One Verse To Dismantle Calvinism?
While coding my theme for Obsidian Canvas yesterday, I had one of Jason’s videos in the background. His objection inspired me to write this post, originally planned as Part 5 of the Total Depravity series. Instead, I made it a separate post. Jason was briefly mentioned in Part 1, so reading it first will provide context and demonstrate the significance of a strong foundation or starting point when it comes to rightly dividing Soteriology.
Jason boldly claims that Isaiah 65:2 “…by itself just dismantles Calvinism.” But I’ll be bolder and assert that Reformed Soteriology can never be refuted on exegetical grounds. I’ve worked through this subject for over a decade, and the fact that Christians are still debating and discussing in 2024 goes to show how nuanced the subject is. My advice to those seeking to refute Calvinism is this: don’t bother looking for a one-verse-to-rule-them-all theology. There isn’t one. There’s no perfect verse or argument, but there are plenty of nuances and mysteries. Instead, accept the nuances and mysteries in God's word, and let Him be God without questioning His ways (Psalms 105:24).
Last year I got this email from somebody that had just gone to a conference with a philosopher, and I’m not going to give you his name. I’m not going to give you any names. If you want to know the philosopher’s name, I might tell you if you ask me in the break, because I don’t think it’s any secret, but in this setting it might not be appropriate. Listen to this.
“This week I spent time with [blank].” So this philosopher teaches at an evangelical seminary. “He does not like Calvinism too much. He began to talk about how the mass majority of the exegetes,” now that’s Bible people, Bible interpreters as opposed to philosophers, “that the exegetes adopt Calvinistic interpretations while the mass majority of philosophers and apologists opt for Arminianism. We came to some fascinating conclusions, all of which I will not share, but he did say, ‘It is true Calvinists have the exegesis behind them, but we have philosophy and I think libertarianism,’“ that means free will understood as self-determination. “‘I think libertarianism trumps exegesis and must determine it.’ I said to him, ‘So we have to bring our theology to the text?” Answer, ‘Yes.’ He responded. ‘The ethical implications of Calvinism are too severe.’“
So a major evangelical philosopher says the exegesis is on the side of the Calvinists, philosophy is on the side of the Arminians, and you have to bring your philosophy to the text, otherwise, the conclusions you draw are too severe. —John Piper
(See that post here: https://soteriology.substack.com/p/t-people-dont-come-to-calvinism-by/)
What I said in one of my posts, “The multitude of passages about God extending His arms, calling all to repentance or come to Him do not contradict the reformed perspective of John 6:45.” You should pause here and read that post before preceding because everything I discuss on here are interconnected.
My Response
Jason Breda: Jesus is talking about Israel, and He’s like, “All day long, I’ve stretched out my arms for a disobedient people, and they were not willing to come.” Okay, I feel like that verse by itself just dismantles Calvinism. Just one verse, and there are many more like it. But how can God, if the god of Calvinism is true, sit there and say, “I just want all of you, Israel, to come and know that I am God, and that Jesus is the Savior, but actually, I'm not going to let you know that Jesus is the Savior because I’m only going to give certain people the ability to see that Jesus is the Savior.” Do you see how wrong that is? God is not a liar. He’s not arbitrary like that. He’s not hiding things that way. That’s just not who God is, and so that’s what I see.
There Jason is referencing Romans 10:21 (Isaiah 65:2)
In discussing God and His works, we should heed the advice of Ecclesiastes 5:3 and Proverbs 10:19 to be cautious with our words, and how we talk about God. Since we’re representing Him, we should always approach the subject with reverence and humility. Ironically, God mentions in Isaiah 66:2 that He looks upon those who tremble at His word. So let us tremble at His word as we reason together.
Here’s the passage:
I have stretched out My hands all day long to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good, according to their own thoughts;
The human heart and condition has always been the problem. See my post on Acts 7:51 if you doubt what I just said.
“I feel like that verse by itself just dismantles Calvinism. Just one verse, and there are many more like it.”
If you take all these verses together, you’ll find a common theme: Men love darkness. Non-Calvinists misrepresent Reformed Soteriology by painting a picture of sinners wanting to come to God but He’s not allowing them to. What they’re not telling you is that sinners are in active rebellion. Sinners aren’t sad and depressed that they can’t come to God because He’s not enabling them to, no… you won’t find that in Scripture. It’s true that unless God gives them a new heart, they won’t come. However, it’s not true that they want to come but can’t because God didn’t give them a new heart. There’s a significant difference. Now, how you choose to interpret that is none of my concern. I’m only interested in pointing out what Scripture teaches. You can even see it right there in Isaiah 65:2, “to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good, according to their own thoughts…” In other words, apart from regeneration, sinners walk after the dictates of their own evil hearts. We see this clearly with Paul.
If the heart is the problem, and it is, what kind of result do you expect when God stretches out His hands calling sinners to Himself? Rejection! Rejection! Rejection! The external call of the Gospel will always be rejected or received for non-salvific reasons. Non-Calvinists like Jason won’t give you a biblical reason for why sinners reject the Gospel. Doing so will get right to the heart of the matter.
People say Calvinists like to complicate things, but it’s actually pretty straightforward. Paul says, “you were once darkness…” (Ephesians 5:8). And John’s conclusion is that “men loved darkness rather than light.” (John 3:19). Left to ourselves we would never have come to the light, lest our deeds should be exposed. BUT “God, being rich in mercy because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive…” (Ephesians 2:4-5)! HOW? Paul says, “For God, who said, ‘Light shall shine out of darkness,’ is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.” (2 Corinthians 4:6)!
God came to us while we were dead and shone His light into our darkened minds and hearts. This is why, “he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.” Or by God (John 3:21). Lydia heard Paul, but she still needed her heart to be opened by God. Otherwise, the Gospel would have come off as foolishness to her darkened heart and mind. It is by God’s doing that she was in Christ Jesus.
There’s nothing complicated about that. Only when people can’t acknowledge that Saving-Faith is a gift that the need to complicate things with philosophies and man-made analogies come into play.
“He’s not hiding things that way. That’s just not who God is, and so that’s what I see.”
God hides and reveals, but this is a topic for another post.