Thought for Today

Today, we come to chapter 6: Distorting Scripture To [sic] Teach Heresy.

Kirkland notes, “Calvinism teaches some people are predestined by God to burn in Hell” (page 59). He repeatedly makes that blanket charge against all forms of Calvinism. Calvin did hold to it. One can argue that the view is still held by some hyper-Calvinists. But it is repudiated by many (most?) of those in the Calvinist-Reformed tradition. Kirkland is grossly unfair to ascribe the view to all Calvinists. It is time to directly address the Reformed view.

R.C. Sproul is one of Kirkland’s main targets, to him, one of the worst offenders in advocating another gospel. But what did R.C. Sproul say about double predestination, the belief that God predestined most humans to eternal hell, as Kirkland describes it?

The following is taken from the Ligonier ministry website (10/6/22):

The distortion of double predestination looks like this: There is a symmetry that exists between election and reprobation. God works in the same way and same manner with respect to the elect and to the reprobate. That is to say, from all eternity God decreed some to election and by divine initiative works faith in their hearts and brings them actively to salvation. By the same token, from all eternity God decrees some to sin and damnation (destinare ad peccatum) and actively intervenes to work sin in their lives, bringing them to damnation by divine initiative. 

Such a view is indeed a monstrous assault on the integrity of God. This is not the Reformed view of predestination, but a gross and inexcusable caricature of the doctrine. Such a view may be identified with what is often loosely described as hyper-Calvinism and involves a radical form of supralapsarianism. Such a view of predestination has been virtually universally and monolithically rejected by Reformed thinkers.

It is unfortunate that Kirkland uses the caricature as the basis for his attack against all forms of Calvinism.

Kirkland is on more solid footing when he states, “The basic Calvinist theory of limited atonement is that the death of Christ on Calvary’s cross was limited for only those they call the ‘elect.’ This means it would be impossible to tell a sinner who was not one of the so-called elect that Christ died for him or her” (page 62).

Kirkland’s first sentence is accurate, Calvinism’s main point on the topic. His second sentence is arguably worded badly. It would have been better to say that you can tell a non-elect person about Christ, but according to the Calvinist definition, there would be zero chance of that person coming to faith, since that person is not of the elect.

What do the Scriptures teach?

1 John 2:2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (KJV).

1 Peter 3:18: “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that he might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit” (NAU).

Christ’s death atones for all sin. As Hebrews 10:12 notes, Christ offered his one sacrifice for sins for all time. As Kirkland would point out, this is another case where some Calvinists change the meaning of the word “world.” Scripture is clear that Christ’s death covers all sin, that all sins were laid upon him.

Kirkland’s failure to distinguish between Calvinists who hold to double-predestination and those who do not is a serious oversight. The doctrine, as Kirkland indicates, is monstrous. The trouble is, while Calvin held it, arguably most Calvinists don’t.

As for limited atonement, there is solid biblical support for Kirkland’s view against it. It is a view the Scriptures oppose.