Calvinism has often been called "the flower that changed the
world." The seed thoughts of this theology, however, were
planted long before the time of John Calvin. In fact, the seeds of
Calvinism were being planted toward the close of the fourth century.
Augustine (345-430 AD) is credited with planting the seed thoughts that
John Calvin (1509-1564) would eventually systematize and popularize much
later.
Augustine taught that, because of the fall of Adam, all humanity,
even infants, are totally depraved (sinful). According to Augustine,
this condition destroyed the human will and left man in the position of
being helpless servants of sin. The only way that they could overcome
such a condition was said to be by a direct and miraculous operation of
the Holy Spirit. Essentially, Augustine initiated the doctrine of
"Original Sin," which states that all men are sinful from
birth and that all generations have inherited sin from Adam – Adam’s
sin in the Garden of Eden is said to have contaminated the human race
and is inherent in the human family bloodline. Augustine also taught
that since man was so depraved and sinful that it took a working of God
to save man. The Holy Spirit was said to be directly responsible in
regenerating the human heart. His doctrine taught that man was so sinful
he did not even have the capacity or the "free will" to
respond to God. Man was so corrupt God had to directly and miraculously
infuse His Spirit into the heart of the sinner in order for him to
respond to God and to do good.
As the years passed by, teacher after teacher espoused and expanded
upon Augustine’s theory – that man was born totally depraved as a
consequence of Adam’s fall. Ultimately, John Calvin synthesized this
false teaching into a systematic doctrine. Calvin was born to Roman
Catholic parents in Noyon, France on July 10, 1509. His father, a
lawyer, was determined that John would become a Roman Catholic priest.
When Calvin was fourteen, he began studies at the University of Paris.
He attended the University of Orleans in 1528 to study law. While there,
he became captivated with classical literature. When his father died in
1531, he returned to Paris to study the literary classics. It was in
1533 that he experienced a sudden and emotional conversion, which would
change his entire course of life.
In 1533 he abandoned Roman Catholicism and began promoting
"reformation ideas" in opposition to the Roman Catholic
Church. After his conversion from Roman Catholicism, he spent three
years in seclusion. During this time he authored the "Institutes of
Christian Religion" and in 1536 (age 26) he published his first
edition. As Calvin’s theology began to take on more shape, it
eventually took on a name of its own; Calvinism. He did not refer to it
as such himself but because he was the principle party responsible for
articulating and expounding on the doctrine of original sin and the
necessity of a miraculous and effectual working of the Spirit to
overcome man’s depravity, these doctrines became know as Calvinism.
Calvinism contains five basic tenets or planks: (1) Men are totally
depraved by virtue of inheriting such a sinful nature from their parents
and ancestors. (2) God has chosen a definite number of people from all
eternity to be recipients of eternal life, without faith or works or any
other thing on the part of man as a condition. (3) Jesus died only for
those whom God elected to be saved. His atonement was limited. The
benefits of His death were not for all men. (4) Only those who were
elected, and for whom Christ died, would receive the direct operation of
the Holy Spirit. The miraculous power, exerted upon their hearts by the
Holy Spirit, would be irresistible. (5) The elect saints will always
persevere in their relationship with God. Such persons cannot fall away
and be lost. These five planks of Calvinism can be summarized and easily
recalled by means of a well-known acrostic:
T
otal Hereditary Depravity
U
nconditional Election
L
imited Atonement
I
rresistible Grace
P
erseverance of the Saints
As you can see, combining the first letter of each of the
five major premises of Calvinism gives us the word "TULIP." Hence,
the flower that changed the world is the "TULIP" of Calvinism.
Growing out of his work in Switzerland in 1541, Calvinism was introduced
into Scotland, England, and Ireland. It was staunchly upheld by Puritans
and Scotch-Irish Presbyterians in the American colonies from the early
1600s to the mid 1740s. Then revivalism under Jonathan Edwards (1703–1758)
and others forced change. Continuing modifications have revised the system
of Calvinism further. Today, Calvinism survives as the basic theological
stance of most denominations and there is hardly a denomination on the
face of the earth that has not been tainted by the doctrine of Calvinism.
Therefore, the doctrine of Calvinism has not only revolutionized the
religious world; it has also impacted the secular arena as well.
Of course, this is not to say that all denominations
embrace all aspects of Calvinism. Some do not take the whole flower, but
select certain petals of the flower, which suit their particular
theological fancy. In modern-day denominationalism, a modified Calvinism
is very prevalent. The modifications to Calvinism account for the
differences between Primitive Baptists, Free Will Baptists, Southern
Baptists, Presbyterians, and Reformed Churches. In fact, even the Catholic
Church teaches certain aspects of Calvinism, though Calvin was an opponent
of Catholicism. Therefore, Calvinism has evolved since the 1500s and not
every denomination accepts all five tenets of the Calvinistic theory but
they still cling to most of them.
Today, modified Calvinism still maintains three original
and dominant planks of this theological system and have boiled them down
to: (1) Man is born in sin. They still maintain the doctrine of
Total, Hereditary Depravity. Total means all, whole complete. Hereditary
means one receives it from his parents, which in turn comes from Adam –
hence, Adamic, original sin. Depravity means bad, wicked, evil. Thus every
person born into this world is, at birth, thoroughly, utterly sinful – a
little devil. (2) The Holy Spirit regenerates the sinner directly.
Man can do nothing to effect his deliverance from his unhappy state of
depravity. Man is wholly passive in his redemption. The "enabling
power" of the Holy Spirit must regenerate the totally wicked sinner
before he can respond to the call of the gospel. This "direct
operation" of the Holy Spirit is performed without the subject’s
will or choice. Since one is totally dead, he must be given life before he
can act. Therefore, the Holy Spirit, without means or agency, regenerates
and gives life to the soul. (3) Those regenerated cannot die. Once
the Spirit infuses life, that life cannot be lost – "once saved,
always saved." As man cannot undo his fleshly birth, so he cannot
surrender his spiritual birth. "Once in grace, always in grace."
I believe this is an adequate description of modern Calvinism and is a
fair representation of the creeds and beliefs of denominationalism. Let’s
now analyze all three planks of modern Calvinism.
Man is Born in Sin (Total, Hereditary Depravity)
There is much Scripture, which defeats the false doctrine
of total hereditary depravity that it is difficult to know where to begin.
First of all, there is nothing in the Bible or even in Genesis about Adam
and Eve’s act of disobedience changing their nature. It may have changed
their location (kicked out of the Garden) but there is not a shred of
Biblical evidence that the sin imparted a depravity to Adam’s soul that
would be passed down to all succeeding generations. None!
An important distinction is made in Hebrews 12:9, where
the writer speaks of "fathers of out flesh" and the
"Father of our spirits." We know that our spirit came
from God and that it will return to Him (Eccl.12:7). It is God that forms
our spirit within us (Zec.12:1). We are the offspring of God (Acts 17:29).
Therefore, if it is true (and it is not) that man inherits sin, from
whence does he receive it? To study the theory of Calvinism we need to go
back to the root of it all, to the Garden of Eden and Adam & Eve.
If the alleged doctrine of "total, hereditary
depravity" is true (and it is not), then there must, of
necessity, be a "total, hereditary righteousness." That
is, Adam was created, body, soul and spirit by God Himself. Adam did not
experience the human birth process. He came directly from God. Therefore,
he was totally, hereditarily righteous. His parent, the Creator, had no
sin and he was sinless at birth. The question is then, if we are born
totally, hereditarily depraved and can do no good, how could Adam, born
totally, hereditarily righteous, do any evil? Calvinists must address this
question and not back pedal. When they answer it, they will dissolve their
position, but answer it they must!
If there is a direct operation of the Holy Spirit on our
hearts, to regenerate our dead hearts, then there must have been a direct
operation of the devil on Adam’s heart that made him sin. Adam was born
totally, hereditarily righteous, therefore, there must have been a direct
operation of an unholy spirit on Adam’s heart to give him death and
enable him to sin. If a totally depraved individual requires a direct
working of the Spirit on his heart to give him life, why would not a
totally righteous man require a direct working of the devil on his heart
to give him death and enable him to obey the devil?
Our Calvinist friends repeatedly tell us that we are dead
in trespasses and sins (Eph.2:1; Col.2:13), and as a dead man cannot act
until he is given life, so sinners cannot act or respond to God until the
Spirit gives him life. However, Adam was just as "dead TO
sins" (Rom.6:2; Col.3:3; 1Pet.2:24) as the sinner is said to be
"dead IN sins." Therefore, it must have taken a
direct work of the devil on Adam’s heart to enable him to sin. If not
why not? If one is dead IN sins and is unable to effect
righteousness until the Spirit gives him spiritual life, then the one who
is dead TO sin is unable to effect unrighteousness until the devil
works on his heart and gives him spiritual death. Adam was dead TO
sin yet he was able to sin without a miraculous act of the devil on his
heart. So, one who is dead IN sins is able to obey God without a
miraculous act of the Holy Spirit on his heart? If not, why not?
Adam was led to sin by the spoken word of the devil. By
means of lying, deceit and enticement, Adam was led to sin (Gen.3:1-6;
Jas.1:13-15). The devil’s word allured this totally righteous man - this
man who was dead TO sins and by the devil, Adam was led to commit
sin and die. Therefore, and contrariwise, God can allure the totally
depraved man, the man dead IN sins, to obey God and live (Jn.5:25).
Otherwise, the word of the devil is more powerful than the word of God.
Here is the corner in which Calvinism backs itself. Also, Calvinism wants
us to believe in "once saved, always saved." Well, then, by
necessity there must be "once lost, always lost." Once Adam
sinned he should have been completely and utterly lost – irretrievably
lost. He should not have been able to hear the word of God and respond to
it after he died spiritually. However, is this what happened? Calvinism
says that when the totally depraved sinner receives life, he is unable to
respond to the call of the devil – that he cannot be led to eternal
ruin. Yet, Adam could hear and obey God after his sin (Gen.3:7ff). But, we
are told that the regenerated child of God cannot hear or obey the devil
after his regeneration. But since Adam could hear, reason, and follow God
after his fall, then, the saved one can hear, reason, and follow the devil
after his salvation (2 Pet.3:17; Heb.3:12). Those who support Calvinism,
in part or in whole, must answer these questions and this dilemma
presented for them. To do so will only inspire them to give up their silly
proposition. Adam, as well as all of us, have been given Free Will, that
is volitionism – the power to choose and to decide for ourselves. We are
not puppets on a string or machines that God operates. Ultimately, we will
either choose to follow God and His ways or follow the devil and his ways.
God did not make Adam to sin or give him a sinful nature, nor does He
impart a sinful nature unto His offspring (you & me).
The Bible clearly denies the notion that that the child
will bear the iniquity of the parent. In fact, there are passages, which
explicitly deny the transmission of sin from parent to child. Consider the
following passages:
"Fathers shall not be put to death for their
children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; a person
shall be put to death for his own sin" (Deut.24:16).
"Yet you , ‘Why should the son not bear the guilt
of the father?’ Because the son has done what is lawful and right, and
has kept all My statutes and observed them, he shall surely live" The
soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father,
nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the
righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be
upon himself (Ezek.18:19-20).
Could language be any plainer? According to God’s word
there is no imputation of sin transmitted from the father to his
offspring. None! Well, someone might say that if do not inherit sin from
our father than we must get it from our mother. First of all, The Hebrew
language generally puts the masculine as standing for the feminine. By
saying the Fathers, it is implied the mothers as well. For instance, males
were circumcised not females. When males were made clean they represented
all of Israel, including females.
Furthermore, if we do receive sins passed on from our
mothers, then what would that imply our Lord, Jesus Christ? It would imply
that He was born a sinner, because He was born of a human mother. It is
often said that extremes beget extremes, and this is certainly true. The
Catholic church invented the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (the
notion that Mary was miraculously born without inheriting the Adamic
nature from her parents) in order to avoid having to explain how Jesus
could be born into this world totally depraved and still be qualified to
be our Savior. Of course, there is not a shred of Scripture to
substantiate such an outrageous doctrine. None!
Moreover, if we can inherit the guilt of the sins of our
parents, then can we also inherit their righteousness? After the flood,
eight righteous souls were saved to repopulate the earth. But, wait a
minute. How did these righteous souls impart a totally depraved nature to
their offspring? The flood had killed all of the wicked and depraved
people on the earth. How can righteous people impart a totally depraved
nature? They can’t!
Those supporting modern Calvinism usually point out some
of their favorite verses as "proof-texts" for their doctrines.
Personally, I am in favor of providing proof-texts as long as they are
indeed "proof." If one is simply going to provide us a
particular passage, which is in conflict with other Bible passages or if
one provides a passage and take but takes it out of context, then all one
is providing is his own doctrine rather than God’s. Let’s analyze some
of these passages that have become Calvinism’s "sugarstick."
Many will turn to Romans 5:12 and 1 Corinthians 15:22 as
proof-texts for the doctrine total, hereditary depravity. It needs to be
pointed out that the context of both these passages has to do with
physical death, not spiritual death. The death that came or comes upon ALL
men is physical death. As a consequence of Adam’s sin, we will all die
physically (Heb.9:27). However, as a result of Jesus’ resurrection, we
may live again.
We should not confuse suffering the consequences of Adam’s
sin as equivalent to suffering the guilt of Adam’s sin. They are vastly
different in scope and nature. Children of alcoholic parents usually
suffer the consequences of their parent’s actions. However, who would
make the charge that the child is actually guilty of their parent’s
transgressions? The sins of the fathers do have far reaching consequences
in the lives of their children (1 Sam.8:10-18; 2 Kings 20:14-18;
Deut.28:15,32). The children of later generations can suffer because of
the punishment meted out by God to their wicked fathers (Ex.20:5), but it
is not true that the children of the third and fourth generations inherit
the guilt of their fathers (Deut.24:16; 2 Kings 14:6; Eze.18:20). On the
other hand, if the children of the fathers engaged in the same sins as
their fathers, they were promised punishment as well (Psa.106:6;
Jer.16:10-13; 44:21; Mal.3:7).
Another set of Scriptures often cited can be found in
Psalm 51:5 and Ephesians 2:3. The question often asked is, "If we don
not inherit the sin of our fathers, then why did David say that he born in
sin? And why did Paul say the Ephesians "were by nature the
children of wrath, even as others"? If it wasn’t for the system
of Calvinism searching so desperately for Biblical support, Psalm 51 would
never have been twisted to mean to mean that babies are born sinners. Let’s
consider the meaning of this passage.
David is saying that he was born into a world of sin.
Someone has pointed out that one can born into a potato patch without
being a potato. We can see a similar meaning in Acts 2:8 where it refers
to "the language wherein you were born." One can be born
in a language without being a language. One can be born into a family of
criminals and not be born a criminal. Therefore, one could be born into a
world of sin, or the environment of sin, without being a sinner. Moreover,
David considers himself to have been "shapen in iniquity"
or "born" in iniquity because of the sinful activity of
his ancestors Judah and Tamar (Gen.38:13-20). The law of Moses prohibited
"bastards" from entering the congregation unto the tenth
generation from the commission of the sin (Deut.23:2). David was aware of
his sinful heritage and therefore considers himself to have been "shapen
in iniquity." Incidentally, David was the tenth generation from
Judah; hence, he could say, "I was glad when they said unto me,
let us go into the house of the Lord" (Psa.122:1). Additionally,
David is also using the hyperbole in Psa.51:5 to express his anguish over
his sins. David was not literally claiming to have been born a sinner but
he simply overstated the situation to reveal his shortcomings before the
Lord and his complete reliance upon a saving God. David used hyperbole
elsewhere in his writings. In Psa.22:9, David says, "Thou didst
make me hope (trust) when I was upon my mother’s breasts." Did
David mean that, as an infant sucking on his mother’s breasts, he
possessed a full and complete trust in God? Of course, not!
Another example, and one very similar to Psalm 51:5, is
found in Psalm 58:3, wherein David wrote, "The wicked are
estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking
lies." Several observations are in order regarding this passage.
First, it is interesting to note that David is obviously exaggerating for
the sake of emphasis. Should we conclude that David meant to suggest that
infants literally go astray as soon as they are born, "speaking
lies"? Later, in Psalm 58:6, David asks God to "break the
teeth" of those wicked individuals he had described in verses 3-5.
Now if David was talking about literal newborn babies in verse 3, does
this mean that they had teeth at the time they were born? After all, David
asked God to break their teeth! Oh, but it is figurative, you say. Of
course, it is! Infants cannot speak at the time of they are born, much
less speak lies at that time! Perhaps what David is saying is similar to
the statement in Genesis 8:21 that "the imagination of a man’s
heart is evil from his youth."
Second, David does not say the wicked are "born
astray" but that they "go astray" after they are born.
Furthermore, when David described his life in the womb of his mother prior
to his birth, he said, "for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
marvelous are thy works" (Psalm 139 :14). David ascribes praise to
God for fearfully and wonderfully making him in the womb. If indeed this
activity was God’s doing, and if David was totally depraved at the time
of his conception, and while he was in the womb, then it was God who made
him such. Who can believe it?
Another sugarstick passage for the proponents of original
sin is Ephesians 2:3. Almost every one of them cite this text as proof
that children are born in sin. However, a closer look at the passage
reveals that it says nothing of the kind. Paul says that the Ephesians
were children of wrath "by nature." He says that it was
by nature, not by birth! The immediate context demonstrates that they were
dead in their trespasses and sins (Eph.2:1). Not one word is said about
their bearing the guilt of Adam’s sins. They were dead because of their
own sins. Moreover, look at the verbs used by Paul to explain why they
were in such a state. They had walked according to the course of the
world; they were fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and
thus, they were by nature the children of wrath. A form of the Greek word
"phusis" is the word translated "by nature"
in this passage. Thayer gives the following as one of the definitions of
the word: "a mode of feeling and acting which by long habit has
become nature." It was not anything that Adam had done that put them
into such a state; it was their own doing, their own sinful habits that
did so.
Another passage Calvinists turn to is Isaiah 1:3. In
reality, it is amazing that they would cite this text as proof of their
position. A careful study of the passage actually demolishes their view of
total hereditary depravity. In the first place, the context shows that we
are talking about the children of Israel in this passage, not all of
humanity. Also, there is nothing in the text, which indicates that infants
are under consideration. Although it is true that the picture of God’s
people here is one of depravity, there is still nothing in the text to
suggest that this depravity is inherited at birth. Further, there isn’t
any evidence that a miraculous, irresistible act of the Holy Spirit would
be necessary to eliminate depravity. On the contrary, they are told to
give ear to the word of the Lord and to repent and learn to do well
(Isa.1:10, 16-17).
The most damaging part of the passage, and a real blow to
Calvinism, is found in verse 4: "They have forsaken the Lord, they
have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away
backward." If they had forsaken the Lord, then they were once in
fellowship with the Lord. God says that His people had turned away
backward. Backward from what? From total depravity? If they had gone away
from what they formerly were, and they were formerly totally depraved,
then why would God condemn them for such? On the other hand, if they had
turned away from their former condition, and their former condition was
one of innocence, then they were not born totally depraved!
The New Testament implores man to be reconciled to God.
However, the word "reconciled" implies a separation, followed by
a return to the original state. For example, if a husband and wife argue
and that argument alienates them from one another, reconciliation would
bring them back to their original state of relationship. Calvinists say
that an infant is born in sin, totally depraved. That is his original
state. If he ever departs from that state of existence, he would have to
go to God. But the Bible teaches that we are to be restored to our
original state. Therefore, if we are born in sin and then separate
ourselves from that original condition, reconciliation would demand that
we return once again to a state of total depravity! Who can believe it?
The fact of the matter is that we start out perfect and pure and upright
(Ecc.7:29; Eze.28:15)), but like all mankind, we seek out "many
inventions": we sin and fall short of the glory of God (
Ecc.7:20; 1 Kin.8:46; Prov.20:9; Rom.3:10, 23).
In addition to al of the above, it needs to be pointed out
that Jesus told his disciples, "Except ye be converted and become
as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven"
(Matt.18:3). Luke records the words of Jesus, "Suffer little
children to come unto Me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom
of God" (Luke 18:16). If the children are totally depraved and
the kingdom of God belongs to them, then the kingdom of God belongs to
those who are totally depraved. Furthermore, if little children are
totally depraved, and we are to become like little children in order to
enter the kingdom of God, then we must become totally depraved to enter
the kingdom of God. Do you see what happens to the simple truth of God’s
Word when it is polluted by the doctrine and commandments of men?
Calvinism is indeed a wilted flower but even more so, it is a deadly and
poisonous doctrine. As we conclude this portion of our study, here are
some important questions and observations:
-
A proper definition of sin will demonstrate the
absurdity of total hereditary depravity. Sin is not something we
inherit. It is something we do. It is an action. It is a transgression
of the law (1 John 3:4). What law of God do babies violate or
transgress by being born into the world? Sin is failing to do what we
are capable of doing (James 4:17). Since a baby does not know his
right hand from his left (Jonah 4:11), how can he or she commit sin by
not doing what he or she is incapable of doing? Sin is a violation of
our conscience (Rom.4:23). How can a child sin against a conscience
that he has yet to develop?
-
If the doctrine of total hereditary depravity is true,
it supplies men with a built in excuse for his sinful behavior and
unbelief. He can always say, "I can’t help it – that’s my
nature."
-
If we are totally depraved from birth and cannot obey
until the Holy Spirit miraculously regenerates him, whose fault is it
he is lost? The doctrine of original sin makes God a respecter of
persons, which He is not (Acts 10:34-35; Rev.22:17).
-
If the sinner is so dead that he cannot hear, why does
the Lord say, "Hear, and your soul shall live"
(Isa.55:3)? Why would Jesus even command that the gospel be preached
to every very creature in every nation (Matt.28:19-20; Mark 16:15-16)
if some creatures (people) are so depraved that they are incapable of
responding? Imagine a father who offers a delicious treat to his
children, one of whom is free to come and get the gift, while the
other is tied up in the basement unable to reach out and receive the
gift. What kind of father would that be? Why would Jesus stand at the
door and knock if we have no choice but to let Him in (Rev.3:20)?
-
If man is born in such a depraved state, due to Adam’s
fall, and does not have the capacity to believe, then why did Jesus
marvel at the unbelief of the Jews (Mark 6:6)? Why would God ask His
people, "Why will you die?" (Eze.18:31), if their depravity
rendered them unable to do anything else? Why would Peter instruct
those on Pentecost to save themselves (Acts 2:40), if one must depend
upon the irresistible working or act of the Holy Spirit to be saved?
If the gospel is God’s power to be saved, and it is (Rom.1:16), then
any theory which diverts attention of the lost from it is absolutely
false! God never uses more than is necessary to save man. If one life
jacket will save a drowning soul, then why throw two? If the gospel
really id God’s power to save, then why argue for alleged direct
operation of the Holy Spirit, separate and apart from it?
-
Why bother sending Bibles to untaught nations if the
Bible cannot teach them how to be rescued from their alleged inherited
depravity? For that matter, why should we even preach at all,
imploring men to repent? According to Calvinism, if God has salvation
in mind for someone, He will see to it that they find it. Why bother
preaching Matthew 11:28 to lost sinners?
-
If man is born totally depraved, then why did the
apostle Paul say that "evil men and seducers shall wax worse
and worse" (2 Tim.3:13). How can one become more depraved
than totally depraved? Luke described that some were of a "baser
sort" (Acts 17:5). If all men are born are born equally
sinful – that is totally depraved – then why would some be
described as being of a "baser sort."?
-
The Bible teaches that we will be judged after our own
ways (Eze.33:20) and that we will give an account of ourselves to God
(Rom.14:12) for the things we have done in our bodies, whether they be
good or bad (2 Cor.5:10). Thankfully, Christ has made it possible for
us to be saved from our sins so that we when He appears, we may have
confidence and not be ashamed before Him at His coming (1 John 2:28).
If we are lost on the Day of Judgment, it will be due to our sin and
transgressions against God, not something we have inherited from
others. We must work out our own salvation, according to the will of
God, with fear and trembling, confident that He will save if we obey
Him (Phil.2:12; Heb.5:9; Mat.7:21).
In our next article, we will discuss and analyze the
second part of modern Calvinism and refute the silly notion that the Holy
Spirit must work directly on the heart of the sinner to regenerate him so
he can live.