Although Reformed Theology has been around for a little less than 500 years, the foundation originated from John Calvin’s Institutes, and of late, has seen greater interest in both denominational and non-denominational movements. There have been a number of notable modern day pastors who have embraced this theology and in doing so, have led many others who do not regularly study Scripture to also embrace the theology. However this is not an orthodox theology today nor was it during the first 1,500 years of the church in spite of the fact the Augustine’s works may be said to be the precursor of John Calvin’s work Institutes (since Calvin quotes him more than 400 times). This theology is also known as “the doctrines of grace.”
Although I will not outright state whether the theology is true or not, there are many, many warnings signs which any person interested in truth should consider however it takes careful reading and consideration of the text to understand these warning signs. As with others doctrines (ex. the Trinity), they come from Scripture and reasoning.
We will examine some of the core issues. First, we will consider some foundational issues. Second, we will consider some Scriptural issues. Third, we examine some sovereignty issues. Finally we will address some of the foundational pillars (the five main ones). We will not directly examine the Westminster Confession of Faith nor the Canon’s of Dordt here.
Foundational Issues
Issue 1: If God is controlling everyone and everything, what need is there for His word? This is a straightforward question. If God, in His sovereignty as understood by the Reformed is truly controlling (or irresistibly leading) everyone and everything, there is simply no logical need for His word. When we say controlling here we mean that to the ends of salvation. It is not that most Reformed Theologians believe that God controls everyone, but the logical inference is that God controls people to the degree they do not have the free will to walk away from Him even though Scripture warns over and over about this. Thus, the commands, pleas, and warnings to us are simply not needed in a world where God is controlling (or irresistibly leading) us. Remember the Reformed view. God alone is the sole source of salvation. He alone calls and those he calls have no choice in the matter. Those He calls He perseveres. Those he calls he justifies, sanctifies, and even teaches. He leads those into good works. All this with no effort of man. However the moment we agree that God is not controlling us and His word has true value in our lives, all sorts of other doctrinal possibilities emerge. For example, if God is not controlling us, we have the freedom to turn away from our Lord (as warned about in Scripture) then the idea of perseverance of the saints is rendered inaccurate. Furthermore, the entire idea of accountability of man before God is rendered academic in a world where God is controlling everything. That is how is it just to hold someone accountable for decisions they are not in control of? It has been suggested by Reformed theologians that the warnings of God in Scripture are not real in the sense that they can never happen. Thus, they suggest that God is being dishonest in His communication to men. When God warns Christian’s of for example apostasy, Reformed Theologians say that can never happen, in effect refuting the words of God. This is even though they witnessed what happened to God’s chosen, Israel.
Issue 2: Many Reformed Theologians believe that God is brought the most glory to Himself through the teachings of Reformed Theology. But is this true? Which results in more glory to God? The idea that God fully orchestrates a family to Himself or that God allows people to answer His call and freely love and follow Him? Do we in our families try to orchestrate our children to love us? The problem is that everything we have seen in Scripture suggests the latter. God’s angels had the free will to choose. Adam and Eve had the free will to choose (and both the angels and Adam and Eve were untainted). God’s chosen, Israel had the free will to choose. Even the believers in Galatia which Paul was so worried about had the choice to believe a different gospel. If Paul really believed that God was orchestrating everything, there would have been no reason that Paul would have had to address it knowing God would straighten them out.
Issue 3: In Reformed Theology the plain meaning of some words are changed to align with the theology rather than using them in what might be in an orthodox manner. Here are some of the words which Reformed Theologians redefine to accommodate their doctrine.
- All, world, whole world – Often redefined to be the elect
- Foreknew, foreknowledge – Often redefined to be fore loved, apart from any action foreseen or otherwise
- Sovereignty – Often redefined to mean that God is controlling (most would use the actual word ordain) everything.
- Love – Often redefines agape love into familial (or storge) love.
Some words in Scripture should be examined contextually, but some seem a clear departure from the intent and context of the passage. Furthermore, we must not take a redefinition of a word in one place and then carry that redefinition throughout Scripture.
Issue 4: God’s will, throughout the Old Testament, is often thwarted even in His chosen people. How do we know this? Because God is explicit in many places in the Old Testament as to what His will is. However, often this will, as He states it, is not done. Why would God get angry with men if His will for them is always being fulfilled? The God of the Old Testament is the same as the God of the New Testament. He has not changed. God’s will in salvation does not override human freedom. This is why we see men actually walk away from God (even after meeting the Biblically defined method of determining they are following) and why God warns Christians throughout Scripture.
Issue 5: The idea of what regeneration is and what it does is probably misunderstood. First, Calvin seemed to believe that regeneration was actually a long-term event. Most believe regeneration occurs after faith (non-Reformed generally) while others (Reformed) believe it is the seminal event leading to faith. However, probably the most misunderstood aspect of regeneration is how controlling it is. But regeneration is most often misunderstood by some to believe, apart from Scripture, that a person regenerated will always want to do the will of God. Perhaps stated more strongly, regeneration ALWAYS results in the eventual will of a person to align with God’s will. Here is a key equivalency
Regeneration = circumcision of the heart = made spiritually alive
In the Old Testament, this idea is first introduced in Deuteronomy 30:6 “And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.” Scholars clearly understand the idea that the text implies that recipients must respond by yielding to His transformative power as does the language in the New Testament. Scholars who analyzed the Hebrew wording note that the posture of the person-trusting and returning to God-opens the way for this literal inner change to happen but does not force it. This is why the New Covenant is based on “better”, but still not absolute promises (Hebrews 8:6). Men receive the promises of God through faith.
This is further evidenced through the fact that King Saul himself was regenerate but turned away from the Lord. We read in 1 Samuel 10:9 “And it was so, that when he had turned his back to go from Samuel, God gave him another heart: and all those signs came to pass that day.” The evidence of the new heart immediately manifested itself however as we all know, Saul did not endure even with the Holy Spirit guiding Him.
Finally, the warnings in the New Testament bear witness to the fact that regeneration, as a means to exclusively do the will of God, is not absolute (nor is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit). These are incredible gifts given to us by the Lord and we should be profoundly thankful for them, but neither are control mechanisms. They lead us. In fact this idea is stated in Scripture. In Galatians 5:18 we read “But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.” But we can choose to ignore that leading and rebel against God. If regeneration was absolute there would be no purpose to the warnings to Christians, some with explicitly stated outcomes. In fact, those who dismiss the warnings, along with some of the stated outcomes, make God out to be dishonest and we all know God is not dishonest. We know to whom the warnings were written.
Issue 6: Man’s accountability is often eliminated. Although many Reformed pastors affirm the accountability of man before God, their doctrine denies it. Why do we say this? The logic is straightforward. First they believe man is totally depraved (in spite of those in Scripture actually seeking God). According to them, this depravity prevents them from seeking God. Hence man cannot be held responsible for seeking God when according to their doctrine, man cannot. According to their doctrine, God is the only source of a heart that seeks Him, the responsibility is solely one sided – with God. If God is the sole choice as to who seeks Him and who is saved, then ALL responsibility lies with Him. How can a man be held responsible for a decision he cannot make? But Scripture is not structured that way. It is written to beings who have the ability to choose. It is possible however, and most likely, that the ability to choose God is restored in God’s calling, yet still holding man accountable for His decision to accept the Lord and for following the Lord.
Scriptural Issues
| Scripture Verse(s) | Questions that should be asked if Reformed Theology is true |
| Acts 13:46 “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. | Why would Paul say that it was those who he was talking to that are responsible for rejecting their salvation? If Paul truly believed that God elected and called people (in that order in Reformed Theology) then shouldn’t Paul have said something like “since God did not choose you to eternal life”? Paul knew who was responsible for their rejecting of the gospel and it was not God. Thus, either Paul was lying to his audience, or he did not understand Reformed Theology. Any theology which posits man is completely responsible and accountable for his or her salvation is as incorrect as any theology which posits that what man does is irrelevant to salvation are incorrect. They are polar opposites. |
| 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 “Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.” | Did Paul really believe what he wrote here? First that they are saved if [conditional] they hold to what Paul taught about the gospel. How could those that currently stand later believe “in vain”? This verse, directly places, a human condition on continuing to be saved, something foreign to Reformed Theology. |
| Acts 20:28-31 “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.” | Why would Paul worry about “grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock”? In Reformed Theology, no one God calls and elects, may be lost. But Paul was so distraught over the loss of individuals from the flock, so much so that he spent three years warning them with tears. If Paul believed what Reformed Theology teaches, how could Paul think that there are those within the flock that would be lost and be so emotionally distraught over it that he warned them with tears for three years? |
| 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.” | Here Paul is concerned that those in Christ could be led away from Christ. Think about what this means. Eve did not possess a sinful nature and was not indwelt by the Holy Spirit (as we understand). But Paul is concerned about those, even though they have the Holy Spirit, that they may be led away. This is Paul’s point (and he actually makes it in other places (ex. Galatians 1:4). This means Paul does not understand the Holy Spirit to be so controlling as to protect believers from whatever they believe or do. Again, this clearly reflects that Paul understands the Holy Spirit does not control people and they can turn away from the truth. Remember that Jesus describes the Holy Spirit as a “Helper”, “Comforter”, or “Advocate.” Jesus does not describe the Holy Spirit as a controller. |
| 2 Corinthians 13:5 “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?” | What would be the purpose of examining yourselves? According to Reformed Theology if you are not in the faith there is nothing you can do to make yourself become in the faith and if you are in the faith what is the value of examining yourself? One more passage that shows Paul did not understand Jesus or God as Reformers do. |
| 2 Peter 1:10 “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall” | Here we are commanded (it is an imperative) to give diligence (Greek spoudazō) meaning “to exert oneself, endeavor, give difference” to make our calling and election (note the order) sure with the warning that if we do this, we shall not fall (Greek ptaiō) meaning “to fall into misery, become wretched (often so in Greek writings): of the loss of salvation.” But note here also that election is after calling. Intelligent writers do not normally list steps in a process out of order. How can we be responsible for exerting such effort if God is doing everything in salvation? What does that effort mean in Reformed Theology? Why would God even mention falling since according to Reformed Theology its not possible? |
| Acts 10:1-2 “There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band, a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people and prayed to God alway.” | Cornelius was a devout, generous, and prayerful man prior to receiving the Holy Spirit. He actively sought God and His ways, even though he needed someone to explain who Jesus Christ was and what He had done for him. The scripture does not mention Cornelius’s regeneration nor receipt of the Holy Spirit before the angel appeared to him, but it does indicate that the Holy Spirit later came upon Cornelius and his family. How can this be if he is totally depraved? This is just one of multiple examples in Scripture of men knowing of, and even seeking God, before being regenerated. |
| John 15:1-7 “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.” | This passage illustrates that we have a choice to abide or not abide in Christ. Our eternal destiny is tied to the fruit we produce in Him. In verse 4, we receive a command to abide, implying we have the ability to choose. There is no basis for issuing commands to people who have no choice. The consequences of refusing this command are clearly stated, indicating that those who are removed were once in Christ, as indicated by the phrase “every branch in me.” Why would God command us to abide if there were no choice? Why would God take away a branch that is in Christ? What happens to the branches taken away? |
| Romans 1:19-21 “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.” | A key phrase in this passage is “when they knew God.” This does not refer to people who never knew God but rather to those who had knowledge of Him and, interestingly, if we consider the Reformed view of “knew” as meaning to love, it suggests an even deeper understanding. They chose not to glorify Him, even when surrounded by evidence of His existence. Why would God have to, as he says later in the same chapter, “gave them up to uncleanliness”, “gave them up to vile affections”, and “gave them over to a reprobate mind” if they already had them? Were they regenerated and turned away from God or knew God even though not regenerated? Either cause problems for Reformed Theology. |
| Acts 17:27, 30 “That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us” (v27). “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent” (v30). | Paul speaking to the men of Mars Hill tells them what to do and what requires. Does God command all men to do what Reformed Theology says they cannot? Or does God command people who are subject to irresistible grace to do something they cannot help but do? As previously stated, when God calls, individuals have the choice of how to respond. Remember the Greek gives us no alternatives as to who responds to the call of God. Those who argue that God commands things that men cannot do, mistake what God is asking. God is commanding men to strive to do what He commands. |
| Revelation 22:17 “And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” | This passage reiterates the idea presented earlier in Scripture that individuals have the ability to freely choose to accept the water of life. |
| Acts 9:9, 17 “And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink[v9]” and “and Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost[v17].” | Here, Paul responds directly to Christ before receiving the Holy Spirit three days later. It raises the question of why Jesus needed to appear to Paul on the road to Damascus if the simple act of regeneration by the Holy Spirit were all that was necessary. When does true regeneration occur? |
| Acts 7:51 “Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.” | In this passage, Stephen confronts Israel’s religious leaders for resisting the Holy Spirit, as their forefathers did. They were not filled with the Holy Spirit, as he points out their uncircumcised hearts and ears. This indicates that they resisted God’s call through the Holy Spirit, demonstrating that God’s call can indeed be resisted. It should be noted however Israel’s leaders believed they were seeking God (even though they weren’t). |
| Romans 11:7-8 “What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded, according as it is written: “God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, unto this day.” | Why would God need to blind His people if they could not come to Him without regeneration? Aren’t they already blind as Reformed Theology suggests? According to Reformed Theology, God would only need to withhold regeneration; there would be no need to blind them nor give them a spirit of stupor unless there was a possibility for them to seek Him. |
| 2 Corinthians 4:4 “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” | According to Reformed Theology every unbeliever is already blinded. Why would Satan want to blind those that are already following his will? Seems there is no reason for Satan to do this unless there is a chance they can in fact see. |
| Matthew 13:36-39 “Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.” | Why would the wicked one need to intentionally sow tares if all men are inherently unable to come to God and are already within the domain of the wicked one? Why would God need to speak to people in parables if all were spiritually blinded. Sounds to me that in Reformed Theology every one is a tare until called by God and the person answers. |
| Acts 17:26-27 “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us.” | This indicates that God desires us to search for Him. What is the point of searching if the doctrines of predestination (and double predestination) dictate the outcomes for those who can and cannot come to God? It is essential to distinguish between seeking God and seeking Jesus Christ, even though Jesus is God. How does seeking God in a Reformed world work since Reformers believe men cannot seek God? |
| Romans 10:21 “But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.” | Why would God reach out to a disobedient and gainsaying people when all that is necessary is His sovereign regeneration? |
| Romans 11:13-14 “For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.” | The term “emulation” (Greek parazēloō) translates to jealousy. What purpose does jealousy serve that the Holy Spirit’s regeneration cannot, if regeneration aligns with the Reformed understanding? Did Paul not comprehend predestination and regeneration as Reformers do? Essentially, Paul expresses hope that human emotions will lead his people to the Lord. |
| Romans 11:17-23 “And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.” | This passage illustrates that the branches were cut off due to a lack of faith (see John 15:1-6). Even the natural branches (genetic Israel) were removed because of unbelief. Notably, they were once part of the tree, indicating they stood in faith at some point. Remember what the passages says about why they were cut off. This is further emphasized by the warning to remain in God’s goodness, which aligns with the metaphor of a fruitful tree. God urges people to heed this warning, or they risk not being spared. What is the need for a warning and plea if God is controlling all aspects of salvation? Why would God warn the Gentiles specifically? This concept resonates with the warnings in the New Testament regarding the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt, highlighted three times (1 Corinthians 10:1-12, Hebrews 3:7-4:11, Jude 1-5). |
| Matthew 13:19 “When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.” | How can the wicked one take away what was sown in a person’s heart? This seems to indicate that the man is not solely at fault, but rather the influence of the evil one. The verb suggests something was planted in the heart; this likely refers to the call of God. Even if the person did not understand it, why would the wicked one need to take something out of the heart of a person who did not understand it? According to Reformed Theology how can a person be called in his heart and not understand it? How can something sown in the heart later cause someone to come to God? Sounds like the grace extended by God, is not always immediately irresistible otherwise there would no reason to take away what was sown. |
| 2 Peter 2:1 “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” | How is it possible that these which are spreading “damnable heresies” and “denying the Lord” were actually bought by the Lord? What is brought on them? Destruction. But these are people whom the Lord bought. |
| Romans 5:15-18 “But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.” | Who is the many in v15? Is it not those who inherit Adam’s sin? So the word “many” here really means all. We know this because of Romans 5:12. In maintaining consistency “the gift grace, which is by one man Jesus Christ” would then also be to all, correct? It seems linguistically clear that the ones to whom God’s grace and gift go to are the same ones who died by the curse of Adam; that is all men. If we replace the many with the elect, it seems we must do the same in both situations meaning that Romans 5:12 is incorrect and only part of humanity dies through Adam’s sin. |
| 1 Timothy 4:10 “For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.” | Who are the all men here? Some might say the elect but if this is the case the sentence resolve to a meaningless tautology. If we redefine all men to the elect, the sentence effectively says “For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of the elect, specially of those that are the elect.” Clearly Christ died for all. |
| Romans 5:15, 18 “But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many”, and “Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.” | Who is the first many in v15? Seems like all of humanity since it is referencing the sin nature passed down to all men through the one man, Adam (ex. Romans 3:23). Yet in the second part of the verse, the gift of grace abounds to many, leading us also to believe this also means all. Furthermore, when we get to v18, who did the free gift come upon? All men. |
| 1 Peter 5:8 “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.” | How can the evil one ensnare us if our destiny is predetermined? What does the term “devour” imply? According to the dictionary, it means to destroy, consume, or waste. How could the devil achieve this if our destiny is already set? Is God warning us about situations that can never happen? |
| Galatians 6:7-9 “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.” | This passage clearly teaches that we have a choice to listen to either the Holy Spirit or the flesh. Those who choose the latter risk losing their salvation. Moreover, the term “corruption” (Greek phthora) means “loss of eternal life” or “eternal misery,” indicating that both choices cannot lead to eternal life. The phrase “loss of” refutes interpretations suggesting that those who follow the flesh are unbelievers, as one cannot lose what they never possessed. Additionally, the context in Galatians Chapter 5 shows Paul warning those he believes are in Christ that living in sin jeopardizes their eternal destiny (v21) and urging them to walk with the Holy Spirit, not just live in Him (v25). The final part of v9 is conditional; we will reap if we do not give up. |
| Hebrews 2:9 “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.” | How can this statement be made if Jesus only tasted death for the elect? |
| John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” | This well-known verse states explicitly that God loves the world. While some scriptures suggest God does not love the world, the overarching message is that He loves all mankind, not just the “elect.” Additionally, “believes” is in the continuous present tense, indicating an ongoing action. The wording emphasizes that those who will receive eternal life are those who choose to believe (John 1:12), not those whom God forces to believe. There is a tension in Scripture between the sovereignty of God and the accountability of man. |
| Matthew 11:28 “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” | This would be a disingenuous offer from Jesus if God had already determined who could come to Him. Presenting this as a choice is inconsistent with the idea that God has predetermined everyone’s eternal destiny apart from human will. Moreover, Jesus could have said, “Come unto me, those whom the Father has sent me,” but He chose to say “all.” |
| 1 Timothy 2:6 “Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” | This reinforces that our Lord and Savior gave Himself as a ransom for all, not just the elect. |
| 1 John 3:23 “And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.” | How can God command us to believe if we cannot? Spiritual death is separation from God, not the actual death of our spirit. |
| Romans 11:32 “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.” | Seems to clearly teach that not only have all been concluded in unbelief, that is shut up in unbelief, but that God has mercy upon all. Contrast this with Romans 9:23 where God discusses those vessels of mercy. What can be the difference? Those who come to Him in faith. |
| Romans 2:14-16 “For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another; In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” | This demonstrates that Gentiles without the law can still act according to the law, which is good (see 1 Timothy 1:8, Romans 7:12). If one were entirely depraved, they could not follow the good law, nor could their thoughts defend them. |
| Titus 2:11 “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men.” | This indicates that God’s grace that brings salvation, has appeared to all men, not just the elect. |
| John 12:32 “Jesus answered and said, “This voice has not come for My sake, but for your sakes. Now judgment is upon this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.” | This passage highlights a conflict within the doctrine of Limited Atonement. If God calls “all men,” then He is not limiting His drawing to a select few. It clearly states that Jesus will draw all men to Himself, though it does not imply that all will respond. There may be a distinction between calling and drawing, yet the Greek word for “draw” (helkō) conveys the idea of morally and spiritually influencing all hearts to Himself. |
| Romans 10:6-8 “But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach” | How is it possible that that God tells us that which we need is near us, so near to us in fact, that we don’t have to go to extreme lengths to get it? It seems that according to Calvinistic doctrine that one must indeed go to heaven because having the word near us means nothing if we have not been regenerated thus rejecting the very idea of this passage. |
| Hebrews 10:26-29 “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden underfoot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? | This passage clearly addresses individuals who come to Christ, are sanctified by His blood, yet continue to live in sin. Their future holds judgment and fire, not salvation. The belief in guaranteed, instantaneous, and permanent salvation—assuming God will ensure their perseverance in faith—will not alter their destiny. This is one of more than 70 warnings to Christians in Scripture. |
| Romans 8:12-14 “Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” | God indicates that we have an obligation to live according to the Spirit, which is essential for spiritual (eternal) life. This does not mean our works save us directly, but rather serve as evidence of our true and saving faith. Generally, a person’s actions reflect their beliefs. The shallow “faith” of someone who does not demonstrate their faith through action is not the faith that saves (James 2:14: “What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but has no works? Can that faith save him?”). As reiterated throughout Scripture, a person’s eternal destiny is stated to be determined by their works, with no mention of faith. |
| John 1:12 “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.” | Here, God grants individuals the power to become His sons, not automatically making them so. The language indicates that humans are responsible for both receiving this power and for becoming sons. This is akin to God’s declaration in the Old Testament regarding wealth: “But you shall remember the LORD your God, for it is He who gives you power to get wealth, that He may establish His covenant which He swore to your fathers, as it is this day” (Deuteronomy 8:18). Although God provides the power, not everyone becomes wealthy because they fail to use it as intended. |
| Philippians 2:12 “Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” | This passage instructs us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. It has been correctly noted that this does not mean working for salvation; rather, “work out” (Greek katergazomai) signifies making every effort to attain salvation. This implies that salvation is not fully realized since we must exert effort to complete it, demonstrating our part in the covenant with God. Does this suggest God is doing everything in salvation? |
| Ezekiel 18:31-32 “Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.” | Does God only do or allow what pleases Him? Does this passage affirm this? How do we deal with all the places in Scripture where God describes His will only to see it not done? What actually happened to the Israelis. |
| John 5:40 “And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” | Here, Jesus confronts the Pharisees, indicating that their refusal to come to Him for eternal life is entirely their choice similar to what Paul did in Acts 13:46. How can Jesus make this statement if Jesus understands the only way that a person can come up Him is solely of the Father? The reason is clear. The Father calls but we have a choice whether to answer. |
| 1 John 2:2 “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” | Once again here if we make an attempt to replace “sins of the whole world” with “the sins of the elect” we again end up with a meaningless tautology. This would change the statement to “And he is the propitiation for the elect’s sin; and not for only the elect’s sins, but also for the sins of the elect.” Again remember who the ours is in this context. This verse affirms that Jesus is the propitiation for the “whole world,” dispelling any notion that it refers only to the elect. The phrase “whole world” (Greek holos kosmos) supports this interpretation. |
| Hebrews 4:11 “Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.” | After warning us against developing a hardened heart, God instructs us to labor (Greek spoudázō), meaning to exert oneself and endeavor. This is presented in the active voice, indicating our responsibility. Thus, it is evident that God is not doing everything; we are commanded to exert ourselves to enter into that rest. |
| Matthew 13:10-13 “And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.” | Why would Jesus speak in parables to the spiritually dead? That is if He is speaking to spiritually dead people, why would it be necessary to use parables to hide the meaning to them who could not even understand a plain meaning? |
| Matthew 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” | Jesus stated quite clearly He desires His people to come to Him, but they refuse. Why? Because they are unwilling. If God had predetermined their response and eliminated free choice in coming to the Savior, why would Jesus state they were unwilling if they had no choice? Here Reformers either a) make Jesus out to be a liar (that is he really did not want to gather them) or b) the Reformers are wrong about man’s will not being involved even though it explicitly says so in this passage. |
| 1 Timothy 1:12-13 “And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry; Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.” | Here, Paul states that he received mercy for acting in unbelief. Yet Paul did believe in God and sought Him, but he does not claim that he was shown mercy solely by God’s choice. He said he received mercy because of something he did, not just because of a choice of God far in the past. |
| Colossians 2:11 -12 “In whom also you are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ. Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. ” | How can the circumcision made without hands occur for those already in Christ? In Calvinistic theology, does this circumcision equate to regeneration? If so, how can those who experience regeneration already be in Him? How can one be risen through faith if regeneration comes first? Wouldn’t the person be already in Him before being raised if regeneration comes first. Sounds like faith precedes being raised. |
| Hebrews 4:11 “Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.” | After warning us against developing a hardened heart, God instructs us to labor (Greek spoudázō), meaning to exert oneself and endeavor. This is presented in the active voice, indicating our responsibility. Thus, it is evident that God is not doing everything; we are commanded to exert ourselves to enter into that rest. |
| 1 Timothy 2:3-6 “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” | This passage clearly establishes God’s will for all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. If this is God’s will and He acts toward it, why are not all men saved? The answer lies in man’s freedom to reject God’s call. This does not align with the concept of limited atonement. Spurgeon remarked on the tendency of some to distort the text to fit their theology, emphasizing that “all men” means precisely that—”all men.” |
| Romans 10:21 “But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.” | Why would God stretch forth His hand for an extended period if all it required was His election, calling and regeneration? This suggests that human will must respond to God’s outstretched hand; otherwise, why would God bother? The implication is clear that man has the freedom to choose to respond to God. |
| Acts 7:51 “Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.” | This verse highlights how Israel’s leaders resist the Holy Spirit’s calling through their own will, making them responsible for the consequences of their actions. Their uncircumcised hearts and ears emphasize their resistance to the Holy Spirit’s efforts. |
| 2 Peter 3:9 “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” | Although this passage is directed at Christians, it suggests more than just the perspective of the elect. It implies that repentance refers not to initial repentance but to believers who have not repented of ongoing sins. The focus is on God’s patience with Christians, as indicated by the term “us-ward.” This patience allows Christians who are sinning to come to repentance to avoid perishing. It is God’s desire that they repent, but this may not always happen. If God wished something, it contradicts the beliefs of Reformed Theologians. The context here relates to God’s impending judgment on those who do wrong. |
| Isaiah 66:3b “Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.” | Here, God indicates that His people have freely chosen their own paths, stating they possess the freedom to make such choices. |
| Joshua 24:15 “And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” | Joshua presents a clear choice to the Israelites, indicating that he does not view their decision to follow the Lord as predetermined. He explicitly states, “choose this day.” |
| Deuteronomy 30:19 “I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.” | Although this passage specifically addresses entering the Promised Land and following God on earth, it clearly illustrates that God allows us to choose. |
| Job 1:1 “There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil. | God describes Job as perfect and upright, which does not imply he was sinless, but rather that he was dedicated to doing what was right and trusting in God. God provides specific reasons for this description: Job feared God and shunned evil. |
| Isaiah 53:5-6 “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” | It is clear that the iniquity of us all fell on Him. If Reformed Theologians are correct that the pronouns refer only to the elect, Isaiah would have been inspired to write it differently; he was not. The interpretation that the pronouns refer to all mankind aligns with the contextual consistency found in Isaiah 52:14-15, 53:3, and 6. |
| Proverbs 22:6 “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” | This suggests that a person can be trained to do what is right and seek God without requiring specific regeneration. Much of the beginning of Psalm 22 addresses the man’s volition to avoid evil. Anecdotally, I can attest that this proverb, which generally holds true, has manifested in our family in various ways. |
| Proverbs 16:4 “The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.” | As many know, proverbs are generally true statements; they are not designed to drive strict doctrine because there are places they are not true. But more compelling is that many will read this as God made a person TO BE wicked as opposed to reading what it says: God made those who ARE wicked. Even the wicked may be subject to God’s purposes and for those who reject the truth and do evil, these people will suffer. |
| Titus 2:11 “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men” | Sounds like the grace of God brings not just rain, not just other blessings, but actual salvation to all men. Salvation (Greek sōtērios) here means exactly what the English says, salvation. This is similar to other passages which reflect the same including John 12:32 and Romans 11:32. |
| 1 Kings 14:13 “And all Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him: for he only of Jeroboam shall come to the grave, because in him there is found some good thing toward the LORD God of Israel in the house of Jeroboam.” | How could God find goodness in someone, towards himself, if every one is totally depraved? |
| Acts 22:3 “I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.” | How could Paul be zealous for God since no man can supposedly seek Him? While we can understand that Paul was shown mercy because of ignorance (1 Timothy 1:13). But what is this ignorance and unbelief? Is it that the God of the OT did not exist? No. It was based on a lack of understanding (ex. Hosea 4:6). It references what God desires, not a complete lack of seeking God. There are others in Scripture which demonstrate the same. This requires us to re-examine Romans 3:10 to try to discern what the comment that none seek God actually means. |
| Jude 20-21: “But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.” | How is it possible in a monergistic theological system, that God commands (building yourselves up, keep yourselves in the love of God) which are both imperatives that men do some of the most critical work? Of course there is no doubt that God leads here too, but it is we who are commanded to do these things. |
Romans 8:28-30
Romans 8:28-30 is often cited in support of Reformed Theology and at first pass, it is easy to see why. But a careful study of this shows that what many believe about this passage may not be as plain as it might be imagined. First, let’s quote the passage.
“And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.”
Let us now make some observations about this passage.
- Reformed Theologians will often suggest this passage needs to be read in a straightforward manner, but then immediately move to redefine one of the words (foreknow).
- The intro to the key verbs (ex. foreknow, predestinate, etc) is qualified by those that love God and are called according to His purpose.
- Each of the verbs in question are aorist, indicative, normally translated as past tense verbs.
- Foreknow, in Reformed Theology circles is redefined to mean foreloved. There is Biblical precedent for this however the lexical entry opposes this redefinition. Here we are left with a further interesting question. If God meant foreloved, why would God inspire those writing to use words with different meanings when He could more precise words? If this term normally means foreknowledge, but when used by God, it means electing love, intimate knowledge, or determining choice, why use it this way? Why not say something such as foreloved, or electing love?
- Foreknow here could also be considered to mean knowledge from before, not knowledge of the future. This same Greek verb (proginōskō) is actually used in other places in Scripture (ex. Acts 26:5, 2 Peter 3:17) to describe knowledge known from something that has already occurred. In this vein glorification takes on the proper aorist indicative positioning where as Reformed Theologians acknowledge that if they are talking about those currently alive, they have not been glorified yet which violates the language construct of the aorist, indicative. Reformed Theologians often claim that glorification is so certain that it can be said to have happened in the past. Quite a stretch linguistically which does violence to the language.
- This generally ordered list of soteriological events is incomplete; that is there are parts to the process that are missing. Of note are faith, election, regeneration, and sanctification.
- The list of verbs, beginning with foreknow, are called the Golden chain and are assumed to be unbreakable. The text does not say this; it is assumed.
- Predestination (proorizō) in this context, simply means “before a horizon” although in general Biblical usage connotes something God decided before the stated horizon. In this passage however this the horizon is not explicitly stated. What Reformed Theologians do to define this horizon is to connect it with Ephesians 1:4 which may very well be invalid.
Romans 9
Romans 9 is often said to be about God’s sovereignty in salvation. Yet there is much more going on here. Romans 9 is not a generalized teaching about God and His salvation but a specific teaching related to His chosen people the Jews. Everything up through v25 is about the chosen Jewish people who did not receive salvation (v1-3) because of they did not endure in their faith. This is later emphasized in Romans 11 (v19-21). However weaved within this discussion in Romans 9 is an interlocutor whom Paul is answering answering two critical questions. These are v14 and v19. Furthermore, here Paul is stating why God endured the faithless Israelis. The reason? So that the Messiah might be brought to the world according to His purpose.
A summary of most of Romans 9 is below.
1-3 Paul’s anguish that his fellow Israelis are not all saved. His concern is for national Israel, not spiritual Israel.
4-13 Paul’s review of all the advantages that the Jewish people had and that fact that even though not all of God’s called and chosen will be saved, the Word of God was not without effect. This is important because it ties directly into his concern for his fellow Israelis. Paul defining what true Israel looks like; it is not those of genetic lineage but rather those who stand by faith. Notice that here Paul continues to talk about Israel effectively defining who and who is not true Israel. The context before and after confirm this. Many will try to sneak the Gentiles in here but they do not appear until v24. Israel must be dealt with separately since they have provisions and promises from God that we Gentiles do not. Furthermore, God had planned to save the world though Israel. This is important in the next five verses. Why? Because it continues the dialog about how Israel was blessed and God’s choosing to make that happen. Thus, while Romans 9 does address salvation, the part of this introduction is addressing all the blessings that God brought on His people. Even the Messiah came from them which is reflected in what comes next. Paul now defines to us the two nations, Israel and Edom and that He has chosen one over the other. Here begins the idea that God chooses, but not why. In reality, I suspect it had nothing to do with Jacob, but through which line the Messiah would best come from. God’s foreknowledge here could easily have made Jacob the better choice without Jacob himself having anything to do with it. But this is an extension of the argument that Paul made above about what the nation of Israel has been given. We know this for two reasons. First, during his lifetime, Jacob effectively served Esau showing that if the prophecy is about individuals, the prophecy failed. It is about nations. Second, one of the greatest gifts given to Israel that the world’s Messiah will come through them. Since its about nations, its not about individual salvation explicitly here although Paul will now address that in coming verses.
14-15 Now Paul begins to address objections raised by a potential Jew to the question: isn’t God then unrighteous since he called and chose Israel and even blessed them, yet not all will be saved? Here Paul tells us that God will continue being faithful and compassionate to those He has been faithful and compassionate to (these are the correct verb tenses). Who are those? Faithful Israel, the remnant.
16 Paul now states that God’s will is critical in determining who will receive His mercy, however it is not God’s will alone that is the sole determining factor even though it is the most significant factor. This is the typical “not, but” construction which is used in Scripture (ex. John 12:44). This means that while God’s will is key, man’s will also plays a part. Furthermore, an array of Greek verbs affirm that man is involved in the process of coming to Jesus Chris (ex. John 1:12). This also ties into the previous verses where Jacob, not Esau was chosen, not for salvation, but the nation which would receive the blessings of God and from whom the Messiah would come from.
17 Paul then uses the example of Pharaoh to demonstrate a person whom God endured to his glory just as He endured the unfaithful Israelis. In actually God showed mercy to Pharaoh because he could have destroyed Him at first rebellion. While there is no doubt that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, it was done in response to Pharaoh’s own rebellion. Scripture affirms this. This demonstrates that God’s mercy and hardening are not arbitrary but rather are based on the actions of the created creature. Furthermore, God did not create Pharaoh to oppose Him.
18 Here Paul tells us God will have mercy on those he will have mercy and that he will harden those He will harden. Yet we must be careful here. These are present tense verbs meaning something God is doing. It has nothing to do with what will happen in the future. So this mercy and hardening are not something God has done from eternity nor will necessarily do in the future. However again we are not told the reason for these decisions. Yet this is directly related to the discussion about Pharaoh. In fact, God did both to Pharaoh but it was Pharaoh that initiated the conflict with God. Similarly all Israel would have been saved if they had remained faithful, just as the Egyptian army would have remained if Pharaoh had submitted to God’s messenger Moses when he had the chance. In fact, if one will simply examine and ponder of many of those who interacted with God, a pattern seems to develop. See if you can find it:
- Pharaoh
- Nebuchadnezzar
- God’s elect Ancient Israel
- The clay in Jeremiah 18
- The likely Gentiles of Romans 1
- The Israelis in Romans 9
In each of these cases, God did not predestine them to oppose Him. In all cases, they rejected God after knowing Him and it was then, and only then, that God acted to harden them. In each case, their behavior was the precipitate that initiated God’s actions against them. For none of these did God predestine to disobey him from eternity.
19-20 Paul now answers the next objection of the Jew who is trying to self-justify himself by saying that his lack of faith and ungodly actions are the result of God’s will. Paul answers back that who are you to talk back to God. However as with Pharaoh, the whole conflict with God was started by the Israelis who did not remain faithful to God. Once that happened, God was free to turn them over to what they thought they wanted. But this does not address how God made a person. It does not seem reasonable for God, a just God, to create someone to oppose Him before they are ever born. How does this align with what we understand justice to be? So does God create people to oppose Him? No, those who oppose God choose to oppose God. Once this occurs God can and will harden and/or blind them. God gives them over to what they think they want just like He did to Pharaoh as well as those in Romans 1.
21 Now Paul uses the potter to show that God can make anything out of anyone. But we must remember that in the story of the potter in Jeremiah 18, we see what God was making became marred in His hands. How could this happen to a sovereign God as Calvinists understand it? The answer is the will of the creatures in the nation. Furthermore, the pattern is established in Jeremiah 18, and with Pharaoh, that God making things for honor and dishonor is not about creating them, but making them out of what they are. Did the example of the potter state the potter created the clay (although he does)? No. In fact the Greek word for make here in this verse means make something out of something else. He is fashioning what is there. But we must not assume that God randomly creates people in a way they have no choice but to oppose God. Even though God can do this, that would be unjust. Again, we are still dealing with Israel here. Now we see that the fashioning that God did was actually after the Israelis were unfaithful just as God fashioned Pharaoh after Pharaoh rebelled against God’s messenger, and just as the potter refashioned the clay after it became marred in His hands. That is the pattern and its consistent.
22 Paul now asks the question (notice it is not a statement of fact) what if He wanted to endure (or suffer) the vessels of wrath (in context the unfaithful Israelite nation). Notice here that He endured them just as He endured Pharaoh’s rebellion for a while. It does not say He created them that way. God had a specific reason to endure faithless Israel. Why? So that the Messiah came from them as foretold. Remember God actually threatened to destroy all Israel. If you read the genealogy of Jesus Christ, we will find both people committed to righteousness and people committed to sin. God endured those sinful men. Could God have destroyed all the unrighteous along the way? Yes. But he did not, He endured them to His larger purpose.
23 Paul now addresses those recipients of God’s mercy which he had afore prepared for glory here. In most cases, afore is interpreted to mean in the far past and is assumed to apply to individuals. Yet we must also be careful of this. Whom else did God prepare for glory who did not receive it? The faithless Israelis. This idea is reflected in Isaiah 43:7. Only where the sovereignty of God may be misunderstood does the idea of ‘prepare’ assume a God controlling people instead of leading them.
24-26 Now finally Paul begins address those outside of Israel. To this point everything prior is contextually about Israel. Here God tells us that He will call His people who are not His people; that is the Gentiles. Furthermore all that is read into the sovereignty of God here is actual what resulted from man, specifically the nation of Israel, God’s chosen.
27-29 Finally, Paul affirms only the remnant of Israel will be saved and that God will cut His work short. Furthermore there is a specific teaching here that if the Lord had not intervened, Israel would have been completely destroyed rendering His promises invalid. But this is the summary of where Paul started. That not all Israel are Israel but that the faithful remnant will be saved.
30-10:4 Paul now re-emphasizes what He has been telling us about. That the Israelis have not obtained salvation because they did not seek God’s righteousness but their own. In the end, this is why the Israelis have not been saved. Not because of predestination, but because they sought righteousness through their own works.
Sovereignty Issues
Many Reformed Theologians struggle mightily when trying to frame the concept “Sovereignty of God.” A witness to this involves the example of a leading Reformed Theologian, when asked whether the rape of a child was ordained by God, responded with “of course, otherwise its an act of meaningless evil.” God is sovereign. Very few who consider themselves Christian (or Jewish) will deny this. But is He sovereign in the way that Reformed Theologians believe?
We start with the idea of ordain. This is a key concept in Reformed Theology as most theologians of this type affirm that everything that comes to pass is ordained by God. Ordain means “arrange, set in order, or establish.” The word is used 35 times in Scripture and almost always relates to establishing a person or position. In a few cases, it relates to His creation. But Reformed Theologians have taken this concept and applied it to everything.
Next we address the idea of theodicy, a concept which seeks to address the problem of evil in the world in light of the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing, and benevolent God. The idea becomes problematic when we assign God as the first cause of evil. It should be noted that very few Reformed Theologians assign God as the first cause of evil. But they create conflicting ideas when they say God ordains everything but is not the cause of evil. Why? Because they believe God ordains it.
Next we address the idea of God’s will. Reformed Theologians will claim there are multiple wills of God. There are two different words used to describe the will of God in the New Testament. These are Greek theléma and bouléma. Thelema and its cognates (used 63 times) means properly, a desire (wish), often referring to God’s “preferred-will,” i.e. His “best-offer” to people which can be accepted or rejected. Boulema and its cognates (used 39 times) and means will, counsel, purpose even a preset, fully-resolved plan. However this word can also, and in most instances, even in the cognates, also mean desire, wish, wanting. There are other conjugated versions of these verbs. What this clearly means is that the will of God, as the Reformed often use it, translates overwhelmingly to God’s desire, not a fully established plan that will be accomplished. There are purposes of God that will not be denied. But controlling everyone’s life, in suppression of the ability to choose that God has granted them, is a not a purpose of God for many people. Praise God that He leads us; does not control us. God directly warns us about resisting, grieving, and quenching the Holy Spirit. Why would God do this if the Holy Spirit’s indwelling was a controlling presence? Furthermore Scripture explicitly tells us who the Holy Spirit is. He is a helper, advocate, and comforter (varying based on Bible version). What you can see from these verses is the things that are a part of His will of decree are few and far between.
Yet Scripture is very clear. The single most important example that we can look to is God’s will for His chosen people. Not only do we see more about them throughout Scripture than any other group, they represent the chosen of God. We see over and over throughout Scripture that God’s will for His chosen is not fulfilled. How do we know this? Because God, in the pages of Scripture tells us what His will is for His people in many circumstances only to see that will go either unfulfilled, or unfulfilled by those He desired to fulfill His will. Do we believe that God’s will, from the start, was to destroy most of His people through the Assyrians, Babylonians, Romans, and even the Germans?
Free will is something that is affirmed by Reformed Theologians but only within the framework of their nature. Their argument is man cannot choose things that are outside of their nature. In life, this argument often fails. Man has shown in many circumstances that he is able to choose things inconsistent with his nature. Self-sacrifice is an example of such. Doing something that is right is another. But in Scripture, Reformed Theologians would suggest that one cannot choose to follow God because of their sinful nature. Yet we see God himself tell His chosen people to choose. If we understand that man is so corrupt that he cannot choose God, then the choice put before the Israelis was disingenuous.
Pillar Issues
Total Depravity
While there are none in Scripture, save our Lord, who have not been corrupted, there are those that sought God. Look through Scripture yourself and see if there are those that have sought God. Even in 1 Kings 14:13, God says He has found good in this young man towards God. But there are others who have sought God.
We start with Lydia, who was known for worshiping God before the Lord opened her heart in Acts 16:14, Cornelius in Acts 10:1-4 who sought God before Peter was sent to him to tell him about Jesus Christ, Paul himself who was zealous for God as he stated in Acts 22:3, Job himself in Job 1 who God described as righteous. In Proverbs 22:6, we are taught “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it” which also addresses those children trained to know the Lord and have Him all their life. They often have no seminal event visible where they “turned” to the Lord. This does not mean that there are not those which are not seeking at all that God calls.
This means that what is often preached from Romans 3:11 is probably not what it means on the surface. We must explore deeper meanings here otherwise it conflicts with what other Scripture teaches. While there are none in Scripture, save our Lord, who have not been corrupted, there are those that sought God. We must explore deeper meanings here otherwise it conflicts with what other Scripture teaches.
First, it should be noted that the passage most often appealed to is Romans 3:11 which states “There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.” This is a quote of the Septuagint from Psalms 14 and Psalm 53 both which set the context of those who say “There is no God.” This quoting of the Septuagint was not captured in Romans 3:11. However it is clear that those who say “there is no God” do not seek God for why would a person who says there is no God, seek God?
Second, the word used for God in Romans 3:11 is theos. This word can be used to refer to the Godhead or anyone of the persons of the Godhead. The question we might ask is there a chance is that theos here refers to the Son, Jesus Christ? Again, the reason I ask this question is because there are those in Scripture who have sought God, but no place I am aware of has anyone, of their own volition, sought the Son. This understanding would then make it consistent with John 6:44.
Third, there is a chance that that passage in Romans 3:11b, “there is none that seeketh after God” actually refers to the way in which God desires to be sought. It does not mean that men do not ever seek God, but rather they do not seek God in the manner in which God desires to be sought. We see this idea reflected in John 14:6b. where Jesus tells us “no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” But cometh and seek are not the same. Hence it is very possible that although we need Jesus to come unto the Father, we may seek God (although not the way in which He desires). In Romans 3:11 seeketh after means “seek the favor of God, worship him.”
In addition, even when it clearly says that there is no on righteous, what it does not say is that no one does anything righteous. Remember God’s standard to be considered righteous. That is we follow 100% of the law 100% of the time. Anyone failing that standard is unrighteous. But that does not mean that people, before coming to Christ, have never followed parts of the law.
Fourth and finally, God clearly says in Romans 1, that His existence is known by men because God has made Himself known to them. For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images of mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles” (Romans 1:19-23). This means that God teaches us, even in Romans, that His is existence is plain to all.
Thus, the commonly accepted idea of what is represented in Romans 3:11 is probably not what it means. It may be true that no one comes to Christ of their own or it may even mean that no one seeks God on the terms that He requires, but the idea that no one seeks God, is not true. This is important because it disposes with the idea of total depravity. If the concept of total depravity is that people do not seek God ever or in any way, that is inconsistent with Scripture. If the idea that people do not worship God as He desires, this is more correct.
When we consider what Reformed Theology teaches, we come up with the following syllogism (remember these are all tenets of Reformed Theology):
- Man cannot come to God on his own; only God’s call allows a man to come to God
- Nothing that man does is a basis for being called
- Man has a sinful nature which cannot be avoided; that is it was inherited from Adam. It was not something that man chose.
- Most will not be saved
- God holds man accountable for his actions
What is the logical conclusion of these statements according to Reformed Theology? The logical conclusion is that God creates most people for the purpose of destruction (or eternal punishment depending on which part of our being we are discussing). Why do we say this? Man cannot seek God because he is “totally depraved” through no fault of his own. It arises from something passed onto him.
Even though Reformed Theologians will argue that man deserves death (and he does), the causal factor is the fall, something that cannot be avoided. Even in our justice system, a person who murders and deserves death is spared (and often sent to a mental institution) if declared to be mentally incompetent. Since man cannot save himself and cannot even seek God, only God’s call allows him to come to God. Since few will be saved, with no input from man, the logical conclusion in Reformed Theology is God has overwhelmingly created most men (and women and even children according to some Reformed Theologians) for destruction. In the end, man cannot be said to be responsible for not seeking God since, he cannot according to Reformed Theology.
While there is no doubt that sin of Adam has in fact infected every part of our being, there are plenty of reasons to doubt the Reformed concept of “Total Depravity” because it is not reflected in what we see across the breadth of Scripture. That is we do see people seeking God and we see God acknowledging people as having good in them, as righteous, and as seeking Him.
A more reasonable interpretation of the breadth of Scripture is that men can indeed come to God generically, however it takes the call of God to come to Jesus Christ. Furthermore, we do not know how many are called to Christ and when. It is possible that the call is in fact for all men at different times. We simply don’t know.
Unconditional Election
Of all the parts of Reformed Theology, i think this is the one that could use much greater scrutiny. There is a tendency among many to amass all references to election and choosing as being the same type of election and choosing, yet Scripture gives us clues this is not the case. Here are a few of these clues.
First, the Israelis were a chosen people (Deuteronomy 7:6, 14:2, Amos 3:2). Yet not all of God’s people will be saved (Romans 9:2-3). Some will point out that the calling of Israel was to be a light unto the nations or to service, not to be saved however i believe this is fallacious. God does not seem to call people just to service with the intention to allow them to perish. Furthermore, Romans 9-11 is essentially about Israel moving from elect to unelect (although there are some other things going in those chapters as well). However the general point of these chapters is that it was God who chose the Israelis but the Israelis, who through their lack faith, lost their elect status (except of course for the remnant). Even with the remnant cited in Romans 11:4 it was they that did not bend their knees to Baal. Stated differently, they remained faithful. This aligns with the understanding of what Romans 9 really teaches. Not that God creates people for salvation or destruction, but that God is within His right to not save those that were elect because of their actions, most specifically their lack of continuing faith.
In addition, we see God tell us “Say unto them, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?” (Ezekiel 33:11). Think about what God is saying here. Is this consistent with the idea that God unconditionally elects everyone before the foundation of the world? Would not God be untruthful if He says He has no pleasure in the death (and this must be spiritual death) of the wicked if He has consigned most people to eternal punishment?
Second, in Scripture the term elect (or chosen) seems to refer to two different types of election. The first, in Ephesians 1:4 seems to be related to corporate election. That God has chosen what will happen, specified in the verse, to those who come to faith in Jesus Christ. It is not an individual election but a corporate election. The collective verb noun would seem to support this.
Third, there seems to be another election. Why would I say this. There are several places in Scripture which strongly suggest this. This other election that is more personal and which seems to occur after being called. Why do I say this? Because in Scripture there are places where election is referenced after calling. Intelligent writers, when they are reflecting steps in a process, list those processes chronologically. For example if i was describing my day, i would not write, “I purchased some bread and I went to the store” when the clear order of events would be “I went to the store and i purchased some bread.” There are at least two places where this ordering is stated outright and a third where it is implied. The specific places where the ordering is calling, election (or chosen) are 2 Peter 1:10 and Revelation 17:14. The ordering is also implied in Matthew 22:14. If election is after calling, how can this be done from the foundation of the world?
Fourth and finally, we must realize in Scripture the elect seem to be at risk. In 2 Peter 1:10, we are commanded “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.” Here is what I note about this passage. First, it is a command to us (active verb with us as the subject). How can we be the ones to assure our calling and election? Second, the warning is clear here. The fall (Greek ptaiō) means “to fall into misery, become wretched (often so in Greek writings): of the loss of salvation.” Paul clearly thought the elect could be lost (unless he somehow believed there were two classes of the saved which is not referred to in Scripture). In Acts 20:28-31 we read “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.” Paul cried over a space of three years over those he considered faithful. How many of us have done this? This cannot be for people he believed were not chosen according to Reformed Theology.
There are also many places in Scripture where God expresses His desire to save all. Does it make sense that God desires to save all but, according to Reformed Theology is the only one that can make that happen yet refuses to? This creates a view of God which is schizophrenic; that He tells us He wants one thing to happen (and has the power to make it happen) but then does not do what it takes to accomplish it. We note below this is why Reformed Theologians change the meaning of words to align with the theology. Here are some of the passages which reflect God’s idea to save all.
Limited Atonement
Who did Christ die for? Scripture tells us in these passages: (1 Timothy 2:6, Isaiah 53:6, Hebrews 2:9, John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, Romans 5:6, 2 Peter 2:1, Matthew 20:28, John 11:50-51, Ephesians 5:25, and Galatians 2:20). Consider the information under ‘Wording’ below and understand that the Reformists must redefine words in order to make aspects of their theology make any sense.
Unbelievers can never say that a provision for their salvation was not made and not offered. They can never stand before God and say, “The reason I am not saved is because Christ did not die for me or you God, did not will it.” No, the reason they are not saved is because they reject the one who died for them, the Savior of all men (1 Timothy 4:10). They are without excuse. However, if as we covered above, the sin of Adam is so pervasive, corrupting their entire being and it is something they cannot avoid (that is all are born with it), then they have excuse. Again, there is no doubt that man is infected from the sin of Adam, but it does not control him to the degree that Reformed Theologians postulate or is consistent with Scripture.
God has clearly defined throughout Scripture who Christ died for. A few of the more salient verses describing whom Christ died for.
- For all (1 Timothy 2:6; Isaiah 53:6)
- For every man (Hebrews 2:9)
- For the world (John 3:16)
- For the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2)
- For the ungodly (Romans 5:6)
- For false teachers (2 Peter 2:1)
- For many (Matthew 20:28)
- For Israel (John 11:50-51)
- For the Church (Ephesians 5:25)
- For “me” (Galatians 2:20)
The concept held in Reformed Theology which suggests Christ is a failure if He died for those who did not end up being saved is frankly, ridiculous. It would be like saying God is a failure for not ensuring all Israelis entered the Promised Land after telling them they would or God is a failure for not ensuring that Eli’s family ministered to Him forever after promising they would. It is the will of men, granted to them by God, that are responsible.
Irresistible Grace
God’s grace is said to be irresistible. Yet this idea also defies what Scripture teaches. While some non-Reformers may portray the idea of being forced to accept Jesus Christ, the truth of what most Reformers believe is more subtle. A more representative belief is the idea that is man is so overwhelmed by being regenerated that he only wants to accept God’s call. However, even this understanding has issues.
While there is no question that we are a new creation when we come to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17). people read into what that verse means. The reality is that new creation, although being indwelt by the Holy Spirit and having His laws written on our hearts does NOT equate to some type of control or irresistible desire. Men, after being regenerated, continue to sin. This demonstrates quite clearly that men retain the free will, even after regeneration, to do what they are said not to desire. But Reformers argue the grace extended to us in regeneration overwhelms us even though we continue to sin after being regenerated. They would say even though the flesh can overwhelm us and incite us to sin, it does not do so in sufficient quantities allow us to reject God’s call. Hence they view the Holy Spirit is initially irresistible, but not after indwelling a believer. They have no Scriptural basis for this but its what they believe. Even Saul who was regenerated and did became a new man (1 Samuel 10:6) fell to sin and the Holy Spirit departed him. Similarly, if we look at Galatians 5:24, we see clearly who is responsible for putting the sinful nature to death (and this with extreme pain). This is an active verb covering those who belong to Christ.
Regeneration is not an extensively described act. In fact Calvin seemed to think that faith preceded regeneration and that regeneration occurs over time, coincident with repentance; that it is not only an punctiliar act. There is indeed Scripture to support this idea. For example, Ephesians 4:23-24 “And be renewed in the spirit of your mind. And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness” and Colossians 3:10 “And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him.” Why would we be commanded to put on the ‘new man’ if the ‘new man’ was fully created at regeneration? Both of these ‘put on’ verbs are middle tense verbs; something we do to ourselves and both are after initial faith. Calvin even states in III.3.ix “Therefore, speaking in the person of a man alienated from God, he properly prays for the blessings which God bestows upon his elect in regeneration. Accordingly, like one dead, he desires to be created anew, so as to become, instead of a slave of Satan, an instrument of the Holy Spirit.” There are only two uses of the term regeneration in Scripture and one of those terms relates to restoring creation. There are other places in Scripture which are said to describe regeneration but the word itself is in limited usage.
We see in Scripture that there are those who were called but who rejected the call and went off to tend to other things (Matthew 22:2-8). Notice also in v8 that those invited were not worthy. Reformers recast this as the difference between an internal call and an external call (or an effectual call and an outward call). According to Reformed Theology the outward call may be considered the call by people to come to God. The effectual call is the act of regeneration, a call by God to come to God. The outward call is resistible, where as the effectual call is not consider to be resistible.
But this introduces a problem. When we are commanded to share the gospel in any manner that suggests that God loves them and died for them (as Scripture teaches), wants them to come to Him, we may well be dishonest with them. That is because in Reformed Theology the elect are already set meaning many we share the gospel with will never be able to come to God. This is the error of polarized salvation; that is God does everything, man does nothing. Even in the parable it is clear the King (God) desired them to come to the wedding feast and invited them. There is no reason for the King to have invited those He prevented from coming.
Furthermore, there is an example in Scripture of a person called, but not chosen (Matthew 22:14). This is a case where the call was answered but they were not elect (chosen). This again suggests that there is an election (choosing) after coming to faith through a call. Also in this parable, there are many called that did not even answer the call.
Perseverance of the Saints
See the Scriptural errors of this doctrinal teaching here.
Predestination
The Greek word for predestination is proorizo and means before (pro) a horizon (oorizo). It appears a total of six times in Scripture: Acts 4:28; Romans 8:29, 30; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 1:5, 11 and another eight times where only the word oorizo is used. While it does carry the sense that God decided something before a horizon, there are disagreements as to what the word actually means.
In the six instances where the word proorizo is used, they are all in the aorist tense; that is timeless. The potential understanding of this is significant. Let’s look at how a lexicon describes the nature of an aorist indicative verb: “Is a simple statement of fact. If an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be rendered in the indicative mood.” This means that the idea of God’s predestination means it could be something that has occurred, is occurring, or will occur. Again, what many try to do however is tie it in with other verses (which are not necessarily linked ex. Ephesians 1:4) to create timing for the verb. That can be an exegetical no-no.
Warnings / Accountability of Man
In the Old Testament, there is a clear framework depicted where man is accountable for their actions. This is shown clearly by the depth and nature of the law but also in God telling the Israelis to chose, warning the Israelis over and over, followed by the Israeli’s reaping the consequences of their actions. Remember, Paul in Romans 9 is clearly distraught that not all Israel will be saved. However as shown, it is because of unbelief they are not saved.
However Reformed Theologians seem to believe that God has fundamentally changed. That is man is no longer accountable in anyway in the New Testament. God does everything as relates to salvation. Think about how large God’s word is. What is the benefit of God sharing as much as He has with us if He is doing everything?
However what has not changed is that just as God warned the Israelis in the Old Testament, we are warned about following where the Israelis went in the Old Testament in addition to many other warnings. In the New Testament there are many warnings to those who are believers. This is easily confirmed by the context. What is the purpose of warnings, many with specific consequences, to those who can never be lost? To ignore the warnings of God suggests that Reformed Theologians view God as untruthful. Remember that Paul himself, the writer which most Reformed Theologians quote, took the warnings from God seriously whereas those same Reformed Theologians say that what God says, cannot happen.
God of the OT / God of the NT
It seems that in Reformed Theology the God of the Tanakh, is not the same as the New Testament. Why would we say this? The reason is clear. In the Tanakh, God’s treasured possession, the Israelis, were called by God, were chosen by God, but most did not endure. Could God have ensured they all entered the Promised Land and ensured that they were all saved? Yes. But He did not.
Yet in the Holy Scripture of the New Covenant, according to Reformed Theology, God, elects (chooses) and calls irresistibly so that a person in effect has no choice in the matter and cannot, regardless of what decisions they make, fall away.
Some might say this is the difference between the new and old covenants. Yet even though the new covenant is superior to the old covenant, we are warned three times (1 Corinthians 10:1-12, Hebrews 3:7-4:11, Jude 1-5) in the Holy Scripture of the New Covenant to not follow the example of the Israelis. If the new covenant was sufficient to eliminate the possibility of falling away, there would be no warnings not to repeat what the Israelis did in the Tanakh.
Why would God warn us in the New Testament to not follow the example of the Israelis since there is no reason for the warnings in a theological paradigm where God is doing everything? In fact, this is one of the single greatest warning signs about Reformed Theology. Their understanding of the sovereignty of God renders all the warnings and many teachings (more than 70) from God, as disingenuous. Hence, the God who afforded His called and chosen people the freedom to follow or reject where He led in the Tanakh, does not do so in the Holy Scripture of the New Covenant (according to Reformed Theology).
But there is another aspect of this idea that is even more insidious. In the Old Testament, God clearly held men accountable for their decisions. God puts decisions at men’s feet. When they chose evil, they were punished and destroyed. When they didn’t, they enjoyed God’s peace, provision, and protection. But God held them accountable to their choices. In Elijah’s time, there were 7000 who refused to bow to Baal.
But Reformers in the New Testament believe God does not hold people accountable for their decisions. First and foremost Reformers hold that a man has no choice to come to God. Second, even when God calls a person, that person has no choice but to answer. Third, after the man chooses God (and again this is clear in Scripture), the person has no freedom to walk away from God. In short, the God of the Reformers has completely eliminated man’s accountability for their decisions since God is doing everything.
Are these two separate Gods?
Reformed Passages
Previously we looked at a few of the many passages in Scripture which seem to refute the foundation of Reformed Theology. Now lets look at some of the passages that Reformed theologians cite to affirm their theology. We must again remember that when we encounter passages that appear to conflict with texts contained elsewhere in Scripture, we must look carefully at both Scriptures striving to rationalize them to bring all texts into harmony.
| Key Passages Cited by Calvinists | Understanding These Passages |
| Romans 3:10-11 “As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.” | There are several issues with this passage. First, the context from which this is quoted in the Old Testament (Psalm 14, 53) specifies this applies to fools who say “There is no God.” Second, there are a number of people in Scripture who have sought God. Thus, we seem to be at a conflict. There are two possible ways to resolve the conflict I can think of. First, the idea of seeking after God may be as God desires; through His Son. Second, the Greek word for God in this passage is theos which can be interpreted to mean God (the trinity) or anyone of the persons of the Godhead. As stated, we have seen people in Scripture seek God, but no one truly seeks Jesus Christ, the Son. |
| Romans 8:28-30 “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” | There are a number of ways in which this passage is interpreted. The one however that seems the most likely is the consideration of the idea that “foreknow” here is actually knowledge from before rather than knowledge about the future. Why do we say this? First, according to the non-gnomic understanding of the Greek aorist verbs, these are all past tense verbs. The explanation often offered that the verb glorified (doxazo) is so certain that it can be said to be in the past is completely unsatisfying and does violence to the language. Furthermore, the church at Rome was under persecution and part of what is being expressed is comfort in knowing that those that God knew from before were in fact delivered by Him. |
| Romans 9:10-23 “And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,” | See above for breakdown of these verses. |
| Ephesians 1:4-5 “According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.” | The key part of this verse, used through the early parts of Ephesians is “in him.” Thus, it is clearly being written to Christians. What is being chosen here is v4 is what becomes of those who are faithful and remain faithful. The phrase “chosen in Him” is modified by “holy and without blame.” That is what they are chosen for. That is those in Him (faithful believers) are chosen, before the foundation of the world, to be “holy and without blame.” The verse says nothing about salvation; no use of the word sozo. Ephesians 1.13 makes it very clear when we were included in Christ. Thus, when we are in Him is clearly defined. |
| John 6:37-40 “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. | In this passage, we must carefully consider who is being spoken of. In Reformed Theology this is assumed to be an open-ended claim to all of humanity. First, when did God give those to the Son? How does this giving occur? Giving (Greek didōmi) here is a continuous present tense verb meaning such giving cannot have occurred before the foundation of the world. The “giving” is ongoing. This also causes problems for verses such as Ephesians 1:4. There are places in Scripture where the idea of giving is not universal (ex. Psalm 2:8), Finally, the last part of the passage has nothing to do with perseverance of the saints but of reflecting that Jesus himself will lose no one (consistent with the Father’s will which Scripture shows is not always accomplished) but the warnings throughout Scripture shows clearly that one may walk away from God in a couple of ways. This does not constitute “losing” someone. |
| Acts 13:48 “And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” | The verb here is often reflected as a passive voice verb but it could also be a middle voice verb because the spellings are the same. The compelling reason to believe that the middle voice is more accurate is the verse that is two verses before this. We read “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.” Here Paul directly lays the refusal of the gospel at the feet of those who rejected it. He does not say that God did not enlighten them, or they are not the elect. |
| 2 Timothy 1:9 “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began” | There is no doubt salvation is from the Lord and He calls us. Furthermore it is not based on what we have done as referenced here and elsewhere. However as with other passages the question is whether the purposes of God are always fulfilled? We see many places in Scripture where God tells us He has a purpose not to see it done. It would seem natural in this passage to link calling and purpose. However that is not the case. Why do we say this? Because God calls those that do not answer. Did God have a purpose in calling those who did not answer? Hence, there are probably two different people in this passage. While the calling is individual, the purpose is probably towards the group of people who will answer His call. |
| Philippians 1:6 “Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ” | This is a passage often interpreted as defending the doctrine of perseverance of the saints. We cover why this is likely not the case here. |
| John 15:16 “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.” | In fact, if this is believed to be exclusively about salvation, this would cause a conflict with other Scriptures if taken at face value. First, the context is clearly shown here. It is chosen and ordained to bring forth fruit, not directly salvation. Second, Scripture is clear from other passages that God does in fact draw us to Christ however the number and ways in which God draws us is not defined in Scripture save that we are told “many are called.” Third, we know from Scripture who actually believes. Finally, this is statement is made to the disciples (Apostles) of Jesus as the context beginning in Chapter 14, shows. |
| John 10:27-29 “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.” | This is a passage often interpreted as defending the doctrine of perseverance of the saints. I cover why this is likely not the case here. |
| Romans 9:15-16 “For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.” | While this is often used as a lynch pin of Reformed Theology what is being discussed here in context is different. Remember that Paul is concerned that all of Israel will not be saved even though they have been greatly blessed by God but some remain unsaved. The tenses of this verse make it clear what God is saying; that He will show mercy to those He has been showing mercy to. Who are the recipients of God’s mercy? Those who humble themselves before Him and trust in Him for their salvation. It does not reflect that God just chooses those for salvation at all. Finally the final verse stresses that it is not all about man’s will. This is true. But in context of numerous other Scriptures man’s will is important, just not as important as God’s in this matter. This “not, but” construction gets used elsewhere in Scripture (ex. John 12:44) and reflects relative priority, not exclusivity. |
| John 6:65 “And he said, therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.” | The term for “draw” (Greek helkō) in this context means to attract by inward power, to lead, or to impel. There exists another form of the word that implies dragging by force (as seen in Acts 16:19, 21:30) against one’s will, but that is not the intended meaning here. In fact, Jesus stated that when He is lifted up, He will draw all men to Himself. There is no place in Scripture where the number of people called by God is stated. The one allusion to how many is in Matthew 20 and 22 is when we are told “many are called, but few [are] chosen.” Notice that this phrasing clearly implies that chosen FOLLOWS calling as intelligent writers when describing steps in a process, list them in chronological order. |
| John 1:12-13 “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” | This passage clearly shows that God gives power to those that receive Him [Jesus Christ]. Their rebirth was something they could not do themselves and thus it was God’s will to cause their rebirth however the language is clear that God wills to call and man wills to receive. This is consistent with those called but who did not answer reflected elsewhere in Scripture. |
| Romans 10:20-21 “But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.” | States that God does reveal himself to people not looking for Him, but this is not an exclusive statement. There are those in Scripture as discussed who have sought after God. Furthermore, in v21 why would God have to have “stretched forth my hands” if the will of the people He is reaching out to have nothing to do with accepting Him? Again, this is consistent with the God calls, people choose to answer paradigm. |
| Ephesians 2:1 “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins” | Here we are told that God quickens those who were dead in trespasses and sin. However, it takes a reading into Scripture what dead in trespasses means to understand it as true death. We are spiritually dead, but that is not actual death. It is separation from God. We are separated from God. We are quickened (reconciled to God) through what Jesus Christ did for us when we place our faith in Him. But the death spoken of in this verse in no way suggests we cannot seek God as those in Scripture have done. All it means is that we are separated from God. |
| Matthew 1:21 “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.” | The key phrase here is “His people.” However how is “His people” defined? Is it Israel? Is it those who put their faith in Him? Is it those who are called by God. This requires a reading into in order to make it Calvinistic. |
| Matthew 11:27 “All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.” | In this passage, we first note that things are delivered to Jesus by the Father; not people. While it is clear that the Son reveals the Father to people the question arises how does Jesus reveal the Father and whom constitute whomsoever. We have already seen people seek God apart from Jesus apart even though it may be correctly stated these people probably did not seek God as He desired. |
| Psalm 65:4 “Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple.” | While there seems to be a clear choosing here, two questions remains. What is the nature of the choosing and how is the choosing accomplished? The rest of the context of the psalm does not lead us to salvation at all. Choosest and causeth are both imperfect verbs suggesting not a single event, but rather a continual event. |
| Philippians 2:13 “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” | First, this is written to Christians, as shown by the prior verses. But the question is as follows: is the work of God forcing? The answer is probably not. Why would we say this? Consider Romans 2:12a “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” What are the tenses of the verbs? “Do not conform” is an imperative; a command to us”, but what is the tense of the verb “renewing of your mind”? It is a passive verb; something done to us, by God. So the correct understanding of this is we are commanded to allow God to renew our mind.” Hence its not compelling but leading; something we can refuse. The same idea applies to this verse. |
| Hebrews 12:2 “Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.” | Often confused with the idea that Jesus finishes our faith, the key word here for finisher is Greek teleiōtēs and means “one who has in his own person raised faith to its perfection and so set before us the highest example of faith.” This has nothing to do with Jesus finishing our faith. |
Additional Scripture
Ephesians 2:1-3 “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” COMMENTARY While it is clear that we are spiritually dead in our trespasses and sins and were once children of wrath, this does not address what an individual may or may not do when called. Even the most virtuous among us sin before turning to God.
Ephesians 1:11 “In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will. COMMENTARY The key point here is that while God works all things according to His own will, it is humanity that often presumes to understand that will. For instance, we have established that God desires all to come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved (1 Timothy 2:4). Therefore, we must conclude that this verse does not imply a divine determination of individual salvation; otherwise, God would ensure that all are saved—unless we suppose that God acts against His own will. What I am suggesting is that humans dictate their understanding of God’s will concerning His intentions. A more reasonable interpretation of this verse is that God wishes for everyone to know the truth and be saved, actively working to protect (as seen in Jude 1:1) those who come to faith in Jesus Christ, guiding them to endure and follow the Spirit. Additionally, as previously discussed, predestination may be a passive act of God.
SCRIPTURE 1 Corinthians 2:14 “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” COMMENTARY While discernment of scripture is guided by the Holy Spirit, this statement pertains to general spiritual awareness. Many have received the Holy Spirit without ever having read the Scriptures (consider the early church, much of which came to Christ without the New Testament).
SCRIPTURE John 6:44 “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.” COMMENTARY The term for “draw” (Greek helkō) in this context means to attract by inward power, to lead, or to impel. There exists another form of the word that implies dragging by force (as seen in Acts 16:19, 21:30) against one’s will, but that is not the intended meaning here. In fact, Jesus stated that when He is lifted up, He will draw all men to Himself.
SCRIPTURE Romans 3:23 “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” COMMENTARY This does not imply total depravity; rather, it illustrates that we have sinned in front of a just and holy God. We must remember that even after coming to Christ, we will still occasionally sin.
SCRIPTURE Romans 8:6-8 “For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.” COMMENTARY This passage emphasizes the nature of our choices before God—whether to focus on the flesh or the Spirit—and is directed at Christians. Once again, this teaching is universally applicable. Cornelius was called by God long before he received the Holy Spirit and was specifically identified as dutiful and pious (Greek eusebēs) in Acts 10. Furthermore, Galatians 5:25 and 6:8 reinforce the choices presented to believers.
SCRIPTURE Romans 5:12-13 “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.” COMMENTARY While this clearly states that all men are sinful (a point that is not disputed) and that sin separates us from God, it is important to note that this separation is due to our sinful state.
SCRIPTURE Romans 3:10-12 “As it is written, there is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.” COMMENTARY As noted elsewhere, this verse quotes part of Psalm 14, where the context relates to the fool who says, “there is no God.” It is unreasonable to expect someone who denies God’s existence to seek Him. We must ask whether it is truly accurate to say that no one seeks God, or is it that no one seeks His Son and the righteousness found in Him? We can point to examples such as Job, Cornelius, and Paul, who all appeared to be seeking God, albeit perhaps in misguided ways. Paul himself affirms this.
SCRIPTURE Romans 7:18 “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.” COMMENTARY This is addressed to believers and likely reflects Paul’s personal struggle in striving to do what is right before coming to Christ. If this statement was made after his conversion, it suggests that Paul, despite being redeemed and endowed with the Holy Spirit, still faced challenges with sin.
SCRIPTURE John 1:12-13 “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” COMMENTARY It is noteworthy that this verse is often cited to support unconditional election, yet the initial phrase indicates that those who received Him made a choice, especially in context. This reinforces that while salvation originates from God and aligns with His will, it does not exclusively rely on His will at the expense of human choice. This passage clearly illustrates the collaborative effect of God and humanity in salvation, acknowledging that humans cannot save themselves.
SCRIPTURE Matthew 11:25-30 “At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” COMMENTARY Here, we see Jesus extending an invitation to come to Him. Such an invitation would be unnecessary if all were predestined, elected, and called, leaving no alternative outcomes (i.e., those who are saved will be saved, and those who are not will not be). Is Jesus’s call here a genuine invitation (all who labor), an internal call, or an external call?
SCRIPTURE John 6:35-37 “And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, that ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.” COMMENTARY As previously mentioned, the act of coming to Jesus signifies entering into a relationship with Him rather than merely seeking Him. Additionally, we must consider this passage in relation to John 15:1-6, which indicates that a person can (and will, according to Scripture) depart from Christ. It appears that those who remain faithful and strive to honor God by bearing fruit will not be cast away.
SCRIPTURE Acts 2:39 “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” COMMENTARY This reinforces the ideas in Romans 8:29-30, while 1 Timothy 2:3-4 implies that God calls everyone. However, this call is effective only for those who choose to accept Christ (John 1:12-13). The Greek word for call (proskaleo) refers to those who are invited and drawn. Later, in Romans, the term for called (kletos) means invited.
SCRIPTURE Romans 8:28-30 “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” COMMENTARY The initial context here refers to “those who love God,” yet it does not imply that God’s call is limited only to those who ultimately love Him. This passage is often referred to as the “Golden Chain” of Calvinism, which suggests, though not explicitly stated, that a) it is unbreakable, b) foreknowledge means fore-love and thus is predetermined by God without regard to human choice, and c) the acceptance of faith granted by God is irrelevant to those He foreknew (predestined) because the choice rests solely with God, not with those chosen.
SCRIPTURE Ephesians 1:3-4 “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.” COMMENTARY As previously mentioned, this likely refers to a collective group rather than individuals. God chose, from the foundation of the world, the destiny of those who accept the faith given by Him. There is no scriptural basis for the notion that some are chosen based on criteria other than their response to God’s call with saving faith. The term “us” clearly refers to a community, not individuals. He chose the family of God to be holy and blameless before Him. Reformed theologians often conflate God’s foreknowledge with His choice, disregarding human choice.
SCRIPTURE John 17:9 “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.” COMMENTARY This reference seems to pertain to the Apostles, supported by verse 12, which mentions one destined for destruction. Additionally, this prayer occurred after many of His followers had departed.
SCRIPTURE John 10:15 “As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.” COMMENTARY This illustrates the previous point. Some interpret the sheep as those specifically chosen by God, rather than those who have come to faith in Christ. The text refers to “the sheep,” not a select few, which allows for varying interpretations of who constitutes that group.
SCRIPTURE John 1:12-13 “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” COMMENTARY While this passage emphasizes God’s will, we must consider two important points. First, God’s desire is for everyone to know the truth and be saved. Second, the act of receiving Him is in the active voice, indicating that humans are the ones who receive Him. If the action were passive, it would imply that God is the one receiving or causing the reception. We also note that God empowers them to become children of God, highlighting the word “become.” Throughout Scripture, there are numerous instances where man is called to act, albeit under God’s guidance.
SCRIPTURE John 6:37-39 “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.” COMMENTARY Several key points arise from this passage. First, the notion that those given to Jesus by the Father will not be cast out does not preclude the possibility that they may leave voluntarily or that the Father may cut them off due to habitual sin (John 15:1-6, Galatians 5:21). Second, it is the Father’s will that Jesus loses none, just as it was His will to lead all Israelites into the Promised Land and that all men be saved. However, God’s will is not always fulfilled because He has granted humanity free will.
SCRIPTURE John 6:44-45 “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, and they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.” COMMENTARY The Greek word for draw (helkō) means to lead. There is another term that implies forceful dragging against one’s will, but that is not the context here. The verse does not suggest that one cannot resist the call. While it is true that we need God’s call to come to Jesus, Scripture contains examples of individuals who actively sought God.
SCRIPTURE John 6:65 “And he said, therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.” COMMENTARY The phrase “come to” (Greek erchomai pros) means to commit oneself to Jesus’ teaching and enter into fellowship with Him. This does not imply seeking. We affirm that in order to engage in a salvific relationship with God’s Son, we need our Father’s call, but this does not negate our ability to resist and reject that call.
SCRIPTURE John 12:32 “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” COMMENTARY This verse conflicts with the doctrine of Irresistible Grace. If God calls “all people” and His call is irresistible, it would imply that everyone will be saved, not just the elect. We know this is not the case (Revelation 20:11f).
SCRIPTURE 1 John 2:19 “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” COMMENTARY This passage specifically addresses anti-Christs (v. 18, v. 22), as defined in the same epistle. These individuals never truly believed, so it is not surprising that those anti-Christs who associated with Christians would eventually depart. However, Calvinists support their doctrine based on the unfounded assumption that none of those who remained ever abandoned their faith or lost their salvation. This guarantee is not present in the text. They assume this to uphold their doctrine of perseverance, even though the verse does not address that issue.
SCRIPTURE Ephesians 4:30 “And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.” COMMENTARY While this verse clearly instructs us not to grieve the Holy Spirit, it also affirms that we are sealed for the day of redemption. However, nowhere does it state that this seal cannot be broken. In fact, multiple passages discuss the loss of salvation. Additionally, the Old Testament shows instances where the Holy Spirit departed from those living in rebellion. Like all of God’s promises, they must be received with true and saving faith.
SCRIPTURE Romans 11:28-29 “As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” COMMENTARY The gifts and calling of God are irrevocable, meaning He will not withdraw them from people as a group. This does not pertain to personal promises. What God has established will stand, but it is a misinterpretation to claim this is a personal promise that remains unaffected by an individual’s faith (or lack thereof). The preceding context in Scripture demonstrates that one may be cut off due to unbelief, implying that they must have had belief to be part of the vine initially.
[1] Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 26: 49-52