Read the entire article here.

Many moons ago, I promised to look at Scriptural evidence for irresistible grace. Well, obviously, I’ve been busy since then and haven’t had the time to get around to it. But now I’ve had a few free moments, so I thought I’d post on that very topic.

It may be helpful to review my definition of irresistible grace here.

The Golden Chain of Redemption makes an impressive case for irresistible grace by itself. The same people predestined are also called, justified, and glorified. But the writings of John are where one can find the strongest case for irresistible grace.

Consider Jesus’ words in John 6:36: “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.” Jesus is saying that everyone given to him by the Father comes to him. It is helpful to remember that Jesus later declares “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him . . .” (6:44) and “. . . no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father” (6:65).

We know that it is the elect that God gives to Jesus, and Jesus says that “Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me . . .” (John 6:45; see also 6:36). Combined with the Golden Chain of Redemption, the case for irresistible grace is very good.

Since I haven’t written in a while, I was surprised to find that Rey had posted an entry in his blog, since his posts generally respond to my own. This time, it looks as if things will be the other way around.

Normally, I ignore Rey but this time he has posted something that is such an obvious error that I can’t pass it up. He says that Hebrews 11:6 is proof that Calvinists cannot be saved as long as they are Calvinists. That simply isn’t true, and if Rey did his homework on the Reformed position, he’d know that. Far from disproving Calvinism, this verse actually solidifies the Reformed position!

First of all, faith is a gift from God. Don’t believe me? Check Galatians 5:22-23, which lists the fruits of the Holy Spirit. Those who have the Holy Spirit produce the listed fruits, which are gifts from God. Notice that faith is on that list! Unless God grants you faith, you can’t have it in the first place.

The Reformed position grants that people can seek God, but not apart from his drawing us (Jn 6:44). Those that are seeking God apart from that drawing (the non-elect, in other words) are seeking God for selfish motives. They don’t want to know God, they want the benefits of knowing God. This is not really diligently seeking God.

Regeneration, which precedes salvation and always produces a saving faith, is monergistic (i.e. it is God’s work only, with no human involvement). However, once regenerated, the sanctification process is synergistic (i.e. requires human involvement). This means that the person has a saving faith, and now will diligently seek God (having his heart inclined to God).

So far from disproving the Reformed position, this verse is actually perfectly consistent with it.

My pastor made a grave error during this last Sunday School at my church. My pastor is a proud Arminian, and I am a proud Calvinist. Therefore, we differ about things, and one of the chief things is predestination. He had an entire series in Sunday School a few months back dedicated to smashing predestination. Unfortunately, I couldn’t attend so we couldn’t debate about it. Since I don’t know the content of those lessons, I won’t be able to explore them further here. However, I will be able to discuss the error he made this past Sunday.

My pastor was teaching on Revelation 21, the New Heaven and the New Earth. I’m a historicist, and my pastor is a futurist, so we could argue about interpretations of Revelation longer than we could about predestination. However, the specific error concerns the Lamb’s book of life in verse 27. Pastor says that the book won’t be “parsed out” until the end of time as we know it. Really? Let’s take a look at another verse that talks about the timeframe of writing, specifically, Exodus 32:32.

After seeing that the people had sinned by making the Golden Calf and bowing down to it, Moses intervenes with God and says, “But now, if you will forgive their sin—but if not, please blot me out of your book that you have written” (Ex 32:32, emphasis added). This is the same Lamb’s book of life mentioned in Revelation 21:27 (among other verses). Notice when the book was written–in the past. In other words, God has already written this book.

I wouldn’t build a case for predestination based on this verse alone, but it does strengthen the case when combined with the other biblical evidence for predestination.

James White had a thoughtful post on the 12th about the theological issues faced in deciding whether or not one is Roman Catholic. Reading that post, and listening to his extended edition of the Dividing Line here has made me re-re-evalutate my stance on the Reformed position.

Although I’ve been coming away from the Reformed position, it has been nagging at me somewhat. What about the problem of evil? How is it to be answered in light of Arminianism? The only answer that Arminians have is that evil exists becauase of free will. That means three things.

First, evil is senseless. If evil exists because we define it and carry it out, then this is simply senseless.

Second, evil is out of God’s hands. Because evil is there due to the free will of man, and God either can’t or won’t stop it, it means that God has, in some sense or another, washed his hands of evil completely.

Third, evil is pointless. As the happenstance of existentialism, if we are caught in something evil it is because of that reason and not for any other.

Now consider Chapter 3, paragraph 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith:

God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

From this, evil is not senseless or pointless, and it is not out of God’s hands. It exists alongside good for the purpose of glorifying God by God’s eternal decree. But notice the final thoughts of this paragraph: “neiter is God the author of sin . . . nor is the liberty or contigency of second causes taken away, but rather established.” Evil still exists by our free will, but our free will is subject to God and therefore he is still in control without being the author of sin. But sin is still included in his plan. And, guess what? We are still responsible for choosing that evil over good.

By Arminianism, sin cannot be included in God’s plan and is therefore out of God’s control. Well, not the God that I worship. Like the shirt says: CALVINISM: When a finite God won’t do.

I’m convinced that the truth of the matter lies somewhere in-between Calvinism and Arminianism. But for now, I’m afraid that I must remain on the side where God is in control of what happens on earth. I choose Calvinism.

This is likely to disappoint a great number of people who frequent this blog, like the commenter who goes by “rey” but is in reality “Beowulf2k8” from other Calvinist blogs and has his own rarely updated blog. My friend Caleb, who thought that I put the Westminster Confession above Scripture (and who might be mad at me for linking to him). I know this will disappoint the pastor of my church, since he, too, has a certain distaste for Calvinism (he spent an entire series in Sunday school–three weeks–preaching against predestination).

On the other hand, this will probably make other readers happy. Craig French, TurretinFan, and James White (if he reads this blog). Most readers probably won’t care too much. Hopefully this will solidify my apologetics, which have been faltering as of recently. Owing in no small part to my brief departure from sound theology, most likely.

To those I disappoint, sorry, but I’ve made up my mind. James White is right: Theology Matters. So, in answer to the question posed by the title, YES, I am still a Calvinist.