Such logic is fatally flawed, because it forces more meaning into the expression “dead in your trespasses and sins” than the apostle Paul intended. Using the same logic, we could conclude that those who are dead in their sins cannot think, breathe, speak, or hope, since dead people cannot do those things either. Like all metaphors, there are similarities between physical and spiritual death, but there is also a point at which the similarities end and the dissimilarities begin.

Paul’s phrase “dead in your trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1) expresses the fact that unregenerate people have no relationship with God because of their sins and are void of spiritual life in Christ as well as eternal life. It does not express the idea that man is incapable of making a choice to repent, just as it does not imply man’s inability to make any other choice, including moral choices.

Unregenerate people have the capacity to choose between doing what God commands and not doing what God commands (regardless of their motives). This is obvious because unregenerate people make choices all the time to obey or disobey their God-given consciences (see Romans 2:14-15). They are not so evil that they are incapable of choosing to obey, for example, one of God’s commandments. Sometimes unregenerate people even stop practicing certain sins while continuing in others—such as when an adulterer ends an affair because of overwhelming guilt, or when a thief stops stealing for fear of being caught. So what is the difference between any other moral choice an unregenerate person makes and the moral choice to repent and follow Jesus?

It is clear from many Scriptures that Paul did not believe people who are dead in their trespasses and sins are incapable of submitting to God. From the time of Paul’s conversion, Jesus made it plain to him that unregenerate people have both the capacity and the responsibility to turn from their sins. In Acts 26:16-20, Paul recounts before King Agrippa his conversion and calling. Jesus said to him:

But arise and stand on your feet; for this purpose I have appeared to you, to appoint you a minister and a witness not only to the things which you have seen, but also to the things in which I will appear to you; delivering you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am sending you, to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me (Acts 26:16-18, emphasis added).

Paul continued:

So, King Agrippa, I did not prove disobedient to the heavenly vision, but kept declaring both to those of Damascus first, and also at Jerusalem and then throughout all the region of Judea, and even to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance” (Acts 26:19-20, emphasis added).

Are non-Calvinists saying that a sinful person can repent and believe apart from God’s gracious assistance? Anyone who claims this is in error. God graciously seeks the attention of the unregenerate person, speaking through His creation (Romans 1:18-20), His providence (Acts 14:17), and each person’s conscience (Romans 2:14-16). By His Spirit and by His grace, God calls and anoints messengers who take the message of His saving grace to the sinner.

By His Spirit and grace, God warns and convicts every sinner of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8). All of this God does by His grace so that the sinner might be saved—and He does it all before the sinner has taken a single step toward repentance. Without God’s prevenient grace, no person would ever repent. Jesus declared that He is “draw[ing] all men to [Himself]” (John 12:32) since He has been lifted up from the earth. He also declared, “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him” (John 6:44a). The Calvinist, ignoring the testimony of much of Scripture that declares God’s universal love, His universal atonement, and His universal call to salvation, wrongly concludes that the Father draws only some, not all, to Jesus. Yet Jesus plainly stated that He would draw all men to Himself. This fact cannot be denied by any honest reader of Scripture.

Note, however, that although Jesus is drawing all men to Himself, not all are saved. This again proves that man has a part in his salvation: he must yield to God’s drawing.

John 6:64-65

Another similar Calvinistic misinterpretation revolves around Jesus’ words in John 6:64-65. Jesus said, “But there are some of you who do not believe” (John 6:64a). John then adds: “For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. And He was saying, ‘For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.’”

Disregarding the greater context of John 6:41-71 as well as many other Scriptures that reveal God’s desire for all people to come to Jesus (Matthew 11:28; 16:25; 22:9; Mark 16:15; Luke 9:23; John 3:16-17; 5:34-40; 7:37; 12:47; Acts 17:30; 1 Timothy 2:3-6; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 John 4:14), Calvinists conclude that Jesus’ statement “No one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father” proves that God sovereignly chooses only some to be saved.

This interpretation stands in contradiction to many plain Scriptures that declare God’s love for all, Jesus’ death for all, and God’s desire that all be saved. Since inspired Scripture cannot contradict itself, we must find an interpretation that harmonizes with the rest of Scripture rather than contradicts it.

When Jesus said, “There are some of you who do not believe,” it was not the first time He mentioned believing in John’s sixth chapter. He spoke of believing in Him in 6:28-29, 35-36, 40, and 47—and He spoke of it in such a way that any unbiased reader would conclude that believing in Him is something anyone can do, and something God desires every person to do.

Thus, in 6:64, Jesus indicts some of His audience for not believing, just as He did in 6:36. Clearly, believing is something they were supposed to do, not something God did for them. Jesus said, “Some of you do not believe.” Those words strongly affirm the non-Calvinist view of human responsibility in salvation.

John then explains that Jesus possessed foreknowledge of those who would not believe, which is no surprise. Non-Calvinists rightly maintain that God knew before the foundation of the world who would and who would not believe in Jesus. John again supports the view that each individual is held responsible to believe. Notice that John said Jesus knew “who they were who did not [not could not] believe, and who it was that would [not had no choice but to] betray Him” (6:64).

Finally, John quotes Jesus: “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father” (6:65). Contextually, Jesus means that God grants that people can come to Him only by believing. This is in perfect harmony with the two preceding verses, the entire context of 6:26-71, and the whole of Scripture.

Calvinists also use this portion of Scripture to support the claim that Judas betrayed Jesus because salvation was not granted to him. This makes God the real betrayer of His Son, eliminating Judas’s responsibility. To the Calvinist, Judas had no choice but to betray Jesus; he was acting out a predetermined destiny.

But if this were true, why would Jesus pronounce woe upon Judas for what he did, clearly holding him responsible? “Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born” (Matthew 26:24). How could Jesus rightly hold Judas responsible if he had no free choice? On Calvinistic terms, it was actually God the Father who betrayed Jesus, and Judas was merely a tool. In that case Jesus should have said, “Woe to My Father for betraying Me!”

God Granting Repentance

What about the biblical statements that indicate God grants repentance? For example, Peter proclaimed before the Sanhedrin, “He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins” (Acts 5:31).

There are only two possible interpretations of Peter’s statement. Either God was sovereignly giving every totally depraved, unable-to-repent Israelite the ability and the will to repent by irresistible grace (note that Peter said Jesus granted repentance to Israel, not to some Israelites), or God was granting all Israel—individually and corporately—the opportunity to repent, along with His gracious help in their repentance.

If the first interpretation is correct, every Israelite would have been saved, because God granted repentance to Israel as a whole. If Calvinists apply their doctrine consistently here, they must conclude that God bestowed irresistible grace upon every Israelite. Of course, all Israel was not saved, proving the first interpretation incorrect.

This leaves the second interpretation, which alone makes sense and harmonizes with the rest of Scripture. Because God has given man free will, man has a part (albeit a very small part compared with God’s) in his own salvation. He must cooperate with God if he is to be saved. God takes the initiative: He loves the sinner, dies for him, draws and convicts him through creation, providence, and the Spirit, sends messengers, sometimes performs miracles, offers salvation, and gives the opportunity to repent and believe. If the man yields to all this influence, believing the gospel and humbling his proud heart, God’s grace continues to work, helping him to repent by the Holy Spirit’s power—just as He helps the man all the rest of his Christian life to obey God. Both God and man play a part in repentance and ongoing sanctification.

Peter did not believe, when he said Jesus had “granted repentance to Israel,” that man’s free will played no part. He later wrote, “The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). Clearly Peter believed God wants everyone to repent, yet not all do, because they play a part in their repentance.

At the same time, we must never neglect to say that no man can repent apart from God’s grace. We need His help to come to the light, repent, and believe. John Piper cites John 3:20-21 as proof that those who come to the light are those in whom God does His work. I agree: no man will come to the light unless God works in him. Piper, however, elevates such Scriptures that highlight God’s part and does not acknowledge the many that emphasize man’s part. Salvation occurs when a person does not abort God’s plan but cooperates with God, who sent His Son to be “the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man” (John 1:9). Why does Piper not mention that verse?

When Peter reported to the Jerusalem elders that Gentiles had been saved and God had poured out His Holy Spirit upon them, they acknowledged, “Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life” (Acts 11:18). They were amazed that God was granting salvation to sinful Gentiles.

According to the Jerusalem elders, God granted repentance to “the Gentiles”—that is, to the Gentiles as a group, not merely to some pre-selected individuals. We have now learned from Scripture that God has granted repentance to Israel (Acts 5:31) and to the Gentiles (Acts 11:18). That includes everyone. Since not all Israelites and Gentiles have repented, we can safely conclude that God’s granting them repentance does not mean man plays no part—which is also obvious from many other Scriptures. Piper neglects those Scriptures that clarify man’s part and quotes only one (2 Timothy 2:24-26), which he misuses to support Calvinism’s one-sided view.

Let us consider that Scripture. Paul wrote:

The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will (2 Timothy 2:24-26).

Paul could not have been saying that man plays no part in repentance and that repentance is a purely sovereign gift; otherwise he would have been contradicting much of what he himself wrote. For example: “This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:3-4, emphasis added).

If we are to harmonize Paul with Paul, we must conclude that he was emphasizing God’s part in man’s repentance. No one can repent without God’s help, because unregenerate man is a slave to sin (Romans 6:6). God wants all to repent. He grants every person the opportunity to repent and offers the ability to repent to all who humble themselves. “God… gives grace to the humble” (James 4:6). He, not they, frees them from slavery to sin. And that is more likely to happen if the Lord’s bond-servants are kind and gentle to their opponents, because kindness softens hearts.

If God were sovereignly granting repentance apart from man’s willingness, what would be the point of Paul’s admonition to be kind and gentle? It would make no difference. But because God is not granting repentance in that sovereign, irresistible sense, believers’ actions can affect an unbeliever’s receptivity to the freedom from sin that God offers.

In the Calvinistic interpretation of such passages, we see the primary flaw in their method: ignoring context. Calvinists focus on certain “supportive” Scriptures and ignore those that clearly contradict their reading of them. Their interpretation therefore fails to harmonize with the whole of Scripture. They emphasize God’s sovereignty to the extreme, excluding what Scripture says about man’s responsibility and God-given free will. They dive into a haystack looking for a needle; when they are pricked by something sharp, they exclaim, “This isn’t a stack of hay—it’s a stack of needles, just as I suspected!”

The Mind Set on the Flesh Cannot Submit to God

By ignoring context, Calvinists misinterpret many Scriptures. Piper, for example, cites Romans 8:7 to support the idea of unregenerate man’s complete inability to repent and his need of irresistible grace: “Because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so.”

Is this one verse the only statement in Scripture about the state of unregenerate man? Does this single sentence nullify or supersede everything else the Bible says about salvation? Was Paul a fool who contradicted his own teaching earlier in Romans (for example, Romans 2:14-15)?

We must interpret this verse so that it harmonizes with everything else the Bible says. That is easy to do. Paul is simply saying that a mind “set on the flesh”—a hostile mind—does not and cannot submit to God. But does this prove that one cannot, with God’s gracious help, soften that hostile mind, yield to God’s call, and repent of setting the mind on the flesh? No. All of Scripture leads us to believe such a thing is possible.

In the next verse we read, “And those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Romans 8:8). Does that prove it is impossible for someone to repent, no longer be “in the flesh,” and be “in the Spirit”? Obviously not.

Moreover, Paul did not write Romans 8:7 to prove total depravity and the need for irresistible grace. He was writing to Christians to describe the difference between them and nonbelievers (8:4-11), to help them understand their obligation to put to death the deeds of the body by the Spirit, and to warn them against living according to the flesh lest they die (8:12-14). Once again we see the classic Calvinist error of ignoring context.

Calvinism’s Inconsistency

Piper contradicts his own theology when, after elaborating on man’s total depravity and complete inability to submit to God, he states: “If we think of ourselves as basically good or even less than totally at odds with God, our grasp of the work of God in redemption will be defective. But if we will humble ourselves under this terrible truth of our total depravity…” (p. 8).

Surely Piper is not speaking here to people who have been regenerated and indwelt by God’s Spirit, who are forgiven, clothed in Christ’s righteousness, and set free from sin’s dominion. Such people are not totally depraved. Every Calvinist admits that regenerate people can choose to obey God; therefore no regenerate person can be considered totally depraved by Calvinistic definitions. Piper is speaking to the unregenerate—those whom he says are totally depraved and will always use their freedom to resist God (p. 9), since they have no capacity to do otherwise. Yet he counsels these depraved people to humble themselves, something impossible for them apart from God’s sovereign choice to show them irresistible grace! Like all Calvinists, Piper finds it difficult to remain consistent with his own conclusions.

There is no better illustration of Calvinistic contradiction than at the end of his booklet, where Piper approvingly quotes J. I. Packer explaining what a person who desires to be saved must do. We would expect Packer to say that one can do absolutely nothing, since salvation is supposedly all God’s work and none of man’s. The very question “What must I do to be saved?” reveals, on Calvinistic premises, that the inquirer does not understand that salvation is God’s sovereign work.

The consistent Calvinist must tell such an inquirer: “You can’t do anything! If God has pre-selected you, He will change your will by His irresistible grace, regenerate you, and give you the gifts of repentance and faith. Your very question is presumptuous and reveals your pride. But you can do nothing about your sin of pride, because you are totally depraved and will only use your freedom to resist God. In fact (according to page 6 of Piper’s booklet), you are so totally depraved that any attempts you make at repentance are actually evil in God’s eyes, because everything you do is sin.”

Keep in mind that Piper has already declared that God first sovereignly regenerates the sinner, who then immediately receives Christ. According to the Calvinist, one does not believe in Christ and then receive regeneration; God regenerates him and then he believes, because he had no capacity to believe while dead in sins. Piper writes:

We believe that new birth is a miraculous creation of God that enables a formerly ‘dead’ person to receive Christ and so be saved. We do not think that faith precedes and causes new birth. Faith is the evidence that God has begotten us anew…. The two acts (regeneration and faith) are so closely connected that in experience we cannot distinguish them. God begets us anew and the first glimmer of life in the newborn child is faith. This new birth is the effect of irresistible grace, because it is an act of sovereign creation (pp. 11-12).

So who is this person asking, “What must I do to be saved?” He must be unregenerate, for he confesses that he does not believe he is saved, indicating that God has not regenerated him or given him the gift of faith. As an unregenerate person, he is either predestined to be sovereignly changed by irresistible grace or he is not. (We will later consider Unconditional Election.) If he is not predestined, there is nothing he can do; he will never be saved.

If he is predestined, either God is currently showing him irresistible grace or He is not. If God is currently showing it, the man cannot resist for a moment and must already be regenerate—yet he cannot be regenerate, because he is confessing that he does not believe he is saved.

Therefore God is not currently changing him by irresistible grace. If he is ever to be regenerated, he must wait until God does so.

Thus only two possibilities remain: either the man is predestined to be changed at some future point, or he is not. Currently there is nothing he can do but continue to sin (he is totally depraved), wait, and hope—which, of course, he does not, will not, and cannot do, since he is totally depraved. To tell him to believe in Jesus is absurd, because (on Calvinistic terms) he cannot do that until after he is regenerate. Yet that is exactly what Paul told the Philippian jailer (Acts 16:31), because Paul believed Jesus’ plan of salvation rather than Calvin’s.

Now read how Packer answers the person who asks, “What must I do to be saved?” My comments are in brackets.

To the question: what must I do to be saved? The old gospel [Calvinism] replies: believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. [Yet why would Packer tell an obviously unregenerate person to do something he cannot possibly do?] To the further question: what does it mean to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ? its reply is: it means knowing oneself to be a sinner, and Christ to have died for sinners; abandoning all self-righteousness and self-confidence, and casting oneself wholly upon Him for pardon and peace; and exchanging one’s natural enmity and rebellion against God for a spirit of grateful submission to the will of Christ through the renewing of one’s heart by the Holy Ghost. [Did the Philippian jailer know and do all this in order to be saved?]

So, to believe in Christ and be saved, I must, among other things, abandon all self-righteousness and self-confidence and exchange my natural enmity and rebellion for a spirit of grateful submission. Yet according to the Calvinist I can do none of these things unless God first regenerates me. And if He regenerates me, He also gives me faith in Christ. If I already have faith in Christ, I do not need to be saved. Why, then, is Packer telling me I must do these things “through the renewing of [my] heart by the Holy Ghost”? If my heart is already renewed, I will automatically do those things because God has sovereignly changed me. I am already saved; I do not need to be saved.

Packer is aware of the inconsistency. In attempting to dig himself out, he only digs deeper:

And to the further question still: how am I to go about believing and repenting, if I have no natural ability to do these things? [Great question!] It [Calvinism] answers: look to Christ, speak to Christ, cry to Christ, just as you are [a depraved person who would never and could never look, speak, or cry out to Christ, who cannot submit to God, and whom God is obviously not currently giving irresistible grace—otherwise you would already be regenerate]; confess your sin, your impenitence, your unbelief, and cast yourself on His mercy; ask Him to give you a new heart, working in you [what you obviously do not yet have:] true repentance and firm faith; [Yet all of these things the Calvinist says are impossible for a totally depraved person until he is regenerated by irresistible grace! Packer continues:] ask Him to take away your evil heart of unbelief and to write His law within you, that you may never henceforth stray from Him [How could one who is predestined before time and regenerated by God’s sovereign choice ever turn away from God?]. Turn [!!!!!] to Him and trust Him [!!!!] as best you [!!!!!] can [but you can’t!], and pray for grace to turn and trust more thoroughly; use the means of grace expectantly, looking to Christ to draw near to you as you seek to draw near to Him [Here Packer interestingly reverses the order of James 4:8 and adds the word “seek”—a transparent attempt to make the verse more acceptable to his theology, because he knows totally depraved people cannot “draw near to God”]; watch, pray, read and hear God’s Word, worship and commune with God’s people, and so continue till you know in yourself beyond doubt that you are indeed a changed being [When did that happen?], a penitent believer, and the new heart which you desired [Amazing! A totally depraved person wanted all those things and a new heart before God sovereignly gave it to him against his will!] has been put within you.

Packer’s advice repeatedly contradicts his own theology. According to that theology there are no unregenerate people sincerely seeking to know how to be saved, because totally depraved people use their freedom only to resist God and do evil. Packer would have been more consistent if he had answered, “You can’t be sincere in asking that!”

Not only is Packer’s advice inconsistent; it is potentially dangerous. Suppose a sincere seeker follows Packer’s list and afterward feels he is saved. On what does his faith rest? It cannot rest on any of God’s promises, because, to the Calvinist, there is no promise of salvation that any individual may claim; it is only God’s will for some to be saved, and their names are not listed in the Bible. The only real basis for his faith can therefore be what he has done and is doing. His faith rests in himself, not in Christ—something Scripture repeatedly warns against.

The non-Calvinist, by contrast, can take Jesus at His word: “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:16). He can cry out in faith, “Lord Jesus, I believe in You, and according to Your promise to everyone (including me), I have eternal life by faith!” His works will immediately validate his faith. While the non-Calvinist rejoices in the gift of salvation and manifests the Spirit’s fruit, the Calvinist is still wondering whether he is one of the chosen ones and is looking at his works to try to convince himself that he is.

God Opens Hearts

Rather than allowing Scripture to balance Scripture, Calvinists consistently focus on passages that emphasize God’s part in salvation and ignore those that focus on man’s part. They conclude that salvation is entirely God’s work and that man has no responsibility. Piper points, for example, to Acts 16:14:

A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.

“See!” the Calvinist exclaims. “God opened Lydia’s heart! That is just another way of saying that God showed her irresistible grace!”

Because such an interpretation stands in absolute contradiction to what thousands of Scriptures say about God and salvation, the person who wants to harmonize Acts 16:14 with the rest of the Bible offers a better reading: Luke is simply emphasizing God’s part in salvation.

God succeeded in doing in Lydia’s heart what He desires to do in everyone’s heart. He succeeded because she, unlike others, first submitted to listen to Paul’s preaching. She could have walked away. She didn’t. Then she yielded to the Holy Spirit’s conviction and drawing. Lydia believed. Over the years I have observed many people “open the hearts” of even their adversaries by various means, but I have never thought they did so without their adversaries’ consent.

In the same chapter we read that the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas what he must do to be saved (Acts 16:30). Paul did not respond, “You can’t do anything! You may be saved only if it is God’s preordained will, and if it is, He will show you His irresistible grace and you will be regenerated and given faith!” Rather, Paul said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household” (Acts 16:31).

Paul could make this promise because he knew salvation is open to anyone who believes in the Lord Jesus. He then “spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house” (Acts 16:32), because “faith comes from hearing” (Romans 10:17). They all believed, were saved, and were baptized.

Here is how a Calvinist must understand the jailer’s salvation: When the jailer asked what he must do to be saved, he was not yet under the influence of irresistible grace; otherwise he would already have been regenerate and would already have received the gifts of faith and repentance. He was therefore still totally depraved, always using his freedom to resist God. Why, then, is a totally depraved person sincerely asking what he must do to be saved? If the Calvinist says it is because this person is under conviction, it must be “resistible grace” rather than “irresistible grace.” Yet according to Piper the totally depraved sinner will always use his freedom to resist God and would never sincerely seek salvation. This jailer, however, was clearly seeking sincerely.

When Paul told the jailer to believe and he would be saved—along with his household—Paul did not know whether the jailer was predestined. On Calvinistic premises he must have been thinking, “I hope this man is one of the predestined ones and that God is about to bestow irresistible grace, because what I have just told him is absolutely impossible for him to do. I have actually given him false hope if he is not predestined. I also hope every member of his household is predestined, otherwise I have deceived him about them as well. Perhaps I should have simply told him the truth about total depravity and irresistible grace.” How could any consistent, thoughtful Calvinist tell people they will be saved if they believe in the Lord Jesus without such thoughts running through his mind?

The book of Acts is full of indications that man plays a part in his salvation (see Acts 2:37-41; 3:19-26; 7:51; 8:6-14, 22-23, 36-37; 9:35, 42; 10:34-35, 43; 11:21; 13:8-13, 38-41, 46-47; 14:1; 15:19; 16:30-34; 17:2-4, 11-12, 17, 30-31; 18:4-8, 19, 27-28; 19:8-9, 18; 20:21; 22:18; 26:17-20; 28:23-24). It is also full of indications that God is actively seeking to get people to respond to His love. Once again we see the primary error of Calvinists: they focus on Scriptures that seem to support their doctrines and ignore those that stand in direct contradiction, failing to harmonize Scripture with Scripture.

Because Acts 2:47 says, “The Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved,” should we conclude from that single verse that God is the only one who plays a part and that man plays none? The verse does not say anyone repented or believed. Should we conclude that no one did, and that God simply saved them? It also does not say anyone preached the gospel to them. Should we conclude that God was saving them without preaching? No intelligent Calvinist would draw such conclusions. Yet that is precisely what Calvinists do with verses such as Acts 16:14. Searching for the needle in the haystack, they are pricked by something sharp and conclude the whole stack is needles, not hay.

Satan Blinds the Minds of Unbelievers

Piper also cites 2 Corinthians 4:3-6 to support irresistible grace:

And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your bond-servants for Jesus’ sake. 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.

Does this passage prove that God shines His light only into the darkened hearts of certain ones to whom He shows irresistible grace? Only to someone with a preconceived bias looking for supporting verses. The passage highlights Satan’s part in keeping people in his clutches and God’s part in releasing them. It does not emphasize man’s part in that process, nor is it everything the Bible has to say about salvation.

No Calvinist would conclude from this passage that the only reason unregenerate people perish is that Satan blinds them through no fault of their own. Rather, the Calvinist would quickly say there is more to it—the unsaved man is totally depraved and always uses his freedom to resist God. Every Calvinist would therefore admit that this passage does not explain everything about why man is sinful or how he is freed from sin.

The passage focuses on Satan’s influence and God’s influence. God’s truth can break through the lies of Satan that are believed in the hearts of the unregenerate.

Something of man’s responsibility is also implied: Paul refers to the “perishing” as the “unbelieving.” Unbelieving people are people who do not believe, and believing is something Scripture repeatedly says is man’s responsibility. Everyone—regenerate and unregenerate—believes something. The unregenerate believe Satan’s lies and are thus blinded by him; the regenerate believe God’s truth and are no longer blinded. Moreover, many Scriptures, including the best-known verse in the Bible (John 3:16), tell us that people perish because they do not believe.

Paul also refers to Satan as “the god of this world.” Satan is “the god of this world” because the world has chosen to serve him. When people (to use Jesus’ exact words) “turn… from the dominion of Satan to God” (Acts 26:18), Jesus becomes their Lord and Satan is no longer their master. God frees them from Satan’s power.

2 Corinthians 4:6 does not prove that God sovereignly shines His light into the hearts of those He has pre-selected for salvation and withholds it from those He has pre-selected for damnation. It simply says that God has shone His light into our hearts, contrasting that with Satan who had previously blinded our minds. To extract the Calvinistic concept of irresistible grace from this passage is to force more meaning into it than is there and to produce an interpretation that does not harmonize with the rest of Scripture. Moreover, if God sovereignly preordains who will and who will not be saved, this passage creates more problems for Calvinists than they want to handle: they can only conclude that God—sovereign to the point of being responsible for everything—is the true force behind the satanic deception that blinds unbelievers, and that Satan is not God’s enemy but His obedient helper.

Does the New Birth Precede Faith?

Piper connects irresistible grace with the new birth and states that God sovereignly regenerates us, resulting in our having faith. The only scriptural support he offers is 1 John 5:1, quoted from the Revised Standard Version: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God.” Piper argues that “has been” indicates that faith is the evidence that one has already been born again prior to believing.

This is poor exegesis. John is not revealing that the new birth precedes faith; he is simply describing one result of faith in Jesus.

John’s clear purpose was not to establish the chronological order of salvation but to state one of the main themes of his first epistle: the evidence of a true Christian. He repeatedly lists three tests: (1) love for the brethren, (2) keeping Christ’s commandments, and (3) believing that Jesus is the Christ. In 1 John 5:1 he touches on the third test, as he does elsewhere (1 John 2:18-27; 4:1-6, 14-15; 5:5, 10, 13).

Clearly John did not believe regeneration precedes faith. He wrote at the close of his Gospel: “These have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name” (John 20:31, emphasis added).

Neither did Jesus: “While you have the Light, believe in the Light, so that you may become sons of Light” (John 12:36, emphasis added).

Neither did Paul: “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26, emphasis added).

Incidentally, the NASB translation of 1 John 5:1 does not contain the past-tense form on which Piper’s interpretation rests: “Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is [not has been] born of God.” Piper’s reading of 1 John 5:1 is another imaginary needle in the haystack.

On the same subject Piper attempts to explain away the obvious contradiction between his doctrine and John 1:12-13: “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

Any normal reader, without a Calvinistic lens, would understand these words to mean that anyone can receive Christ by believing in His name, and that as many as do, God gives them the right to become His children. Believing therefore comes before regeneration. This regeneration is not a physical birth, and it does not happen because man willed it, but because God willed it. No person can cause himself to be spiritually reborn. But God will regenerate anyone who believes in Jesus and make that person His child.

In his explanation Piper contradicts both himself and John: “In other words, it is necessary to receive Christ in order to become a child of God [that means one receives Christ before becoming a child of God; receiving Christ is a condition that must first be met], but the birth that brings one into the family of God is not possible by the will of man. Man is dead in trespasses and sins. He cannot make himself new or create new life in himself. He must be born of God. Then, with the new nature of God, he immediately receives Christ.” This directly contradicts what Piper has just said and what John actually wrote.

Conclusion

Under the scrutiny of Scripture, the Calvinistic doctrines of total depravity and irresistible grace are found to add to and contradict the revelation of the Bible.

These doctrines nullify Scripture’s clear teaching regarding man’s sovereignly-granted free will and his responsibility to respond to the gospel and cooperate with God.

They make human beings into robots, incapable of making moral choices and having no capacity to love.

They make Christians into people whom God forced against their wills to become His children.

They make the preaching of the gospel senseless and make liars out of all gospel preachers who lead people to believe they have a choice.

They make meaningless Christ’s and His apostles’ appeals to repent and the hundreds of Scriptures that state that people have the ability to do so.

They make God an unjust judge who condemns people for doing what they are incapable of not doing.

They also make Him a confused being who works against Himself yet cooperates with Satan, and a hypocrite who condemns others for what He Himself is guilty of.

Moreover, they make Him responsible for the damnation of billions and ultimately for all the suffering in the world, since only He can stop sin, yet He chooses not to regenerate billions of sinners.

Finally, Calvinists are unable to live consistently with their own doctrine. If they preach any gospel at all, they preach a deceptive Arminian gospel. They must lie (according to their own definition of truth) to anyone who asks, “What must I do to be saved?”—as J. I. Packer’s advice to sincere seekers reveals.

All of this is done at the expense of Scripture, upon which they force their interpretations and which they twist—so that millions are currently deceived by their doctrine. How many people have given up hope of salvation because of Calvinistic teaching, thinking they are not among the elect because they have felt no irresistible grace? How many unregenerate people have deceived themselves into believing they are among the elect, and thus claim what they do not possess and can never forfeit?

Dear Calvinist, the blood of such people is on your hands.