Calvinism Analyzed

Refutation

A ruler who can rule if and only if all his subjects cannot make any free choice, vs a ruler who can rule a group of people who can choose to oppose him - which is more powerful, wiser, more skillful, more intelligent, greater - more capable? The one who can rule people that have free will.

If the only way the king can rule to accomplish the goal is to completely control everyone - that indicates a ruler who is not very capable; this is the way Calvinism portrays God.

Refutation

One argument in favor of Calvinism is that it is internally consistent.

Listed below are some of the inconsistencies in Calvinism:

NOTE: many of the claims of Calvinism below may seem horrible; they are NOT being stated as true claims of truth or reality; rather, they are false claims of Calvinism!

Refutation

Calvinism claims that God seeks glory by sending most people to hell. Love does not do this; speaking of charity or love, 1 Cor 13:5 tells us that love

Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

Calvinism says that God does what love does not do. This insults God, portraying God as not loving.

Refutation

Paul wrote of having a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. This reminds one of Calvinism. The zeal for God seems misdirected in both cases. In Calvinism, micro-manipulative control is magnified beyond love, and also beyond scripture. However, the Bible tells us that God exalts His word higher than his name. This seems to imply that what God says should take precedence over how we feel regarding glorifying God's name. Also, the Bible says God is love - it does not say God is control.

Refutation

TBA (to be added)

Refutation

 

Refutation

Impassibility is a theological doctrine that God does not experience emotion due to the actions of people. 1 ^,2

They said, We're all gonna die! 1

Israel said that God brought them out of Egypt to die in the wilderness:

And all the children of Israel murmured against Moses and against Aaron: and the whole congregation said unto them, Would God that we had died in the land of Egypt! or would God we had died in this wilderness!

Col 2:12 says that being risen with Christ is through faith:

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Does being risen with Christ come first, and then enable one to then have saving faith? 

Or does faith come first, then through that faith one becomes risen with Christ?

This verse looks like it is through faith that one is raised with Christ, that being raised with Christ (salvation) is through faith.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Not of works, lest any man should boast. - Eph 2:8-9

This does not claim that faith is the gift of God. William Lane Craig explains this.

Calvinism does this

• The word all is loosely interpreted to mean not all, when such meaning would support Calvinism.
• When such looseness does not support Calvinism, it is rejected, as in the case of God's not repenting in the book of 1 Samuel, in which the extremely literal meaning is applied, ignoring all context.

Below is part of John 17.

The issue is those whom the Father gave to Christ. Verse 2 says Jesus should give eternal life to those the Father gave him.

We will call these the given.

But, who are they?

17 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:

2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

Calvinism might claim sola scriptura, that Calvinism is based on the truth of God's word. However, presumptions seem to predominate in interpretation, turning supposedly exegesis into eisegesis. 

All of the other issues - free will, sovereignty, fairness, etc. can be analyzed from what the Bible, sola scriptura, says. The problem is that Calvinism brings these ideas in as starting points, and then tries to find interpretations of the scripture to fit those ideas.

Per Calvinism, election cannot be changed by people; God elected people before they were born, and they themselves can not affect such election. 

However, Peter suggests differently, contradicting Calvinism's portrayal of election as being to salvation.

Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: ... - 2 Pet 1:10

This verse refutes election as being to salvation. For it tells people to try to make their own election sure.

In 2 Thess 2:13, "from the beginning" could refer to the beginning of Paul's ministry. The scripture does not say "from the beginning of creation" so to claim such is to claim something not in scripture -  not "sola scriptura."