why i disagree with all 5 points of calvinism

3 min read 16-04-2025

why i disagree with all 5 points of calvinism

Calvinism, a major branch of Protestant Christianity, rests on five core tenets often summarized by the acronym TULIP: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. While I respect the theological depth and historical influence of Calvinism, I find myself disagreeing with each of its five points for the following reasons:

1. Total Depravity: A Rejection of Human Free Will

The doctrine of Total Depravity asserts that humanity is utterly corrupted by sin, rendering us incapable of choosing God without divine intervention. This concept, I believe, diminishes the significance of human agency and free will. While acknowledging the pervasive influence of sin, I contend that humans retain the capacity for moral choice and response to God's grace. The Bible itself presents numerous examples of individuals choosing to follow or reject God, suggesting a level of free will inconsistent with total depravity. This capacity for choice, even within a fallen world, is crucial to a balanced understanding of human responsibility.

2. Unconditional Election: Challenging God's Justice and Love

Unconditional Election posits that God chooses some for salvation irrespective of their faith or actions. This view, while emphasizing God's sovereignty, raises concerns about fairness and divine justice. How can a loving and just God arbitrarily choose some for salvation while condemning others to eternal damnation based solely on his preordained decision? This selective salvation feels inconsistent with a God who desires all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4). A more inclusive understanding of God's grace embraces the possibility of salvation for all who genuinely believe and repent.

3. Limited Atonement: Restricting Christ's Sacrifice

Limited Atonement teaches that Christ's atoning sacrifice was only for the elect, not for all humanity. This interpretation, I believe, severely restricts the scope of Christ's sacrifice and undermines the universal message of the Gospel. The Bible portrays Christ's death as a sacrifice for the sins of the world (John 3:16; 1 John 2:2), suggesting a broader application than solely to the elect. To limit the efficacy of Christ's atonement diminishes the potential for universal reconciliation and contradicts the inclusive nature of God's love.

4. Irresistible Grace: Undermining Human Responsibility

Irresistible Grace claims that God's grace cannot be resisted by those he has chosen for salvation. This doctrine, in my view, negates the possibility of rejecting God's offer of grace. It minimizes the individual's role in responding to God's call and accepting salvation. The narrative of the Bible contains countless examples of individuals who, despite encountering God's grace, chose to reject it. Attributing salvation solely to an irresistible force removes personal responsibility and diminishes the significance of faith and repentance.

5. Perseverance of the Saints: Questioning the Possibility of Falling Away

Perseverance of the Saints teaches that those genuinely saved will persevere in their faith until the end, never truly falling away from God. While I believe genuine faith should lead to a life of commitment, I don't agree that it guarantees an unwavering adherence to Christ devoid of any possibility of backsliding or apostasy. The Bible itself portrays instances of believers falling away (Hebrews 6:4-6; 2 Peter 2:20-22). This possibility highlights the ongoing need for vigilance, repentance, and the continuous working of God's grace in a believer's life.

Conclusion: A Broader Vision of Grace

My disagreements with the five points of Calvinism stem from a desire for a more holistic and inclusive understanding of God's grace and human agency. While appreciating the emphasis on God's sovereignty in Calvinistic theology, I find that its limitations on human free will, the scope of Christ's atonement, and the possibility of backsliding lead to a theology that, in my estimation, is too restrictive and ultimately less compatible with the overall message of love, grace, and inclusivity that I find in the scriptures. I believe a broader perspective, acknowledging both God's sovereignty and human responsibility, offers a more complete and satisfying picture of salvation.