 |
Calvinism Disproved by the Unpardonable Sin
Throughout the gospels, Christ speaks to people in the language of personal responsibility, and He places the responsibility for accepting the grace of God on His hearers. The "unpardonable sin" defined in Matthew 12:22-37, Mark 3:22-30, and Luke 12:10 deals a devasting blow to the Calvinist notion that God gives irresistible grace to the Elect and that he reprobates (passes by) all others. Also, there are numerous scriptural and logical arguments against Calvinism that do not appeal to the possibility of an unpardonable sin, but those are not addressed here.
When I first began to study Calvinism, I believed that it probably was true. After all, the arguments seem so convincing. However, it seemed to me that Christ's statement that a particular sin is unpardonable means that each must be eligible for grace through Christ *until* he or she commits this sin. This calls the doctrines of sovereign election and limited atonement into serious question.
To get clarification, I wrote to a prominent exponent of Calvinism. I have an immense respect for this person and this person's ministry, scholarship, character, and godliness. However, I was disappointed with the response I received, because it did not appeal to scripture and avoided the issues I raised. Mainly, the response simply asserted that "this issue has no bearing on election" and "the elect never commit the unpardonable sin".
I have reproduced my letter below, but out of respect I have deleted the name of the minister and ministry. Also, I have replaced the term 'non-elect,' which I used in the original letter because I was unaware of the correct terminology at the time, with the the correct term "reprobate". Also, I have removed a few lines that are irrelevant to the issue at hand.
I believe that the issues I raise in the following letter disprove Calvinism, because the teaching by Christ on the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shows that ALL PEOPLE BEGIN LIFE AS PARDONABLE PEOPLE but that SOME PEOPLE MAY END UP AS UNPARDONABLE BY COMMISSION OF THIS SPECIFIC SIN, and also because the language Christ uses in the unpardonable sin passages indicates that the responsibility for spurning or not spurning the grace of God rests with each sinner.
In Calvinist theology, humanity is seen as utterly incapable and unwilling to respond to Christ; but in scripture, Christ Himself appeals to people to repent and warns them of the consequences for failing to repent. In Calvinist theology, regeneration precedes faith; and only the already-regenerated person can - and irresistibly and inevitably will - place his or her faith in Christ. In scripture, however, faith in Christ and acceptance of Christ as Lord and Savior precede salvation; in scripture, the exercise of saving faith results instantly in regeneration.
"Reprobates" by the Calvinist definition are unpardonable people (in the sense that God does not enable them to be interested in the Gospel and does not enable them to respond to it) regardless of which sins they commit or do not commit. Logically, if Calvinism if true, they cannot be be in danger of committing a sin which will render them unpardonable, because they can never be pardoned anyhow.
If the Elect receive irresisistible grace and are kept from the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and if the reprobate are unable to respond to the gospel, then why would Christ warn against an unpardonable sin?
________________________________________________________________
[beginning of the letter]
Dear __________:
My question concerns the doctrines of limited atonement and sovereign election, which I have come to believe are almost certainly correct. However, the accounts in Matthew and Mark of the “unpardonable sin” incident seem to me to support the free will position; so I would like for you to clarify for me how the existence of an “unpardonable sin,” if one does exist, fits in with limited atonement and sovereign election.
In essence, my question is: Although scripture overall does seem to teach limited atonement and sovereign election, if people are predestined to salvation or to damnation, how can there be an “unpardonable sin” since individuals are pardonable or unpardonable long before they come into existence, regardless of their actions in life?
Christ’s ominous pronouncement (“Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men”) seems to mean, in effect, “All sins and all insults against God will be forgiven those who place their faith in me as Lord and Savior, but blasphemy of the sort you have just heard these Pharisees commit will not be forgiven.”
Christ seems to be warning these particular Pharisees that if they persist in their blasphemy they will become unable to have their sins forgiven but that if they desist they will remain eligible for forgiveness. If they are of the reprobate, how can they be in jeopardy of losing eligibility for forgiveness?
However, if Christ means that these particular Pharisees already have become unpardonable (by committing a specific act or series of acts) and if Christ is solemnly warning the crowd not to follow them down the same path of doom, it seems to indicate that the people in the crowd will remain pardonable until or unless they commit the same sin.
Presumably the people in the crowd are mostly reprobate, since the elect is the minority of the human race. How could members of the elect possibly become unpardonable, and how could the reprobate people ever have been pardonable? While scripture overall does seem to point to limited atonement and sovereign election, nonetheless it seems that in order for an “unpardonable sin” to exist, there must be people who start out as ‘pardonable people’ and then end up as ‘unpardonable people.’ In human time and human space there is a real possibility but no certainty that people will come to faith in Christ.
If Christ did not atone for the sins of the reprobate and the Holy Spirit does not call upon the reprobate to receive Christ, it would seem that each reprobate person is an unpardonable person (either from the moment of conception or from the moment of that person’s first sin), meaning that all of their sins are unpardonable. If this is true, then how can one specific type of sin be “the unpardonable sin,” since under limited atonement and sovereign election it is people rather than their sins that are pardonable or unpardonable?
I’m not certain if damnation lays hold of each reprobate person at the moment of conception, due to a latent Adamic sin nature. It seems to me more likely that the unpardonable condition of each reprobate person begins only with the first actual sin. That is, each reprobate person who lives long enough and attains enough intelligence to commit his or her first ‘little’ sin would be irreversibly damned. Certain reprobate humans who never get an opportunity to sin (the unborn who die through miscarriage or abortion, infants who die at an extremely young age, and those who live their entire lives in a state of profound mental retardation) might escape damnation despite being reprobate. This is peripheral to my initial question, but if you could address this issue also and refer me to appropriate resources, I would be grateful.
[end of the letter]
___________________________________________________________________
The gospel of Jesus Christ is for a world of pardonable people. Various Calvinists say that God's love is "not promiscuous," that God's love is "particular." Their use of the word "promiscuous" unintentionally or intentionally implies that a divine love available to all people would somehow be less holy, sovereign, and beautiful than a love available only to an elect few. I counter this by proclaiming that while God's beautiful, sovereign, magnificent love for all of humanity is not promiscuous it is PLENTIFUL and that He gives it to all who choose to receive it.
"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
- John 3:14-18
Valentine's Day and the Love of God
Some Poetry of Eric Stokes
An Argument for Abolishing the Electoral College
The Poetic Voice of Rita Dove (literary)
Send E-Mail to: emstokes72@yahoo.com
Copyright © 2008 Eric M. Stokes. All Rights Reserved