Alana L.: 3h (bad analogies)
This series is based on this 14-minute video from Alana L.: 5 Signs Your Loved One is Becoming a Calvinist
Point #3 Still:
H. Along with the Calvinist idea of "it's fair and just for everyone to go to hell anyway, so we should be thankful that God saves anyone at all," Alana shares two analogies about salvation:
The Calvinist One: God reaches down and only scoops up a few people to save, and then leaves the rest to go to hell. Calvinists say that hell is what we all deserve anyway for being sinners, that we're all on our way to hell anyway (which contradicts Calvinism's belief that the elect were never on their way to hell at any point in time because they were created for heaven)... and so it's not wrong for God to let the non-elect continue in the direction they were already headed, giving them what they "deserve," while "graciously" plucking out a few sinners to save.
The non-Calvinist One: God scoops up everyone (offers salvation to everyone), but most jump out of His hand (reject the offer of salvation).
I agree with Alana that this is what the Bible really teaches.
Something to watch out for with Calvinists is that they use bad analogies all the time to try to slowly, subtly, stealthily reel people into Calvinism, convincing them it makes sense and is "fair and just." And if you don't know how to pick it apart, you'll probably fall for it.
Such as these two bad analogies (get ready for a wild ride, a romping good time through some crazy Calvinist quotes):
First analogy: The classic "100 people on death row" analogy: "There are 100 people on death row for murder, and God graciously chooses to save 10 of them, but He lets the other 90 go to their punishment. Was He unjust to save some but not others? No. None of them deserves to be saved. They all deserve to be punished. So it's not unjust to rescue some but let others pay the penalty they deserve. God predestines the non-elect to hell to show His justice in punishing sin (and to get glory for it), and He predestines the elect to heaven to show His grace and mercy."
Seems to fit, to make sense, to be fair and just, right?
After all, as my ex-pastor preached: "If it wasn’t for predestination, election, nobody would go to heaven because we’re born slaves to sin, in bondage to sin, under the wrath and judgment of God, no one seeking Him… God is a God of mercy. He is a God of grace. And He delights in summoning a remnant to Himself, forgiving and bestowing mercy and grace on them.... It’s why He sovereignly elects and gives grace and mercy to some.… election does not make God look bad; it makes God look good. In fact, election and even its opposite - hardening - both glorify God. God is equally glorified in the salvation of sinners as He is in the damnation of sinners. [Which should scare the crap out of Calvinists, not elicit their praise.]… The elect get mercy. The unelect get justice. Nobody is treated unfairly."
Like I said, kinda legit-sounding, right? Mercy is gracious, and justice is fair - so even if it feels wrong to us, we shouldn't really have any problem with God predestining people to hell for their sins, right? God is not required to free murderers on death row because they deserve the punishment, right? So let's just be thankful He saves any one of us wretched, evil, God-hating sinners at all, which is so very gracious of Him. After all, it's all for His glory, so it's totally okay and good.
Right?
Wrong! Because the critical, inherent flaw in their "100 murderers on death row" analogy is that, in Calvinism, those people are only on death row in the first place because God "ordained" their crimes. He preplanned, orchestrated, directed, caused them to do the crimes they did, giving them no option or ability to do anything differently or to resist doing the crimes, but then He punishes them for it.
[And God "ordained" that kind of ending for the victims they killed. God had no other plan for them than death by murder, for His pleasure and glory. As Calvinist Gordon H. Clark says in Religion, Reason, and Revelation: “I wish very frankly and pointedly to assert that if a man gets drunk and shoots his family, it was the will of God that he should do it… Let it be unequivocally said that this view certainly makes God the cause of sin. God is the sole ultimate cause of everything…”]
And Calvinists call that kind of God "good," and they call it "justice" and "deserving the punishment."
And furthermore, it's not "grace and mercy" for God to save people whom He created to be totally-depraved sinners in the first place, people whose sins He preplanned and orchestrated. Grace and mercy can only be true grace and mercy if it's in response to truly voluntary, free-will choices. We can only be truly guilty and truly deserve to be punished if we are truly responsible for our own sins. That's what makes it true grace and mercy. Otherwise, God is just a grand puppet-master playing with dolls, first causing the puppets to sin and resist Him, and then extending fake grace and mercy to them by causing them to repent and believe in Him. It's ridiculous.
And further-furthermore, it's very important to know that God Himself tells us how He chose to demonstrate His justice and get glory, and it wasn't by creating non-elect people to predestine to hell.
“God presented [Jesus] as a sacrifice of atonement through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished- he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.” (Romans 3:25-26, emphasis added).
Jesus said "Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!" (John 12:27-28)
"When he was gone, Jesus said, 'Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him.'" (John 13:31)
God Himself tells us that He sent Jesus to take our punishment for sin in order to demonstrate His justice and for His glory. Jesus's death demonstrated and satisfied God's justice. Fully. "It is finished." For His glory.
And so He didn't also need to create sinners for hell to show His justice and get glory, as Calvinists say:
Vincent Cheung, ("The Problem of Evil"): "One who thinks that God's glory is not worth the death and suffering of billions of people has too high an opinion of himself and humanity... Christians should have no trouble affirming [that God creates people for hell for His glory], and those who find it difficult to accept what Scripture explicitly teaches should reconsider their spiritual commitment, to see if they are truly in the faith.”
Robin Schumacher ("If God wants everyone saved, why isn't everyone saved?"):"God’s passion for His glory takes priority over the salvation of everyone... God gets glory when He showcases His justice and wrath in the same way He does when He distributes His mercy... [God] desires to put His justice on display with those He allows to continue in their chosen sin. He receives glory in this as well... This is the answer, then, as to why everyone is not saved and what God desires more than everyone’s salvation... what God desires most – His glory that comes from displaying both His mercy and justice on those He chooses." ["With those He allows to continue in their chosen sin": "Allows" and "chosen" are deceptive words because, in Calvinism, God predetermined that the non-elect would have the unregenerated nature which comes only with the desire to sin and reject Him, which means the non-elect only have the ability to desire to sin and reject Him, which means they can only "choose" to sin and reject Him. (This is why Calvinists will always qualify "we sin/make decisions/choose freely" with "according to our nature." That is a key qualifier which means "you can only choose what your God-given nature makes you choose, as God predestined.") No other options or abilities are possible for the non-elect than to sin and reject God. They cannot change their nature or the desires of their nature, and they cannot resist the desires of their nature... and so they must obey the desires to sin and reject God, as determined by God. They "choose" to sin and reject God because God predestined that it's all they could choose. And no one but Calvinists would call that truly "allowing" anything or having a true "choice"! *See extra comments below.]
Jim Hamilton, 9Marks ("How does hell glorify God?"): "Hell glorifies God. Do you object to this?... You are a creature in the Creator’s work of art. Accept it. He is the Creator, not you."
Was Jesus's death not enough? Why do Calvinists feel the need to add to it, to supplant it? [If Calvinist can find one verse that clearly says God created non-elect people to punish in hell to show off His justice and get glory, maybe then I'll start to give them more credit.]
If we end up in hell, it's not because we were predestined by God to hell for "justice" and for His glory, but it's because we chose to reject the sacrifice Jesus made on behalf of all people which satisfied the requirement for justice, the gift of eternal life He offers to all people that He paid for with His blood, the death He died for us so that we didn't have to die too.
That God "needed sinners to punish in order to show His justice in order to get more glory for Himself" is a completely unbiblical idea that Calvinists add to Scripture to make their unbiblical doctrine of election/predestination sound good and God-glorifying. [But all it actually does is contradict what God said He did to show His justice and to get glory, and it replaces/detracts from Jesus's sacrifice, stealing God's glory.]
And "the non-elect deserve their punishment" is what Calvinists say to make it seem logical and "fair," to manipulate us into accepting what we know in our spirits sounds wrong.
*Just a few extra comments to prove that, in Calvinism, "allows" and "choice" are not really truly "allows" and "choice," that we can only "choose" what God predestined/caused us to choose, and that God only "foreknows" what we will "choose" because He first preplanned it (emphasis added):
A.W. Pink in Doctrine of Election: "Man is a moral agent, acting according to the desires and dictates of his nature: he is at the same time a creature, fully controlled and determined by his Creator."
John Calvin (Institutes of the Christian Religion, book 1, chapters 17): "the devil, and the whole train of the ungodly...[cannot do any evil or even move a finger] unless in so far as [God] permits - nay, unless in so far as he commands."
Erwin Lutzer (this quote was found at Examining Calvinism): "...we can say that God permitted evil, as long as we understand that he thereby willed that the evil happen... In a word, what God permits, he ordains." (The Doctrines That Divide, pg. 210)
Jonathan Edwards ("Remarks on Important Theological Controversies, Chapter III"): "It cannot be any injustice in God to determine who is certainly to sin, and so certainly to be damned... God has decreed every action of men, yea, every action that is sinful, and every circumstance of those actions... It can be made evident by reason, that nothing can come to pass, but what it is the will and pleasure of God should come to pass... It is a contradiction to say, he wills it, and yet does not choose it... God decrees all the good that ever comes to pass... [which means that] no more [people will] believe, no more [people will] be godly, and no more [people will] be saved, than [those] God has decreed that he will cause to believe, and cause to be godly, and will save." [If you read this work of Edwards, you'll see it's a bunch of philosophical ramblings, one bad idea leading to another. And yet Calvinists claim that Calvinism is all right from the Bible and that they don't use philosophy or "human logic" to determine truth. (Hahaha, good joke!)]
Parsons, Ligonier Ministries ("How is God's sovereignty compatible with man's responsibility?"): "We have to understand that God is sovereign over all. He orchestrates all things. He foreordains all things that come to pass... God ordains the ends of all things as well as the means of those ends... He ordains our works, our deeds, what we do, what we say, what we believe, and the ends of those things... God is ultimately the One orchestrating all things. He is permitting, but He is permitting 'not by a bare permission' as the Westminster Confession states... Does God sovereignly, in some mysterious way, permit us to sin (though not by a bare permission)? Absolutely." ["Not by bare permission" means that God doesn't just allow us to make truly free-will choices. He doesn't merely foreknow and allow what we will choose. But it's that He only "permits" us to do what He first decreed/ordained us to do. This is why it's not "bare permission," mere permission, but "permission" of only that which He pre-planned and orchestrates.]
Vincent Cheung (The Problem of Evil): "…man is morally responsible even if he lacks moral ability; that is, man must obey God even if he cannot obey God... Scripture teaches that God's will determines everything. Nothing exists or happens without God, not merely permitting, but actively willing it to exist or happen … God controls not only natural events, but he also controls all human affairs and decisions... God controls everything that is and everything that happens. There is not one thing that happens that he has not actively decreed – not even a single thought in the mind of man. Since this is true, it follows that God has decreed the existence of evil, he has not merely permitted it, as if anything can originate and happen apart from his will and power."
Mayhue ("Election and Predestination: The Sovereignty of God in Salvation"): "... No matter where you go, God is sovereign, God's determinative; man is responsible, and man participates with his will. But he doesn't have free will to determine, and he doesn't have free will to override." (Translation: "We only have the 'freedom' to do what God determined we'd do, but we'll still be held responsible for it.")
John MacArthur ("Doctrine of Election, part 1"): "You’re guilty. You’re culpable. You did it. You did it with your own will. But God had predetermined it would be done. It was set in his predetermined plan and foreknowledge. That is to predetermine, to foreknow, is not simply to have information about what’s going to happen, but to predetermine it. So we understand, then, that the Bible is very clear on the doctrine of election ['but it's only clear after you spend many months immersed in our huge Calvinist Systematic Theology books']."
Tom Hicks (Founders Ministries, "The Nature of God's Eternal Decree"): "In the case of sin, human beings can always choose otherwise, but God’s decree makes their choice certain... But the confession denies that God’s decree depends on knowledge conditioned by the future free choices of human agents. Rather, God’s knowledge of the future depends on God’s decree alone. God knows the future because He decrees the future." (So Calvi-god doesn't just foreknow what man will choose, but he decides/decrees what man will choose. So then tell me again, Calvinist, how we could have made different choices!?! 'Cuz I still don't get it.]
Mark Talbot/John Piper (from Suffering and the Sovereignty of God, page 42-44): “God brings about all things in accordance with his will. It isn’t just that God manages to turn the evil aspects of our world to good for those that love him; it is rather that he himself brings about these evil aspects… God speaks and then brings his word to pass; he purposes and then does what he has planned. Nothing that exists falls outside of God's ordaining will. Nothing, including no evil person or thing or event or deed. God's foreordination is the ultimate reason why everything comes about, including the existence of all evil persons and things and the occurrence of any evil acts or events. And so it is not inappropriate to take God to be the creator, the sender, the permitter, and sometimes even the instigator of evil.”
Jeff Durbin, talking to a woman about evils like gang rape (see clips of it in this review The Madness of Calvinism and the full video in Jeff Durbin Answering 'The Problem of Evil'.): “God actually has a morally sufficient reason for all the evil He plans… nothing happens in the universe apart from His will… So let’s say this evil happens. How do [people try to] get God off the hook?... By saying 'He didn’t want that to happen, or He’ll fix it, or He wouldn’t mess with your free will'… [But] the truth is that all those answers make God unworthy of worship… He actually decrees all things."
Gordon H. Clark (Predestination): “[Some people] do not wish to extend God’s power over evil things, and particularly over moral evils… [But] the Bible therefore explicitly teaches that God creates sin.”
John Calvin (Institutes, book 3, chapter 23): "... it is impossible to deny that God foreknew what the end of man was to be before he made him, and foreknew, because he so ordained by his decree."
J.I. Packer ("Predestination: God has a purpose"): "Predestination is a word often used to signify God’s foreordaining of all the events of world history, past, present, and future."
My ex-pastor's (March 2014 sermon about finding hope in hard times): “God is on the throne! Random evil doesn’t just happen to people. Random loss doesn’t just occur in our lives. God is in control of each aspect of every detail, right down to our salvation... We want to get God off the hook [for sin and evil and suffering], and every time we try to, God puts Himself back on the hook in the Bible and says, 'Yes, I did!'… God is sovereign over those who seek to harm us. Who of us hasn’t been harmed by somebody?... We’ve had people betray, lie, steal, vilify, slander, and do unspeakable things to us. Some of us have undergone horrific abuse at the hands of parents or aunts or uncles or brothers. God is sovereign over those who seek to harm us.
That means, friends, that there is no such thing as random evil or random acts of tragedy... John Flavel in The Mystery of God’s Providence says '… In all the sad and afflictive providences that befall you, eye God as the author. Set before you the sovereignty of God…' Amen!?!” [No! Not Amen! Not with the way Calvinists define sovereignty, allows, foreknows, choice, etc..]
And from my ex-pastor's November 2019 sermon about Job, about trusting God in our times of confusion, pain, suffering, and uncertainty (he started this sermon with a true-life story of a young father who died early of cancer): "God is in full control of His universe, including suffering and tragedy. And frankly, He's not interested in trying to get off the hook.... God allows and appoints suffering for His own good reasons... God allows-slash-appoints tragic disasters. These are really two sides of one coin. Saying 'God allowed it' is too soft. God clearly is orchestrating what is going on here... and He ordains suffering for His own good reasons.... in the end [Satan] will find out he did exactly as God sovereignly decreed, under God's sovereign decree."
4. In Jeremiah 19:5, God says, "They have built the high places to Baal to burn their sons in the fire as offerings to Baal - something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind." If God foreknew/predetermined that these people sacrificed their children, then He's lying when He says He didn't have anything to do with it.
5. Isaiah 30:1: "Woe to the obstinate children," declares the Lord, "to those who carry out plans that are not mine..." If He predetermined/orchestrated what the "obstinate children" did, then He's lying when He says the plans weren't His.
6. Acts 14:16: "In the past, he [God] let nations go their own way." What does "going their own way" mean if God really predetermined what they did? If every way is God's way, then there would be no "going their own way."
7. Kings 20:42 says, "He said to the king, 'This is what the Lord says: 'You have set free a man I had determined should die.''" If everything that happens is because God predetermined/orchestrated it, then how could God determine something that didn't happen? What kind of God predetermines that people don't do what He predetermined? Does this make any sense? How "sovereign" can [Calvinism's] God be if the thing He predetermined to happen didn't happen? And then which one was His true Will: kill the man or don't kill the man? If it's "kill the man," then He caused the people to not do His Will (He willed that His Will didn't get done). But if it's "don't kill the man," then He gave a command at first to put the man to death that He didn't really mean. Either way, it makes Him untrustworthy and double-minded, working against Himself and His own decrees/plans.
8. Exodus 13:17: "When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them on the road through the Philistine country. For God said 'If they face war, they might change their minds and return to Egypt." I probably don't even have to spell it out by this point, but... if foreknowing means predetermining and orchestrating, then there would be no "if" or "might" about it. In Calvinism, the fact that God foreknew the people would turn back should mean that He predetermined and orchestrated it to happen. But it didn't happen. How is that possible if Calvinism is correct that "foreknows" means "fore-decreed/fore-ordained" and that it must happen because God will orchestrate it to happen?
Second analogy: Similar to that analogy is this one my Calvinist ex-pastor gave to reel people into believing that it's okay for God to predestine some people to heaven and the rest to hell: "If a wealthy person went into the inner city and said 'I’m gonna pick 25 young, poor people, and I’m gonna bless them with a full ride to any Ivy League university’… could we say he was being unfair to the people he didn’t give that gift to? The answer is: No. He has a right to bless whomever he wants to, and he’s good and grace-full for doing it."
But once again, this is a bad analogy because it doesn't accurately reflect what happens in Calvinism. In Calvinism, God first created all the people to be in inner-city poverty, giving them only the desire to be in poverty and with no ability to get out of poverty themselves even though He commands them all to get out of poverty... and then He comes in and acts like He's "so gracious" to at least rescue a few, leaving everyone else in the inner-city poverty with no ability to get out... and then when His chosen ones are safely in their Ivy League dorm rooms, He blows up the inner city with a nuclear bomb to kill everyone He didn't save because He decided from the very beginning to hate them and to get glory by destroying them.
Now that's a more accurate Calvinist analogy!
Calvinists think that Romans 9 is about God choosing who gets saved and who doesn't, about God predestining some people to heaven and the rest to hell.
But they're wrong. Simply put, Romans 9 is about Israel as a nation, about God punishing them for rejecting Jesus and the gospel (handing them over to their own hard-heartedness) and about Him giving the gospel/salvation/the job of spreading the gospel to the Gentiles instead, because they were willing to receive it.
And because God did this, the Jews essentially cried "Not fair!" They thought that they (the Jews, the special, chosen ones) should get God's special favor and blessings (and that the Gentiles shouldn't) just because they were Jews, and that it couldn't/shouldn't be taken from them.
And Romans 9 is Paul's response to them, telling them that God can do whatever He wants in response to our decisions/actions. God can give His favor, the gospel/salvation, and the special task of spreading the gospel to whomever He wants to (even Gentiles), to whomever is willing to receive it (and the Gentiles were), and He can take it away from anyone (even Jews) if they resist/reject it.
This is what Romans 9 is about. Read it this way and see if it fits.
Romans 9 is not about God choosing which individuals get saved and which don't. But if you let Calvinists convince you that it's about God predestining individual people for salvation and hardening individual people for hell, you will become a Calvinist.
See "When Calvinist say 'But Romans 9!'" for more on this.]
[The posts in this series will be added to the "Alana L." label as they get published.]
