There are few topics in Christian history that have caused as much controversy as that of Calvinsim. Augustine and Pelagius, Martin Luther and Erasmus, John Calvin and Jacob Arminius, George Whitfield and John Wesley, R. L. Dabney and D. L. Moody have all debated Calvinism passionately.1 They have also set the stage for the debates going on today. Consider the following quotations from contemporary authors.

Christ commands, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” Calvinism voids that mandate by teaching that the nonelect cannot believe the gospel and that the elect are regenerated without it. That belief entangles Calvinism in a web of contradictions.2

Nothing will deaden a church or put a young man out of the ministry any more than an adherence to Calvinism. Nothing will foster pride and indifference, as will an affection for Calvinism. Nothing will destroy holiness and spiritually as an attachment to Calvinism . . . The doctrines of Calvinism will deaden and kill anything: prayer, faith, zeal, holiness.3

I have been a [Southern Baptist Convention] preacher over 50 years . . . But, current attempts to move the SBC to a Calvinistic soteriology are divisive and wrong . . . I have stated before, so it’s not new news, that should the SBC move toward five-point Calvinism it will be a move away from, not toward, the gospel.4

You can add to this the Bible translations which have weighed in on this debate. The New American Standard Bible gives a very literal rendering of Romans 8:29 when it says:

For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren . . .

The Living Bible, however, does not agree with the doctrines of foreknowledge and predestination, so it translates Romans 8:29 in the following manner:5

For from the very beginning God decided that those who came to him – and all along he knew who would – should become like his Son.6

In a strict translation, God predestines sinners to be conformed into the image of His Son. In a loose translation with an Arminian bias, men destine themselves and God looks into the future to see it.

Conferences have even been held over the issue of Calvinism. In 2008, a thousand pastors and laymen gathered together at First Baptist Church of Woodstock, Georgia to attend the “John 3:16 Conference,” which was held “to help people understand the issue [of Calvinism].”7 The interesting thing about the conference is that none of the speakers were Calvinists. In other words, the conference was held to dispute Calvinism, not to promote it.

The point is that the debate is far from over. It is still ranging today. So what are we to think about it? Is this a hopeless discussion? If Christians have been debating it for centuries, is there any hope for us to reach a conclusion? Is the Bible vague on the doctrines of depravity, predestination, election, perseverance, and the extent of the atonement? Does it leave us in the dark as to how God saves sinners?

James Montgomery Boice and Philip Graham Ryken have answered all of those questions in their helpful book, The Doctrines of Grace. Published in 2002 by Crossway, this joint effort was written to show that “evangelicalism stands or falls with Calvinism.”8 They go on to write:

To put it more simply, evangelicalism stands for the gospel and Calvinism stands for grace . . . the gospel stands or falls by grace. As [B. B.] Warfield recognized, the gospel is not really the gospel unless it is a gospel of grace; in other words, the gospel is only good news if it announces what God has done to save sinners.9

James Montgomery Boice began writing this book when he learned he was dying of cancer. From the time of that discovery until his death, he only lived six weeks but engaged in several writing projects.10 The Doctrines of Grace was one of them and it was a joint effort with a staff member at his church, Philip Graham Ryken.11 According to Ryken:

Fortunately the volume was already half written. Not only had Dr. Boice prepared a complete outline for the book and determined the thesis for each chapter, but he had also written a full draft of the five chapters on the Five Points of Calvinism.12

Boice would die in 2000 and the book would be published two years later but Ryken says that both authors shared the same vision for the project.

It was Dr. Boice’s intention for this book to mount a vigorous defense of Reformed theology while at the same time maintaining the highest standards of Christian charity. This has also been my intention.13

R. C. Sproul says that this was a passion James Montgomery Boice had for the duration of his life.

It is no surprise to me that this final work from Jim Boice, who wrote literally scores of books over the course of his ministry, should focus on the doctrines of grace. Here was a man who not only believed in the doctrines of grace but also loved those doctrines and had fire in his bones about propagating them. I knew Jim Boice for more than thirty years and never saw that fire diminish.14

James Montgomery Boice served for 30 years as the Senior Minister of Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia.15 He was a prolific author and a leading spokesman for Reformed theology.16 Philip Graham Ryken is currently the president of Wheaton College but served for several years as the Senior Minister at Tenth Presbyterian Church. He has also written several books.17

The following is a review of their combined work, The Doctrines of Grace.

Content

The Doctrines of Grace is 240 pages long with 3 parts. Part One is entitled “The Doctrines of Grace”18 and it begins with a helpful definition of Calvinism:

Calvinism insists that salvation is by grace from beginning to end. Salvation is a gift, in every sense of the word . . . The gift is given to those to whom God chooses to give it; and although it is offered to everyone, it is not given to everyone. When God does choose to grant this gift, however, he effectively places it in the hands of his child; and once it is received, it can never be lost, stolen, or damaged. Truly, it is the gift that keeps on giving!19

Part One also describes how Calvinism started.

Calvin did not invent [Calvinism], nor were [his doctrines] characteristic of his thought alone during the Reformation period. These truths are contained in the Old Testament Psalms. They were taught by Jesus, even to his enemies, as recorded in John 6 and 10 and elsewhere. The apostle Paul confirmed them in his letters to the Romans, the Ephesians, and others. Saint Augustine argued for the same truths over against the denials of Pelagius. Martin Luther was in many ways a Calvinist . . . So were Ulrich Zwingli and William Tyndale. For this reason, it is perhaps more accurate to describe this theology as “Reformational” rather than “Calvinist.”20

Calvinism did not start with John Calvin. It started with the words of the prophets and apostles in Scripture. Calvin’s name later became associated with “Calvinism” at a famous church council held from 1618-1619 called the Synod of Dort.21 Calvin himself did not attend the Synod since he died in 156422 but the five points of Calvinism were created there.

Before discussing those points, it might be helpful to discuss the five points of Arminianism, which were written first. Jacob Arminius died in 1609,23 so he did not attend the Synod of Dort, either. However, his followers summarized his teachings into five points at the Synod and they are as follows:

I. God elects or reproves on the basis of foreseen faith or unbelief.

II. Christ died for all men and for every man, although only believers are saved.

III. Man is so depraved that divine grace is necessary unto faith or any good deed.

IV. This grace may be resisted.

V. Whether all who are truly regenerate will certainly persevere in the faith is a point which needs further investigation.24

In describing these points, Boice and Ryken show that their main goal is to show that man is free to choose his eternal destiny. In their words:

Jacob Arminius and his followers stressed the free and therefore self-determining will of man.25

To counteract that idea, Calvin’s followers composed their own five points. They are easily recognized with the acronym TULIP.

I. Total depravity . . . Rather than signifying that the unregenerate person is wholly evil in everything he does, total depravity teaches that nothing he does is ever completely good . . .

II. Unconditional election. If the condition of the human race is as bad as the biblical doctrine of depravity indicates, then salvation must originate with God. It must be a work of the triune God, accomplished and applied by him without any assistance on our part . . .

III. Limited atonement . . . What Reformed people want to say by these words is that the atonement had a specific object in view, namely, the salvation of those whom the Father had given the Son before the foundation of the world, and that it was effective in saving those persons . . .

IV. Irresistible grace. Somehow the benefits of the atonement must be applied to the elect. This is the work of the Holy Spirit, whose inward operation enables sinners to repent and believe in Christ . . .

V. The perseverance of the saints . . . The perseverance of the saints really is the preservation of the saints, for their perseverance depends on God’s preserving grace. It is the faithfulness of Christ, rather than the faithfulness of the Christian that brings the saints to glory.26

These five points summarize what “the doctrines of grace” are all about: the glory of God. As Jonah 2:9 says, “Salvation is from the Lord.” Salvation is not about what we have done but about what God has done. God did not save us to magnify our worth but to magnify His worth. In the authors’ own words:

Thus the one point of Calvinism that the Five Points aim to demonstrate (and which Arminianism tends to deny) is that every aspect of salvation is the absolutely gracious work of the totally sovereign God. To him be the glory forever!27

Of course, this raises a few questions and it is the point of Part Two of the book to deal with those.

Evaluation of Content

Part Two is entitled “The Five Points.”28 It describes each of the five points of Calvinism and then answers objections about them. For example, in their discussion of Unconditional Election, Boice and Ryken quote from Romans 9:6-18 which describes how God elected the forefathers of the nation of Israel in spite of their shortcomings.29

Abraham had a pagan ancestry, his family worshipped idols, and he had no knowledge of the true God, yet God chose Him (vv. 6-7).30 Isaac was the second born son of Abraham, which means the inheritance should not have gone to him but it did (vv. 7-9).31 God chose Jacob to succeed Isaac even though he was the second born son as well (vv.10-13).32

The point is that God chooses whomever He wants to. He did that in Old Testament times and He does that today. He elects purely based on His will. He does not choose based on things that we consider important like good birth or good deeds or good intentions.

Numerous passages in the Bible teach this.33 Deuteronomy 7:7-8 says:

The Lord did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but because the Lord loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the Lord brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

John 15:16 says:

You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you.

Acts 13:48 says:

When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

Ephesians 1:4-5 says:

Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will . . .

Second Thessalonians 2:13 says:

But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

These verses clearly teach that God elects some to salvation and not others. But, despite the clarity, there has been great uneasiness among Christians over this doctrine. Many do not like to hear that they have no part to play in their salvation and some have tried to ease their discomfort by changing the meaning of “elect.”

The concept appears too frequent to deny it. However, some who have trouble with the doctrine accept the word but try to reduce its force by arguing for what they call “conditional election.” This means that God bases his election of an individual on foresight, foreseeing whether or not a particular individual will have faith. This destroys the very meaning of the word, of course, for such election is really not election at all. It actually means that men and women elect themselves, and God is reduced to a bystander who responds to their free choice.34

Others try to argue that God elects by looking down the “Tunnels of Time.” He does not choose as much as He looks into the future to see who will believe in Him. John Calvin disagreed with this idea centuries ago:

What could he [God] foresee, but this corrupted mass of Adam, that brings forth no other fruit but malediction . . . Take away election and what shall remain? As we have declared, we remain altogether lost and accursed.35

Others say that election is unfair. After all, if God were just, He would simply give everyone the ability to believe.36 This objection is a little more complex and there are several answers to it. The first is that God is under no obligation to elect anyone because everyone has sinned against Him and deserves to go to Hell.

The justice of God, if it were to operate apart from any other factor, could do nothing other than to send every human being to hell. In fact, apart from the electing grace of God and the gracious death of Christ, this is exactly what would happen . . . If any individual is to be saved, it must be by mercy only, and mercy falls in an entirely different category from justice.37

The second answer is that, if salvation were based solely on man’s ability to choose, it would be unfair since all men are not created equal. All are not given the same opportunities in life. All men do not have the same access to the Bible and to good teaching. Election alone gives every man an equal playing field. It teaches that we are all unwilling and unable to come to God, therefore, God must choose us in order to save us.38

The third answer is that we do not ultimately know why God chooses who He does. That has not been revealed to us. Romans 9:15 says:

For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

Paul does not give us any further answers about how the election process works.39 In fact, he tells us to stop questioning God in verses 19-20:

You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?

While election displays God’s power40 and shows His patience, glory, and mercy,41 we do not ultimately know why God elects some and not others.42 It is a mystery to us and James Montgomery Boice and Philip Graham Ryken do an excellent job of leaving this mystery in the hands of God.

Biblical Accuracy

The Doctrines of Grace handles the Bible with tremendous integrity. Since emotions run high in the Calvinism / Arminianism debate, Scripture often gets taken out of context. The authors avoid this temptation and give a very faithful account of what the Bible teaches on this subject.

They also use lots of Bible passages in their study. In discussing Total Depravity, they refer to Genesis 6:5,43 Jeremiah 17:9,44 John 6:44,45 Ephesians 2:1-3,46 and Romans 3:9-20.47 In discussing Irresistible Grace, they talk about Romans 1:6-7,48 Romans 11:29,49 Ephesians 4:1,50 Second Peter 1:10,51 and Romans 8:29-30.52 In discussing the Perseverance of the Saints, they explore Jeremiah 31:3,53 Jeremiah 32:40,54 Second Corinthians 4:8-9, 14,55 First Peter 1:3-5,56 and First John 5:11-13.57

Since it is the most troublesome point of Calvinism, the chapter on Limited Atonement or “Particular Redemption” should be looked at in detail. Boice and Ryken write:

Following the TULIP acronym, [Calvinists] have called the third of the five points “limited atonement,” which is an unfortunate way of speaking . . . “Definite atonement” or “particular redemption” sounds much better . . . If God planned from eternity to save one portion of the human race and not another, which is what election affirms, then it is a contradiction to say that he sent his Son to die for those he had previously determined not to save in the same way that he sent his Son to die for those he had determined actually to save.58

Election teaches that God chooses some to salvation and some to damnation.59 If that is true, then it only makes sense that Jesus came to provide a definite atonement or a particular redemption for His people. He did not come to save everyone. He was not crucified for everyone’s sins. That would be like punishing one man for the same crime twice. As Charles Spurgeon put it:

How can God be just if he punished Christ, the substitute, and then man himself afterwards?60

It does not make sense for God to punish Jesus for the sins of those who are being punished in Hell.61

John Owen said the same thing a different way: “A Saviour of men not saved is strange.”62 Owen’s point is simply that a Savior saves people and Jesus did not save those who are in Hell; therefore, He did not die for them.

The Doctrines of Grace acknowledges that this is a minority position among Christians today63 and it has some formidable objections. For example, John 3:16 seems to teach that Jesus died for the entire world, when it says:

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

The challenge in interpreting John 3:16 is that the word “world” has seven different meanings in the Bible.64 John 15:19 uses it one way:

If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.

Acts 17:24 uses it another way:

The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands.

Obviously, the authors of Scripture did not mean the same thing in all three verses when they referred to the word “world.” The context must determine the meaning. In John 3:16, the verse itself shows who the world is: “whoever believes in Him shall not perish.” This verse is not talking about everyone in the world but everyone in the world who will believe. It is talking about Jews and Gentiles who will one day trust in the saving work of Christ.65 There is no reference in John 3:16 to the non-elect.66

Another passage that seems to teach an unlimited atonement is Second Peter 3:9:

The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Some have taken this to mean that God wants save everyone but He lets every man decide for himself. In other words, Jesus died for all to give them the opportunity to repent.67 However, this is not what Peter is talking about in this passage.

The issue [in Second Peter 3] is the delay of Christ’s return, and Peter is explaining that God has delayed it, not out of indifference to us, and what we may be suffering, but because he wants to bring to repentance all whom he has determined in advance will be gathered in. If Christ should come now, there would be generations of yet unborn people, containing generations of Christians yet to come, who would not be in heaven. Therefore . . . “He is patient with you, not wanting [any of his elect ones] to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.”68

Other passages that are used as objections to Limited Atonement include First Timothy 2:3-4,69 Second Peter 2:1,70 Hebrews 10:26-27,71 John 1:29,72 John 4:42,73 Romans 8:32,74 and First Timothy 2:5-6.75 All of these are dealt with in The Doctrines of Grace.

At the end of the day, there are three options when it comes to the extent of the atonement.

Jesus’ death was not an actual atonement, but only something that makes atonement possible . . .

Jesus’ death was an actual atonement for the sins of God’s elect people with the result that these and only these, are delivered from sin’s penalty.

Jesus’ death was an actual atonement for the sin of all people with the result that all people are saved.76

The authors hold to option 2 and support their position from Scripture. They accurately quote from passages such as Isaiah 53:8, John 10:11, John 17:1-2, 9, Romans 8:28-32 to show that the atonement applies to the elect only.77 They also point out that terms such as redemption, propitiation, reconciliation, and atonement are meaningless if they apply to people who are not redeemed, propitiated, reconciled, or atoned for.78

If there is a real redemption, then the person who has been redeemed must be set free. When the Bible says that Jesus redeemed us by his death on the Cross, that redemption must be an effective redemption, and those who have been redeemed must be actual beneficiaries of it.79

The only Biblical inaccuracy in the book occurs when Matthew 20:28 is applied to the extent of the atonement.80 This verse says:

The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

It is difficult to see how this verse answers the question “For whom did Christ die?”81 Taken at face value, it could refer to the elect or the non-elect.82

Consistency

Towards the beginning of the book, the authors state that it was their intention to defend Reformed theology while demonstrating the highest standards of Christian charity.83 In the opinion of this reviewer, they achieved that goal.

Even though they make some strong criticisms about the modern church, they make them with clarity and grace. For example, in describing why Calvinism has lost popularity in recent years, Boice and Ryken state:

Perhaps the simplest way to say this is that evangelicalism has become worldly . . . What was once said of liberal churches must now be said of evangelical churches: they seek the world’s wisdom, believe the world’s theology, follow the world’s agenda, and adopt the world’s methods . . .

So churches supplement the plain teaching of Scripture with entertainment, group therapy, political activism, signs and wonders – anything that promises to appeal to religious consumers. According to the world’s theology, sin is merely a dysfunction and salvation means having better self-esteem.84

While that is a strong statement, it is hard to disagree with it. The authors are not poking fun or calling other Christians names; they are simply stating facts. And they are not the only ones who are seeing this alarming trend. In his book, Christless Christianity, Michael Horton writes:

The God of fundamentalism may have been too graceless but the God of contemporary American religion is too trivial to be worth our time. The old-time religion may have been legalistic, adding its own rules and regulations to God’s law, but at least it recognized that God commanded certain things. Today it is less about measuring ourselves against God’s holy will than about helping make good people better through good advice.85

It is easy to see how Arminianism appeals to the majority of American Christians. Most church-goers today think they are good enough to make spiritual decisions on their own. They think they are not totally depraved. They think they do not need to be elected. They just need a little nudge in the right direction. God can provide them with an option and they will make the right decision on their own.

This line of thinking led George Whitfield to write in the 18^th Century:

[Calvinism] has a natural tendency to rouse the soul out of its carnal security. And therefore many carnal men cry out against it.86

There is nothing comfortable about Calvinism. Carnal men cry out against it, which is why churches have backed off from teaching it. Boice and Ryken say that other trends have led to this such as secularism, humanism, relativism, materialism, pragmatism, and anti-intellectualism.87

These are some of the prevailing trends in American culture at the dawn of the new millennium. If the church has become worldly, then we would expect to find these same attitudes in evangelical churches. And of course that is exactly what we do find. As surprising as it may sound, evangelicalism has become increasingly secular.88

Again, this is not written in a spirit of anger and hostility but a spirit of grace. It is even written with a spirit of sadness. The authors are trying to fix the problem, not rail against it. I pray that others would learn from their approach.89

Scholarship

The Doctrines of Grace is a great resource for anyone studying this subject for the first time. This is due in part to its excellent scholarship. James Montgomery Boice held degrees from Harvard University, Princeton Theological Seminary, and the University of Basel, Switzerland.90 Philip Graham Ryken has degrees from Wheaton College, Westminster Theological Seminary, and the University of Oxford.91 They have both written numerous books92 and journal articles and studied this subject intensely.

In The Doctrines of Grace, they combine their resources to discuss historical figures such as Jacob Arminius,93 John Calvin,94 Jonathan Edwards,95 Matthew Henry,96 Abraham Kuyper,97 Martin Luther,98 the Puritans,99 John Murray,100 and B. B. Warfield.101 They also refer to events such as the Enlightenment,102 the Great Awakening,103 the Renaissance,104 the Synod of Dort,105 and the Westminster Confession of Faith.106 They refer to popular ideas such as democracy,107 evolutionism,108 liberalism,109 naturalism,110 and postmodernism.111

Such scholarship might seem intimidating to the average reader, but Boice and Ryken make it understandable. They define terms and leave out details that are not helpful to the flow of the book. They also show how Calvinism is practical. Part Three of the book is entitled “Rediscovering God’s Grace”112 and it demonstrates how Calvinism impacts every aspect of a believer’s life.

Although true Calvinism begins in the mind, it does not end there. This point needs to be emphasized, because although people who identify themselves as Calvinists are usually strong-minded, they are not always large-hearted. Thus it is especially important to understand that Calvinism is not a set of doctrines but a whole way of life. God has revealed the doctrines of grace, not simply for the instruction of our minds but ultimately for the transformation of our lives.113

They go on to show what this looks like in the church,114 the state,115 science,116 and the arts.117 The doctrines of grace transform everything. They change us as well as the world in which we live.

CONCLUSION

Calvinism is a touchy subject in many circles today. Most books misrepresent it or represent it accurately but in a spirit of meanness. As stated in the Introduction, this has been going on for centuries. Charles Spurgeon wrote about it many years ago:

To this day, there are many of our opponents, who, when they run short of matter, invent and make for themselves a man of straw, call that John Calvin, and then shoot all their arrows at it. We are not come here to defend your man of straw – shoot at it or burn it as you will . . . We come here to state what our views really are . . .

If they can disprove our doctrines, let them sate them fairly and then overthrow them, but why should they first caricature our opinions and then afterwards attempt to put them down?118

The Doctrines of Grace breaks that trend. It covers the five points from every area imaginable and it does so in a way that represents Arminianism fairly and respectfully. The authors exhibit a strong doctrinal conviction but they remain respectful towards those with whom they disagree. They present Calvinism in way that John Calvin himself (and Charles Spurgeon) would approve of. Because of that, I highly recommend this book.119

 

1. Dave Hunt & James White, Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views (Sisters, Ore.: Multnomah Publishers, 2004) 7. [↩]
2. Dave Hunt in Debating Calvinism, 363. [↩]
3. Laurence M. Vance, The Other Side of Calvinism (Vance Publications, 1991) viii, 15. [↩]
4. “An Interview with Jerry Vines,” January 24, 2012 at www.sbctoday.com [↩]
5. Robert L. Thomas, How to Choose a Bible Version (Ross-shire, Great Britain, Christian Focus Publications, 2000) 89, 90. The difference between these two translations is not an accident but is the result of their whole approach to the translation process. “A formal-equivalence translation [that the New American Standard Bible employs] concerns itself primarily with accuracy or faithfulness to the original text. In both form and content it focuses attention on the original text being translated . . . The chief concern of the dynamic-equivalence approach [which The Living Bible employs] is readability. This philosophy centers on conveying the thought of the original languages to the reader with the greatest possible clarity and gives little or no attention to obtaining a word-for-word correspondence between the original and the translation.” [↩]
6. James Montgomery Boice & Philip Graham Ryken, The Doctrines of Grace (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2002) 229-230. I am indebted to Boice and Ryken for this illustration. Also, in all fairness to The Living Bible translators, they changed this wording in their next edition. The New Living Bible translates Romans 8:29 as, “For God knew his people in advance, and he chose them to become like his Son.” [↩]
7. Don Beehler, “John 3:16 Conference Examines Calvinism,” November 12, 2008 at www.bpnews.net. [↩]
8. The Doctrines of Grace, 18. [↩]
9. Ibid. [↩]
10. Another book was entitled Hymns for a Modern Reformation. It was co-written with Paul Steven Jones and published in 2000 by Tenth Presbyterian Church. [↩]
11. The Doctrines of Grace, 11. [↩]
12. Ibid. [↩]
13. Ibid., 12. [↩]
14. Ibid., 9-10. [↩]
15. Back cover of The Doctrines of Grace. [↩]
16. Some of his books include The Parables of Jesus (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1983), Christ’s Call to Discipleship (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1986), Living by the Truth (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997), Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace? (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2009), and Renewing Your Mind in a Mindless Age (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2009). He also wrote numerous commentaries and co-authored several other books with Philip Graham Ryken. [↩]
17. Some of his books include Grace Transforming (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2011), Our Triune God (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2011), Is Jesus the Only Way (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2012), Loving Jesus More (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 2014), and Salvation by Crucifixion (Ross-shire, Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications, 2014). He also wrote numerous commentaries and co-authored several other books with James Montgomery Boice. [↩]
18. The Doctrines of Grace, 17-66. [↩]
19. Ibid., 29. [↩]
20. Ibid., 19. [↩]
21. Ibid., 18. [↩]
22. The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. by J. D. Douglas (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978) 177. John Calvin lived from 1509-1564. [↩]
23. Ibid., 70. Jacob Arminius lived from 1560-1609. [↩]
24. The Doctrines of Grace, 26-27. The Calvinists at the Synod of Dort concluded that the Arminianists could not avoid the following implications: human ability, conditional election, indefinite atonement, resistible grace, and defectible grace which are what the five points of Calvinism were written to refute. [↩]
25. Ibid., 18. [↩]
26. Ibid., 29-31. [↩]
27. Ibid., 34. [↩]
28. Ibid., 69-176. [↩]
29. Romans 9:6-18 says: “But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: ‘through Isaac your descendants will be named.’ That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. For this is the word of promise: ‘At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son.’ And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, ‘The older will serve the younger.’ Just as it is written, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’ What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed.’ So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.” [↩]
30. The Doctrines of Grace, 95. [↩]
31. Ibid., 96. [↩]
32. Ibid., 97. [↩]
33. The following verse references are borrowed from The Doctrines of Grace, 98. [↩]
34. Ibid., 99. [↩]
35. Quoted in The Doctrines of Grace, 100. [↩]
36. Millard J. Erickson, The Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology, Revised Edition (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1994) 82. This is known as the doctrine of prevenient grace. “In Wesleyanism or Arminianism [prevenient grace is] the belief that although all persons begin life with a sinful nature, God restores each individual to the point where there is sufficient ability to believe.” [↩]
37. Ibid., 107. [↩]
38. Ibid., 108. [↩]
39. Jerry Bridges, Trusting God: Even When Life Hurts (Colorado Springs, Col.: NavPress, 2008 ed.) 68. Neither does any other author of Scripture for that matter. In the words of Jerry Bridges, “While the Bible asserts both God’s sovereignty and people’s freedom and moral responsibility, it never attempts to explain their relationship.” [↩]
40. Ex 9:16. [↩]
41. Rom 9:22-24. [↩]
42. There are many other mysterious doctrines in the Bible such as the rapture, the Trinity, regeneration, the Deity of Jesus, and the inspiration of Scripture. While we can know something about all of these truths, there is still a mysterious element in them. It reminds us of the words of Isaiah 55:8-9: “‘For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,’ declares the Lord. ‘For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.’” [↩]
43. The Doctrines of Grace, 70. [↩]
44. Ibid. [↩]
45. Ibid. [↩]
46. Ibid., 73-75. [↩]
47. Ibid., 75-79. [↩]
48. Ibid., 139. [↩]
49. Ibid., 140. [↩]
50. Ibid. [↩]
51. Ibid. [↩]
52. Ibid., 144-153. [↩]
53. Ibid., 159. [↩]
54. Ibid. [↩]
55. Ibid. [↩]
56. Ibid. [↩]
57. Ibid., 159-160. [↩]
58. Ibid., 115. [↩]
59. Ibid., 102-104. This is known as double-election or reprobation. Not all Calvinists believe this. Some hold to a single election, which says that God elects some to salvation but none to damnation. After referring to several verses such as Proverbs 16:4, John 12:39-40, John 13:18, John 17:12, 1 Peter 2:7-8, and Jude 4, Boice and Ryken describe reprobation this way: “Those statements teach that in some ways election and reprobation are the same: both flow from the eternal counsel or will of God rather than the will of man, and both have as their ultimate purpose the revelation of God’s glory. But there are two important points of difference. First, the [Westminster] Confession speaks of the reprobate being ‘passed by’ . . . Second, the Confession speaks of God ordaining the lost ‘to dishonor and wrath for their sin.’ That makes reprobation the opposite of an arbitrary action. The lost are not sent to hell because God consigns them to it arbitrarily, but as a judgment for their sins.” [↩]
60. Charles Spurgeon quoted in Loraine Boettner’s The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Philipsburg, N. J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1932) 155. [↩]
61. Charles Spurgeon, C. H. Spurgeon Autobiography, Volume 1 (Carlisle, Penn.: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2005 ed.) 172. Spurgeon wrote about this as well when he said: “To think that my Saviour died for men who were or are in hell, seems a supposition too horrible for me to entertain. To imagine for a moment that He was the Substitute for all the sons of men, and that God, having first punished the Substitute, afterwards punished the sinners themselves, seems to conflict with all my ideas of Divine justice . . . God forbid that we should ever think thus of Jehovah, the just and wise and good!” [↩]
62. The Death of Death in the Death of Christ (Carlisle, Penn.: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2007 ed.) 215. [↩]
63. The Doctrines of Grace, 115. “When we speak of particular redemption we have to acknowledge that Reformed thinkers occupy a minority position within Christendom today though that was not always true in church history. We believe that the doctrine is biblical, but we recognize that large segments of today’s church see things differently.” [↩]
64. Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007 ed.) 253-254. The seven different meanings are: 1). The universe as a whole; 2). The earth; 3). The world system; 4). The whole human race; 5). Humanity minus believers; 6). Gentiles in contrast from Jews; 7). Believers only. [↩]
65. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John in The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2995) 203. “The Jew was ready to think of God as loving Israel, but no passage appears to be cited in which any Jewish writer maintains that God loved the world. It is a distinctively Christian idea that God’s love is wide enough to embrace all people. His love is not confined to any national group or spiritual elite.” [↩]
66. The Doctrines of Grace, 209. This does not mean we cannot use this verse for unbelievers, it means that we cannot use this verse to refer to a limited or an unlimited atonement. It does not talk about that issue. It can, however, be used for evangelism. “The gospel does not say, ‘Believe that Christ died for everybody’s sins, yours included.’ Nor, for that matter, does the gospel say, ‘Believe that Christ died for your sins, even though he did not die for others.’ Rather, the gospel says, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, who died for sinners, and who now offers himself to you as Savior and Lord’ (see John 3:14-16; 6:40; Acts 10:43).” [↩]
67. Michael Green, 2 Peter & Jude in The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 1987) 148. Green represents this view when he writes: “The plain meaning is that, although God wants all men to be saved, and although he has made provision for all to be accepted, some will exercise their God-given free will to exclude God. And this he cannot prevent unless he is to take away the very freedom of choice that marks us out as men. Some will indeed perish (v. 7), but this is not because God wills it.” [↩]
68. The Doctrines of Grace, 127. [↩]
69. Ibid., 126-127. [↩]
70. Ibid., 128-129. [↩]
71. Ibid. [↩]
72. Ibid., 129-130. [↩]
73. Ibid. [↩]
74. Ibid. [↩]
75. Ibid. [↩]
76. Ibid., 118. [↩]
77. Ibid., 125. [↩]
78. Ibid., 119-123. [↩]
79. Ibid., 120. [↩]
80. Ibid., 125. This is the only Biblical inaccuracy that I could find. There may be other ones that I am unaware of in the book. [↩]
81. I understand that, given everything else that has been mentioned in The Doctrines of Grace, this verse can refer to believers. My point is that, in and of itself, it is not a clear reference to the extent of the atonement. [↩]
82. For more information about Limited Atonement, see From Heaven He Came and Sought Her, ed. by David Gibson & Jonathan Gibson (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2013). [↩]
83. The Doctrines of Grace, 12. “It was Dr. Boice’s intention for this book to mount a vigorous defense of Reformed theology while at the same time maintaining the highest standards of Christian charity. This has also been my intention.” [↩]
84. Ibid., 20. [↩]
85. Christless Christianity: The Alternative Gospel of the American Church (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2008) 110. [↩]
86. George Whitfield quoted in Arnold Dallimore’s George Whitfield: The Life and Times of the Great Evangelist of the 18^th Century Revival, Volume 2 (Carlisle, Penn.: The Banner of Truth Trust, 2004 ed.) 560. [↩]
87. The Doctrines of Grace, 21-23. [↩]
88. Ibid., 21. [↩]
89. Ibid., 179-180. The authors themselves admit that Calvinists have often been offensive in their approach. “There is a combative streak in Calvinism, and whenever the doctrines of grace are divorced from warm Christian piety, people tend to get ornery. Some Christians who identify themselves as Calvinists seem to be in a perpetual state of discontent with their pastors, often making uninvited suggestions for their personal improvement. Others seem overly concerned with converting people to their ecclesiastical denomination. Still others have memorized TULIP but somehow seem to be missing the heart of the gospel.” [↩]
90. “James Montgomery Boice: Biographical Sketch,” www.monergism.com. [↩]
91. “Our Preachers: Philip Graham Ryken,” www.preachingtheword.com. [↩]
92. See Footnotes 16 and 17. [↩]
93. The Doctrines of Grace, 18, 24-25, 82. [↩]
94. Ibid., 18, 19, 40-44, 82, 91, 100, 127, 150, 157, 196-197, 215-217, 221. [↩]
95. Ibid., 19, 49-52, 57, 58, 60, 83-86, 224. [↩]
96. Ibid., 19. [↩]
97. Ibid., 52-57, 60, 74, 104, 187, 201, 212, 214, 218, 221-222, 224. [↩]
98. Ibid., 19, 36-37, 47, 82-84, 111, 136, 214. [↩]
99. Ibid., 19, 44-49, 57-61, 124, 183, 197, 213. [↩]
100. Ibid., 122-123, 136, 139, 146, 152. [↩]
101. Ibid., 17-18, 24, 32, 61, 180-181, 190-191, 226. [↩]
102. Ibid., 69. [↩]
103. Ibid., 48-52, 57, 61. [↩]
104. Ibid., 46. [↩]
105. Ibid., 18, 27, 41, 45. [↩]
106. Ibid., 31-32, 45, 87, 103, 136, 158. [↩]
107. Ibid., 213-214. [↩]
108. Ibid., 216. [↩]
109. Ibid., 20, 40, 54-55, 58-62, 65-66. [↩]
110. Ibid., 212, 215. [↩]
111. Ibid., 62, 70, 222. [↩]
112. Ibid., 179-226. [↩]
113. Ibid., 183-184. [↩]
114. Ibid., 202-211. [↩]
115. Ibid., 211-215. [↩]
116. Ibid., 215-219. [↩]
117. Ibid., 220-224. [↩]
118. Quoted in Debating Calvinism, 421. [↩]
119. For more books on Calvinism, see R. C. Sproul’s Chosen by God (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 1994), David N. Steele, Curtis C. Thomas, & S. Lance Quinn’s The Five Points of Calvinism (Philipsburg, N. J.: P & R Publishing, 2004 ed.), and Loraine Boettner’s The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination.  [↩]