The Modern-Day Pharisees: Calvinists


Pharisees – “This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” (Matthew 15:8-9)

An article (sermon), worthy to be read with keen interest and no less acute attention, recently appeared on the Internet. It deals with the classic parable of the Pharisee and the Publican Jesus told in Luke 18 to illustrate the dreadfulness of self-righteousness.

As I was reading the article I noticed how the author, who is a staunch Calvinist, unwittingly impeached Calvinism with Pharisee-ism. Lo and behold, he even admitted that the Pharisees believed in election, predestination and limited atonement. That alone, by his admission, proves that Calvinism and Pharisee-ism hinge on three of the most important elements in Reformed Theology.

To kick off my article I would like to begin with this particular camaraderie between Pharisee-ism and Calvinism.


The Pharisees, as the meaning of the word “Pharisee” correctly conveys, believed that they alone were the chosen, pure and separate ones who distanced themselves from the unrighteous. Their right to have been the only ones elected and predestined by God was, as they said, their kinship to Abraham. No wonder John the Baptist rebuked them for their Abrahamic elitism.

Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. (Luke 3:8)

Believe it or not, some Calvinists (there are exceptions such as John Piper who believes all babies are saved) also base their election on kinship.

The sacrament (baptism) is afterwards added as a kind of seal, not to give efficacy to the promise, as if in itself invalid, but merely to confirm it to us. Hence it follows, that the children of believers are not baptised, in order that though formerly aliens from the Church, they may then, for the first time, become children of God, but rather are received into the Church by a formal sign, because, in virtue of the promise, they previously belonged to the body of Christ. (John Calvin, “Institutes of the Christian Religion,” Book 4, Chapter 15, Section 22) (Emphasis mine).

Our children, before they are born, God declares that he adopts for his own when he promises that he will be a God to us, and to our seed after us. In this promise their salvation is included. None will dare to offer such an insult to God as to deny that he is able to give effect to his promise. (John Calvin, “Institutes of the Christian Religion,” Book 4, Chapter 15, Section 20) (Emphasis mine)

The Pharisees believed that they alone were God’s sheep because they were Abraham’s direct Hebraic descendants. Everyone else was of no value in God’s sight and were called goats or dogs (outcasts). The Pharisees claimed that God’s salvific love and compassion were limited to them because He prospered them (Matthew 19:23-26) whilst the non-elect were trash and good for nothing else than to be made fit for eternal destruction in hell.

It is evident that the disciples had been influenced by the Pharisees’ prevailing attitude that poverty was a sign of the curse of God, while prosperity was believed to show the approval of God on one’s life. Their exceeding amazement at Jesus’ saying that a rich man shall hardly enter the Kingdom of God seems to suggest this.

Jesus nipped the Pharisees’ high-mindedness in the bud when He told them “ye believe not because ye are not of my sheep,. .” Jesus Christ never denied that they were sheep. King David called the entire nation of Israel God’s sheep but most of them were sheep who had been lost and needed to be saved.

6O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the LORD our maker.

7For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. Today if ye will hear his voice,

8Harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness:

9When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work.

10Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said, It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways:

11Unto whom I swore in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest. (Psalm 95:6-11)

This excerpt from Psalm 95 asserts that all Israel are God’s sheep (his people; his elect; see Romans 11:28) but that most of them hardened their hearts. In the very same way, the Pharisees were sheep but not the sheep of Jesus Christ’s fold who listened to and obeyed his voice.

They too, like their forefathers in the wilderness, hardened their hearts, despite them having been elected by God. Isaiah 53: 6 confirms that everyone is a sheep, albeit sheep that must be found and redeemed by the Good Shepherd. You are either a lost sheep or a sheep of Jesus Christ’s fold who listens to and obeys his voice and follows Him.

But, what about the goats? Who are they? There is only one passage in the whole of Scripture that uses the word “goats” as a metaphor to depict rebellious human beings (Matthew 25:32-33). Contrary to the clear teaching of the Bible, Calvinists have found a slick way to associate the sheep with the elect and the goats with the non-elect or the reprobate.

The word “ethnos” in Matthew refers to non-Jewish, Gentile, or heathen races, tribes and nations and NOT to the Jewish nation. Consequently, Jesus could not have implied that the Pharisees were goats when He said: “But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep,” unless the Pharisees were not circumcised Jews. He did not say “You are not sheep. He said, “You are not of my sheep.” The Bible Knowledge Commentary, p. 80 (John F. Walvoord and B. Zuck) under the heading “The Coming Judgment of the Gentiles” states:

25:31-33. The words the nations (ta ethne) should be translated “the Gentiles.” These are all people, other than Jews, who have lived through the Tribulation period (cf. Joel 3:2, 12). They will be judged individually, not as national groups. They are described as a mingling of sheep and goats, which the Lord will separate. (Emphasis added).

I can already hear a chorus of objection among Calvinists singing: “We do not base our election, predestination, and limited atonement on physical kinship to Abraham or anyone else. Our election is based on God’s sovereign decree to save only the elect. It was made eons before the foundation of the world.”

As much as this assumption may be true in their view, Calvinists do have a strong affinity with the Pharisees in that they too believe that they are the elect who by virtue of God’s limited atonement were predestined to be saved before the foundation of the world.

This poses an immense problem which makes a mockery of Jesus’ words in Luke 19:10, “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.” If God had already predestined the so-called elect to eternal salvation eons ago and if His decree cannot be overturned (which is impossible because if it were possible to upend God’s will, his sovereignty would be seriously jeopardized), it is reasonable to argue that the elect had never been lost.

On one occasion in my many debates with Calvinists on YouTube I asked a Calvinist: “So, you were convicted of judgment (that you are on your way to hell) AFTER you had already been regenerated?” I deliberately articulated my question in this way because the Holy Spirit can only convict a sinner of judgment (that he is lost and on his way to hell) before regeneration and never after it.

The Holy Spirit cannot comfort someone with the assurance that he/she is saved and at the same time convict him/her that they are lost and on their way to hell. He answered me as follows:

“The bible never says that God’s people were ever bound for hell, it says they were chosen ‘in Christ before the foundation of the world.’ (Ephesians 1:4). The conviction of sin is usually misinterpreted by God’s people to be the conviction that they are hell-bound, the gospel explains to them that they are not, because of what Christ did FOR them.”

Therefore, they’d never been lost. This is a patent denial of what Jesus said in Luke 19:10. If the elect were never lost, Jesus never came to save them. It’s as simple as that.

He continued to say:

“Conviction of sin is the belief in the reality of sin in light of God’s holiness and perfection. Many of God’s children believe this to mean that they are going to hell. They are not. That is why they need to hear the good news of their salvation, so that they can believe it, rejoice in it, and profit from it. The gospel doesn’t make their salvation true, their salvation IS TRUE and the gospel proclaims it to the Lord’s people who receive it by faith and profit from that understanding.”

Therefore, they’d always been saved without knowing it. Really? What did Jesus say about eternal salvation? “And this is life eternal, that they might KNOW thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3). It is preposterous to say that the elect is saved without them knowing it and only need to hear the Gospel to convince them that they are already saved.

According to the usual run-of-the-mill credo in Reformed Theology man is dead in his sins and trespasses, even to the degree that he is unable to hear and understand the Gospel, and hence incapable of either willingly or unwillingly responding to it. The only option open to God is to sovereignly choose some among the dead, regenerate them monergisitcally (without faith), and then grant them the gift of faith after their monergistic regeneration.

Anything a sinner ventures to do, including putting his trust in Jesus Christ and his finished work on the cross, to be saved, is to a Calvinist sheer blasphemy. It supposedly robs God of his glory. This they cling to like a nit despite the clear teaching of the Bible that it is impossible to please God without faith (Hebrews 11:6), especially in the act of salvation/regeneration.

A Calvinist whom I know very well seems to be a little confused when he says the time has come to tell the people who believe in free will and the necessity to have faith in Christ to be saved that they are going to hell if they do not repent and turn to Jesus Christ for their salvation.

I appreciate his concern for the lost but how on earth can you expect someone dead in sin and trespasses to repent (“metanoia”- change his mind for the better with abhorrence of his sins) and to turn to Christ of his own accord? Repentance (to change your mind) and a turning to Christ involves free will and faith and yet these are the very things my Calvinist friend rejects because they supposedly demean God’s sovereignty.

The confusion seems to be the bedrock of Calvinism because none of them know what they want – for a man to repent and turn to Christ of his own accord or to be monergistically regenerated. After all, he cannot possibly repent and turn to Christ of his own accord. If, as Calvinists assert, no one can come to Christ unless he/she is drawn (John 6:44), then the plea to repent and turn to Christ is an absurdity.

You may as well tell people: “I don’t know whether you are one of the elects whom God in his own time is going to effectively draw to his Son Jesus Christ so that He may regenerate you sovereignly and monergistically. Nevertheless, I urge you to repent and turn to Christ for your salvation.”

Though my Calvinist friend piously urges people to repent and turn to Christ, it is quite evident that it is not what he has in mind. His main concern is that non-Calvinists embrace the so-called doctrines of grace (TULIP) so that they may prove that they are the elect and therefore liable for salvation. This, to say the least, is Phariseeism to its very core. It has absolutely nothing in common with biblical evangelism but has everything to do with proselytization.

Whereas evangelicalism is motivated by pure love to reach out to the lost and to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ so that whosoever will, may be saved, proselytization is a Pharisaic recruitment gimmick to get people to adopt their particular doctrines (which in this case is TULIP). Jesus’ indictment in Matthew 23:15 fits them like a glove.

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves. (Matthew 23:15)


Calvinists believe that only the elect are drawn to Christ (John 6:44) and that their drawing to Him is effectual which simply means that the Holy Spirit gets the job done. Every single elect person drawn to Christ is saved; none are lost. Rev Roger Smalling describes effectual calling as follows:

  • The call is based on predestination. It is different from the general call to mankind to repent since it is for the few, not the many.
  • This call invariably results in justification, which in turn gets us to heaven, glorified.
  • This call is irresistible and efficacious. Otherwise, only some of those justified would be glorified.
  • Faith is included in this call because faith is necessary for justification.
  • This call must be involved with an internal transformation of the sinner, making faith possible.
  • God alone is the cause. …He predestinated . . . He called . . . He justified . . . He glorified.
  • This call must be a special grace from God different from His general benevolence toward mankind as a whole.
  • This call is a sovereign act of God by which He saves the elect. Theologians call this doctrine by various names: Irresistible Grace, Special Grace, or most often, Effectual Call.

Jesus’ parable in Luke 18 paints a completely different picture.

To a Jew, the holiest place in the temple was where God dwelt and as such, it was the ideal place to meet God in prayer. Jesus Himself said that the temple was designed to be a house of prayer for Jews and Gentiles alike (Mark 11:17). It follows that God, by virtue of the temple being a house of prayer, drew all men to Him. Religious zealots, publicans, the rich and the poor, the sick and the healthy, men, women, and children were all drawn to the temple because that was where they could communicate with God in prayer.

The fact that the Pharisee went to the temple to pray, proves that God even draws His Son’s enemies to Him (John 12:32). Was the drawing of everyone always effectual? Did the Holy Spirit always get the job done in the lives of all those who were drawn to the temple to pray and effectually save them?

One would have expected that the Pharisee – who the author of the article I am critiquing admits that he believed in election, predestination, and limited atonement – would have been the one whom God effectually called to Him. Ironically the Pharisee, the one who believed in election, predestination, and limited atonement, was the one who went home without being justified (Luke 18:14). It was the publican who did not believe in election, predestination, and limited atonement who was justified.

What in particular tells us that the publican did not believe in election, predestination, and limited atonement?

  1. The fact that he realized and acknowledged that he was a lost sinner who desperately needed to be forgiven all of his sins, proves that he did not hold to the infamous doctrines of false grace – election, predestination, and limited atonement. He was not so utterly dead in his sins and trespasses that he was unable to pray to God for the forgiveness of his sins.   The only thing left for Calvinists, who believe they are as dead as a corpse in sin and trespasses and therefore completely unable to call on the Name of the Lord in the way the publican did, is to thank God that they are not like other men, by the already effectual accomplishment of their election and predestination. Even the great Prince of Preachers, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, fell into this dark Pharisaic conduit when he proudly said: “I suppose there are some persons whose minds naturally incline towards the doctrine of free will; I can only say that mine inclines as naturally towards the Doctrines of Sovereign Grace! Sometimes, when I see some of the worst characters in the street, I feel as if my heart must burst forth in tears of gratitude that God has never let me act as they have done! I have thought if God had left me alone and had not touched me by His Grace what a great sinner I would have been! I would have run to the utmost lengths of sin, and dived into the very depths of evil! Nor would I have stopped at any vice or folly, if God had not restrained me; . . .” (Emphasis added). (Read here). What difference is there between his gratitude for not being like some of the worst characters in the street and the Pharisee’s phylacteric boastfulness that he was not as sinful and obnoxious as the publican? Spurgeon’s

    immodesty is stained with the reformed doctrine that God foreordained everything that comes to pass, even the sins of all men.

    Nevertheless, He restrains some so that they may not sin as grossly as others, especially the elect. If, as Spurgeon claims, it was God’s restraining grace that prevented him from running “to the utmost lengths of sin, and dived into the very depths of evil” why didn’t He restrain Adam and Eve from their heinous sin that lurched the entire human race in the grip of sin and death? Surely mankind would have been spared the abyss of sin and death if He had restrained Adam and Eve from sinning against Him. Spurgeon’s ostentatious and boastful words “If God had left me alone and had not touched me by His Grace, what a great sinner I would have been” is classic Phariseeism. Being lost is not construed by how great or how small a sinner you are; it is determined by the fact that we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). God never multiplies his grace to some so that they may sin less than others and withholds it from the non-elect so that they may “run to the utmost lengths of sin, and dive into the very depths of evil.” God poured out his grace on all men (Titus 2:11) so that whosoever believes in Him and his finished work on the cross may be pardoned and receive eternal life. That’s precisely what the publican had done; he cast himself completely on the mercy of God and was immediately justified by the grace of God. He did not compare himself to others and concluded that God had restrained him from “the utmost lengths of sin” and “the very depths of evil.” He knew that he was a lost sinner and that’s it. Not once did he try to justify himself by comparing his own hardly conceivable sins with the sins of “some of the worst characters in the street.” Spurgeon’s faith in God’s Sovereign Grace was so overwhelming that he believed it was God’s restraining power – a power He did not wield, to restrain Adam and Eve from sinning – that kept him free from acting in the horrendous sinful way the worst characters in the street were guilty of. How do you think Jesus would have compared Spurgeon to the woman of whom He once said: “Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.” (Luke 7:47). Could it be, that Jesus restrained Spurgeon from sinning like the scum on the streets (and this woman) because He wanted him to love Him less? Perhaps Spurgeon’s heart should have burst forth in tears of gratitude, for rather not having been restrained from sinning, and sinned much, much more than the woman so that his love for Christ could have abounded in greater depths.

    Jesus did him a great disservice when He restrained Spurgeon from sinning like the scoundrels in the street and the woman in Luke 7:47.

  2. The fact that he went into the temple to pray proves that he willingly exercised his God-given free will to call on the Name of the Lord for his salvation (Acts 2:21; Revelation 22:17).   The most distinctive difference between the publican’s salvation and the repulsive doctrine of election and predestination is that he was declared justified only after he had called on the Lord’s Name of the Lord and received forgiveness for his sins. Calvinists assert that they don’t need to call on the Name of the Lord for their salvation. Indeed, if they needed to call on the Name of the Lord for their salvation it would necessitate an act of faith on their part, and faith as a precondition for salvation is a taboo in Calvinism. That is why the elect needs to be regenerated first before they can call on the Name of the Lord. Needless to say, this is putting the horse before the cart. No one needs to call on the Name of the Lord for salvation when he has already been monergistically regenerated. That’s ridiculous. A very important question we need to ask ourselves is: Would or could God have saved the publican if he’d not cried out in shame over his sins “God be merciful to me, a sinner” and had not called on the Name of the Lord for the forgiveness of his trespasses? Jesus provides the answer in Luke 5:31 where He likens Himself to a physician and a lost sinner to a patient. No one can refute what He taught here and that is that only those who realize and acknowledge that they are terminally ill (lost sinners on their way to hell) will come to Him for their healing (salvation). A terminally ill patient must of necessity trust the physician who treats him. That’s the very first prerogative on the path to recovery from the life-threatening disease of cancer. A terminally ill patient will never go to a physician whom he cannot trust or in whose hands he cannot entrust his life. The spiritual antecedent of this undeniable truth is Hebrews 11:6: “But without faith, it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” This is precisely what the publican ventured to do as opposed to what the Pharisees had done. The Pharisee denied that he was terminally ill (lost and on his way to hell) but was already whole and acceptable to God due to his wonderful good deeds and law-abiding pristine lifestyle. Isn’t that what Calvinists believe – that they’d always been God’s elect (his sheep) and therefore never lost since before the foundation of the world? Yes, of course, they do not deny that they are as depraved as the non-elect (the reprobate) but unlike them, they’d never been lost. Yes, they would say, they’d been the lost sheep but not in the sense that they were bound for hell. Their lostness is more of a going astray than being hell-bound and their regeneration more of a being drawn to Christ and a monergistic regeneration than a trusting (having faith) in Christ to save them. Does the following testimony sound like someone who was once lost and on his way to an eternity in hell?

In an interview Phil Johnson had with John MacArthur, John explained his conversion as follows:

PHIL: So you’re saying . . . are you saying it would be difficult for you to put your finger on when your conversion took place?


JOHN: Yeah. I’ve never been able to do that. And it doesn’t bother me. I think I’m one of those kids . . . I was one of those kids that never rebelled and always believed. And so when God did His saving work in my heart, it was not discernible to me. I went away to high school and for all I knew, I loved Christ, I was part of the ministry of the church. I went away to college and I wanted to serve the Lord and honor the Lord. I was certainly immature.

But at some point along the line, I really do believe there was a transformation in my heart, but I think it may have been to some degree imperceptible to me because I didn’t ever have a rebellious time, I didn’t ever revolt against, you know, the gospel or not believe. And I guess that’s . . . in some ways that’s a grace act on God’s part. So that all that wonderful training found some level of fertile soil in my heart and none of it was wasted.

MacArthur’s “conversion” reminds one of Herman Hoeksema’s words, “Regeneration can take place in the smallest of infants . . . in the sphere of the covenant of God, He usually regenerates His elect children from infancy.” (Homer Hoeksema, Reformed Dogmatics Grandville, MI: Reformed Free Publishing Association, 1966, 464.).

No wonder John MacArthur was unable to discern his sovereignly and moneristically imposed regeneration. Calvinists’ offspring, like John MacArthur, seem to have received the grace to live and behave in a far more sanctified and more sanctified sinful way than other children. Really?

Calvinists are indeed a rare species.

  1. They have never rebelled against God.
    To make the extremely profound claim that they’ve never rebelled is equal to saying, “I have always been good.” Really? (Romans 3:12b).
  2.  They have always believed.
    To make the extremely profound claim that they’ve always believed is equal to saying, “I have always been endowed with God’s gift of faith.” If, as they say, God endows the gift of faith only to the elect after their monergistic regeneration, then it is reasonable to conclude that they’d always been regenerated. Really? (Romans 3:12a, 23).
  3. They have never revolted against the Gospel.
    To make the extremely profound claim that they’d never revolted against the Gospel is equal to saying: “I have always understood, loved and embraced the Gospel.” In turn, they are saying that they’d never been natural men (unbelievers). Really? (Isaiah 53:6; 1 Corinthians 2:14).
  4. The transformation they allegedly experience in their hearts is to some degree imperceptible.
    To make the extremely profound claim that the elect’s regeneration is to some degree unnoticed is equal to saying: “You cannot immediately perceive your regeneration. You will only know when you persevere to the end.” Really? Was Paul’s salvation imperceptible to some degree? Hardly, because he knew exactly when he was saved. “Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles. For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he can keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. (2 Timothy 1:11-12)

There are two things on which we need to focus our attention in Paul’s redemption.

  1. Paul knew exactly how and when he was saved. His salvation was not clouded with imperceptive vagueness. He knew that he was saved in Ananias’ house in Damascus when he first believed in Jesus and called on his Name for the cleansing of his sins (Acts 22:16).
  2. Paul never entrusted his salvation to his own perseverance but to Jesus Christ who he believed would keep that which he personally (not God) committed unto Him against that day when He catches up all the true believers to meet Him in the air.

How do the elect know they are the elect?

The doctrine of predestination, election, and limited atonement inevitably leads people to ask, “Am I elect?” The more they ponder this question the more uncertain some of them become. Many Puritans began to doubt their election on their deathbeds. R.C. Sproul wrote:

A while back I had one of those moments of acute self-awareness…and suddenly the question hit me: “R. C., what if you are not one of the redeemed? What if your destiny is not heaven after all, but hell?” Let me tell you that I was flooded in my body with a chill that went from my head to the bottom of my spine. I was terrified.” (R. C. Sproul, “Assurance of Salvation,” Tabletalk, Ligonier Ministries, Inc., November 1989, 20.)

Contrary to the uncertainty that disturbed the election of some of the Puritans and R.C. Sproul, Paul of Tarsus never once doubted his salvation. He wrote:

“I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.” (2 Timothy 1:12).

He referred to that day, in Ananias’ home in Damascus, when he called in faith upon the Name of the Lord for the cleansing of his sins (Acts 22: 16). He recalled that day when he placed his trust in the Lord Jesus Christ for his salvation. Calvinists cannot recall any such day because they have ruled out faith and free will as a necessary requirement for one’s salvation.

God must sovereignly and monergistically regenerate them without them really knowing when the regeneration took place. John MacArthur says “it was not discernible to me.” If the moment of their regeneration is not discernible, how could they possibly know that they are elect? The answer is quite simple, as some Calvinists would say.

The fact that you believe and continue believing in Christ is the real litmus test, they say. The problem with this is that Calvinists do not believe that faith is a prerequisite or a precondition for salvation. Due to man’s total depravity, he is completely inept to hear, understand, and respond to the Gospel in faith. R.C Sproul explains that according to the: “Reformed view of predestination before a person can choose Christ he must be born again”

A.W Pink declares

“the sinner, of himself, cannot repent and believe.”

Explaining Calvinism carefully, Palmer reiterates that no man can understand the gospel and that this “lack of understanding is also a part of man’s depravity . . . all minds are blind unless they are regenerated.” (Edwin H. Palmer, the five points of Calvinism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, enlarged ed., 20th prtg. 1999), 16))

James White declares,

“The Reformed assertion is that man cannot understand and embrace the gospel nor respond in faith and repentance toward Christ without God first freeing him from sin and giving him spiritual life (regeneration).” (White, Potter’s, 101)

If these statements are true, it means that every single one of the pieces of evidence Stephan D Doe provides for the verification of election must be given after the elects’ regeneration and not before, simply because the depraved elect are incapable of believing unto regeneration.

They cannot believe the things Stephen D Doe lists prior to their regeneration because they are inept to believe before their regeneration. When does the Holy Spirit convict sinners of sin, righteousness, and judgment – before or after their regeneration? We may rightly argue that the Holy Spirit can and often does convict saints of sin after their regeneration.

However, what purpose is there in convicting them of righteousness and judgment after their regeneration? These two elements of conviction can only take place when a sinner is still in an unregenerate state, and for the sinner to respond to the conviction of the Holy Spirit before regeneration, he must be able to believe and understand the Holy Spirit’s conviction.

It is ludicrous to assert that the Holy Spirit can convict an elect person of judgment after his monergistic regeneration. The Holy Spirit cannot comfort him with the words “you are saved” and simultaneously convict him that he is on his way to hell after his regeneration.

Here are the pieces of evidence Stephen D Doe provides as proof for election.

So I will ask:

  • Do you believe that you have offended the all-holy Creator (Rom. 3:10, 18; Ps. 51:1-4)?
  • Do you believe that your sins cry out to heaven itself for justice, and that you deserve to perish under the wrath of the God you have offended by your sins (Isa. 59:2-3; Ezek. 18:4)?
  • Do you believe that you are, in fact, dead in your sins and unable to make yourself alive? (Eph. 2:1-3; Rom. 8:5-8). (Thomas comments: This is so typical of the Calvinists’ insipid belief system. Only they can tell a corpse that cannot hear, understand or respond to anything: “Do you believe that you are, in fact, dead in your sins and unable to make yourself alive?”).
  • Do you believe that nothing you could ever do no good deeds, no mighty acts of faith, no church attendance, no niceness of character will ever be sufficient to appease the wrath of your holy Creator against your sins (Mic. 6:6-7; Isa. 59:12-14)?
  • Do you believe that God, the God you have offended by your sins, has himself provided the way of escape through his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ (Titus 3:5-7; Col. 2:13)?
  • Have you been united to Christ by faith, a faith you did not earn, but received as a gift from God? Do you believe that, having been savingly joined by faith to the Son of God, your sins are finally and fully paid for, and that you are forgiven and declared righteous, as though you had never sinned (Gal. 2:16, 20; Rom. 8:1-4)?
  • Do you believe that, by the grace of God, having turned from your sins and turned to the Son of God to pay for your sins and to give you his own righteousness, you will be received by God as his own dear child, to be loved and blessed by him throughout eternity that is, that you are saved by God’s unmerited grace (Rom. 3:21-28; 5:1-11)?

If you believe these things, you are exhibiting a key characteristic of the elect: the elect believe the gospel of Jesus Christ and continue in faith. The elect do not focus on their election, but rather on their Savior. The elect are saved from the wrath to come because God has chosen them to salvation through Jesus Christ (1 Thess. 5:9-10; cf. 2 Thess. 2:13). And that is what the gospel promises as well: the one who believes in the Son has eternal life and escapes the wrath of God (John 3:36).

Think back to the day of Pentecost. In Acts 2, we find Peter directing the crowds to consider, not election, but the Lord of glory whom they crucified. The elect will believe the gospel, but the reprobate will turn away from the gospel.

Calvinists have an uncanny propensity to disagree with one another. Here Stephan D Doe says that “the elect will believe the Gospel, but that the reprobate will turn away from the Gospel.” What does he mean? Does he mean the elect will hear, understand and respond in faith to the Gospel while the reprobate will recoil in unbelief and never be saved?

If so, then he does not agree with the Calvinists I quoted above who say that no one – not even the elect – are capable of believing the Gospel but first need to be regenerated – before the gift of faith can be given to them. In that case, Stephan D Doe is downright dishonest in saying that the “the elect will believe.”

He should rather have said, “the elect will receive the gift of faith after their monergistic regeneration while the reprobate will neither be regenerated nor be given the gift of faith.” Therefore the gift of faith is withheld from the reprobate.

Jesus once said to the Pharisees:

“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. (John 5:39-40).

Stephen Doe’s above exposition is chock-full of verses proving that the author had thoroughly searched the Scriptures but not once does he encourage his readers to come to Jesus for their salvation (Matthew 11:28-29). How on earth can they, when they are told that they cannot come to Jesus of their own accord? (John 6:44). Neither are they told that the Father draws all people (John 12:32).

Even Roman Catholics will gladly bear out their belief in every single one of the seven points he mentions to prove that one is an elect. Are they saved? No wonder James, the brother of Jesus, had to rebuke some who claimed that they believed when he wrote:

“You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe-and shudder!” (James 2:19). Jesus commanded us to believe as the Scriptures have said (John 7:38).

Do Calvinists believe as the Scriptures say? To answer this question we need to briefly look at the so-called Reformed Doctrines of Grace entrenched in the acronym TULIP.

Total depravity, which in Calvinistic terms means total inability, deprives the elect of any capability to respond in faith to the Gospel or of their own volition to come to Jesus for their salvation. It also excludes the ability to choose according to one’s own free will. The elect are dead in their sins and trespasses and need to be regenerated first, then granted faith as a gift so that they may come to Jesus.

As we’ve seen earlier, this is called effectual drawing or calling. Only the elect are called or drawn in this way. In fact, the drawing itself is the regeneration. James White writes:

“The Reformed assertion is that man cannot understand and embrace the gospel nor respond in faith and repentance toward Christ without God first freeing him from sin and giving him spiritual life (regeneration).” (James White: The Potter’s Freedom, p. 101).

RC Sproul explains that according to the

“Reformed view of predestination before a person can choose Christ he must be born again.” (R. C. Sproul, Chosen by God (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1986), 72.))

David Steele and Curtis Thomas, in their book “The Five Points of Calvinism,” p. 16, proclaim that:

“Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature; therefore, he will not-indeed he cannot-choose good over evil in the spiritual realm.

Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit’s assistance to bring a sinner to Christ-it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God’s gift of salvation-it is God’s gift to the sinner, not the sinner’s gift to God.:


Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees in the Gospel according to Matthew fits Calvinism like a glove:

“But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces [by telling them God never loved them and that His Son Jesus Christ never died for them]. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in.” (Matthew 23:13).

While Calvinists, as we’ve seen earlier, believe that man is completely unable to will to come to Jesus of his own accord and to respond in faith to the Gospel in order to be saved, some Calvinists have the nerve to preach on Revelation 22:17 and urge all depraved sinners to come to Jesus and to be reconciled to God through faith alone. Who are they trying to bluff? In short, they say:

  • You are completely void of a free will to come to Jesus but I am honored to invite you to come to Him and to be saved. 

In their attempt to offer proof for their view that man has no free will they refer to John 5:40 where Jesus indicts the Pharisees for their unwillingness to come to Him so that they may have life. The Pharisees acknowledged the Scriptures as the Sola Scriptura of God’s revealed truth but were unwilling to come to the Sola Dispendera (Dispenser) of God’s grace.

Their unwillingness to come to Jesus for their salvation was not due to an alleged non-existence of free will but rather to an outright refusal to come to Him. In fact, several other Bible translations interpret it in exactly those terms.

“And still you are not willing [but refuse] to come to Me, so that you might have life.” (AMP Bible)
“yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” (NIV)
“But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.” (NKJV)
“and ye do not will to come unto me, that ye may have life; (YLT)

The ability to will or not to will points to the fact that man does indeed have free will. Would Jesus have been so inordinately cruel to invite all who are weary and heavy-laden with sin to come to Him when He knew they had no free will?

On the contrary, his invitation was/is an invitation to use their God-given free will to come to Him when they experience the pangs of a weary and heavy-laden sinful life.

  • God’s Spirit alone can make you willing to come to Jesus Christ for your salvation but I have the wonderful honor to invite you to come to Him and to be saved.

I have always maintained that a wrong interpretation of biblical eschatology often leads to an erroneous soteriology. One of the most forceful examples is the Emergent Church that believes the Kingdom of God must be realized here and now through the altruistic and benevolent work of its followers.

In their appraisal of the end-times there is no room for a Rapture, a seven-year period of great tribulation on earth, and eventually, a literal 1000 years of peace on earth when Christ will rule from the throne of his father David in Jerusalem. This particular model, they say, is too exclusive.

What they want and are working toward is an all-inclusive kingdom in which everyone – Christians and every other conceivable religious persuasion, including atheists – may share in the benefits of the kingdom. Needless to say, this model also excludes the unadulterated Gospel of Jesus Christ to the extent that it has become a redefined Gospel with no power (1 Corinthians 1:18). Tony Campolo, one of the most distinguished teachers and proteges of the Emergent Church, describes the emergent kingdom as follows:

“This is a theology that – with its implicit threat of being left behind [at the Rapture], of time running out – is used by Dispensational preachers to great evangelistic effect. It has been a very effective goad to conversion . . . To the contrary, the history of the world is infused with the presence of God, who is guiding the world toward becoming the kind of world God willed for it to be when it was created. Human history is going somewhere wonderful.” (Tony Campolo, in Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo, Adventures in Missing the Point ( El Cajon, Calif,: Youth Specialties, 2003), p. 59.

N. T. Wright, the doyen of the “New Perspective on Paul” (claiming that we have misinterpreted Paul and, in turn, the gospel, since the foundation of the church) and evangelicalism, has the same eschatological resolve,

“[Paul] was to declare to the pagan world that YHWH, the God of Israel, was the one true God of the whole world, and that in Jesus of Nazareth he had overcome evil and was creating a new world in which justice and peace would reign supreme.” (N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1997), p. 37.).

To illustrate to what extent the Emergent eschatology has putrefied the Gospel, I would like to quote Rob Bell and Robert Webber. Bell writes:

“Salvation is the entire universe being brought back into harmony with its maker. This has huge implications for how people present the message of Jesus. Yes, Jesus can come into our hearts. But we can join a movement that is as wide and as big as the universe itself. Rocks and trees and birds and swamps and ecosystems. God’s desire is to restore all of it.” (Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis ( Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), pp.109-110).

“For Jesus, the question wasn’t how do I get into Heaven? but how do I bring heaven here?… The goal isn’t escaping this world but making this world the kind of place God can come to. And God is remaking us into the kind of people who can do this kind of work.” (Ibid., pp. 147,150).

Robert Webber, the author of the influential book “Ancient-Future Faith,” believes that “Christ has bound Satan and all demonic powers,” (Robert Webber, Ancient-Future Faith, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2004) p. 49)), the result being that the followers of Christ can usher in the Kingdom of God by means of a “secular salvation” (by accelerating massive social and cultural changes). He writes:

“Faith in Jesus Christ, who is the ultimate ruler over all of life, can break the twisting of political, economic, social, and moral structures into secular salvation. Because those structures that promise secular salvation are disarmed, they can no longer exercise ultimate power in our lives. The powers have been dethroned by the power of the cross.” (Ibid, p. 51).

Judas Iscariot cradled a similar kind of “secular salvation.” He merely wanted Jesus to rid them of the Roman yoke of injustices, of suffering, and of poverty, without the cross (John 12:5; Stephan Joubert once told a gathering of pastors at the Moreleta Park DRC to sell their churches and give the money to the poor).

Although there are differences of opinion in the Calvinistic fold, the overriding eschatological position of Calvinism is that of Amillennialism. Like the Emergent Church, they too believe that the major principles of God’s Kingdom are already present on earth, i.e.

  1. Satan is already bound so that the Gospel may be proclaimed unhindered;
  2. the elect are already ruling with Jesus where He is seated at the right hand of God;
  3. God’s Kingdom began at Pentecost when Peter used the prophecies of Joel to explain what happened; and
  4. the Church and the spread of the Good News are Christ’s Kingdom on earth and will be forevermore [that is, every elect person shall be regenerated and effectively called to eternal life and faith in Jesus Christ and reign with Him forevermore).

No wonder many well-known Calvinists and churches have developed a penchant for Contemplative Spirituality (John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Matt Chandler, Francis Chan, John Ortberg, Tim Keller, Mark Dever, Al Mohler, and Joshua Harris). Having found a shared aim in their similar views on the Kingdom of God, many of the younger generation Calvinists have opted for the contemplative journey.

And why shouldn’t the young, restless, and reformed (New Calvinists) feel so strongly connected to the Emergent Church and their Kingdom now theology when John Calvin’s Geneva was a model for God’s Kingdom on earth? In his book “Calvin’s Tyrannical Kingdom – Geneva’s experiment in Christian Dominionism,” Dave Hunt writes:

“From 1541 to 1549, French theologian John Calvin attempted the perfect marriage of Church and State in Geneva, Switzerland. Determined to transform the city into a model of God’s kingdom on earth, Calvin established numerous detailed “reforms” as well as devising a system to police citizens through regular home inspections-questioning the residents on all aspects of their beliefs and practice.

Some of those who profess a “Reformed” faith today take Calvin’s Geneva as their model and thus hope to Christianize the United States-and then the world. Is it any wonder that much of the general public, accusing evangelicals of orchestrating a “vast right-wing conspiracy,” recoils in horror at such a thought? Many Christian activists with looser attachments to Calvin hope to force an ungodly American citizenry into godly living. But is such an agenda within the will of God? No one ever worked so hard at attempting to do this, nor for so long a time, as John Calvin-whose “righteous” judgment dominated the people of Geneva for eight deadly years.

Should today’s Christian leaders continue to laud a man whose behavior was often so far removed from the commandments of Christ and the example of Paul? Should believers seek to celebrate (and emulate-Calvin’s theology-which led to his ungodly reign as “Protestant Pope” of Geneva?

It is no surprise that Calvinists who shun biblical eschatological events such as the Rapture, the seven-year tribulation period on earth, and the Second Coming of Christ together with all the saints who had been raptured prior to Daniel’s seventieth week, to misinterpret Old Testament prophecies relating to the end-times. They prefer to interpret these end-time prophecies in terms of their doctrines of grace rather than what the text plainly says. A verse Calvinists often quote to verify their interpretation of Revelation 22:17 is Psalm 110:3.

They assume that whosoever willingly come to Christ to take and partake of the Living Water do so, not because they desire it of their own accord (motivated by their own free will) but because the Holy Spirit makes them willing and able to come to Jesus Christ. As we’ve seen earlier, this is called the effectual calling of the elect for they alone (not the reprobate) are made willing and able to come to Jesus Christ and receive the Living Water.

Calvinists need to answer several pertinent questions.

1a) Presupposition: The elect (we must deal with the elect only because they are allegedly the only ones being saved) are dead in their sins and trespasses and consequently do not have a free will or the capability to hear, understand and respond in faith to the Gospel message.

1b) Consequence: To make the calling effectual the Holy Spirit (according to Psalm 110:3) first needs to make the spiritually dead elect alive (regenerate them) and only then make them willing to come to Jesus so that they may take and partake of the Living Water. (Dead people cannot exercise any shape or form of free will and hence the Holy Spirit must first make them alive so that He can make them willing). The Canons of Dort declare, “Therefore all men . . . without the regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit . . . are neither able nor willing to return to God [come to Jesus Christ] . . . nor to dispose them to reformation.” (Canons of Dort (Dordrecht, Holland, 1619), III, IV:3.))

1c) Question: Why do the elect need to come to Jesus to take and partake of the Living Water (a metaphor of regeneration, redemption, salvation), when the Holy Spirit sovereignly and monergistically regenerates and grants them the gift of faith as well as the will to come to Jesus, after to their regeneration and prior to their coming to Jesus? Surely, an elect person who had already been regenerated (redeemed) by the Holy Spirit has no need to come to Jesus and to take the Living Water.

Regeneration involves the Holy Spirit indwelling a repentant sinner through faith alone and as such he receives the Living Water at the moment of his regeneration because the Living Water IS the Holy Spirit (John 7:38-39). Therefore, it would not be unreasonable to infer that the elect are sovereignly and monergistically regenerated first, after which they are given the gift of faith and then made willing to come to Jesus so that they may take and partake of the Living Water. It means that the elect are saved (regenerated and gifted with faith and the will to come to Jesus) so that they may be saved (come to Jesus and take and partake of the Living Water).

2a) Presupposition: God’s calling of the elect is effectual to the uttermost which means that every single elect person shall be saved without exception. In layman’s terms, it means that God’s effectual calling is 100% perfect because 100% of the elect shall be saved.

2b) Consequence: No one is able to thwart, spoil or prevent God’s effectual calling of the elect and its inevitable consequences (the effectual regeneration of every single elect person).

2c) Question: If no scope of human intervention is able to thwart, spoil, or prevent God’s effectual calling why is it necessary to persuade, urge, inspire, and plead with depraved sinners to come to Jesus Christ? Why do Calvinists impudently depend on their own superfluous persuasions when God’s calling is so powerfully and sovereignly effective?

Paul Washer

In fact, the very thought that you can contribute something to God’s effectual calling (through the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit who provides both the faith and the will to come to Jesus Christ) maliciously demeans the sovereignty of God. It is arrogant, haughty, and downright puffed-up pride to think that you can contribute something to God’s effectual calling and convince depraved sinners to come to Jesus for their salvation. It is, therefore, no surprise that Paul Washer is at least honest when he laments his absolute inability to coerce or persuade people to come to Jesus.

And yet it is mostly the “tiny boys” who seem to think they can urge and persuade depraved sinners to come to Jesus for their salvation and to contribute something to God’s sovereign grace. What would happen if every preacher, pastor, evangelist, missionary, and Christian witness suddenly stopped to proclaim the Gospel and urge and persuade depraved sinners to come to Jesus Christ to take and partake of the Living Water?

Would it hamper God in his sovereign decree to effectually call and save the elect? Would God still accomplish his will to save every single elect person in the world? Most definitely because God’s purpose cannot fail.

I have already mentioned Psalm 110:3 several times and briefly explained that Calvinists often use it to authenticate their doctrine of effectual calling. Let us now evaluate their assumption that it teaches effectual calling in the light of the Word of God. First of all, we must look at the Psalm in its entire context to rightly divide the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15).

The Psalm is the antecedent of the New Testament’s teaching that Jesus Christ will return with His saints at the end of the seven years tribulation period on earth to judge the nations (Jude 1:14 and 15). It, therefore, has eschatological rather than salvific significance. It certainly does not teach that the Holy Spirit enables and makes the elect willing to come to Christ for their salvation.

The word “ne’ûm” (“says,” “said”) is often used to depict an oracle or a revelation. In this instance, David heard a heavenly conversation between the Lord (Yahweh) and David’s Lord (‘adōnay), i.e. God the Father and the Messiah. In the Oracle, Yahweh says that David’s Lord, the Messiah, is presently seated at Yahweh’s right hand, the place of supreme authority, until the completion of the ages.

At that particular time, when He returns at his Second Advent to the earth at the end of the seven-year tribulation period, the Lord will send David’s Lord, the Messiah, to subjugate his enemies. (Psalm 2:1-12).

Verse 3 describes the dominion Christ is going to exert over the entire earth when He returns with his saints at the end of the seven-year tribulation period to do battle with the nations who treated his people (the Jews) with contempt. God is exceedingly angry with the heathen nations because of the false security they so precariously enjoyed whilst his people (the Jews) suffered so much.

While God was only a little angry with his people, desiring only a moderate punishment, the nations prolonged and intensified their persecution of the Jews (Zechariah 1:14-15). The saints who had been raptured prior to the seven-year tribulation period are going to return with Jesus Christ and willingly offer themselves to take part in His battle. The Israelites of old were required to consecrate themselves to the Lord before going into battle with their enemies, and so too the saints must be holy before going into battle at the consummation of the ages (2 Peter 3:10-11, 14).

I must stress once again that the verse is no indication whatsoever that the Holy Spirit makes the elect willing and able to come to Jesus so that they may take and partake of the Living Water (Revelation 22:17). Calvinists will do anything to validate their agenda and often forcefully read things into verses that are not there.


The Pharisees who sat under the teaching of Shammai were the most important religious group in the time of Jesus. He founded his school shortly before Jesus Christ’s birth. The Shammai Pharisees hated the Gentiles and even the Jews who did not follow them.

Their hatred of the Gentiles was so intense that Shammai passed no less than 18 edicts to enforce separation between Jews and Gentiles. Jesus’ command in Matthew 5:43-44 to love your enemies was specifically aimed at the Shammai Pharisees who undoubtedly had some influence on Jesus’ disciples, in particular, Peter. (Mark 2:16; Acts 11:3).

Like the Pharisees of old, Calvinists have a propensity to love their own (the elect) and hate those who do not follow them and do not adhere to their doctrines of grace. Not even Christ Jesus’ command to love your enemies has made any headway in their so-called doctrines of grace.

In fact, they have shrewdly found a way to circumvent His command in Matthew 5:43-44 by differentiating between their own personal enemies and the enemies of God. According to this new Pharisaic Corban law, they absolve themselves from loving God’s enemies while pretending to obey Christ’s command to love their own enemies. The question we need to ask, is, who are God’s enemies, and who are the elects’ enemies? Are they not the same individuals, or group of people?

If we were to assume that Jesus Christ did not die on the cross for the non-elect, it follows that He does not love them and if He does not love them He must hate them. Having established who the enemies of God are, we must conclude that the elect has no option but to hate the non-elect as well. If they don’t they are not consistent in their determination to hate God’s enemies.

Who are the remaining individuals, or group of people the elect may regard as their own personal enemies but not God’s enemies, and who, they say, they ought to love according to Christ’s command in Matthew 5:43-44? It can only be the elect. This leads us to the bizarre situation where the elect love the non-elect, not because they are elect brothers and sisters in Christ but because they are enemies.

Where else are they going to find enemies to love if not from among their own elect brothers and sisters in Christ? Unless they learn to love their non-elect enemies who by divine decree are God’s enemies, can they in any which way possible avoid their new Corban Law “Hate God’s enemies but love your own personal enemies.” This again proves that Calvinism is not only a strange doctrine but a very dangerous one.


In the next and last segment of my article, I would like to respond to some of Sam’s inconsistencies. Sam owns himself the right to misrepresent me on his blog and spread a pack of lies about me and my beliefs in public. Therefore, I too retain the right to defend myself in public. His misrepresentation of me as an Arminian and Universalist is much worse than content theft which some of his closest friends have accused me of and promptly reported to WordPress. Indeed, character theft/assassination is worse than content theft. They have the nerve to quote you word for word, spread lies about you, and mention your name but as soon as you do it they report you.

In his article Tom Lessing 1994 (Updated) and in response to my affirmation that faith is a precondition for salvation, Sam  said the following:

“. . . we Calvinists do NOT “reject the biblical truth that faith in Christ and his finished work on the cross is a PRECONDITION for salvaton.” (sic)

Of course, you need to believe to be justified and saved. (2 Tim. 3v15; Ep. 2v8; Gal. 2v16, 3v8, v11, v24, v26, 5v5; 1 Pt. 1v5, v9; Rom. 1v17, 3v22, v28, v30, 4v5, v9, v11, v13, 5v1, 9v30, 10v6; Heb. 10v38; Philip. 3v9).

Sam doesn’t seem to know what the word precondition means. The dictionary defines “precondition” as “something that must come before or is necessary to a subsequent result.” Therefore pre-conditional faith is a pre-salvific faith. If faith is a necessary condition to be met prior to a subsequent result (which in this case is regeneration/salvation/redemption), then the notion that faith is given to the elect only after their monergistic regeneration because an elect person has no free will and is unable to choose, is incorrect.

Pre-conditional faith does not exclude free will or choice. If it had excluded free will and choice faith would have to be an irresistibly imposed post-salvific faith which brings us back to where we started, and that is that Calvinists do not really believe in pre-conditional faith. Sam is being a little less than honest. Sam boldly states:

“Of course, you need to believe to be justified and saved. (2 Tim. 3v15; Ep. 2v8; Gal. 2v16, 3v8, v11, v24, v26, 5v5; 1 Pt. 1v5, v9; Rom. 1v17, 3v22, v28, v30, 4v5, v9, v11, v13, 5v1, 9v30, 10v6; Heb. 10v38; Philip. 3v9).”

The pretense is foul play but dishonesty is even worse; it is a travesty. Not only is he inconsistent in his reasoning but also in complete disagreement with most of the heavyweight Calvinists who claim “that no man can understand the gospel, and that this lack of understanding is also a part of man’s depravity . . . all minds are blind unless they are regenerated.”

Therefore his claim that “. . . we Calvinists do NOT “reject the biblical truth that faith in Christ and his finished work on the cross is a PRECONDITION for salvation” is clouded with dishonesty because a corpse cannot believe anything at all. It must first be revived (resurrected, regenerated) before faith can be imparted to it as a gift. And indeed, this is what Sam  candidly admits when he says:

“Yet, Scripture tells us, that mankind is spiritually dead (Gen. 2v16-17: Lk. 15v24, v32; Jn. 11v25; Rom. 11v15; 2 Cor. 5v14), NOT universal endowed with faith (2 Thess. 3v2; Gal. 3v23; Eph. 2v8; Mt. 17v17), and that as a result, we did NOT choose God, but He chose us (Jn. 6v44, v65, 15v16).”

If man is spiritually dead, as Sam says, how can he exercise faith as a precondition for salvation? With this singularly short sentence, Sam smashes to smithereens his supposed belief that faith is a precondition for salvation. He even admits: “

How is it, that the spiritually dead (Gen. 2v16-17: Lk. 15v24, v32; Jn. 11v25; Rom. 11v15; 2 Cor. 5v14; Eph. 2v1, v5, 5v14; Col. 2v13; Jude 1v12) can raise themselves to life, without God’s supernatural intervention?”

Having faith in Christ is in itself not salvation (to raise oneself from the dead). It is, as Sam said himself, merely the precondition for salvation and anyone who does not meet this condition cannot be saved. (Hebrews 11:6).

Furthermore, Sam refers to one Bible verse after another without providing any solid exegesis. In fact, he has a very sloppy way of handling Scripture. A good example is his reference to 1 Corinthians 12:4-9 to prove that God gives the ability to believe only to the elect. He wrote:

What we Calvinists do, however, also believe, is that faith [that is the ability to believe] is a Gift from God (1 Cor. 12v4-9; Eph. 2v8; Jn. 6v29), which is NOT universally bestowed on all mankind (2 Thess. 3v2; Gal. 3v23; Eph. 2v8; Mt. 17v17).

1 Corinthians 12:4-9 does not portray in the very slightest God’s decree to bestow the ability to believe the Gospel only on the elect and NOT universally on all mankind. Paul does not deal with believers and unbelievers with an intent to differentiate between the two groups, especially with regard to salvation. He addresses believers (the church) only and reveals to them the diversity of spiritual gifts the Holy Spirit bestows on individuals so that they may serve the Lord and the church effectively.

The gift of faith mentioned in verse 9 is NOT the alleged gift of faith that enables the elect only to believe on Jesus Christ. Faith in this instance is an unusual measure of trust in God that goes beyond the usual faith exercised by other Christians, for example, 1 Corinthians 13:2. Moreover, these gifts are given for the common good of the body of Christ and not for personal enrichment (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:4; 1 Peter 4:10).

Therefore, this gift of faith cannot be a gift to enable only the elect to believe in Jesus for their salvation because regeneration benefits only the individual and not a corporate group of people. Your salvation does not save others. Others too must be saved individually for their own spiritual and eternal enrichment.

In John 6:29 Jesus does not say that faith is a gift of God which He bestows on the elect only. Calvinists interpret the phrase “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent” as though Jesus said it is God who works the work of faith in an elect person’s resurrected life so that he/she may have the ability to believe. It suggests that Jesus either did not understand their question in verse 28, “What must we do (with emphasis on the “we do”), to be doing the works of God?” or impassively ignored them.

It just shows to what length Calvinists are prepared to go to validate their own agenda. They don’t mind portraying Jesus as an ignoramus who failed to understand the Jews’ question and woefully groped for an answer that completely distorted God’s will in salvation for them.

Barnes says of verse 29 the following:

This is the work of God – This is the thing that will be acceptable to God, or which you are to do in order to be saved. Jesus did not tell them they had nothing to do, or that they were to sit down and wait [until they were monergistically endowed with the gift of faith], but that there was a work to perform, and that was a duty that was imperative. It was to believe on the Messiah. This is the work which sinners are to do [and not God]; and doing this they will be saved, for Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth, Rom 10:4. (Emphasis and parenthesis added)

Walfoord and Zuck in “The Bible Knowledge Commentary”, p 295, says:

6:28. The people recognized that Jesus was saying God had a requirement for them. They would do God’s requirement if He would inform them what it was. They believed that they could please God and thus obtain eternal life by doing good works (cf. Rom. 10:2-4).

6:29. Jesus’ response to their question was a flat contradiction of their thinking. They could not please God by doing good works. There is only one work of God, that is, one thing God requires. They need to put their trust in the One the Father has sent. Because of their sin people cannot please Bod by doing good works for salvation (Eph. 2:8 and 9; Titus 3:5). God demands that people recognize their inability to save themselves and receive His gift (Rom. 6:23). (Emphasis added).

A gift, as we’ve seen earlier, is something you willingly and perceptively receive from the donor, otherwise, it is not a gift. The Calvinist’s gift of faith, on the other hand, is something God imposes on the elect (it is called irresistible grace) without them perceiving or discerning it. That’s why John MacArthur can say “it was not discernable to me.”

Sam proceeds to defend Calvinism with another Strawman argument when he says the following:

“On the 3rd of April 2013 Lessing left the following comment on my responses to Kobus Hattingh:

COMMENT: “How perfectly ironical of you to mention the Pharisees who believed that they were the pristine chosen ones of God because they had Abraham as their father (Mat 3:9; John 8:33) whilst the rest were reprobates on their way to an irredeemable destruction in hell. Like the Pharisees who claimed that they had never been in bondage, Calvinists claim that they have always been Christ’s sheep who have always listened to and obeyed his voice.”

No Calvinist EVER claimed, “that they have always been Christ’s sheep who have always listened to and obeyed his voice”

To the contrary, Calvinists always confirmed their hopeless despair, prior to salvation.” [Thomas’ comment: Notice carefully, he does not say the elect were not sheep but that they were hopeless in despair prior to salvation. Indeed, who is not hopeless in despair prior to salvation? The Bible says all of mankind are like sheep, hopeless in despair and lost prior to salvation – Isaiah 53: 6).”

This is one of the most astounding confessions a Calvinist has ever made. Calvinists, and especially men like John MacArthur, persistently misquote John 10:15 by saying “and I lay down my life for MY sheep,” instead of “THE sheep” to prove that Jesus only died for the elect and not the reprobate who are allegedly the goats. The Calvinist Corner provides a good summary of the Five Points of Calvinism. Under the heading “Limited Atonement” the author says:

“Limited Atonement:

Jesus died only for the elect. Though Jesus’ sacrifice was sufficient for all, it was not efficacious for all. Jesus only bore the sins of the elect. Support for this position is drawn from such scriptures as Matt. 26:28 where Jesus died for ‘many’; John 10:11, 15 which say that Jesus died for the sheep (not the goats, per Matt. 25:32-33); John 17:9 where Jesus in prayer interceded for the ones given Him, not those of the entire world; Acts 20:28 and Eph. 5:25-27 which state that the Church was purchased by Christ, not all people; and Isaiah 53:12 which is a prophecy of Jesus’ crucifixion where he would bore the sins of many (not all).”

If, as Sam says in rebuttal to my assertion above, “No Calvinist EVER claimed, “that they have always been Christ’s sheep who have always listened to and obeyed his voice,” then he is, in reality, conceding to the fact that Calvinists were goats before their monergistic regeneration. What else could they have been other than goats if they’d not always been sheep who always listened to Jesus Christ’s voice?

Isn’t that what Jesus said in John 10:28-30? As you may have noticed already, this poses a huge problem for Calvinists because it suggests that Jesus actually died for some goats, albeit the elect goats. In fact, we now enter an entirely new ball game, one that has a completely new set of rules and regulations of which the following is the most important:

“John 10:11, 15 says that Jesus died for the elect goats (not the reprobate goats, per Matt. 25:32-33).”

They may, however, argue that they’ve always been sheep, regardless of the fact that they hadn’t always been the sheep of Jesus Christ’s fold, but sheep nevertheless, and never, but never goats who are always associated with the reprobate, as per Matthew 25:32-33.

If we were to assume that this is correct we would have to ask: “Would they have been lost and gone to hell if they’d (as sheep nevertheless) never been added to Christ’s sheepfold so that they, as His full-blooded sheep, could hear and obey his voice?” Well no, of course not, they would argue, because God’s decrees are unchangeable and his purpose cannot fail.

The elect sheep who are presently his sheep but do not listen to and obey his voice because they are not yet in his fold (as Sam confirms) will inevitably become the sheep of his fold so that they may listen to and obey his voice because God’s decrees cannot be thwarted or annulled.

If this is true, it is reasonable to assume that the elect cannot possibly and will never be lost which in turn means that they had always been saved in God’s mind from the eternities past. Even a Calvinist cannot dispute the fact that once God has settled something in his mind, no matter how many eons ago, it will come to pass, come hell or high water.

Therefore, the elect were irreversibly saved even in their pre-regenerated, pre-obedience to Christ’s voice, pre-Christ’s sheep-fold-sheep condition, simply because God’s sovereign decree concerning their predestination and election before the foundation of the world cannot and will not be overturned.

That is why a Calvinist like John Mac Arthur can say “I have always believed” and an anonymous Calvinist on YouTube commented that “The Bible never says that God’s people were ever bound for hell, it says they were chosen ‘in Christ before the foundation of the world.'” (Ephesians 1:4). . . . “Many of God’s children believe this to mean that they are going to hell. They are not. That is why they need to hear the good news of their salvation so that they can believe it, rejoice in it, and profit from it. The gospel doesn’t make their salvation true, their salvation IS TRUE and the gospel proclaims it to the Lord’s people who receive it by faith and profit from that understanding.” His words “their salvation ‘IS TRUE’ simply means they have always been saved and never lost.

Sam regularly shoots himself in the foot which proves that, although he pretends to know so much about Calvinism, he doesn’t have a clue what it really represents. If Jesus died for the sheep (the elect) only and not the goats (the reprobate), as Calvinists so vigorously and progressively proclaim, then it is extremely dangerous to put the elect in the goats’ and not in the sheep’s fold, and that’s precisely what Sam has done when he said: “No Calvinist EVER claimed, “that they have always been Christ’s sheep who have always listened to and obeyed his voice,” unless, of course, he means that the elect was NOT something so repugnant as goats but rather benign animals such as doves or little bunnies or even little mice before they became Christ Jesus’ sheep.


There is not a single verse in Scripture that substantiates CALVINISM. And yet JACOB PRASCH (the Oscar-winning Jewish Midrash railer) hails John MacArthur and Paul Washer as true men of God. (2 John 9-11).

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. (Proverbs 14:12)

Please share:

Tom Lessing (Discerning the World)

Tom Lessing is the author of the above article. Discerning the World is an internet Christian Ministry based in Johannesburg South Africa. Tom Lessing and Deborah Ellish both own Discerning the World. For more information see the About this Website page below the comments section.

28 Responses

  1. Sharon says:

    I know that no one here is out for complements. But let me say anyway that this is one of the finest articles I have read concerning Calvinism. Thanks for the hard work & love that was put into this article. Blessings.

  2. Disappointed says:

    Brother, it is such a shame to see such a lengthy and bitter article condeming the beautiful doctrines of grace, from someone who clearly is so totally ignorant of of the actual meaning of them. The five sola’s rightfully give all the Glory to God, praise His glorious name. To say that you twisted these ideas and some of the quotes would be a serious understatement. Election eliminates pride, not gives a believer something to boast in. If you believe in Christ, its because you were called to, that’s all election means. Its because God opened your heart to hear it. To say salvation was your choice, your doing, is to rob the Lord of his glory, and that is is the proud, self-righteous view, not Calvinism. It scares me to think that this ignorant article could possibly hearden somebody’s heart to the doctrines of grace, and to the true meaning of these scriptures that you have stumbled and stomped all over.

  3. Disappointed wrote:

    It scares me to think that this ignorant article could possibly hearden somebody’s heart to the doctrines of grace, and to the true meaning of these scriptures that you have stumbled and stomped all over.

    How can this ignorant article possibly harden anyone’s heart when Calvinists believe man is as dead as a corpse in sins and transgressions and therefore completely unable (because of their total depravity or inability) to understand the Gospel and respond to it in faith? A corpse no longer has a living heart and therefore cannot be hardened in any which way possible, least of all though this article.

    The term “doctrines of grace” was adopted to circumvent the word “Calvinism” which has become a curse because of it’s association with the serial killer – John Calvin. It is NOT doctrines of grace but doctrines of Calvin’s scourge. You aint seen nuttin yet. Read this article. It will knock your socks off.

    And by the way I’m not your brother.

    But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” (Matthew 12:48-50).

    Calvinists are diametrically opposed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and are therefore not doing the will of the Father. In stead, they are twisting and distorting the Gospel in their loving relationship of brotherhood with Satan and teaching the world that God does not love everyone and that Christ did not die for everyone. Do you call that doctrines of grace? Are you crazy?

    OK, explain to us the real covert meaning of Calvinism since I have stumbled and stomped over it. Let’s begin with a simple question. How do you know you are one of the elect?

    Learn from this what true biblical grace means.

    For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, (Titus 2:11).

    Are the “all people” only the elect?

    The term “doctrines of grace” is a hypocritical cover-up to hide the abominable hatred Calvinists have for the so-called reprobate. And why shouldn’t they hate them when they are merely following their god’s example to hate the non-elect?

  4. Terry T says:

    Disappointed wrote:

    Brother, it is such a shame to see such a lengthy and bitter article condeming the beautiful doctrines of grace, from someone who clearly is so totally ignorant of of the actual meaning of them. The five sola’s rightfully give all the Glory to God, praise His glorious name. To say that you twisted these ideas and some of the quotes would be a serious understatement. Election eliminates pride, not gives a believer something to boast in. If you believe in Christ, its because you were called to, that’s all election means. Its because God opened your heart to hear it. To say salvation was your choice, your doing, is to rob the Lord of his glory, and that is is the proud, self-righteous view, not Calvinism. It scares me to think that this ignorant article could possibly hearden somebody’s heart to the doctrines of grace, and to the true meaning of these scriptures that you have stumbled and stomped all over.

    It is very sad. Yes, there are proud men who call themselves Calvinists, just as there are proud men everywhere on the face of the earth. Pride is the seat of our affliction and misery. If God alone does not save me, I will not be saved. I am ungodly, He is God. I have no righteousness of my own. Nothing.

  5. Terry T,

    None of us have any righteousness of our own and therefore we need to call on the Name of the Lord for our salvation. Calvinists believe that man is completely unable to call on the Name of the Lord because he is as dead as a corpse in sins and transgressions. God first needs to regenerate the elect monergistically (save the elect without them having to put their trust in Jesus because they are allegedly unable to do so) and only then – after their monergistic salvation – are the elect given faith as a gift. And this is what they mean when they say they give God all the glory. That’s not giving God all the glory. That’s making God a dictator who chose to send all the non-elect to hell and allegedly save only the elect because He loves them and hates the non-elect. Rubbish!

    In Calvinistic terms “sovereignty = dictatorship.”

  6. Jumpy says:

    Terry T,
    You have indeed put it in a few words, better than my most miserable efforts.
    Thomas goes on at great length about “monergism”, but that is fine by me, and doubtless many others.
    If he is one of God’s elect, then truly, at the last Day, he will thank God for it.
    Many in the history of Christianity, most notably Wesley, railed against Election/Pre-destination (not unlike Mr Lessing). The matter of Wesley and Augustus Toplady, with the latter’s work on Zanchius,(the doctrine of reprobation) caused much bitterness within the Faith “once delivered unto the saints” Jude 1.3.
    Spurgeon “The Calvinist of Calvinists” said of Arminian Wesley, “I believe he will be the first man I will see in heaven!” This IS the man famous for saying “Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing less”! Arminianism (free-will), be it embraced as a stronghold of Popery, many blood bought believers do errantly hold to. Wesley was NO Romanist, he preached, and wrote against it, but faithfully preached salvation by the “blood of Christ alone”. Spurgeon, not unlike Toplady, hated unbiblical Arminian theology, but he had the grace to know that theology alone is not the key to salvation, but only the “grace of God” alone, Ephesians 2.8, many other Scriptures of the “Doctrines of Grace” may be adduced.

  7. Jumpy,

    If Calvinism is the Gospel and Wesley was not a Calvinist then he cannot be in heaven, now can he? Spurgeon either woefully contradicted himself or he was trying to force Wesley into heaven.

    Didn’t Jesus say,

    The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel (Calvinism)? (Mark 1:15).

    If Jesus said only Calvinism (the Gospel aka Charles Spurgeon) gets you to heaven, then Wesley cannot be in heaven.

    How odd of you to associate Arminianism ( I am NOT and Arminian) with Roman Catholicism when Calvin’s book “The Institutes of the Chirstian Religion” is an RCC treatise on Augustine’s beliefs. Calvin mentions the greatest Roman Catholic of all time – Augustine – on just about every page of his book.

    “Theology” means to study (hear – Romans 10:17) the Word of God to gain a knowledge of God. If a knowledge of God alone is not the key to salvation, then Jesus was a liar who said,

    And this is life eternal, that they might know (“ginoski” – to understand) thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (John 17:3)

    It simply means you need to understand (know) God and his Son through His own revelation of Himself in his Word. Indeed, God reveals Himself as the essence of love, righteousness. mercy, lovingkindeness, graciousness, justice. And yet Calvinists say that God – who is the essence of love – does not love all people. This is not a true “ginosko” (knowledge of God) and can therefore not lead to eternal life, as Jesus said.

    Your God is “election” and not the God of the Bible. So, the best thing to do is to repent by learning and understanding who God and his Son really are and to repudiate Calvinism with every breath you still have in you. It’s a lie from the pit of hell.

    And by the by,I am not going on abvout monergism. Don’t blame me. You and your friends, the Calvinists, are the culprits who invented monergism.

  8. Martin Horan says:

    Intereting comment, Thomas.
    Spurgeon himself wrote the following: “I know there are some who think it necessary to their system of theology to limit the merit of the blood of Jesus: if my theological system needed such limitation, I would cast it to the winds. I cannot, dare not, allow the thought to find lodging in my mind, it seems so near akin to blasphemy. In Christ’s work I see an ocean of merit; my plummet finds no bottom, my eye discerns no shore. There must be sufficient efficacy in the blood of Christ, if God had so willed it, not to have saved only all in this world, but all in ten thousand worlds….
    Spurgeon often contradicted himself, as he did a bit with the “if God so willed it. However, regarding that quote, as the late Dave Hunt pointed out: “On the other hand, that Spurgeon believed salvation was available to all mankind is evident from many of his sermons. The contradiction is clear–a fact that Calvinists are reluctant to admit. Thus Ihave been wrongly accused of misrepresenting, and even misquoting, C.H.Spurgeon.”
    In fact, limited atonement never existed until Augustine, whom the Catholic church sees as one of their greatest ever theologians. That’s why the Catholic church has Augustinian monks. Calvin made no secret of esteeming Augustine, as did Luther.
    I cannot understand why any Bible-believing Christian would esteem any mere fallible man on what seems to be a par with infallible popes. And especially so a man like Calivin who certainly did not do unto others as he would have been done by. That was one reason he was called the Protestant Pope. But for the same people to esteem Augustine–a great exemplar as far as the Church of Rome is concerned–is scarcely credible.
    I gave up debating with a friend who was a Calvinist. He would only retort in our correspondence and would never actually answer questions. When he called me childish and “Still a Catholic” I realised he had no intention of answering the questions I put to him. I have read of Dave Hunt’s debates with Calvinists and I notice the Calvinists descend into accusations. I feel that is what you will find yourself dealing with, Thomas.

  9. Martin Horan,

    Indeed, I have had many years of experience to know that Calvinists descend into accustations whenever they fail to answer questions. Why then should we debate them? To warn others who or on the verge of being sucked into the maelstrom of Calvinism and do not know they are being sucked in by their two-faced double-talk. Charles Spurgeon said:

    You must not expect that you will be perfect in ‘repentance’ before you are saved. No Christian can be perfect. ‘Repentance’ is a grace. Some people preach it as a condition of salvation. Condition of nonsense! There are no conditions of salvation. God gives the salvation himself…” —Charles Spurgeon (SOURCE: (Charles Spurgeon, from a sermon titled, REPENTANCE UNTO LIFE, preached at the New Park Street Chapel, Southwark, on Sept. 23, 1855).

    Now let’s see,

    1) “You must not expect that you will be perfect in ‘repentance’ before you are saved.” This is pure Calvinism which says that God needs to first save the elect before they can repent perfectly. What’s he saying? That anyone who assumes to repent in order to be saved is following an imperfect repentence and is therefore not truly saved.
    2) “No Chriatian is perfect.” Of course no Christian is perfect but what has that got to do with repentance and salvation?
    3) “Repentance is a grace. Some people preach it as a condition. Condition of nonsense! There are no conditions of salvaiton” Is faith in Christ’s finished work on the cross nonsense? Faith IS the condition for salvation. Anyone who does not believe in Jesus and his finished work on the cross cannot be saved. Period. Here again Spurgeon preaches the Calvinist view of grace which is NOT the biblical rendition of grace.
    4) “God gives the salvation Himself . . .” Of course it is God who grants salvation but He grants it only to those who believe on his Son, Jesus Christ. This again is the condition. Spurgeon means that God grants salvation Himself only to the elect and this granting is a monergistic and not a synergistic kind of granting.

    By the by, It is not only Calvinists who descend into accusations. You only need to read some of the other comments dealing with other non-Calvinistic issues to realize that they all follow the same tactic – accusation upon accusation upon accusation are flung at you.

  10. Martin

    As Tom pointed out, Charles Spurgeon was indeed a Calvinist who believed in all the tennents of TULIP. If someone quotes him favourably it’s because they actually have not sat down and studied the man’s words properly. And when you do take a look at Spurgeon it does not take you long to see that he spoke from two sides of his mouth – he was and still is (because people still read his sermons today) a very dangerous man.

  11. Martin Horan says:

    Hi Thomas, Hi Debs. Thank you both for correcting me on that one. I didn’t realise that Spurgeon was a Five-Point Calvinist. I had always thought that Spurgeon was fairly sound. I thought, as he said what he quoted above, that he wasn’t a real Calvinist. I had assumed that He did not believe in limited atonement. I was not aware, as you say, Debs, that he spoke from both sides of his mouth.
    I know what you man about accusations, Thomas. There is, as you both know, a big difference between contending for the faith once delivered [Jude 3] and accusations. I may have mentioned this before: a former friend of mine (his choice of being a former one judging by has accusations towards me, showed me that I didn’t have a debating point with him. I found it sad as he had been a person I liked very much. His Calvinism turned him into a person who would not answer question but rather retort in accusations. But as you say, it is not only Calvinists who do his. I have seen it with people on sites regarding the rapture. I believe in it because I see it in the Scriptures and if I was shown it to be false from the Scriptures, I would hope that I would discard it. On one site an anti-rapture believer called me a coward for believing it. So I see what you mean, Thomas, about some folk dealing with non-Calvinisic issues. Such people think that by showing you it’s a waste of time debating with them that they have won the argument.

  12. John says:

    Everybody’s a teacher with impeccable doctrine… ….I’ve played this game before and I could circle stomp know it all’s all the live long day. At 50+ years old I now see it was Lust. It so much easier than feeding the poor in Christ’ name

    Calvinism & Armin go beyond what is written. As do secret raptures, we must have Tongues, immersion, ….we know them all and we know people have been Lit on Freaking Fire over people believing They are apostles.

    The Simplicity of Christ is so liberating and if all these so called leaders and teachers would man a soup kitchen instead of data mining every line of scripture to make absolutely sure they will attract adversaries (who are in most cases Brothers) maybe we would be One as Jesus prayed.

    Oh how wretched we are. We Lust for arguments ,seek them out so we can do nothing good. Don’t go beyond what is written and have faith that God will do what’s right. Condemn the countless lustful self aggrandizing proclamations that litter the forums and blogs and Trust Jesus, for He is the Christ.

  13. John,

    Feeding the poor is not enough. It won’t get them into heaven. When John the Baptist was in jail, awaiting his demise, he sent some of his disciples to ask Jesus whether He was the One that should come. Jesus sent someone back telling John, “The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.” (Matthew 11:5). So, you better preach the Gospel to the poor and not only give them something to eat and something to keep them warm. That will only send them to hell with a tummy filled with bread and their hides kept warm. However, make sure that you do not preach heresy like Calvinism to them because that definitely won’t get them into heaven.

    Your criticism sounds very pious but you don’t say much because God says: –

    Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. (Jude 1:3)

    You sound like one of those do-goody Emergent Churchy guys who only want to help the poor because helping the poor is supposedly the so-called incarnational gospel which is no gospel at all. You should preach the Gospel to all people – kings, queens, governors, laymen, the rich and the poor. Then and then alone will you be doing something good.

  14. Stephanie Nell says:

    The doctrines of disgrace are the doctrines of Satan himself. THAT is calvinism.

  15. Dear Stephanie Nell

    Short and sweet AND the truth as you put it so succinctly.

  16. Paeng says:

    Follow Jesus Christ of the Scriptures, that’s it. I’m sensing so much hate over arguing on these things..what we need to do is just to preach the Gospel of Christ. Then practice what we preach. The writer seems to be just waiting for a brother to say a bit of mistake then grumbles. Preach where no one knows you except God and hell. God because He is pleased, hell because hell hates you. Preach the Gospel and show Christlikeness, by the empowerment of the Spirit in us.

  17. Agreed! Let’s preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ which says He loves everyone and died for everyone because He wants everyone to be saved. Calvinism is NOT this Gospel. It is another gospel with another Jesus and another spirit. It cannot save because lies are from the devil (John 8:44) and cannot redeem anyone.

    Paeng, have you studied Calvinism and what they believe?

  18. Lila says:

    I just wanted to thank you for such an excellent, thoughtful and crucial article. I would not have understood this before I was truly saved and born again but for the love of Jesus Christ.

    I was brought up Christian. My classmate was a Calvinist and together with my close friend we used to debate God; my close friend would not believe in such a cruel God and till today, lives in the dark. I did not know what a false gospel it was back then and was unwittingly poisoned all these years. Now I can stand strong in my corrected view and speak the truth in love to the God who wants all men to be saved! Your work is incredibly edifying and honoring to God. God bless your souls and may the Spirit of truth open the eyes of everyone reading this article!

  19. heather says:

    Thank you for this post. You made a lot of great, thoughtful points. I have recently started a blog against Calvinism (after our church was taken over by a Calvinist pastor), and I am adding a link to your post on it. Thank you, and God bless! (The blog is

  20. Hi Heather :hi:

    Yes, Calvinists have a track record of taking over other peoples churches, it happens all the time, so much so that Baptist churches had to split into Independent Baptist churches to try distinguish themselves from Calvinists – but even then, one is not guaranteed that a church that declares itself an Independent Baptist church is not Calvinist.

    I’m glad you don’t allow comments on your blog, you’d be over-run by Calvinists attacking you from all angles.

  21. Andrew James Patton says:

    You rightly call out the hypocrisies and blasphemies of Calvinism. Nevertheless, you also teach error. First, because you do not confess that God can regenerate infants, even though God’s Covenant with Abraham decreed that every male was to be initiated by circumcision on the eighth day, and that those who remained uncircumcised were cut off. Second, you say that Paul never doubted his salvation, but that is not true. Rather, Paul refused to judge himself, instead saying, “I know of nothing against me, but that does not leave me acquitted; it is God who judges.” Rather than speaking with certitude about his own salvation or anyone else’s, he warned people to “work out your salvation with fear and trembling,” while he crucified his own flesh to be conformed to Christ. Our salvation is not secure until we hear Christ say, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”

  22. Andrew James Patton. I really think you should read my article again because you are accusing me of things I never said. Here’s a question. Are you saved, and if so, why do you doubt your salvation? I also think you should read Philippians 2:12 again because it does not mean what you think it means.

  23. christopher owen says:

                     The 5 real Solas of ” reformed theology”

    ” Scripture alone ” = philosophy alone
    ” Faith alone ” = regeneration alone
    ” Grace alone ” = forcible seizure alone
    ” Christ alone ” = election alone
    ” To the glory of God alone ” = to the glory of God correcting theologians alone ”

    Reformed theology = Manachean gnosticism dressed in clever philosophical presuppositionally front loaded pre text for proof texts to explain why the Bible doesn’t mean what it says

  24. Dear Tom,

    My highest commendation for your article equating Pharisees with Calvinism! On a scale 1-=10 I award you with a 12.”

    Here are some of Calvin’s vitriolic misogynist quotes against women:

    “On the first post-resurrection appearance of Jesus to women rather than to men: “I consider this was done by way of reproach, because they [the men] had been so tardy and sluggish to believe. And indeed, they deserve not only to have women for their teachers, but even oxen and asses. . . . Yet it pleased the Lord, by means of those weak and contemptible vessels, to give display of his power.”“On this account, all women are born that they may acknowledge themselves as inferior in consequence to the superiority of the male sex.”

    “. . . there is no absurdity in the same person commanding and likewise obeying when viewed in different relations. But this does not apply to the case of woman, who by nature (that is, by the ordinary law of God) is formed to obey; for γυναικοκρατία (the government of women) has always been regarded by all wise persons as a monstrous thing; and, therefore, so to speak, it will be a mingling of heaven and earth, if women usurp the right to teach. Accordingly, he bids them be “quiet,” that is, keep within their own rank.”

    A different translation of the last line is, “He therefore commands them to remain in silence; that is, to keep within their limits and the condition of their sex.”

    …“Now Moses shews that the woman was created afterwards, in order that she might be a kind of appendage to the man; and that she was joined to the man on the express condition, that she should be at hand to render obedience to him. (Genesis 2:21) Since, therefore, God did not create two chiefs of equal power, but added to the man an inferior aid, the apostle [Paul] justly reminds us of that order of creation in which the eternal and inviolable appointment of God is strikingly displayed.” JOHN CALVIN

    I invite you to read my “25 Reasons Why Augustine Was Not A Saint, The Weaponization of Christianity” (Augustine was Calvin’s veery foundation).

    This is all going into my now 900+ page book exposing Augustine and Calvin where I will recommend Tom Lessing.

    In Him Alone,


  25. James Sundquist says:

    Dear Tom,
    Just re-read your article and discovered a handful of typos I think you will want to spellcheck and fix.


  26. Dear Tom,

    Your demolition of the Principality of Amillennialism is seismic because it totally refutes Sam Waldron’s Amillennialism at:
    “End Times Made Simple”: Amillennialism w/ Dr. Sam Waldron

    Ironically, Waldron collides with John MacArthur in another Ytube video.

    Well done thy good and faithful servant!


  27. Thanks James. I will correct the typos as soon as I can.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *