Ronnie W. Rogers, “Taking every thought captive…”

Here is my article regarding God’s work of salvation and what I consider to be shortcomings of the teachings of Calvinism.

I affirm that the grace of God can be and is at times resisted, and this includes but is not limited to the genuine offer of salvation and/or resisting the Holy Spirit. The Bible says in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 that reprobates “perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.”¹ Further, that the ability of man to accept or to resist God’s genuine offer of salvation is a part of God’s plan and redounds to His glory; moreover, that this genuine offer of the gospel is more than “a good faith offer” upon the part of the Calvinist. It is an actual offer from God though His chosen medium, which can be accepted by faith or rejected unto damnation. Finally, this includes the reality that God has given the gift of repentance and the clear call of Scripture is for everyone everywhere (Acts 17:30) to repent and be saved, which imply that those called upon to repent can, by the grace of God, repent.²

I disaffirm that the Bible teaches that God’s salvation plan is carried out through selective “irresistible Grace”.³ Further, that all verses that say, teach or imply that man can resist are merely reiterating the position of compatibilism—sure they resist salvation since that is all, according to their nature, that they can do.

I also disaffirm that a resistible offer of salvation by anyone who views salvation through the grid of Calvinism constitutes a real offer of salvation from God since a compatibilist view of free will precludes the possibility of a person rejecting God’s real offer because the real offer of salvation from God always results in regeneration.

An example of my point is, in what sense can a person be said to be offered a job, if it is impossible for him to accept it, and not only is there no intent to give it to him, but actually there was a predetermined unalterable decision by the CEO to not give it to him; and this in spite of the personnel manager’s sincerity in offering the job. The answer seems obvious, NONE!

Let me elucidate this further, Calvinists seek to emphasize the positive of Irresistible grace e.g., God saves some unworthy sinners who otherwise would all perish in hell; but the dark side of irresistible grace is that although the “good faith offer” of a Calvinist seems to exonerate him from being guilty of making an artificial offer of salvation to sinners who cannot according to Calvinism really repent, believe and be saved since he can never be sure of whom God has selected to regenerate (this as long as he is careful not to say specifically to someone things like “God loves you” or “cares about you” or “wants you to go to heaven); it does not exonerate God from using language, commands, parables…that clearly picture God as wanting all to be saved even though, according to Calvinism, He is the sole determiner that they can’t be saved.

Consequently, the insurmountable obstacle to irresistible grace determining who receives eternal salvation—besides the fact that it is not taught in Scripture—is that it puts God the Father, the Lord Jesus, and the Holy Spirit in the position of appearing to offer deliverance from the wrath to come to all who cry for mercy; but actually, God has no intention of doing so; for He predetermined, contrary to what the gospel and the Scriptures say, to only offer salvation to a few; in other words, it makes God the CEO who allows, yea commands, and says He wants all to be hired but He has actually predetermined long ago that they cannot ever be hired even though his personnel managers continue to offer jobs to them.

In order to sustain the idea of irresistible grace, it appears that we must turn common language upon its head, take the obvious and simple meaning of language as seen in Scripture and used in everyday life, and subject it to biblically unnecessary restrictions and meanings, which is one of the pervasive problems in Calvinism.

For example, Christ felt love for the rich young ruler and out of that love told him how to be saved, but the young man refused; after which Jesus noted how difficult it was for a rich person to be saved. This clearly indicates that the young man could have been saved if he would have chosen to believe, and part of the reason that he chose not to follow Christ was that he was rich (Mark 10:21-23). From the standpoint of Calvinism, whether he was rich or poor had no bearing on whether he would come or not since the draw is irresistible.⁴ Further, I absolutely deny that the Scripture teaches or logic demands that God granting the opportunity to resist His genuine offer of salvation in any way constitutes an undermining or minimizing of His sovereignty since He sovereignly chose to grant that choice.

I do not believe irresistible grace applied to some in salvation is what the Scriptures teach, nor is it consistent with what God revealed about Himself. Since God has revealed Himself in Scripture to actually love the world so much that He sent His own Son to die for them (John 3:16), thereby providing for their salvation, which they can receive if they will obey His command and repent and be saved, which they can do by His grace. I do not believe that God offers what cannot be accepted or what He has no intention of providing.

Next Topic: World vs. Elect

1. Of course I am rejecting the compatibilist answer that sure he refuses because as a sinner that is all that he can do. It seems crystal clear in reading the passage without Calvinist glasses on that the context and language clearly imply that he “should have not refused” which carries the idea of choice, which is exactly what Calvinism denies. [↩]
2. See Matt. 3:2, 4:17, 11:20; Mark 6:12; Luke 5:32, 13:3, 13:5, 24:47; Acts 2:38, 3:19, 5:31, 11:18, 20:21, 26:20; Rom. 2:4; and 2 Peter 3:9. Jesus pronounced woe upon all the people of Chorazin and Bethsaida because they didn’t repent, obviously indicating He believed they had the capacity to repent (see Matt. 11:21). The book of Revelation depicts the Apostle John as stunned that unregenerate people refuse to repent even when they are suffering from the wrath of God (see Rev. 9:20-21; 16:9, 11). Acts 17:30 reminds us that the call of God to repent is for everyone. The Bible says in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 that reprobates “perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.” See also Acts 7:51. The writer of Hebrews, when describing those who draw back unto destruction (Heb. 10:39), said “How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?”(Hebrews 10:29) italics added. The Spirit of God will not always strive with man, clearly implying that He is now. (Gen 6:3); also why did God bring judgment upon leaders and Jews so they could not hear and see and return if that in fact is their state already see Isa. 6:9-10 & Matt. 13:10-17. [↩]
3. John Piper describes irresistible grace thusly, “When a person hears a preacher call for repentance he can resist that call. But if God gives him repentance he cannot resist because the gift is the removal of the resistance. Not being willing to repent is the same as resisting the Holy Spirit. So if God gives repentance it is the same as taking away the resistance. This is why we call this work of God “irresistible grace” (p. 10, para. 6). Note that those who receive this act of grace against their will, will believe and those who don’t receive this cannot be saved; hence, any talk from a Calvinist that God loves people, the lost, hurting etc is double speak because He, according to Calvinist, only loves some lost and hurting people. [↩]
4. This also shows Christ loves the lost, and loves them enough to tell them how to be saved, which by every normal meaning those words meant he could have been saved at that time had he chosen that. The later statement that “all things are possible with God” is exactly my point and in no way proves Calvinism is true but is actually contrary to the system. [↩]