Jesus said that if we will continue in his Word, then are we his disciples indeed; and, we shall thus know the truth ~ which shall make us free (John 8:32). In this essay, we will examine the truth of God which frees us from the deceitful and dangerous doctrines of . . .
Calvinism. Before proceeding with a critique of the doctrines of Calvinism, it is vitally important to point out that Calvinism lies very much at the root of the modern-day Apostasy of the Church. Whether explicitly or implicitly, ideas related to Calvinism can be found amongst practically every contemporary false prophet, not a few of whom are national or even international celebrities. Of course, some of the world's largest Protestant denominations were founded upon the doctrines of Calvinism. Not insignificant, it should serve as a huge "red flag" alerting us to the true nature of Calvinism, when we consider the apostate condition of those mainstream Protestant denominations, today.
Some of you will recognize the acronym T.U.L.I.P., which stands for the so-called "five points of Calvinism." Here is a brief synopsis of those five points, as those are construed in Calvinistic teaching:
- T stands for "total depravity" of the human person. Mankind is not only "fallen," but every human person is therefore totally, utterly depraved (morally corrupt, and "spiritually" dead). Human beings are utterly incapable of any conduct which is not wicked, at least with respect to the motivation for such conduct, if not also with respect to the apparent effect of that conduct. Furthermore, being totally depraved, human beings thus are utterly incapable even of understanding "the things of God."
- U stands for "unconditional election." Calvinism teaches that God has sovereignly chosen some to be saved, and all others to be eternally damned. Importantly, God's choice of who shall, and who shall not, be saved, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with any individual's own character or actions at any time; but God's choice has only to do with his own will and purpose~which no human being is at all capable to know or to understand.
- L stands for "limited atonement." Christ's death only made atonement for the sins of those whom God has chosen (unconditionally) to salvation.
- I stands for "irresistible grace." Those whom God has sovereignly chosen shall be saved. Period. It is impossible for them to resist the grace of God, because, of course, they are the "chosen." Those whom God has chosen, he then draws them to himself by means of his "irresistible grace."
- P stands for "perseverance of the saints." It might be easier to remember what "P" stands for, by associating that with the well-known proverb which says: "The proof is in the pudding." In other words, those who are "unconditionally elected" shall not only be "saved" in order as they respond to God's "irresistible grace;" moreover, the proof that they are in fact the "chosen" of God, is discoverable in the demonstration of their "perseverance" in that grace of God. Those who are among God's "elect" shall not only come to Christ but they shall also "persevere" in Christ. Their perseverance is the seal, or the sign, of their having been chosen (elected) by God.
In order to treat this important subject with a reasonable degree of thoroughness, I intend to compose this series in five distinct parts, in which I will address each of the "five points of Calvinism" in turn. Let us then consider the first letter in the T.U.L.I.P. acronym.
Calvinism claims that the Bible teaches that man is "Totally depraved." Not only is man morally depraved and, thus, man is incapable of doing anything that is truly "good." Furthermore, because that man is spiritually dead, "total depravity" means that man is depraved (corrupt, debased) in all of his faculties, including his intellectual capacities. Therefore, man is incapable even to understand the meaning of God's Word. John MacArthur, one of America's most widely known proponents of Calvinism, in his recent teaching series titled "The Doctrines of Grace (part 3)," wrote (and said, on his nationally syndicated radio program):
"But at the very same time without any contradiction, only in apparent difficulty in our minds, there is a mystery unfolded for us in scripture that tells us that no sinner is capable of understanding the truth. 'The natural man understandeth not the things of God. They are incomprehensible to him.'
"The Bible then says people are incapable of understanding the truth, the gospel truth." (emphasis and highlight added)
The yellow-highlited portion, above, was placed in quotation marks in the original text which was published on MacArthur's website (link). I presume, then, that MacArthur quoted from some so-called Bible "version," although, I could not identify the particular source. I do believe that MacArthur's own Commentary Bible is based upon the New King James Version (NKJV). Here is a good example of how that Bible-substitutes corrupt the Word of God and, so, they pervert the truth. The verse of Scripture which, I strongly suspect, corresponds to MacArthur's above quotation, is found in 1 Corinthians 2:14, which states:
"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" (King James Bible)
There is a vast difference in meaning between MacArthur's "understandeth not" and the (true) Word of God's "receiveth not." As well as there is tremendous difference in meaning between MacArthur's "incomprehensible" and the Bible's "neither can he know them." Where the Greek word there translated "know" means "to allow, to accept, or be sure of." It does not even suggest the idea that "people are incapable of understanding the truth," as MacArthur falsely claims.
MacArthur prefaces his remarks concerning man's supposed intellectual inability, by saying it is "a mystery," one which presents to "our minds" an "apparent difficulty." He then asserts that "no sinner is capable of understanding the truth." But doesn't MacArthur intend that his own statements are true? and, that his own statements can be understood~even by "sinners?"
Or, does MacArthur rather mean that Bible "truth" is somehow different from every other expression of truth? It seems to me, in the context of everything else MacArthur said, that the latter is really what MacArthur means. For, if, as MacArthur claims, "people are incapable of understanding the truth," then, every form of human communication were thus impossible. MacArthur surely means no such thing. But he evidently means that "sinners" (and "people" generally) are incapable of understanding the Bible; for, apparently according to MacArthur, the Bible contains a different kind of "truth." He so much as said so, where he appended the phrase, "the gospel truth," as if to distinguish that from your regular run-of-the-mill kind of "truth."
MacArthur's grave error is typical of most liberal theologians, who assert that the knowledge of God is transcendent (beyond man's ability to comprehend), and that the writings of Scripture are thus somehow unintelligible or, at best, subjective. But that is not what the Bible itself teaches:
"But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me [the LORD]" (Jeremiah 9:24).
"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool" (Isaiah 1:18).
The latter verse, above, is obviously addressed to "sinners." But according to MacArthur, "sinners" are incapable of understanding Isaiah 1:18; much less are sinners then capable of "reasoning together" with God. We agree that all men in their natural state are sinners. But if no sinner were capable to understand the meaning of God's Word, then, no one could be saved, for the Bible would be to all men a closed book. But it is self-evident that that is not the case. For, every sinner who reads the words, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" (Exodus 20:14), surely understands the meaning of those words. Whether he or she obeys those words, is quite a different matter. But, then, perhaps MacArthur would argue that nothing in the Old Testament is part of the "gospel." Who knows.
But why does MacArthur~indeed, why does Calvinism teach that "people are incapable of understanding the truth"? MacArthur himself gives us the answer, where he wrote:
"If anyone is ever saved, it is because God overrules all the normal natural inabilities. That’s why we say salvation is all of God. It’s not just all of grace, it’s all of God." (ibid.)
Well, that fits very neatly with the logical requirements of "unconditional election" and "irresistible grace." Only, it is not true according to the Word of God.
Now, here's a thought which may mess with your head: If, as MacArthur insists, "people are incapable of understanding the truth," then, everything were all the same as truth. For, if people were incapable of differentiating between truth and falsehood, then, either every statement must be accepted on face value as being truth, or else, no statement would have any meaning whatsoever. People MUST be capable of differentiating between truth and falsehood; otherwise, human communication would be impossible. Moreover, God would then have no basis for judging human beings~in the case that "people are incapable of understanding the truth."
The first of the five points of Calvinism thus perverts the truth concerning: the nature of man; the nature of God, who made man in the image of God; and, the nature of God's Word. All in order to accommodate other false ideas comprising that wicked 'system.' It is not unlike the case involving the Theory of Evolution, which (because it is neither true nor, therefore, can it be logically consistent,) necessitated the fabrication of yet another theory (i.e., The Big Bang), in order to "prop up," as it were, the former falsehood. That simile can be carried even further, in that, just as The Big Bang Theory leads to a cognitive dead-end (where did the original energy come from?); so too does Calvinism contain its own cognitive dead-ends, as seen in the following of MacArthur's statements:
"I understand that this is not a small controversy when you talk about the doctrine of election. There are many people who feel, as I noted in our original message, that this is a dangerous doctrine, that this turns God into a monster, that this is an almost blasphemous, that this is a kind of heresy. And yet no matter how much human reason, human preference might rage against this doctrine, it is inescapably taught in scripture." (underline and emphasis added)
Why would anyone want to advocate in favor of a doctrine which they know that "many people...feel...that this turns God into a monster"? MacArthur furthermore acknowledges that reason itself "rages against" the doctrines of Calvinism. I wholeheartedly agree with him, on that point. Reason does rage against the teachings of Calvinism: because, Calvinism contains numerous cognitive dead-ends, that is, it involves ideas which are neither logically tenable nor can they be reconciled with the plain teachings of Scripture. Human reason rages against logical inconsistencies; just as God intended that it should. In fact, that is one of the primary mechanisms whereby man is capable to differentiate truth from falsehood.
But what about man's moral depravity? Is man utterly incapable of doing anything that is morally "good?" Scripture does have somewhat to say about that. Here are two of the principal passages which, it is supposed, lend credibility to Calvinism:
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings" (Jeremiah 17:9-10).
"The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one" (Psalm 14:2-3).
To say, as the Scripture does, that the heart is "deceitful" and "desperately wicked," is not the same as to say that man is "totally depraved" in his nature and, thus, he is utterly incapable of doing anything that is morally "good." But doesn't the latter passage above quoted say just that? No, it does not. The phrase, "there is none that doeth good, no, not one," does not mean that sinners are utterly incapable of doing anything that is morally "good." Rather, it means that fallen man is incapable of doing good always. Even sinners are capable of making decisions and of doing deeds which, in truth, are morally "good." Has there never been a case when a sinner ran into a burning house to save a child? Or, is it not morally "good" that a sinner goes to work in order to provide food for his family? Are there no unsaved Mothers who love their children?
The claim that man is "totally depraved," which Calvinism insistently teaches, is a non-sequitur (it does not logically follow, from the teachings of Scripture). The Bible does not teach that man is utterly incapable of doing anything that is morally "good." Only, that no sinner is morally "good" in himself or herself; that is to say, that no sinner will do good at all times and in every circumstance. Jesus explicitly stated: "There is none good but one, that is, God" (Matthew 19:17). That means that neither Moses, nor Samuel, nor Daniel, nor David, nor Isaiah, nor John the baptist, nor Matthew, nor John, nor Peter, nor Paul (you get the idea), was "good;" but only God is "good."
Man is fallen in his nature. Man is therefore sinful, inclined to sin. And sin is what separates man from God. But the fact that man is sinful does not mean that man is "totally depraved," or that "people are incapable of understanding the truth," or that the teachings of Scripture are "incomprehensible" to sinners. All of those statements are, frankly, untrue. Importantly, those untrue statements are the "first premise," so to speak, of Calvinism. And false premises must invariably lead to false conclusions; which they invariably do.
The "five points" of Calvinism must be understood as comprising a set of rules (called doctrines), which thus forms a framework for interpreting all of Scripture. It is widely supposed that the doctrines of Calvinism were distilled, as it were, from the totality of Biblical teaching. But that cannot be so. Rather, it is demonstrably the case that Calvinism represents not a "system" of interpretation but, rather, it is a biased perspective (predicated upon misunderstanding of certain passages of Scripture), which distorts the meaning of all Scripture. The result is not truth, but error and falsehood.
MacArthur was right about one thing, however, where he wrote: "There are many people who feel...that [Calvinism] is a dangerous doctrine, that this turns God into a monster, that this is an almost blasphemous [sic], that this is a kind of heresy."
Those are deadly serious charges. And here is another such charge which I will lay to Calvinism, viz.: There is no common ground between Calvinism and Biblical Christianity.
No comments:
Post a Comment