Calvinism takes spiritual truth, such as some men are blinded by their love of darkness, and extrapolates it into falsehood, asserting wrongly that all men are blinded by the love of darkness and therefore cannot respond affirmatively to the gospel. However, if we consider Matthew 13:1-23, the Parable of the Sower or the Four Soils, we see that only some folks are totally blinded, but the others respond affirmatively to the gospel. This demonstrates that the concept of Calvinism, termed total depravity, but meaning the spiritual inability of all mankind in their fallen state to respond affirmatively to the gospel is a mistaken view of scripture.
Calvinism takes spiritual truth, God sometimes predestines the circumstances and actions of men, and extrapolates it into falsehood, asserting wrongly that all the circumstances and actions of all mankind are predestined. However, if we consider Deuteronomy 30:11-17 we see that God has not predetermined our choices but instead gives us the opportunity to trust in Him or not.
One of the areas where Bible scholars disagree is in determining the scope of a statement. If scripture says men are blinded, does this mean all men are blinded or some men are blinded? You cannot tell directly, and so folks draw various inferences, some correct and some incorrect. Sadly, what Calvinism does is pick and choose which inferences to draw, not based on context but on the need to mesh the text to their doctrine, so they assert the scope of the text in Romans 3 is universal, but where Jesus says if I am high and lifted up, I will draw all men, then the scope is limited to all kinds of men.
Bottom line, true doctrine will be revealed only when a consistent set of interpretation principles is applied to the entire text. Ends driven interpretations both make unwarranted extrapolations, and use man-made inventions to nullify verses that show the doctrine being advocated does not fit with all scripture.
Here is an example, Jesus says we should seek the kingdom of God, but that does not fit with the idea that fallen man cannot seek God. So Jesus was merely saying what we ought to do, not what we are able to do. Using this idea, the verse is nullified and made to no effect by the traditions of men.
Another example is the Calvinist misuse of “anthropomorphism.” Basically the term refers to attributing physical form to God, who is spirit, and has no actual form. The Bible employs these illustrations to convey some spiritual attribute God actually has. Thus the “everlasting arms” of God reveals steadfast love – an actual attribute.
What Calvinism does is say some of God’s actual attributes, such as putting our forgiven sins out of His mind, are merely “anthropomorphisms” and God really has no spiritual attribute of putting knowledge out of His mind. Note how deceptive this argument is: first anthropomorphism is a valid interpretive tool for recognizing figurative language and pausing to consider what the underlying truth being illustrated might be; and second by using the same term to refer to spiritual attributes as if they were figurative and did not actually mean what scripture says, it opens the door to nullifying scripture while appearing to be a careful student.
Anthropomorphisms can be recognized if God is given physical attributes, hands, arms, front, back, wings, eyes, etc., but when God’s spiritual attributes are being revealed such as intellect, will and emotion, to dismiss these as “anthropomorphisms” is without merit.
Note in the first case, the literal sense makes no sense because God is spirit and therefore does not have a “physical body.” But when the term is misused to make scripture to no effect, the literal sense makes sense and does not conflict with any revealed truth concerning the attributes of God.
What Calvinism does is say one of God’s revealed attributes is “total omniscience” and God putting something out of His mind conflicts with that doctrine. But what this reveals is the man-made doctrine is false, not the attribute of God. All these behaviors of God such as obtaining knowledge not known beforehand, or putting knowledge out of His mind, are fully consistent with the Biblical doctrine of “Inherent Omniscience” which says God knows everything His has chosen to know. Since there is a boat load of scripture that attributes will, intellect and emotion to God, Occam's razor suggests the path with the least assumptions and is most consistent with all scripture is not only most probable but highly likely.
Calvinism takes spiritual truth, God sometimes predestines the circumstances and actions of men, and extrapolates it into falsehood, asserting wrongly that all the circumstances and actions of all mankind are predestined. However, if we consider Deuteronomy 30:11-17 we see that God has not predetermined our choices but instead gives us the opportunity to trust in Him or not.
One of the areas where Bible scholars disagree is in determining the scope of a statement. If scripture says men are blinded, does this mean all men are blinded or some men are blinded? You cannot tell directly, and so folks draw various inferences, some correct and some incorrect. Sadly, what Calvinism does is pick and choose which inferences to draw, not based on context but on the need to mesh the text to their doctrine, so they assert the scope of the text in Romans 3 is universal, but where Jesus says if I am high and lifted up, I will draw all men, then the scope is limited to all kinds of men.
Bottom line, true doctrine will be revealed only when a consistent set of interpretation principles is applied to the entire text. Ends driven interpretations both make unwarranted extrapolations, and use man-made inventions to nullify verses that show the doctrine being advocated does not fit with all scripture.
Here is an example, Jesus says we should seek the kingdom of God, but that does not fit with the idea that fallen man cannot seek God. So Jesus was merely saying what we ought to do, not what we are able to do. Using this idea, the verse is nullified and made to no effect by the traditions of men.
Another example is the Calvinist misuse of “anthropomorphism.” Basically the term refers to attributing physical form to God, who is spirit, and has no actual form. The Bible employs these illustrations to convey some spiritual attribute God actually has. Thus the “everlasting arms” of God reveals steadfast love – an actual attribute.
What Calvinism does is say some of God’s actual attributes, such as putting our forgiven sins out of His mind, are merely “anthropomorphisms” and God really has no spiritual attribute of putting knowledge out of His mind. Note how deceptive this argument is: first anthropomorphism is a valid interpretive tool for recognizing figurative language and pausing to consider what the underlying truth being illustrated might be; and second by using the same term to refer to spiritual attributes as if they were figurative and did not actually mean what scripture says, it opens the door to nullifying scripture while appearing to be a careful student.
Anthropomorphisms can be recognized if God is given physical attributes, hands, arms, front, back, wings, eyes, etc., but when God’s spiritual attributes are being revealed such as intellect, will and emotion, to dismiss these as “anthropomorphisms” is without merit.
Note in the first case, the literal sense makes no sense because God is spirit and therefore does not have a “physical body.” But when the term is misused to make scripture to no effect, the literal sense makes sense and does not conflict with any revealed truth concerning the attributes of God.
What Calvinism does is say one of God’s revealed attributes is “total omniscience” and God putting something out of His mind conflicts with that doctrine. But what this reveals is the man-made doctrine is false, not the attribute of God. All these behaviors of God such as obtaining knowledge not known beforehand, or putting knowledge out of His mind, are fully consistent with the Biblical doctrine of “Inherent Omniscience” which says God knows everything His has chosen to know. Since there is a boat load of scripture that attributes will, intellect and emotion to God, Occam's razor suggests the path with the least assumptions and is most consistent with all scripture is not only most probable but highly likely.
