does the Bible say?

“A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits. Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness. (Matthew 7:18-23)

These whom Jesus commands to depart seem to have an internal attachment to Christ, yet they are rejected because they don’t obey. We’ll come back to this passage in a moment.

Jesus also says something else about loving Him, “If you love me, you will keep My commandments.” (John 14:15). Having an emotional response to Christ is not a way to gain assurance of salvation, for feelings are fleeting; they change every day. It is only obedience that proves love, or in Sproul’s words, “affection for Christ.”

Dr. Sproul continues, now giving a hint of the true way to gain assurance:

In addition to the inward evidence of grace there is also outward evidence. We should be able to see visible fruit of our conversion. The outward evidence, however, may also cause our lack of assurance. We can see the abiding sin in our lives. Such sin does not do much for our assurance. We see ourselves sinning and we ask ourselves, “How can I do these things if I really love Christ?”[4]

Good question, but Dr. Sproul doesn’t give an adequate answer.

We must ask ourselves if we see any real change in our behavior, any real outward evidence of grace. This is a precarious process because we can lie to ourselves. It is a difficult task to perform, but by no means impossible.[5]

Does the Bible say that we are to be assured by a change in our behavior? Yes, but how much change? Dr. Sproul wishes to allow the possibility of daily, ongoing sin, but how much sin is allowed before our assurance is dashed? With his system, Dr. Sproul can give no answer. There is no definitive line that can be drawn. If we change somewhat, yet go back and forth between sin and obedience, is that real change? How much change is necessary? If I used to sin twenty times a day before salvation and reduce it to nine times, does that mean I am saved? What if I mess up and go back to eleven times for a few days and then back to six the next? Is that evidence of change?

A change in behavior that allows for sin draws a wavy, jumping line. It is useless.

But the Bible does draw an absolute, definitive line.

And by this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked. (1 John 2:3-6)

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. (1 John 3:9-10)

We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him and the evil one does not touch him. (1 John 5:18)

For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. (Romans 8:14)

Notice in the 1 John 3 passage, the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest. Allowance for any sin makes the decision “not manifest,” for who can draw an adequate line that says how much sin is too much. And John, in the verse immediately preceding verse 10, says that a true Christian does not commit sin at all, as we saw in the Matthew 7 passage that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit.

Simply put, the Bible leaves no room for the commission of sin in a true Christian. In fact, it gives a foreboding warning about what happens if a person who knows the truth should ever sin.

26 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a certain terrifying expectation of judgment, and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay.”  And again, “The Lord will judge His people.”  31 It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God. (Hebrews 10:26-31)

This takes us to our next question, “Can a person “lose” his salvation? We have said that a true Christian does not commit sin, and some theologians have agreed. “A Christian is so far perfect as not to commit sin. This is the glorious privilege of every Christian, yes, though he be but a babe in Christ.”[6]

But the question remains, can a person have true salvation and then lose it? The Hebrews passage seems to say so, at the very least providing the theoretical possibility. The writer of Hebrews somewhat hedges on the practicality for his particular audience in verse 39, “But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.” The same writer repeats the message back in chapter 6.

For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame. (Hebrews 6:4-6)

But he again states that he believes better of his readers and real salvation, “But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation, though we are speaking in this way (Hebrews 6:9). This hedging can make a reader wonder if this forfeiture of salvation is merely hypothetical.

Again, I propose that making the distinction of whether or not a sinner was ever saved is unimportant, practically speaking. If obedience is our only way to gain assurance, then it is our divining rod by which we determine whether a person is or is not saved currently, not whether a person has ever been saved. Our concern is with present condition and not in wrangling over a previous position in Christ. We should deal with the current problem at hand.

The “once saved, always saved” doctrine of the Calvinist is offensive, but not because it gives assurance of salvation; it is offensive because it has been used to give license to sin. In other words, as I indicated earlier, many people stretch it to say that if a person is saved, he is always saved, no matter how much he sins. This gives false security, providing people with a reason to believe they can do anything they want and still enjoy the assurance of going to heaven. This false assurance is surely leading a host of millions into eternal condemnation, and they will say with those in Matthew 7, “Lord! Lord!” And Jesus will say, “Depart from me!” They will be shocked at His response, but it will too late to repent.

We have security as real Christians because we obey God, because we follow in the footsteps of Christ. But this is a conditional security. If we ever begin sinning, then we no longer have assurance, for no one who is born of God sins. At this point, knowing whether salvation is lost or never held is of no practical value.

But what about Hebrews 6:4-6 where it says that it’s impossible for them to be renewed to repentance? Doesn’t that make it important? Not really. It doesn’t change the fact that we will still call such people to repent; we will still call them to be reconciled to God. Since we can’t know their true previous position, we will not fail to beseech them. Therefore, in practicality, it still makes no difference.

Calvinists use several passages in an attempt to prove their views. For example, the following is a passage I hear most often with regard to this topic:

For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:38-39)

This is certainly true, but it in no way proves perseverance. It proves that we cannot be separated from God's love, but it doesn't say that we cannot be separated from salvation. Salvation isn't the topic.

Then there is this passage:

All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day." (John 6:37-40)

Yet, later, Jesus gives an exception:

I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are. While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled. (John 17:11-12)

Jesus says that one of the disciples God gave was ultimately lost. Why? Because he turned his back on Jesus and betrayed Him.

The solution is simple. It is the Father's will that none would be lost, but the Father's will is not always done. God's will is thwarted here on earth on a daily basis. God doesn't want anyone to fall away, but that doesn't mean it won't happen.

Of course, Calvinists can't bear the thought that God's will might not be done. Few can even think in those terms.

Here is another:

"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. (John 10:27-29)

Supposedly, since no one is able to take a sheep from the hand of Jesus or out of the Father's hand, a saved person can never be lost. Yet, this passage is referring to someone on the outside taking a sheep away, that is, an enemy forcefully removing a sheep from God. This, of course, could never happen. But the passage says nothing about the sheep leaving voluntarily or about God sending the sheep away because of rebellion. Therefore, this passage provides no evidence that a Christian cannot lose salvation.

Here is another:

Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. (Jude 24-25)

According to the Calvinist, this proves that God can keep us from the stumbling that would cause loss of salvation.

Well, of course God can do that, but that doesn't mean that everyone will follow the course God sets to prevent that stumbling.

And finally:

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. (1 Peter 1:3-5)

This passage says that the inheritance is imperishable and won't fade away. Of course it won't perish. Heaven and its blessings will always be there, but it doesn't say that an individual's ability to partake in it will always be guaranteed. Still, it does say that the reservation is protected by the power of God, but by what? By faith. If our faith continues, then the reservation is secure. What happens if the faith doesn't continue? We can assume only that the reservation no longer is protected.

I write these rebuttals to show that the Calvinists look at these passages through their Calvinist filters. They come to the Bible with presumptions that make the verses say things they don't actually say.

My own view is the hybrid one I mentioned earlier. I believe that true Christians will persevere and that they won't sin. If I see someone who claims Christianity and still sins, I first assume that he or she was never actually saved and did not lose salvation. I think God's cleansing power and the presence of His Spirit are overwhelming factors in making us and keeping us holy. I can't see how someone could be truly crucified with Christ, have his flesh crucified and removed, be cleansed of all sin, be raised to new life and indwelled by the Holy Spirit, and still turn to sin. It makes much more sense to me that anyone in sin was likely never saved, regardless of their history. I don't doubt the theoretical possibility, just the practical application.

In any case, we should be able to agree, as I stated before, that no one who is in sin can have assurance of salvation. The Calvinistic form of perseverance is not true, and it endangers people's souls.

In Conclusion:

God’s sovereignty is not damaged by the free will of man. God is not rendered powerless by the fact that man can operate outside of His absolute control. Yes, God can step in and prevent an act by erecting insurmountable obstacles or guide someone into an act by creating desirable or alluring incentives. If God, however, were to force people to worship Him by infusing faith into those He chooses unconditionally, He has created false adoration, for only true free will can induce true worship.

If God drags people to their knees by an irresistible call, He has merely designed robots, programmed to bow at the push of a button. In this there is no glory. Are these true praises, the voices of those who have been forced to sing hymns of worship? Or is this Calvinist God more eloquently described by those consigned to hell who were condemned simply for being born sons of Adam?

Let us who understand this great gift of free will respond according to its awesome responsibility. We speak to the lost as though God Himself were beseeching through us. “Come! Be reconciled to God! He has given you a choice. Which will you choose? Life, or death? I beg you to choose life!”


[1] Ibid, P. 169.

[2] Ibid. P. 169-170.

[3] Ibid, P. 170.

[4] Ibid, P. 170.

[5] Ibid. P. 171.

[6] John Wesley, "A Plain Account of Christian Perfection", The Works of John Wesley, 11:376.

Irresistible Grace - The I in the TULIP

Irresistible Grace:

This is one of the more misunderstood tenets of Calvinism. It implies that God grabs an unbeliever by the scruff of the neck and drags him kicking and screaming into the kingdom of God. In other words, God saves a person whether he likes it or not. The Calvinist who understands his doctrine will deny this implication, though, in practicality, it exists, albeit without the kicking and screaming.

According to the Calvinist, God infuses His grace into a person, regenerating him so that he wants to come to Christ. He is not an unwilling participant; he is made to be willing. As R.C. Sproul writes:

Natural man does not want Christ. He will only want Christ if God plants a desire for Christ in his heart. Once that desire is planted, those who come to Christ do not come kicking and screaming against their wills. They come because they want to come. They now desire Jesus. They rush to the Savior. The whole point of irresistible grace is that rebirth quickens someone to spiritual life in such a way that Jesus is now seen in his irresistible sweetness. Jesus is irresistible to those who have been made alive to the things of God. Every soul whose heart beats with the life of God within it longs for the living Christ. All whom the Father gives to Christ come to Christ (John 6:37).[1]

The Calvinist still can’t escape the charge, however, that God forces a person into the kingdom against his will. Before this infused grace, the man was unwilling to come. Then God, by an act of His omnipotent power, makes a man willing. What God did was against the man’s previous will, and man did not want this grace infused. With God acting as an irresistible influencer, man is, in a sense, dragged into the kingdom. He is made to want it, making God’s grace sound like some sort of mind-altering drug that forces man into liking what he sees, though he previously did not like it. Is this repentance of sin? Is this a true act of faith, when God does the altering? I think not.

Dr. Sproul brought up John 6:37 at the end of his quote, “All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.” This verse is almost universally used in concert with verse 44 in the same chapter to prove this doctrine of irresistible grace. “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.” Let’s look at these verses in their context to determine what Jesus was trying to say.

26 Jesus answered them and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled. 27 “Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal.” 28 They said therefore to Him, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” 30 They said therefore to Him, “What then do You do for a sign, that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? 31 “Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’” 32 Jesus therefore said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. 33 “For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34 They said therefore to Him, “Lord, evermore give us this bread.” 35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me shall not hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst. 36 “But I said to you, that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 “All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38 “For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 “And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 “For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him, may have eternal life; and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.” 
41 The Jews therefore were grumbling about Him, because He said, “I am the bread that came down out of heaven.” 42 And they were saying, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, ‘I have come down out of heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered and said to them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. 45 “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me. 46 “Not that any man has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father. 47 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 “I am the bread of life. 49 “Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 “This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 “I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he shall live forever; and the bread also which I shall give for the life of the world is My flesh.”
52 The Jews therefore began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?” 53 Jesus therefore said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. 54 “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 “For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 “As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me. 58 “This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate, and died, he who eats this bread shall live forever.”
59 These things He said in the synagogue, as He taught in Capernaum. 
60 Many therefore of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble? 62 ”What then if you should behold the Son of Man ascending where He was before? 63 “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64 “But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me, unless it has been granted him from the Father.” (John 6:26-65)

Again, the verses most often used by the Calvinist to promote irresistible grace are these two:

John 6:37, “All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.”

John 6:44, “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.”

The Calvinist says that only those God chooses for salvation will come to Christ, i.e. those whom He draws by His irresistible grace, because He has elected them from the foundation of the world. The problem with this understanding is that God’s decision to draw someone is interpreted as being based on a predetermined election made before the foundation of the world. Where does it say that in this passage? Jesus said that the Father must draw someone before that person can come to Him. It doesn’t say why the Father draws a person or what conditions must be met for God to draw a person.

Let’s see what the context says. Look at verse 45, which comes immediately after Jesus’ statement about those who are drawn. “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.”

Jesus gives us two facts. 1) Everyone is taught of God. 2) Those who hear and learn come to Christ. Jesus is trying to tell us that God initiates the process of coming to Christ by teaching all people. Those who heed that call come to Christ. It doesn’t say that God’s decision is based on a predetermined choice; it clearly says that His decision is based on the person’s response.

Not everyone who is taught will come to Christ. God draws those who, by faith, respond to the teaching. This passage says nothing about predestined election to salvation, so any attempt to read it into the verse is done by the addition of words that simply aren’t there.

Back to verse 37, “All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.”

Whom does the Father give to Jesus? Is it those predestined to salvation? If so, where does the passage say that?

Verses 29, 36, 40, and 64 give us the answer:

29: But I said to you, that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe.

36: For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him, may have eternal life; and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.

40: Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent. 

64-65 “But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me, unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

These last two verses drive our conclusion home. Jesus directly gives us the reason He made the statement in the first place, that some of them don’t believe. He didn’t say it because some of them were not of the elect. Jesus was saying that only those who believe are granted access to Christ by the Father, only those who respond to the enlightening call by faith.

It is the faith of a person that determines whether or not God draws him to Christ. The context provides no other reason. When God teaches all people, this is the universal grace of God, the enlightenment that is brought by the Holy Spirit. Those who respond are those who come to Christ. This is really a simple concept, but those who have a predetermined understanding of Calvinistic election have a hard time getting past their presuppositions, which we shall see.

Sproul argues against the concept of universal grace (or prevenient grace) by asking why, if everyone gets the same amount of enabling grace, do some people come to Christ and others do not. Doesn’t that give the believers something to boast about?

Why is it that you have chosen Christ and they have not? Why did you say yes to prevenient grace while they said no? Was it because you were more righteous than they were? If so, then indeed you have something in which to boast. Was that greater righteousness something you achieved on your own or was it the gift of God? If it was something you achieved, then at the bottom line your salvation depends on your own righteousness. If the righteousness was a gift, then why didn’t God give the same gift to everybody?[2]

Sproul goes on to castigate prevenient grace as follows:

But I must press the question. Why did you recognize your desperate need for Christ while your neighbor didn’t? Was it because you were more righteous than your neighbor, or more intelligent?

The $64 question for advocates of prevenient grace is why some people cooperate with it and others don’t. How we answer that will reveal how gracious we believer our salvation really is.

The $64,000 question is, “Does the Bible teach such a doctrine of prevenient grace? If so, where?[3]

Our answer to the $64 question is, “Some people cooperate because they want to do so. Those who do not cooperate don’t want to cooperate.” The Calvinists have a premise in their thinking that they simply can’t put out of their minds, the concept that man doesn’t really have free will. Something has to cause a thought or decision. They can’t accept the fact that a person can be a first-cause agent or that two different people can make different choices even with identical influences.

In refuting our position, Calvinists make the assumption that either the believer must be more righteous than someone who doesn’t believe or else God gave the believer more grace. They can’t accept individual choice as a viable alternative, thus creating an either/or fallacy. In other words, Calvinists provide only two possibilities, vanquish the opposing position with logic, and claim victory. The problem is that they use a Calvinistic premise in their logic, that man cannot have true free will, in order to prove that the concept of prevenient grace isn’t possible.

But we deny the premise. We claim that man can choose to have faith once he is enlightened by God’s Holy Spirit. We believe that God is a rewarder of faith, and that boasting comes as a result of works. No person who truly surrenders in complete repentance has room for boasting. They are completely aware of their inability to obey God without His grace. The charge of boasting assumes that they will keep their unregenerate mindset, so the charge is spurious.

If a person could actually work for his salvation, i.e. gives to charity, participate in missions, tend to the sick, etc, in a sense, he would be able to earn his salvation, and in this he could boast. Basically, he would deserve it. Faith, however, is not a work. It is surrender. Who is able to boast about surrendering? Who is able to boast about freely receiving an undeserved gift? Such a concept is absurd. The Calvinists try to equate choosing faith with works, and they claim that choosing faith enables boasting. This attempt is a great error, and we completely reject it as a misunderstanding of what real faith is all about.

Prevenient grace is simply the call of God to all people everywhere, a call that reveals their sin and gives them an opportunity to repent. God’s call is a light in their darkness that allows them to see reality, the spiritual truth that they are in need of a savior. This is truly an act of grace, for it is a good gift, and it is undeserved.

Such a call gives people the opportunity to exercise their free will. Before this call of grace, they had insufficient knowledge or spiritual insight to see the darkness in themselves, for darkness is all they knew and someone who knows only darkness cannot recognize its separation from light.

As the Bible says,

In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it (John 1:4-5)

And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God (John 3:19-21)

The blazing light of the gospel sheds light and reveals both the goodness of God and the sin in ourselves before we believed. Only then can a person trapped in the chains of sin respond. This call is truly a call of grace.

As Charles Wesley wrote so eloquently in his hymn, “And Can It Be?”


Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature’s night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray—
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

The answer to Dr. Sproul’s $64,000 question is in the passage we studied. “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me” (John 6:45). And we could site many more.

John 12:32 “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”

John 16:7-11 “But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper shall not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin, and righteousness, and judgment; concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me;  and concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you no longer behold Me; and concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.”

Acts 17:30-31 “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead.”

Romans 5:18  So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.

Galatians 3:21-24 Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law. But the Scripture has shut up all men under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith.

Although we listed several places the Scriptures teach prevenient, universal grace, and we could easily come up with many more, I doubt that Dr. Sproul will soon be sending us a check for $64,000.

As a side note, some Calvinists try to get mileage out of their understanding of the word “draws” in verse 44, “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.” They say that “when it refers to man it has the meaning of to compel, of irresistible superiority, as in James 2:6 where the rich drag the poor before the judge, and as Paul and Silas are dragged into the market place in Acts 16:19.”[4]

It’s a fallacy to assume that a word has the same nuance wherever it appears. A man runs for political office in a very different way than he runs in a road race. A woman cries in a very different way for a lost child than she cries for her son to hit a home run. Yes, “draw” can be used to mean “drag” or “coerce,” but the Calvinist remains silent when he sees, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself,” for he cannot abide God dragging all men to salvation.

What does the Calvinist system of doctrine do to their efforts to evangelize? If God irresistibly draws the elect to salvation without fail, why would they bother to go through all the world to preach the gospel, bringing danger and huge burdens upon themselves?

They give a reasonable answer; they evangelize out of obedience. They realize that God may use them to bring the gospel to the lost, and in obedience they are willing to do whatever it takes to obey God by bringing the message of salvation.

The problem with this answer is that it doesn’t address the logic of the Calvinist system and how it might affect the minds of its followers. If a person can’t have faith until God regenerates him, then speaking the gospel message to Him will have no effect. They have to admit that sinners will always refuse to listen unless God infuses faith in their hearts. What does this do to the motivation of the evangelist? Why should a missionary be passionate for reaching the lost when they can do nothing to inspire faith?

Also, a Calvinist missionary “knows” that any person who is saved in his ministry would have been saved whether he made his sacrificial journey or not. And every single person to whom he speaks is already ordained to his eternal destiny, a decision by God that his years of laborious duty cannot possibly change. He is risking the health, comfort, and life of himself and his family in order to do what? Absolutely nothing. It’s impossible to maintain that such a doctrine has no effect on the passion of the laborers in the harvest.

We know, however, that God has a completely opposite viewpoint.

“Whoever will call upon the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then shall they call upon Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring glad tidings of good things!” (Romans 10:13-15)

The Apostle Paul knew that people would not hear the good news without the message bearers going out and spreading it throughout the world. He knows that millions who deserve condemnation because of their sin need to hear the gospel, and their destiny is not unalterably chiseled in a predestined stone.

There is hope for every lost soul. Not a single one is destined to eternal fires simply because God has not chosen him from the foundation of the world. This fact gives us true zeal to reach the lost. We have a message that can really make a difference, an eternal difference. Our inspiration is not the lukewarm response of those who preach out of duty, believing that God will only save those already chosen. Our inspiration is love, the urgency of a man searching the seas for floundering souls, a lifesaving rope in his hands and a beacon that guides the way to the firm foundation of Jesus Christ.

And it is this knowledge that feeds our zeal, that as laborers in the harvest, God can use us to change the world. “Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were entreating through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (2 Corinthians 5:20).


[1] Chosen By God, P. 122-123.

[2] Ibid, P. 124.

[3] Ibid. P. 125.

[4] Berkouwer, G. C., Divine Election, pp. 47f

Limited Atonement - The L in the TULIP

Limited Atonement:

Limited atonement declares that the mission and death of Christ was restricted to a limited number—to his people, to his sheep.[1]

In other words, the Calvinist believes that Christ died only for the elect, those predestined to salvation from the foundation of the world. This, of course, would be logical if the first two points, total depravity and unconditional election, were true. If God decided who was going to be saved, why would Jesus die for anyone else? And it seems that Calvinists rarely, if ever, use Scripture to back up this tenet, choosing merely to point to the logical demands for it. Since their first two points actually aren’t true, an appeal to logical consistency fails. The premise upon which they build their arguments has already crumbled, so this house of cards is easily blown away.

What the Calvinists prefer to do is defend their position against the Bible passages that prove it to be false, and they attack opposing views by saying that a universal atonement can’t be true because not everyone is saved.

For example, the following verse indicates that Christ died for all.

He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. (1 John 2:2)

            Let’s look at R.C. Sproul’s explanation, and I’ll comment on it as we go.

The world for whom Christ died cannot mean the entire human family. It must refer to the universality of the elect (People from every tribe and nation) or the inclusion of Gentiles in addition to the world of the Jews. It was a Jew who wrote that Jesus did not die merely for our sins but for the sins of the whole world. Does the word our refer to believers or to believing Jews?

We must remember that one of the cardinal points of the New Testament concerned the inclusion of the Gentiles in God’s plan of salvation. Salvation was of the Jews but not restricted to the Jews. Wherever it is said that Christ died for all, some limitation must be added or the conclusion would have to be universalism or a mere potential atonement.[2]

Sproul tries to make us believe that “whole world” means the world outside of Judaism, that John means something to the effect of “other nations besides the Jews.” Does John say that? Not at all. Where in the context does he refer to Jews and Gentiles? Nowhere. Sproul has to conjure this meaning in order to make it fit his system. When the Scripture writers wished to make the Israel versus Gentiles distinction, they were quite capable of doing so. For example:

Is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. (Romans 3:29-30)

This is the blatant error that Calvinists so often commit, making unreasonable assertions about Scripture and indefensible insertions into Scripture in order to make the Bible fit their preconceived notions. Why not allow the Scripture to create and inform our system rather than the other way around?

As we continue to look at Sproul’s argument we should ask, why can’t “world” mean the entire human family? Because, according to Sproul, it would necessitate either universalism or potential atonement. Universalism means that everyone is saved, while potential atonement means that Christ died for people who might or might not be saved. Universalism is easily refuted from Scripture; clearly not everyone is saved. Potential atonement, however, is exactly what is , that Christ died so that everyone has the opportunity to be saved, though not all will respond to God’s gracious offer.

Such a notion is scandalous to the Calvinist. That God’s desire could somehow be thwarted by man’s decision is beyond their comprehension. As Sproul goes on to explain.

Christ’s atonement was real. It effected all that God and Jesus intended by it. The design of God was not and cannot be frustrated by human unbelief. The sovereign God sovereignly sent his Son to atone for his people.[3]

But God is often frustrated by human unbelief. The Bible is bursting with examples.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. (Matthew 23:37)

Wasn’t God frustrated with obstinate Israel in the wilderness, in their desire for a king, and in their response to the Babylonian invasion? Of course He was. God’s desire for obedience is often thwarted, and His desire for each person to be saved is often unrealized. But God’s ultimate purpose is never thwarted.

Sproul continues:

Our election is in Christ. We are saved by him, in him, and for him. The motive for our salvation is not merely the love God has for us. It is especially grounded in the love the Father has for the Son. God insists that his Son will see the travail of his soul and be satisfied. There never has been the slightest possibility that Christ could have died in vain. If man is truly dead in sin and in bondage to sin, a mere potential or conditional atonement not only may have ended in failure but most certainly would have ended in failure. Arminians have no sound reason to believe that Jesus did not die in vain. They are left with a Christ who tried to save everybody but actually saved nobody.[4]

Here we see Sproul appealing to the logical conclusion of his system, that if man is truly dead in sin, at least in the Total Depravity of Man view, then no one would ever come to faith. The strangeness of this argument is that he juxtaposes two opposing systems in order to argue for his own. In other words, he says something like this. “Arminians have no sound reason to believe that Jesus did not die in vain, because since man is Totally Depraved, none would ever come to faith.” But we deny Total Depravity! Those who oppose Calvinism (Arminians and others) have sound reason, because we don’t agree with Calvinist notions. We believe man is capable of responding to the gracious offering of salvation. Sproul’s is actually a rather confused argument and points out his inability to see outside his tightly sealed systematic box.

(Note: Calvinists tend to label as Arminians all who oppose their beliefs. This is a faulty notion. Not all who oppose Calvinism are Arminians. I am not one. This is another Calvinist fallacy.)

It is true that God’s ultimate design is not thwarted. God has graciously offered salvation to all by freely giving His Son in painful, bloody sacrifice. All who respond in faith are saved. This is God’s purpose, that all who call upon His name be brought to salvation. And in this, God’s desire NEVER fails. He never fails in saving someone who lifts up his hands in repentance. His saving arm never loses its power in pulling a soul from the pits of sin. His sturdy grip never releases a man who keeps his feet firmly on the path of life.

The atonement is potential in that it is potentially available to all. Not all respond. The atonement is not, however, unlimited in its effect. It is not automatically conferred upon people who do not respond.

Jesus Christ died in order to allow anyone who comes to Him in faith to be saved. That this sacrificial grace is available to everyone in the world is abundantly clear in Scripture, and efforts to prove otherwise fail, exposed as efforts to preserve a doctrinal system by adding words and notions that don’t exist in the Bible.

John 3:16
16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Whom does God love? Only the elect? That's what Calvinists believe, but the verse says nothing of the sort. Those roads have to be blatantly inserted in order to fit their system.

1 Timothy 2:1-6
2:1 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony borne at the proper time.

Whom does God desire to be saved? All men. Again, the Calvinists have to insert words to make phrases that fit their system, such as "all elect men." Such a notion isn't there.

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Does God want all to come to repentance or only the elect? The text says all, but the Calvinists add words to make it say "all the elect" or something similar.

Again, the Calvinists have no Scripture to back up the notion that Jesus died only for the elect. They rely instead on logical inference, that since, according to them, the first two points are true, then this one must be true as well. Yet, the first two points aren't true, and the Scriptures deny the third, so this idea that Jesus died only for the elect is hereby refuted.


[1] Chosen by God page 205.

[2] Chosen by God pages 206-207.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

Unconditional Election - The U in the TULIP

Unconditional Election:

This is the identifying statement of Calvinism, in other words, the doctrine that most people think about when they consider Calvinistic predestination. Following is a statement defining this doctrine, written by a prominent Calvinist.

Unconditional election means that our election is decided by God according to His purpose, according to His sovereign will. It is not based on some foreseen condition that some of us meet and others fail to meet. It is not based on our willing or on our running, but upon the sovereign purpose of God.[1]

When we say that election is unconditional we mean that the original decree by God by which he chooses some people to be saved is not dependent upon some future condition in us that God foresees. There is nothing is us that God could foresee that would induce him to choose us. The only thing he would foresee in the lives of fallen creatures left to themselves would be sin. God chooses us simply according to the good pleasure of his will.[2]

The Calvinist argues that God chooses people to be saved based on nothing in the person, yet they claim that God’s choice is not arbitrary. As R. C. Sproul writes:

To be arbitrary is to do something for no reason. Now, it is clear that there is no reason found in us for God to choose us. But that is not the same as saying that God has no reason in himself. God doesn’t do anything without a reason. He is not capricious or whimsical. God is as sober as he is sovereign.[3]

God predestines us according to what pleases him. … What pleases God is goodness. … Though the reason for choosing us does not lie in us but in the sovereign divine pleasure, we may rest assured that the sovereign divine pleasure is a good pleasure.[4]

The Calvinist argues that God’s reason is his “good pleasure,” yet he never defines what that is or what brings about that pleasure. Whatever it is, however, it is nothing in the individual being elected. This, of course, is blatantly illogical. The only reason for choosing one individual over another must, by necessity, be in the individual being chosen. Otherwise there can’t possibly be a reason to choose. To say, “It’s God’s good pleasure” completely begs the question. In other words, “How does this choice bring about God’s pleasure?”

The Calvinist gives no answer. He prefers the logical inconsistency, shrugs his shoulders, and says it’s a mystery about God that we can’t understand.

Here’s a dictionary definition of arbitrary:

Arbitrary
1.     Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle: stopped at the first motel we passed, an arbitrary choice; arbitrary division of the group into halves.
2.     Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference: The diet imposes overall calorie limits, but daily menus are arbitrary.
3.     Established by a court or judge rather than by a specific law or statute: an arbitrary penalty.
4.     Not limited by law; despotic: the arbitrary rule of a dictator.

The Calvinists want a positive spin on both sides on their doctrine. They can’t allow for God to use anything in man as a reason to bring about His choice. Otherwise, there would be something in an individual that merits the choice, giving that individual some reason to boast. But they also can’t allow for there to be no reason at all. That would make God arbitrary, capricious, a divine being who seems to draw from straws to see who will share His everlasting glory and who, on the other hand, will gnash his teeth and suffer in the eternal doom of Hell. So they simply appeal to mystery, saying that it’s “God’s pleasure,” which, of course, is no explanation at all.

This appeal to mystery lacks intellectual integrity, and it’s unnecessary. God does have a reason for bringing about salvation to mankind. God responds to the faith an individual has in Christ the Savior.

We’ll look at some of the passages the Calvinist uses to support his view and see why their view of election and predestination is completely false.

We must understand, first of all, that real, biblical predestination does not mean, “God’s predetermined decision to choose certain people to salvation.” And predestination and election do not necessarily have the same meaning. The problem is that the Calvinistic understanding of these key words is pervasive, and many people presume their definitions whenever they see these words in Scripture. We must not get caught in the trap of assuming this meaning whenever we see “predestined” or “elect.”

God does elect people to certain acts and purposes, and some of these election decisions are determined long ago, but that doesn’t mean election and predestination are the same thing. God can elect a person to do something without deciding this election well before the event. “Predestined” purposes, on the other hand, are those that are unchangeable “destinies,” determined before a person acts, before he the purpose is ready to be fulfilled. Let’s look at some of the passages to see what we mean.

Ephesians 1:3-14
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. 7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace, 8 which He lavished upon us. In all wisdom and insight 9 He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fulness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things upon the earth. In Him 11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12 to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ should be to the praise of His glory. 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

Every time we see the words “elect,” “chose,” “predestined,” or similar words, we have to ask the following: “Who is being chosen?” and “For what purpose was the choice made?” We cannot, as the Calvinists do, suppose that every use means, “Individuals being chosen for salvation.”

Look at verse 4, “just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him.”

Who is chosen?  Us in Him. Who are “us in Him.” Believers in Christ.

For what purpose? To be holy and blameless.

This means that God decided before the foundation of the world that believers would be holy and blameless. It does not say that God decided who those believers would be.

How about verse 5? “He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will.”

Who is predestined? Us. Again, believers.

For what purpose? To be adopted as sons.

This means that God decided long ago that believers would be adopted as sons. It does not say that God decided who these believers would be.

Important sidetrack: What is adoption?

Who are the sons of God? How do we know who they are?

12 So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— 13 for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15 For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, “Abba! Father!” 16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him. (Romans 8:12-17)

22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. 23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. 24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one also hope for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it.  (Romans 8:22-25)

4 But when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, 5 in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. 6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” (Galatians 4:4-6)

And that brings us back to Ephesians:

13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

We are sons, and the only way the world knows we are God’s sons is by our obedience to Him (Romans 8:14). There will come a day when the whole world will know whose we are, when the fullness of the time reveals our true identity, when God comes to claim His own. Until then, we have a pledge, the Spirit of Promise dwelling within us, who tells us that we are His. The public claiming of God’s sons is our adoption. Until then, we are, in a sense, sons in secret, our display of God’s light in us being the identifying mark of our sonship.

Therefore, being predestined to adoption as sons simply means that God decided before the foundation of the world that all believers will be adopted as sons. They won’t be left as orphans, cut off from God’s family. We have a pledge, a promise that God will eventually take us into His heavenly home where we will be co-heirs with His Son, Jesus Christ.

The important point to emphasize is that adoption is not the same thing as salvation. It is something that happens in addition to salvation, a future event in which God’s sons will find the consummation of their sonship.


Now we’ll get back to looking at the issue of predestination. Look at verses 11 and 12 in Ephesians chapter 1.

In Him 11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12 to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.

Who is predestined? We are. Again, these are believers.

For what purpose? That we should be to the praise of His glory.

This is a choice of a group for a purpose other than salvation, not a choice of which individuals will be saved.

Therefore, in Ephesians, we see that God predestines that Christians will do or obtain certain things, that we will be holy and blameless, that we will be adopted as sons, and that we will be to the praise of His glory. There is nothing in this passage that says that God decided to save certain individuals. To gain such a meaning from this passage is to read something that isn’t there.

The Calvinist view of predestination, therefore, fails the test of Scripture. The Bible simply doesn’t say what the Calvinist believes. Using our interpretation, God’s character is upheld. There is nothing evil or unjust in God deciding beforehand what He is going to do with His faithful believers after they come to faith.

Now we’ll go on to another passage Calvinists use, one they call “The Golden Chain of Salvation.”

Romans 8:28-30
28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; 30 and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

According to the Calvinist, this chain of God’s activities proves the basics of Calvinistic predestination. Supposedly, whomever God foreknew, he predestined to salvation. Whomever He predestined, he called to salvation. Whomever he called to salvation, He justified. Whomever He justified, He glorified. In other words, God made all the decisions, and he irresistibly called to salvation all whom he predestined.

Simply put, the passage doesn’t say that at all.

The context of the passage is how God works events together for good for those who love Him, those who are called according to His purpose. So, when it says, “whom He foreknew,” who is in mind? The ones who love Him, the ones called to His purpose. The Greek bears this out. “Whom” is masculine plural, harkening back to its antecedent, “called,” a masculine plural noun, and every “whom” and every use of “these” thereafter is masculine plural.

The question that the Calvinist answers incorrectly is, “Who is included in the first ‘whom’ in verse 29?” They assume that it’s the people who are elected to salvation. The problem is, the verse doesn’t say that. In context with the preceding verse, “whom” refers to “those who love God,” “those who are called according to His purpose.” The “whom” in verse 29, therefore, refers to faithful followers of Christ.

Once it’s established about whom Paul is speaking, we can explain what the “chain” of verses 29 and 30 is all about. Let’s flesh out the verse by restating in paraphrase with the antecedent in place.

For God knew beforehand about the people who would love Him, the people who answered His call, and He predestined them to become conformed to the image of His Son. Why? That Christ might be the first-born of many brothers. And these same people he predestined to this image conformity, he also called. And these people He called, He also justified. And these people He justified, He also glorified.

This is not a “Golden Chain of Salvation.” It doesn’t talk about how God chooses individuals to be saved. It’s about how God treats and has treated faithful believers. This is actually a “Golden Chain of God’s Work in Believers.”

The context is crucial. Look at verses 26 and 27: 26 And in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; 27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

The “Golden chain” is given to explain why and how God works; it’s given to encourage believers who need intercessory help from the Holy Spirit. “Why does God allow my suffering?” a reader might ask. The encouragement comes from the apostle in this form. “Don’t be troubled. God works it all out for good for you, because you love Him. And don’t forget. God has planned all of this. He knew beforehand that those who follow Him would suffer for His name, and He predestined that all who follow Him would be conformed to the image of Christ.

Being conformed to the image of Christ is our calling; through our suffering we are honed into the righteous image of the Son of God. And when we are made into that image, Christ then has holy brothers, among whom He is the first-born.

I trust that you can see the Calvinist error. They see the word “predestined” and automatically assume that it means election of individuals to salvation. We see that it really means that God has decided beforehand that believers in Christ will be conformed to His image. That’s exactly what the verse says, and the Calvinist adds a meaning that simply isn’t there in order to make the passage fit his preconceived doctrinal system.

Other “unconditional election” passages:

13 But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. 14 And it was for this He called you through our gospel, that you may gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us. (2 Thess. 2:13-15)

Who is chosen? You, that is, believers.

For what purpose? For salvation. In this context, it means saving people from the wrath to come. In other words, God has chosen that believers would be saved from His wrath. This does not mean God has decided who those believers would be.
 
10 For this reason I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory. (2 Timothy 2:10)

Who is chosen? Paul doesn’t specifically say, but he endures all things so that they may obtain salvation.

For what purpose? Paul doesn’t specifically say, but since he endures so that they may obtain salvation, then it seems that what they are chosen for isn’t necessarily for salvation, because it seems that the obtaining of it isn’t secure.

1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness, 2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago (Titus 1:1-2)

Who is chosen? Apparently those who have faith.

For what purpose? He doesn’t specifically say, so to claim that this choosing is a predestined choosing of which individuals will be saved is a wild stretch.

1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that you may obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in fullest measure. (1 Peter 1:1-3)

Who is chosen? The recipients of this letter, presumably believers.

For what purpose? That they would obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood.

Therefore, God chose that believers would obey Christ and be sprinkled by His blood. It does not say that God decided which individuals would be believers.

2 We give thanks to God always for all of you, making mention of you in our prayers; 3 constantly bearing in mind your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ in the presence of our God and Father, 4 knowing, brethren beloved by God, His choice of you; 5 for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. (1 Thess 1:2-5)

Who is chosen? Believers, those who are working out their faith and have steadfastness of hope in Christ.

For what purpose? This isn’t clear, but the following verses indicate that it might be for them to imitate Paul in his quest:

You also became imitators of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much tribulation with the joy of the Holy Spirit, so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. (1 Thess 1:6-7)


There is nothing here to indicate that God chose which individuals would be saved.
Galatians 1:11-17

11 For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure, and tried to destroy it; 14 and I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions. 15 But when He who had set me apart, even from my mother’s womb, and called me through His grace, was pleased 16 to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went away to Arabia, and returned once more to Damascus.

Verse 15 is often used by Calvinists to “prove” God’s predestined choice of a particular person for salvation. Again, we need to ask about God’s choice, in this context being represented by “had set me apart.” The Calvinist would have us believe that it means, “set me apart to be saved.” As usual, the Calvinist adds words that aren’t in the text.

Who is chosen? Paul was set apart.

What is the purpose? Since it was from his mother’s womb, the most likely meaning is to be a Jew, since that was what he was talking about.

Is the “called me through His grace” part of the setting apart? No. The calling comes after the setting apart as a Jew. He was called to salvation, but so is everyone else.

A closely related passage follows:

13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much harm he did to Thy saints at Jerusalem; 14 and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call upon Thy name.” 15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel; 16 for I will show him how much he must suffer for My name’s sake.” (Acts 9:13-16)

Who is chosen? Paul.

What is the purpose? To bear Christ’s name before the Gentiles, etc.

There is nothing here that says Paul was chosen for salvation.

Acts 13:44-48

44 And the next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of God. 45 But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy, and began contradicting the things spoken by Paul, and were blaspheming. 46 And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, “It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. 47 “For thus the Lord has commanded us,
‘I have placed You as a light for the Gentiles,
That You should bring salvation to the end of the earth.’”
 48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

The last verse in this passage has been misused by many, and for good reason. Most Bibles (perhaps all) mistranslate verse 48.

The Greek allows for two different “voices” in the verb phrase that’s translated, “had been appointed to eternal life.” Here, it’s translated in the passive voice, rather than the active voice. Passive means that someone has appointed them, while active would mean that they appointed someone else. If it’s passive, then the believers didn’t actively do anything. The Greek structure in this verse doesn’t allow for active voice.

The Greek phrase does allow, however, for middle voice. The ending of the verb can be either middle or passive. Middle voice means that the believers did something to themselves. With the middle voice the verse would be translated something like this: “And all those who had agreed (or had aligned themselves) to eternal life believed.” Their faith didn’t come about because of divine appointment; it was the result of their willingness to believe.

This middle voice alternative makes more sense than does the passive when considered in the context. In verse 46, Paul speaks of those who judge themselves unworthy of eternal life. Verse 48 merely shows the contrast, that those who listened and believed were the opposite of those mentioned earlier. The ones who believed did not judge themselves unworthy.

Romans Chapter 9

Romans chapter 9 is considered by many Calvinists to be their most powerful proof text, their absolute proof that their doctrine of particular election to salvation is true. It should be no surprise, then, that they badly misunderstand the purpose and meaning of this chapter. I’ll quote the entire chapter here, section by section, and we’ll ask questions about each section, but let’s jump ahead and read verse 30 first, because we have to keep Paul’s conclusion in mind if we’re going to understand the argument that precedes it.

Romans 9:30 - What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith;

Now, with this verse in mind, let’s proceed.

9:1 I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit, 2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, 5 whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.

What is Paul’s concern? For whom is he grieving and why? How are they special?

He is concerned about his brethren, Israelites. After all, they received the covenants and promises.
 
6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; 7 neither are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: “through Isaac your descendants will be named.”  8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. 9 For this is a word of promise: “At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.”  10 And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; 11 for though the twins were not yet born, and had not done anything good or bad, in order that God’s purpose according to His choice might stand, not because of works, but because of Him who calls, 12 it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.”  13 Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

In verses 6-8, Paul provides the reason that his brethren according to the flesh are in trouble. Only children of the promise are true descendants. Not all the children of the flesh are going to be in the new covenant. They are not all children of the promise.

Paul then gives us examples of promises in verse 9 and 12. It is crucial to understand that the promise is in verse 12 ends with verse 12. The verse Paul quotes in 13 was not part of the promise made to Rebekah. Verse 13 is provided as proof that the promise was fulfilled. It was not part of the promise itself.

Also notice that this promise has nothing to do with salvation. It involves only who will serve whom, and the “Jacob I loved part …” is merely showing us proof that the promise came to pass. It says nothing about God deciding beforehand that He would love Jacob and not Esau.

Here is my attempt to succinctly state what Paul is trying to tell us up to this point.

Paul is grieved over the Israelites and their lack of following God by faith. They continue to try to achieve salvation by following according to the Law. God says that His people are those who are children of promise, and he gives us an example of how God makes a choice based on His purposes rather than on the actions of the people involved. This is not a choice for salvation. Rather it is an example of how God makes a decision. Similarly, God has decided that people who have faith will be saved, not those who attempt to be saved by works. This decision is God’s choice, not man’s.

Let’s continue with Romans chapter 9.

14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”  16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.”  18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

With this in mind, what possible charge of injustice could someone bring against God? None at all. God has decided that those who have faith will be saved, not those who try to achieve salvation by following the Law. That choice of how to save is up to God, not up to men.

In verse 15, the Calvinist claims that God has mercy and compassion on those He elects to salvation, but it doesn’t say that at all. It simply says that God decided on whom He will have mercy. It says nothing about predetermined, individual election to salvation. That’s why the conclusion in verse 30 is so crucial. This entire section is explaining that God decided that He will have mercy on those who have faith, and Paul is defending God’s ability to make that decision.

Verse 17 and 18, then, are simply another example of God deciding what to do with people. He is allowed to do so. And His decision to save by faith is within his authority.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use, and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so in order that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

In verse 19, Paul raises a question that objectors might have. If God can make such decisions, why does he find fault and punish? Paul’s answer is quite dismissive, that man has no right to ask such a question, and then he goes into an illustration about a potter and clay. The basis for the decision to make a vessel for common use or for wrath is not a predetermined, individual election to salvation, but rather on the faith and/or works of the clay. There is nothing in this chapter to indicate an election based on God’s good pleasure, but there is a direct statement in verse 30 that the decision is based on the faith of the people. Therefore, God looks at the lumps of clay (people) and makes the pots based on the quality of the clay (their faith, which is proven by their works).

Some might claim that the word "beforehand" in verse 23 means that God decided before he made the pots that he would make them for glory, that is, before they had a chance to show faith or works. The problem with that idea is the assumption that "beforehand" means before the making of the pot. The language makes this idea impossible.

The text says that God prepared the vessels beforehand for glory. The "beforehand" must refer to a time before the receiving of the glory, not to the time before he made the vessels, because God couldn't possibly prepare the vessels before he made the vessels. Paul is saying that God prepared the vessels before they received the glory. The "which" in verse 23 refers to the vessels, not to the mercy ("which" in the Greek is plural, as is "vessels," while "mercy" is singular). God did not prepare the mercy beforehand, that is, before making the vessels to receive that mercy. God prepared the vessels before the reception of the glory. And it certainly doesn't state that God cannot change His mind regarding what He will do with these vessels. He might have prepared them to receive glory, but that doesn't mean the purpose couldn't change based on how the vessels turned out, as a similar illustration in Jeremiah demonstrates:

Jer 18:1  The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD saying,
Jer 18:2  "Arise and go down to the potter's house, and there I will announce My words to you."
Jer 18:3  Then I went down to the potter's house, and there he was, making something on the wheel.
Jer 18:4  But the vessel that he was making of clay was spoiled in the hand of the potter; so he remade it into another vessel, as it pleased the potter to make.
Jer 18:5  Then the word of the LORD came to me saying,
Jer 18:6  "Can I not, O house of Israel, deal with you as this potter does?" declares the LORD. "Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel.
Jer 18:7  "At one moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to uproot, to pull down, or to destroy it;
Jer 18:8  if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it.
Jer 18:9  "Or at another moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it;
Jer 18:10  if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it.

We see in verses 9 and 10 that God, as a potter, changes His mind with regard to what he will do with the clay based on the quality of the pot's faith and works. God had planned to build up a kingdom, but their evil caused Him to change His mind.

This is also true in Romans 9. God could plan for a pot to receive glory, deciding before the reception of the glory to do so, but that doesn't necessarily mean that this decision will remain. The decision could change if the pot is no longer worthy to receive the glory.

And now to Paul's conclusion in Romans 9:

25 As He says also in Hosea,
“I will call those who were not My people, ‘My people,’
And her who was not beloved, ‘beloved.’” 26 “And it shall be that in the place where it was said to them, ‘you are not My people,’
There they shall be called sons of the living God.”
 27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel, “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that will be saved; 28 for the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, thoroughly and quickly.”  29 And just as Isaiah foretold,
“Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left to us a posterity,
We would have become as Sodom, and would have resembled Gomorrah.”
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 just as it is written,
“Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense,
And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.”

Paul’s conclusion is that God, in His divine authority, has decided to save those who have faith, whether Jew or Gentile. Paul gave us examples of God’s right and power to make such decisions, decisions based on His own purposes, to show the riches of His glory. It follows, therefore, that God has the right to save people by faith rather than by works.

I have included all the major passages that Calvinists have used in my presence to prove unconditional election, and I have shown that these passages simply do not say what the Calvinists claim that they say.

It’s true that God predestines, but it is always for a purpose other than individual election to salvation. God determined that believers would be holy and conformed to the image of Christ, that they would be adopted and sons and escape His wrath, but nowhere in the Bible does it say that God decided who those believers would be.


[1] Chosen By God, R. C. Sproul Pages 154-155.

[2] Chosen By God, R. C. Sproul Pages 156.

[3] Chosen By God, R. C. Sproul Pages 156.

[4] Chosen By God, R. C. Sproul Pages 158.