“No Maverick Molecule!”—by RC Sproul

 

Another interesting short podcast from the late theologian RC Sproul, published by Ligonier Ministries, outlining Calvinistic and Reformed theology that is worth discussing. The transcript begins as follows:

“If God is not Sovereign, God is not God.”

Agreed—except that there is more than one way of defining “sovereign:” the Calvinistic way, or the biblical way. There is the Calvinistic definition of “sovereign,” which requires the predestination and predetermination of all future events, including all future choices and decisions of man (thus abrogating the free agency and freewill of man); and there is also the biblical version of it, which doesn’t result in predestination and denial of man’s freewill. In Calvinism, divine sovereignty and libertarian freewill are incompatible; you can’t have both. Whereas in biblical terms, they are compatible. He continues:

“When I was teaching seminary, I was responsible to teach a course on the theology of the Westminster Confession of Faith. The Westminster Confession of Faith is a 17^th century theological document that was the confessional foundation for historic Presbyterianism.”

Presbyterianism, by the way, is the most Calvinistic of all Protestant denominations. The acceptance of Calvinism is not uniform across all Protestant denominations. Some are more devoted to it than others. Presbyterians are its strongest devotees. He continues:

“And we had come to the place in the Confession where I was going to have to teach chapter three the following week, and chapter three is entitled, On The Eternal Decrees of God. Now, I am among Presbyterians, so they know exactly what that means. They say, ‘Oh, now we are going to talk about predestination!’ And when you get a bunch of seminary students together, and there is nothing they enjoy better than to chew over questions about predestination, and have endless discussions into the night. They love it, and they love to debate that topic. So I said, ‘Next Tuesday night we are going to take up chapter three of the Confession.’

“Now you have to understand that this particular class was open to the public. And so people who were not enrolled as seminary students were allowed to come in and audit the class, or drop by to visit a particular lecture. So every one of my students who had a friend who didn’t believe in predestination, they went out and cornered them, and grabbed them by the throat and say, ‘You have got to come hear our professor, and he is going to play Paladin … He is going to teach us all about predestination.’ So we had about 250 students assembled, I guess, that night in the class.

“And I started the class by reading the opening lines of chapter three of the Westminster Confession. I don’t have them down verbatim, but I can give you basically what it says there. It starts off by saying something like this, ‘That God has or does from all eternity, immutably and sovereignly ordain whatsoever comes to pass, comma.’ I will say that again. ‘God does sovereignly, immutably, ordain whatsoever comes to pass, comma.’ I stopped right there at the comma, and I said, ‘Now, here is this statement: it says that from all eternity, God does freely, and sovereignly, and immutably ordain every single thing that comes to pass. How many of you believe that?’”

That is a nuanced statement. It can be understood in more than one way. One way of understanding it, which is the Calvinistic, Presbyterian way, would be that God has causally determined and predestined all future events, including all the future choices and decisions of man—both good and bad—which amounts to a negation of freewill. That is unbiblical and false. Another way of understanding it, which is the biblical way, is that God has granted man moral agency and libertarian freewill, to freely choose between good and evil, right or wrong, so that they can then be judged justly for all the good or evil they have done, and be rewarded or punished accordingly. That is the biblical doctrine—which does not in any way question or undermine divine sovereignty.

God is perfectly sovereign over all his creation, in that he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. He has a perfect foreknowledge of all the future events, including all the freewill choices and decisions of man. He also has the power to prevent any future event from happening if he wanted to (and sometimes he does). Nothing happens by chance, or by the freewill of man that he is not aware of, and could not prevent from happening if he wanted to. But for the most part he allows the evil in the world to happen because that is the only way that man can be free, and be held accountable for his actions. In that sense of the term, you could say that God has “ordained” all things to come to pass. But it doesn’t mean that he has causally determined all the evil (or good) choices and actions of free moral creatures, including man. It happens by his permission. It happens because he allows it to happen, for the reasons explained above—so that man can be held accountable for his actions. But it doesn’t mean that he has causally determined all the freewill choices and decisions made by man.

The biblical teaching is that this world, this period of time in which we now live, is intended as a test, a trial, to see who will do good and who will do evil, and be rewarded or punished accordingly: “they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:28–29). That is the purpose of this (brief) mortal life. It is a time of test, a trial, followed by a day of judgement in which God will “judge the world in righteousness” (Psalm 9:7-8; 96:12-13; 98:8-9; Acts 17:31); and “reward every man according to his works” (Matt. 16:27; Rev. 2:23; 18:6; 20:12–13).

2 Corinthians 5:

10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Revelation 22:

12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

That is the purpose of this (brief) period of mortal experience, to test our metal, to see whether we will choose good or evil, and be rewarded or punished accordingly. That is the clear teaching of the Bible. Calvinism’s twisted and false idea of “sovereignty,” resulting in predestination and predetermination of all future events, including all the future choices and decisions of man, is a heresy, and a complete rejection of the biblical doctrine as stated above. He then continues:

“I mean this was a Presbyterian seminary, and 200 hands went up in the air, proudly wearing the badge of their conviction of the sovereignty. They go, ‘Oh we believe that.’”

As misled by the Calvinists and Presbyterians, that is! That false belief, the heresy of predestination and predetermination of all future choices and decisions of man, is not a requirement of “sovereignty”. The fact that God has determined to grant man libertarian freewill and free agency, does not in any degree diminish from his “sovereignty”. God does not have to be a tyrant in order to be “sovereign”. It is the heresy of Calvinism that equates the two. He continues:

“50 hands didn’t go up. I said, ‘Okay, how many of you don’t believe it?’ I said, ‘It is okay, nobody is taking down names, and you are not going to get in any trouble, or we are not going to have a heresy trial here, or get out the matches, burn you at the stake.’ I said, ‘Let’s be honest, how many of you don’t believe that?’ About 50 guys raised their hand, ‘We don’t believe that.’ I said, ‘Okay, let me ask another question: How many of you would candidly describe yourselves as atheists? Again, no persecution going to be taking place here. Just how many of you would call yourself atheist?’ Nobody put up their hand.

“And I immediately went into my Lieutenant Colombo routine, ‘There is just one thing I don’t understand here; I don’t understand why those of you who did say that you did not believe in this statement, didn’t raise your hand when I asked you if you were atheist?’ Well, I mean, there was a hue and cry, and I was ready to be lynched. They said, ‘What are you talking about? Just because we don’t believe that God freely and immutably ordains whatsoever comes to pass, you are calling us atheist.’ I said, ‘That is exactly what I am calling you.’ I said, ‘If you don’t believe that God ordains everything that comes to pass, bottom line, you don’t believe in God. You don’t believe in God.’”

That is entirely false, and a perversion of the truth of course. God has foreseen, and also permitted all the evil that shall come to pass by the freewill and free agency of man, for the reasons explained above. If that is what he meant by “ordain,” that would be a true statement; but evidently that is not what he means by it. What he means is the absolute predestination and predetermination of all future choices and decisions of man, which of course is heretical and false, and unbiblical. The “sovereignty” of God is not in the least degree diminished by the libertarian freewill and free agency of man. He continues:

“I said, ‘You have to understand that this passage here in the Confession, that God ordains everything that comes to pass, there is not anything in that statement that is uniquely Presbyterian. There is not even anything in there that is uniquely Christian. That statement doesn’t divide Presbyterians from Methodists, or Lutherans, or Anglicans. …’”

Like I said, it all depends on how the word “ordain” is understood. The Calvinistic way is not the only way. God is omniscient, as well as omnipotent and omnipresent. His omniscience enables him to see and know all future choices and decisions of man (without having “caused” it); his omnipresence and omnipotence also enables him prevent any future evil choices and actions of man if he wants to (and sometimes he does). But more often than not he permits it for the reasons explained above—so that mankind can be held accountable for their actions on the day of judgement.

So there are two different ways of understanding the word “ordain” in that context. If you mean that it has happened by his permission, in the sense that he was aware of it before it happened, and he could have prevented it if he had wanted to, but chose not to for the reasons explained above, that would be a true statement. But if by “ordain” you mean that God has causally determined all the evil (or good) actions of man by a “sovereign decree,” thus cancelling out all of human free agency and freewill—thus attributing to God all the evil desires and actions of man—the answer is emphatically, No. That is the heresy of Calvinism. It is not biblical. He then continues:

“‘… And it doesn’t distinguish between Presbyterians and Islamic religion, or Judaism religions. It is a distinction between theism and atheism. It is a statement, simply a declaration of the absolute sovereignty of God.’”

Not true. I don’t claim expertise on every religion; but as far as I know, predestination vs. freewill has been a subject of debate in all major religions, at one time or another; and it certainly has had a long history in Islam. The ideological battle between the proponents of predestination and those of freewill goes back to the early history of Islam, and has had a long history after that. A Google search will provide much interesting information, such as in this link. I also found references to what looks like a very interesting book, titled: Free Will and Predestination in Islamic Thought by Maria De Cillis, which is very tempting to read. Here is a quote from the abstract:

“The subject of ‘human free-will’ versus ‘divine predestination’ is one of the most contentious topics in classical Islamic thought. By focusing on a theme of central importance to any philosophy of religion, and to Islam in particular, this book offers a critical study of the intellectual contributions offered to this discourse by three key medieval Islamic thinkers: Avicenna, al-Ghazālī and Ibn ʿArabī.” Link

He continues:

“What I tried to get these young people to see was this, very simply that if God is not sovereign, God is not God.”

This is getting boring. Denying predestination is not the same as denying “sovereignty”. God can be “sovereign” over his creation (and is), and still grant man complete libertarian freewill and moral agency to do as they please, so they can be held accountable for their actions on judgement day: “they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation” (John 5:28–29). He continues:

“If there is one maverick molecule in the universe, one molecule running loose outside the scope of God’s sovereign ordination, then ladies and gentlemen, there is not the slightest confidence that you can have that any promise that God has ever made about the future will come to pass.”

Another deceptive and misleading argument. Molecules don’t have wills. They don’t make choices. They can’t do right or wrong, and they can’t be rewarded or punished for doing either. You don’t compare the fate of a free moral agent with that of a molecule.

And God’s “promises” and “predictions” are two different things. When God promises that something will happen, it means that he causes it to happen (without overriding man’s freewill). But when God predicts that something will happen, it does not necessarily mean that he has caused it to happen. It means that he has foreseen, and has a perfect foreknowledge that it will happen. It also means that he has the power to prevent it from happening if he wanted to, but he chooses not to for the reasons explained above. But that is not the same as saying that he has caused it to happen; or even that he is pleased or happy about it to happen.

The Bible teaches that God is grieved at the wickedness and sinfulness of man (Gen. 6:6; Psalm 95:10; Jer. 32:35; Heb. 3:10); and that in him there is no sin (1 John 3:5). Why would he be “grieved” over something that he himself had “caused?” So the conclusion is that Calvinism is heretical, unbiblical, and false, and it is best to stir away from it as much as possible.

“Why Am I a Christian?”—by R.C. Sproul

 

That is a question that RC Sproul was fond of asking, to which he always had a ready-made answer. The complete question from the transcript is as follows:

“Why am I a Christian, and some of my closest and dearest friends are not? I can’t come up with an answer. I can’t come up with any reason why God would redeem me. One question that bothers me, and I am sure it bothers you, is the question, Why am I a Christian, and some of my closest and dearest friends are not? … Is it because you are more righteous than your brother?”

However, on thinking about it more, one instinctively feels that something isn’t quite right with that question. It appears to be a very self-centered, inward looking question. It focuses too much on the self, on “me,” rather than on God or man. As one reads the scriptures, one gets the impression that God wants the focus of our attention to be on God and on man, rather than on ourselves. He wants our focus to be on the glorification of God, and the salvation of man:

Matthew 5:

13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.

16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

That is where God wants our focus of attention to be: on glorifying God, and on the salvation of man. And it is achieved by doing good works. In Calvinism, however, doing “good works” is a sin! It is called “works salvation!” You are trying to “save yourself” by your own “works,” and you are damned! According to Jesus, however, if we are not actively engaged in doing “good works,” we are as “salt that has lost its savour,” and thenceforth is good for nothing but to be “trodden under foot of men”. The focus of attention of the gospel of Jesus Christ is on doing good works. The focus of attention of Calvinism is on not doing good works. It is all about “faith alone” and “imputation,” and no works at all! It is the antithesis of the gospel of Jesus Christ as taught in the Bible.

I am sure the Calvinists will now say, If you genuinely “believe,” if you have the “faith,” the “works” will automatically follow. If it doesn’t, that means that you never “believed,” your faith was not genuine. The answer to that is, Why then does Jesus focus so much on doing the actual “works”? Why doesn’t he just say, “Believe, and you don’t need to worry about anything else; the rest will take care of itself.” Why does he never say that? Why does he place so much emphasis on the importance of doing the “works”?

I hope the folks at Ligonier appreciate all my input to the development of their theology. Such expert theological advice doesn’t come cheap! 😃

Wayne Grudem’s Friends and Colleagues Trying to Rescue his Reputation!

 

Since I posted my series of 7 blog posts exposing all the false claims and untrue statements about the beliefs and teachings of Latter-day Saints made in the second edition of his book on Systematic Theology, his friends and colleagues have been bending over backwards to try and bolster his morale and save his reputation, the above video being the by-product of their efforts. It contains statements of support and encouragement from ten of his friends and associates, the full transcript of which is as follows (the transcript on the video was turned off, I had to obtain it another way):

“Brian Arnold: Hey Wayne, just wanted to say congratulations on the second edition of your Systematic Theology. All of us in Phoenix Seminary are so proud of you in this accomplishment; and we consider it an honor to call you a colleague and a friend. For myself, I first read Systematic Theology as a 19 year old college student, and it lit a fire in my heart to study theology, and it is why I am where I am at today; so thank you from the bottom of my heart. We put together a brief little video of some of your friends, who also wanted to pass along their congratulations. I hope you enjoy it.

“Vern Poythress: Hi Wayne.

“Jason Fritz: Hi Wayne.

“Ray Ortlund: Wayne, congratulations.

“Sam Storms: Just a brief word of profound appreciation for this new second edition of Systematic Theology.

“Al Mohler: It is my great joy to congratulate Wayne Grudem on this new release.

“Tom Schreiner: Wayne congratulations.

“John Piper: Congratulations Wayne on the publication of your Systematic Theology 2^nd edition.

“Jason Fritz: I know it is going to be a tremendous blessing to so many people, as it has been in my life already. I also want to take this opportunity to let you know what a privilege it is to be one of your pastors. We love you Wayne, we love Margaret. God bless you both.

“Sam Storms: I think I have told you before what a blessing it has been to me, to people in my church. I think it is a gift to the body of Christ that will live on for generations to come. So again, thank you for your hard work; I know it was an incredible task to produce this second edition, especially given the fact that it is now so much larger than the first edition; but I plan on digging into it deeply, and reading through the entire thing once again. So I hope and pray that you are blessed to see the release of this book. I look forward to getting my copy. Thank you again for all the effort, the countless hours you poured into this work. I know that the lord will use it mightily for his glory, to bring a lot of correction to a lot of bad theology out there too.

“John Piper: It has been a staple of our discipleship in Bethlehem for decades, and just the other night Noel and I were reading in our advent devotional, and lo and behold, a quote from Wayne Grudem in the devotional. So it has been pervasive and global and foundational, and I thank God for you.

“Gregg Allison: When I began my teaching career in 1994, I began using the first edition of Systematic Theology; so hundreds of students have worked their way through this wonderful resource. Now in the year 2020, after 26 years of teaching, I am using the second edition of Systematic Theology; and look forward to many more years of using this great resource.

“Vern Poythress: Congratulations on the second edition of your Systematic Theology, it is even better than the first. I trust that the Lord will use it to further spread the knowledge of the truth throughout the world, many languages I understand. So congratulations

“John DelHousaye: The biggest impression that it made on me were the hymns that you had at the end of every chapter. At the time, I thought that that was different and unusual, and in fact it was. But I have come to see it as something very dear, which is that the goal of our work should ultimately bring us to worship. And I also think it is appropriate that I am talking to you from a church, because you have always written for the people; and you made theology accessible, so that anyone can understand God better.

“Al Mohler: Wayne there are very few books that really changed Evangelical history, you have written one of them. And the continuing influence of your book is seen in the fact that it is coming out in the second edition, after so many hundreds of thousands have been sold already. I pray the lord will use it. I congratulate you for writing it. It is an incredible triumph. God bless you Wayne.

“Tom Schreiner: I am so thankful for the amazing clarity of your book, its faithfulness, and especially the pastoral application. I pray that the second edition will have even more impact than the first.

“Ray Ortlund: So many weeks, as I am ramping up for Sunday morning preaching, I have needed clarity and richness of understanding, and greater depth on a theological topic. I have picked up your Systematic Theology, looked up that topic in the index, then turned to the passage: I have been helped, I have been equipped; I have therefore preached the gospel more faithfully, more fully, because of our partnership in the work of the kingdom. And Wayne I believe, that what you have done by grace, what I have done by grace, shoulder to shoulder, for the sake of Jesus in this generation, I believe contributes to the next great awakening. I am profoundly grateful. God be with you Wayne.”

Sorry, but that won’t work. The accusations and claims that he has made against the beliefs and teachings of Latter-day Saints are so blatantly false that they are legitimate grounds for legal action to be taken against the publisher. You can’t expect to spread falsehoods and lies about other people’s beliefs and convictions, and expect them to keep quiet about it. The only way for him to rescue his reputation is to instruct his publisher to withdraw all printed copies of the book from circulation, destroy all existing copies, replace them with an amended version, and then to offer to replace all previously purchased copies of the book with the new version free of charge—and to do it all at his own expense, not the publisher’s expense. And then to offer a public apology to Latter-day Saints and to the Church for the false claims and accusations he has made about their beliefs in the first printing of the book.

What is Wrong With This Theology?

 

The above is another short podcast from the late Reformed theologian RC Sproul, answering the question: “Do we have freewill?” It is a short but compact, highly nuanced statement that requires quite a bit of unpacking to get to the bottom of it, and identify all the errors in it. The transcript begins as follows:

“God has given us minds and hearts, and he has given us wills. And we exercise that will all the time. We are not robots. Robots don’t have minds. Robots don’t have wills. We are human beings. We make choices. That is why we are in trouble…”

That is a somewhat dishonest presentation of the Calvinistic and Reformed understanding of freewill. Calvinism teaches that although we “freely choose” what we want, our “wants” and desires, which determine our choices (good or bad), have been predetermined by God; which in the final analysis means we have no freewill at all; we are robots. It is a false pretense and a sham, a fake freewill. It is an extremely deceitful and dishonest theology. RC Sproul is perfectly well aware of this, but tries to hide it. He continues:

“I was interviewed for a series of programs that were being presented about Reformed theology, and the person who was running this program asked me what the basic issue was between Augustinian theology or Reformed theology, and historic semi-Pelagianism.”

This is another exercise in subtle deception, by diverting attention from the problem of freewill vs. predestination in the Calvinistic and Reformed theology, to the “Augustinian” issues of the fifth century, which are not directly related to it. Here is an interesting quote from the Wikipedia on the subject of semi-Pelagianism (emphasis added):

“The term ‘semi-Pelagianism,’ a 16^th-century coinage, is considered a misnomer by scholars. … The historical theological dispute is also known as the Augustinian controversy. ‘Semi-Pelagianism’ has frequently been used in a pejorative sense. … In more recent times, the word has been used in the Reformed Protestant camp to designate anyone who deviates from what they see as the Augustinian doctrines of sovereignty, original sin and grace: most notably Arminian Protestants and Roman Catholics. Although Calvinist and Lutheran theologies of salvation differ significantly on issues such as the nature of predestination and the salvific role of the sacraments (see means of grace), both branches of historic Protestantism claim the theology of Augustine as a principal influence.” Link

He then continues:

“I said, I think it comes down to a different understanding of freedom, and of free will. I think the principal problem that people have with divine sovereignty, with divine election, …”

Another subtle exercise in deception. He is presupposing, and taking for granted, that the Calvinistic idea of “divine sovereignty,” which it equates with predestination and Unconditional Election, is correct and is not in dispute, which is not the case. The Calvinistic idea of “divine sovereignty,” equating it with predestination and predetermination of all future events, including all future choices and decisions made by man (thus effectively denying human freewill), is very much disputed, and is certainly unbiblical and incorrect. He continues:

“… is immediately they say, ‘Well, we believe that man has free will.’ Well, I don’t know any Augustinian in all of church history who didn’t strongly affirm that we have free will.”

Another subtle exercise in deception—on several fronts. Firstly, the issue is not with the “Augustinian” definition of freewill, but with the Calvinistic one. They are not the same. Secondly, the Calvinistic idea of freewill is a false pretense and a sham, as explained above. It is a fake freewill. It is no freewill at all. It does indeed turn human beings into robots. He continues:

“We are volitional creatures. God has given us minds and hearts, and he has given us wills. And we exercise that will all the time. We make choices every minute of the day, and we choose what we want.”

As predestined and predetermined by God (according to Calvinism); which amounts to a denial of freewill. It is a false pretense and a fake freewill. See above. He continues:

“We choose freely.”

We “choose freely” what God wants us to “want” (according to Calvinism); which is a false pretense and a fake freewill. It is no freewill at all. He continues:

“Nobody is coercing us, putting a gun to our head.”

God is, in his own way, according to their theology. If our choices and decisions are determined by our desires and “wants,” and our desires and “wants” are predetermined by God (which they are, according to his theology), then we are not making real choices and decisions at all. It is worse than someone holding a gun to our head. Somebody with a gun to his head, still has a real choice to make—between being shot in the head, or doing as he is told. He could still choose to be shot in the head, if he thinks that is a better option than doing what he is told. But in the Calvinistic model, there is no real choice at all—if he is predetermined by God to want whatever God wants him to want; and his choices and decisions are determined by those wants. He continues:

“And we are not robots.”

That is exactly what we are—if Calvinism is true—no difference. He continues:

“Robots don’t have minds. Robots don’t have wills. Robots don’t have hearts.”

In a certain sense, they do; except that it has been pre-programmed and predetermined by someone else—which is exactly how it works out in Calvinism—no difference. He continues:

“We are human beings. We make choices. That is why we are in trouble with God. Because the choices that we make in our fallen condition are sinful choices. We choose according to our desires, which are only wicked continuously, the Bible tells us.”

As predetermined by God, according to Calvinism. He continues:

“And that we are, as it were, dead in sin and trespasses; even though biologically we are very much alive. And we are walking according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of air, fulfilling the lusts of the flesh, is what the Bible tells us.”

Not according to the Bible. The Bible teaches that all mankind, believers and unbelievers alike (Christians, Jews, Muslims, Pagans etc.) are capable of doing good or evil, and be rewarded or punished (saved or damned) by God accordingly. Numerous references have been given in previous posts. Here are some highlights:

Acts 10:

34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

That was said of Cornelius, who was not a Christian when he was visited by an angel, who told him that his good deeds and righteous acts were approved and accepted by God, and instructed him to send for Peter. That is what the angel told him:

Acts 10:

3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.

4 And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.

He was approved of by God for his righteous deeds as a pagan, long before he had become a Christian. And the rest of the Bible says the same thing:

John 5:

28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life [salvation]; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Matthew 16:

27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

2 Corinthians 5:

10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Revelation 22:

12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

1 Peter 1:

17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:

Luke 6:

47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:

48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

Matthew 7:

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Matthew 25:

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Romans 2:

6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew [or Christian] first, and also of the Gentile [or pagan];

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew [or Christian] first, and also to the Gentile [or pagan]:

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Galatians 6:

7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.

10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

James 1:

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

Romans 14:

12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Ezekiel 18:

20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his [evil] ways, and live?

24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.

Ezekiel 33:

10 Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; Thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live?

11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

12 Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression: as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth.

13 When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it.

14 Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right;

15 If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die.

16 None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live.

17 Yet the children of thy people say, The way of the Lord is not equal: but as for them, their way is not equal.

18 When the righteous turneth from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, he shall even die thereby.

19 But if the wicked turn from his wickedness, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall live thereby.

20 Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways.

So his Calvinistic theology is wrong on many fronts, not just one or two. He continues:

“And so, the Bible makes it very clear that we are actively involved in making choices for which we are responsible, and which expose us to the judgment of God.”

Except that those “choices” are predetermined by God, according to Calvinism; which makes God a hypocrite for judging them and punishing them for doing what he himself has predestined and predetermined them to do. He continues:

“And yet at the same time, the Bible teaches us that we are enslaved. We are free from coercion, but we don’t have what Augustine called royal liberty. We are not free from ourselves. We are not free from our own sinful inclinations, and our sinful appetites, and our sinful desires. We are slaves to our sinful impulses. That’s what the Bible teaches us again, and again, and again.”

Except that that doesn’t agree with the Bible verses quoted above. He continues:

“The Humanist doctrine of free will, the pagan view of free will, says that man is free not only from coercion, but man is free in the sense that his will is indifferent. It has no predisposition or inclination, bias or bent, towards sin, because the pagan and the Humanist deny the radical character of the Fall.”

Except that he never provides any sources for that statement. It is his own invention. A man’s “will” is not determined by his “inclination, bias, or bent” alone (as he presupposes); but also by a moral conscience which everyone has, which enables him to determine whether a given course of action is morally right or morally wrong, and to act contrary to his “inclination, bias, or bent” if his moral judgement tells him that that would be the wrong thing to do. That is what makes him accountable before the law—not just the law of God, but also the law of man. In his theology, this moral ability in man is completely non-existent; but not so in the Bible. See quotes given above. According to those quotes, all of mankind are capable of doing good or evil, right or wrong; and be rewarded or punished (saved or damned) accordingly. He has obtained all of these wrong ideas from Jonathan Edwards, whom he has fallen for head over heels, and which I have already discussed at length in an earlier blog post which can be seen here. He continues:

“But the Bible teaches us that we are fallen creatures who still choose and make decisions; but we make them in the context of our prison of sin.”

As predetermined by God, according to his theology, which is not biblical. He continues:

“And the only way we can get out of that prison is if God sets us free.”

Unconditionally, according to his theology; which is entirely unbiblical and false. See above.

So the answer to the original question: “What is wrong with this theology?” will have to be, Everything imaginable! It is impossible to think of anything “right” with it, at all! It is heretical and false from start to finish, from the beginning to the end, from top to bottom, sideways, diagonally, vertically, horizontally, back to front, and any other conceivable way or direction you want to look at it. Whether Calvinists will ever be honest enough to acknowledge all of this or not, remains to be seen.