Why spend so much time on the ancient Christian doctrine of Original Sin? What difference does it actually make? Is it something that can result in exclusion from the Kingdom of God? Is it an essential doctrine of Christianity?
I recently listened to a podcast where Calvinists discussed the “order of salvation” and said Christians should not split over nonessentials. One of the guys on the podcast mentioned how highly the full Calvinist R. C. Sproul regarded the “Arminian” Billy Graham as an example. Sproul said that he won’t see Graham in heaven (shock) because Graham will be so close to the throne of God compared to where Sproul believes he will be. Some call this stealth Calvinism, for it can sound like an angel of light at times, but at other times it sounds like the serpent’s propaganda, “You shall surely not die when you sin. Let us dig into it.
In classic Reformed/Calvinist theology, the “Order of Salvation” is called the Ordo Salutis (“order of salvation”). Some Calvinists phrase it slightly differently, but the standard sequence usually looks something like this:
- Predestination / Election
- Effectual Calling
- Regeneration (new birth)
- Conversion (faith and repentance)
- Justification
- Adoption
- Sanctification
- Perseverance of the Saints
- Glorification
Many Calvinists ground this especially in Romans 8:29–30 and call it the Golden Chain of Salvation/Redemption:
Here is how Calvinists generally define each step, followed by the major objections raised by Arminians, Eastern Orthodox, and many earlier Christians.
1. Predestination / Election
Calvinist View
Before the world began, God chose certain individuals to be saved—not because of anything they would do, but solely according to His sovereign will.
Key texts often used:
- Ephesians 1:4–5
- Romans 9
- John 6:37–44
- Acts 13:48
Why Calvinists Think It Is Right
They argue:
- Fallen man is spiritually dead and unable to come to God on his own.
- Therefore, salvation must begin entirely with God.
- Election guarantees that God’s purposes cannot fail.
It is right here that the grave errors of Augustinian Calvinism begin to surface, and their false doctrine of Original Sin sets the stage for every error that follows. Their doctrine of Original Sin holds that we all sinned in Adam and are guilty, just as Adam and Eve were. The doctrine of Original Sin also states that from Adam we all inherit a sinful nature at conception or birth. We are born sinners who can do nothing but sin. We can do no good, and we can’t understand and apply spiritual truth until God changes all that. Salvation is entirely the work of God, and we contribute absolutely nothing to it.
Main Objections to their beliefs come from other Christians, such as:
Arminians
Those who believe that the election is conditional upon foreknown faith.
Eastern Orthodox
Election is corporate and relational, not an eternal decree that selects some individuals and passes over others.
Early Church Fathers (pre-Augustine)
Early fathers emphasized:
- free will,
- human responsibility,
- and conditional perseverance.
Many historians and theologians argue that unconditional individual election in the later Calvinist sense is not clearly present before Augustine. As we have seen in these articles, Augustine changed Christian Orthodoxy.
2. Effectual Calling
Calvinist View
God inwardly calls the elect in a way that certainly and unconditionally brings them to salvation. This is different from the general gospel call heard by everyone. However, if they are not elected, they can’t respond.
Why Calvinists Think It Is Right
Texts used:
- Romans 8:30
- John 6:44
- John 10:27
They argue that if man is spiritually dead (Original Sin), then God’s call must actually create the response because we are unable to respond. Grace is irresistible.
Objections to the Calvinist doctrines
Critics say:
- Scripture repeatedly portrays people resisting God’s call as if they were able to respond.
- Matthew 22:14 says, “Many are called, but few are chosen.”
- Acts 7:51 says people “resist the Holy Ghost.”
Thus, opponents argue that the call of grace is resistible.
3. Regeneration (New Birth)
Calvinist View
The new birth happens before faith.
A person believes because he has first been regenerated by God.
This is one of the most distinctive Calvinist teachings.
The order is:
Regeneration → Faith
rather than:
Faith → Regeneration
And this error perpetuates itself the further we go down this path. The Bible teaches the exact opposite, as my articles demonstrate. The conditions of salvation are repentance and faith. These are the conditions we must meet to receive the gift of salvation. God is not going to do for us what He commands us to do.
Why Calvinists Think It Is Right
They appeal especially to:
- John 3
- Ephesians 2:1–5
- 1 John 5:1
They argue a dead sinner cannot believe until made alive, but you must assume the truth of their doctrine of Original Sin for this to be accurate. And if their Original Sin doctrine is not true, then their order of salvation is equally false.
Objections to the Calvinist order of salvation
This is probably the most disputed part of the Calvinist order, and it is rightly rejected by many other followers of Christ.
Critics argue:
- The New Testament repeatedly presents faith as the condition for life.
- John 20:31: “that believing ye might have life.”
- Acts 16:31: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.”
Opponents say Calvinism reverses the biblical order. The Eastern Orthodox tradition, in particular, rejects the idea that man is spiritually incapable of responding to grace. The early church fathers, before Augustine, also rejected this idea.
4. Conversion (Faith and Repentance)
Calvinist View
After regeneration, the elect person freely and certainly repents and believes according to them, but this is actually very misleading and even dishonest. The elect are not free to do anything other than what God predetermined they would do. There is no freedom in any of this according to their own doctrines.
Faith itself is viewed as a gift produced by God. It is a gift the elect will receive irresistibly, which they can’t refuse even if they wanted to. But they don’t want to because God decreed that they wouldn’t.
Why Calvinists Think It Is Right
Texts used:
- Philippians 1:29
- Ephesians 2:8–9
- Acts 11:18
Objections to the Calvinist doctrines
Critics say:
- Commands to repent imply genuine ability to respond.
- If faith is irresistibly caused, human responsibility becomes difficult to explain because it is nonexistent.
5. Justification
Calvinist View
God declares the believer righteous through faith in Christ alone, which is all a result of God’s effectual decree. Calvinists must assert that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to the believer when the Bible doesn’t teach that. The Bible teaches that faith produces righteousness.
Here we see more false doctrines arising from Original Sin. Calvinists must assert that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us as well as Christ’s obedience.
Agreement Across Traditions
Most Protestants agree here, though with major differences about:
- imputation,
- infused righteousness,
- and the role of obedience.
Eastern Orthodox theology speaks more about healing, union with God, and participation than legal imputation alone. The early church stresses that faith, repentance, and obedience are conditions of election and salvation.
6. Adoption
Calvinist View
Believers become sons of God and heirs with Christ.
Texts:
- Romans 8
- Galatians 4
This step is generally less controversial. But other Christians see adoption as conditional and not unconditional, as the Calvinists do.
7. Sanctification
Calvinist View
According to Calvinism, the justified believer progressively grows in holiness but still sins daily in thought, word, and deed. This is the nonsense that Calvinism produces.
Good works necessarily follow true salvation, but may be completely invisible to many Calvinists and evangelicals. Jesus said the opposite. He said that we will know the tree by its fruit. We will see it and know.
Why Calvinists Think It Is Right
Texts:
- Hebrews 12:14
- James 2
- Romans 6
Objections to Calvinism
Critics sometimes argue that some or most, if not all, Calvinist systems create tension here because:
- Believers are said to remain continual sinners,
- yet holiness is also said to be inevitable. And keep in mind that this holiness of Calvinism is imputed and not real or actual. We are created with the holiness and obedience of Jesus Christ in this false scheme.
ChatGPT likes to call this a tension, while I call it a blatant contradiction. I have already noticed this tension/contradiction in my earlier questions and comments about Romans 6 and 1 John.
8. Perseverance of the Saints
Calvinist View
All truly elect believers will certainly persevere to the end. They are eternally secure even in the ongoing unrepentant sins. The devil never thought of anything more alluring and dangerous.
Calvinists and most evangelicals believe that Christians may fall into serious sin temporarily and frequently, but they will never finally perish. Does that not sound exactly like what the serpent whispered to Eve in the garden? He said, Thou shalt surely not die when you sin against God.
Calvinist Proof Texts:
- John 10:28
- Philippians 1:6
- Romans 8:30
Why Calvinists Think It Is Right
They argue:
- God’s decree cannot fail.
We all agree on that, but we do not all agree that God decrees whatsoever comes to pass, both good and evil, as many Calvinists do. We do not agree that God decrees the salvation of some and the damnation of others.
- Christ cannot lose any of those given to Him.
Because of their false doctrine of Original Sin, they must view salvation as unconditional. God does it all because we are totally unable to help in any way, including repenting of sin and believing in Jesus Christ. The Bible teaches no such thing.
Major Objections to Calvinism
Critics rightly point to warning passages:
- Hebrews 6
- Hebrews 10
- 2 Peter 2
- John 15
- Ezekiel 18 and 33
- 1 Corinthians 6, Ephesians 5, Galatians 5
- 1 John
- Romans chapters 6 and 8
Arminians and almost all early fathers argue that genuine believers can fall away through unbelief or persistent ongoing sin. The Eastern Orthodox Church also rejects unconditional eternal security.
9. Glorification
Calvinist View
Final resurrection and eternal perfection. This is the completion of salvation according to them.
Virtually all orthodox Christian traditions affirm glorification in some form.
The Core Calvinist Logic
The entire Calvinist order depends on one central belief: Human beings are spiritually unable to come to God unless first regenerated by irresistible grace. That assumption drives the whole system because its foundation is the heresy of Original Sin and Original Guilt.
If total inability is true, then:
- election must precede faith,
- regeneration must precede faith,
- grace must be irresistible,
- perseverance must be guaranteed.
The system becomes internally consistent. But that does not make it Biblical or rational.
Calvinists claim that regeneration must precede faith, but at the same time, they claim that unbelievers are dead in sin. How can the dead be regenerated when they are not alive to begin with? They actually must mean that we are generated, not regenerated. But the Bible says it is regeneration as in coming clean with God. Nothing in Calvinism makes sense when it is thought through.
The Main Counterargument
The major alternative traditions argue: God’s grace is needed and prior, but not irresistible.
Thus:
- God initiates,
- man must genuinely respond,
- faith precedes regeneration,
- and continued faithfulness is determinative in final salvation.
This is closer to:
- almost all early fathers,
- Eastern Orthodox theology,
- classical Arminianism,
- and many non-Calvinist evangelicals.
One Major Historical Observation
Many scholars note that the highly developed Calvinist Ordo Salutis emerged gradually through:
- Augustine,
- medieval scholasticism,
- the Reformation,
- and later Reformed systematization.
The earlier fathers usually discussed salvation more dynamically:
- repentance,
- faith,
- obedience,
- union with Christ,
- perseverance,
- participation in divine life,
rather than through a tightly defined logical sequence that the Bible actually contradicts. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 6, Paul says that sanctification precedes justification, directly contradicting Calvinist claims.
That does not automatically make Calvinism wrong according to ChatGPT, but it is historically significant. Taken as a whole, it makes Calvinism heretical, in my humble opinion. As you just read, it is an entirely different gospel. (See my article titled Damnable Heresies.)
Next phase. Let us look more closely at the following:
- the specifically Calvinist “Golden Chain of Redemption” explanation from Romans 8, and
- quotations from early Church Fathers showing how they described salvation before Augustine’s radical and unorthodox change?
The Calvinist “Golden Chain of Redemption” (Romans 8:29-30)
This passage is one of the strongest foundations for Calvinist theology:
The text (KJV):
“For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son… moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.”
Calvinists call this the “Golden Chain” because every link is certain and unbreakable. It is based on an unconditional decree of God in eternity past. Why? Because their foundation is Original Sin. And that necessitates all these other false doctrines.
Why Calvinists Believe This Strongly Supports Their System
A. The Same Group Passes Through Every Stage
Notice:
- all the predestined are called,
- all the called/elected are justified,
- All the justified are glorified.
No one drops out because they are decreed by God to be one of the elect.
That naturally supports:
- unconditional election,
- irresistible grace,
- perseverance of the saints.
Calvinists argue that if some justified people (the elect) are later lost, the chain is broken. But it was never an unconditional chain of events to begin with.
In classic Calvinism, especially as shaped by John Calvin and later Reformed theology, each term is understood as part of an unbreakable chain of God’s sovereign saving action. The key idea is that every group mentioned is the exact same group from beginning to end: all the foreknown are predestined, all the predestined are called, all the called are justified, and all the justified are glorified. Therefore, in Calvinist thought, none finally fall away.
I believe in predestination, and all Bible-believing Christians do as well. The difference is in the meaning of the word. For Calvinists, it means an eternal unconditional decree, but that is not what this passage or the Bible actually states. Predestined means this is what God intends and desires for us and what He would like to see happen if we will only submit to Him in faithful obedience.
We will now look at each word in this supposed golden chain of redemption invented by the Augustinian Calvinists.
B. “Foreknew” Is Viewed as Relational, Not Mere Foresight
Calvinists usually reject the idea that “foreknow” merely means that “God knew beforehand who would believe.” Instead, they argue it means that “God set His covenant love upon certain people beforehand.” God sent this love only to the elect, so what did he send humanity? Must have been his hate.
They compare:
- Amos 3:2 — “You only have I known…”
- “Know” often means an intimate covenant relationship.
Thus:
- foreknowledge becomes virtually equivalent to fore-love or fore-choice to the Calvinist.
1. “Foreknew” (προέγνω — proegnō)
Calvinist understanding
“Foreknew” does not merely mean “knew beforehand intellectually.” Instead, it means:
- God set His covenant love upon certain individuals beforehand.
- God chose persons, not merely facts about them. But God chose only a few, not all people.
- It is closely connected to the election.
Calvinists often say:
“Foreknew” means “fore-loved” or “chose beforehand in a relational sense.”
They usually reject the idea that God looked down through time and saw who would freely believe. Why? Because they believe that would make the election depend on human action (free will) rather than God’s sovereign grace. And since the foundation of Original Sin is accepted, we know that mankind is totally unable to choose God. God alone decides and determines all things.
Non-Calvinist understanding of foreknowledge
Many evangelicals, Arminians, early Greek fathers, and others understand “foreknew” more straightforwardly:
- God knew beforehand who would respond to Him in faith of their own free will.
- Foreknowledge does not cause the choice but sees it in advance.
- God’s knowledge is exhaustive but does not eliminate human freedom.
This is often connected with passages like:
- “elect according to the foreknowledge of God” in First Epistle of Peter 1:2.
The early Greek fathers commonly understood foreknowledge as God knowing future free choices without causing them. Augustinian Calvinism continues its drift away from Christian Orthodoxy.
“Predestinated” (προώρισεν — proōrisen)
Calvinist understanding
This is usually defined as:
- God’s eternal, sovereign, unconditional decree determining the destiny of the elect.
- God ordained beforehand who would be saved and conformed to Christ.
In Calvinism, predestination is:
- individual,
- unconditional,
- and rooted entirely in God’s will.
This is tied to unconditional election. The Calvinist view is not merely “God predestined what believers would become,” but rather “God predestined which individuals would become believers.” Did you notice that material difference?
Non-Calvinist understanding
Many non-Calvinists understand predestination differently and more Biblically. A common interpretation is:
- God predestined the destiny of those “in Christ.”
- The predestined thing is conformity to Christ and final glorification.
- The class of believers is predestined, but individuals freely enter that class through faith.
So they often say: Predestination concerns the destiny prepared for believers, not an eternal decree forcing who must become believers. This is close to the interpretation I just mentioned: God intends faithful Christians to become like Christ. The emphasis is more on corporate and conditional factors than on determinism.
3. “Called” (ἐκάλεσεν — ekalesen)
Calvinist understanding
Calvinists usually distinguish between:
- the general gospel call,
- and the effectual call.
In Romans 8:30, they believe this refers to the effectual call:
- an inward work of the Holy Spirit,
- which unfailingly brings the elect to faith.
Thus:
- All who are effectually called will certainly come to Christ.
This is connected to irresistible grace. Notice that the “general gospel call is to the elect and non-elect. But it is a fake call for the non-elect cannot accept it.
Non-Calvinist understanding
Most other Christians understand “called” as:
- God genuinely invites all people through the gospel,
- but people can resist the call.
So:
- many are called,
- not all respond.
They often point to passages like: “Many are called, but few are chosen.” Thus, the call is sincere but resistible. Some Arminians would say Romans 8:30 refers specifically to those who actually answered the call in faith.
4. “Justified” (ἐδικαίωσεν — edikaiōsen)
Calvinist understanding
This means:
- God legally declares the believer righteous through faith in Christ.
- Christ’s righteousness and obedience are imputed to the believer who is our substitute for actual holiness and obedience because we are born with a sinful nature as a result of Original Sin.
This justification:
- cannot be lost,
- because it rests entirely on Christ’s finished work.
All truly justified persons will certainly be glorified. And I agree with that. The difference is that Calvinists believe justification is unconditional and a one-time forensic declaration, whereas many other Christians, including me, believe the Bible teaches conditional salvation and justification based on meeting the conditions.
Non-Calvinist understanding
Most Protestants agree substantially on justification by faith. However, disagreement comes afterward:
- Can a justified believer later fall away?
Calvinists say no. Arminians, many Wesleyans, and others say yes. While both may define justification similarly, they differ in their approach to perseverance.
5. “Glorified” (ἐδόξασεν — edoxasen)
Calvinist understanding
Glorification is:
- the final resurrection and perfection of the saints.
Calvinists point out that Paul speaks of it in the past tense (“glorified”) even though it is future.
Calvinists argue this shows:
- The certainty of salvation for the elect is so absolute that it can be spoken of as already accomplished.
If that is not a license to sin with eternal impunity, then I do not know what is. This also shows that Calvinists have turned the gospel of Christ into a get out of jail free card. It also reveals that Augustinian Calvinism has made Christ a minister of sin.
Non-Calvinist understanding
Non-Calvinists generally agree that glorification is the final perfected state of believers. But not everyone necessarily believes the passage proves unconditional perseverance and eternal security, even though many evangelicals, like Calvinists, do believe in OSAS (Eternal Security)
Instead, they may justly and appropriately say:
- Paul is describing God’s saving purpose for believers,
- not eliminating the possibility of apostasy or backsliding elsewhere, as warned about in Scripture, both Old and New Testaments.
The Core Difference
The central divide is this: Calvinism
The chain describes:
- God’s eternal decree concerning specific individuals,
- guaranteeing their final salvation, no matter how they actually live.
The chain is:
- unconditional,
- irresistible,
- and unbreakable.
It all depends on God, not on us. It makes God the criminal and us the victims. But we know that it is just the opposite. We sin because we want to, not because we are born sinners. We reject God’s commands because we prefer to love ourselves supremely, not because we are determined by God to do what we will do. Dear friends, we must wake up and think about what we are being told to believe about our great and wonderful God.
Non-Calvinist views
The chain describes:
- God’s saving plan for believers based on their willingness to get right and come clean with God,
- with foreknowledge not causing human response.
Predestination is often understood as:
- the destiny God prepared for those who remain in Christ by their continual faithfulness to God, rather than an eternal decree of God determining who must believe.
Early Church Context and Orthodoxy
Before Augustine of Hippo, most, if not all, Greek fathers emphasized:
- human freedom,
- foreknowledge rather than God’s determinism,
- and conditional perseverance.
Writers such as:
- Justin Martyr,
- Irenaeus,
- John Chrysostom,
generally interpreted passages like Romans 8 in ways more compatible with synergism (cooperation) than later Calvinism’s monergism.
For example, Chrysostom argued that:
- God’s foreknowledge does not compel human choices,
- and predestination is connected with those whom God foreknew would respond faithfully.
That differs substantially from later Reformed interpretations shaped through Augustine and then the Reformation.
My comments on the Golden Chain
I think Romans 8 is genuinely one of the strongest Calvinist texts. It cannot simply be brushed aside. In this article, we have not brushed it aside but answered every argument. However, several major interpretive questions remain.
And let us remember that one passage of one chapter of one book must never be allowed to contradict the rest of the Bible, as Calvinism does repeatedly. If we were to accept their faulty interpretation of a single passage in Romans, it would contradict all the warning passages throughout the Bible, including those in the very same book of Romans and in Paul’s other writings. It also contradicts our moral rational nature given to us by God. Moreover, it contradicts our reason.
Question 1: Is Paul Describing God’s Eternal Plan or Every Individual Case?
Paul may be describing salvation from God’s perspective and purpose rather than laying out an ironclad philosophical system.
In context:
- Romans 8 is pastoral encouragement,
- not a technical systematic theology lecture.
Paul’s emphasis may be: God’s saving purpose in Christ will ultimately succeed. That is not necessarily identical to: “No believer can ever fall away.” We know from our own experience that professing Christians do, in fact, fall away, and the idea that they were never saved to begin with is just a convenient excuse. We also know from the Bible’s history that this is not true. Even Solomon fell away in his old age.
Question 2: What Does “Called” Mean?
Calvinists define “called” here as an irresistible inward call. But elsewhere Scripture speaks of people resisting God’s call:
- Matthew 22:14
- Luke 14
- Acts 7:51
Thus, non-Calvinists argue that Romans 8 does refer to believers who answered the call rather than an irresistible summons. And that makes perfect sense and does not carry the baggage of God’s unjust decree, saving only a few when He could have just as easily saved all.
Question 3: Does Romans 8 Cancel the Warning Passages?
This is where the debate becomes intense.
Calvinists prioritize:
- Romans 8,
- John 10,
- Philippians 1.
Non-Calvinists emphasize:
- Hebrews 6,
- Hebrews 10,
- John 15,
- Ezekiel 18 and 33,
- 2 Peter 2.
- Galatians 5, Ephesians 5, 1 Corinthians 6
The question becomes: Can genuine believers later perish? Calvinism says no. Arminians, a few evangelicals, the Eastern Orthodox, and most early Christian fathers say yes.
Overall Assessment of the Golden Chain
The Calvinist reading is logical and internally consistent. But it depends heavily and entirely on earlier unorthodox assumptions Augustine brought into Christianity:
- Original Sin and Original Guilt
- total inability,
- irresistible grace,
- unconditional election.
If those assumptions are questioned, and they should be, Romans 8 will be understood much differently. I do not think Romans 8 alone settles the debate because the broader New Testament contains both:
- very strong conditional assurance passages,
- and very severe warning passages.
3. Early Church Fathers Before Augustine
This is historically fascinating because many people assume the early church taught something close to later Calvinism. Because that is what they have been told their entire lives. The evidence, however, leans heavily in the other direction. Tell a lie long enough, loud enough, and often enough, and people will believe it, and they will believe a big lie sooner than a small lie.
In general, the fathers before Augustine strongly and one might say, universally, emphasized:
- free will,
- human responsibility,
- obedience,
- perseverance,
- and the possibility of falling away.
They absolutely believed grace was necessary, but they rarely described it as irresistible. In fact, some outright rejected the idea that God’s work determined the outcome. They knew we determined our own outcomes. We will either choose life and live or death and die.
A. Justin Martyr (c. AD 100–165)
Justin strongly defended free will. He wrote:
“Each man goes to everlasting punishment or salvation according to the value of his actions.”
Elsewhere: “Men and angels are endowed with free will.”
Justin strongly opposed fatalism, including the divine determinism later proposed by Augustine.
Justin sounds much closer to later Arminian or Eastern Orthodox theology than to strict Calvinism.
B. Irenaeus (c. AD 130–202)
Irenaeus repeatedly emphasized human freedom and obedience. He wrote: “Man is possessed of free will from the beginning.”
He also taught:
- believers must continue in obedience,
- apostasy is possible,
- Salvation is relational and covenantal.
Irenaeus strongly opposes deterministic systems. He presents salvation as participatory and covenantal. His theology does not align with the unconditional perseverance taught by Augustinian Calvinism and by much of evangelicalism.
C. Tertullian (c. AD 155–220)
Tertullian argued fiercely against determinism. He wrote: “Nothing is so much in our own power as the will.” Again, this is difficult to harmonize with later Augustinian and Calvinist doctrines of inability.
D. Origen (c. AD 185–253)
Origen strongly defended free moral agency. He taught: souls can turn toward or away from God,
- obedience matters,
- Apostasy is real.
Some of Origen’s speculative theology was later rejected, but his free-will emphasis remained influential.
E. John Chrysostom (c. AD 347–407)
Chrysostom repeatedly taught cooperation between God and man, unlike later Augustinian Calvinism. Regarding the passage in John 6, he says, “God draws people, but not by compulsion.” That is directly opposed to Augustine’s later-life theology.
This is extremely important historically. The Eastern Orthodox idea of synergy (“working together” with grace) is deeply rooted in the writings of Chrysostom and the Greek fathers.
Augustine Changes the Conversation
Augustine of Hippo became the turning point, and that is not a compliment to him. Early Augustine still emphasized free will heavily. But during the Pelagian controversy, Augustine increasingly stressed:
- inherited corruption,
- inability,
- irresistible grace,
- predestination.
Later Western theology was deeply shaped by Augustine. The Reformers—especially John Calvin—developed many of Augustine’s later ideas further and more systematically.
Dr. Ali Bonner reminds us that Augustine sought to change historic Christian Orthodoxy. He was successful beyond his wildest dreams. And his success ingrained apostasy into Christianity, in my not-so-highly-regarded opinion.
ChatGPT’s Overall Historical Assessment
According to ChatGPT, it does not think the pre-Augustinian fathers taught modern Calvinism in any full sense. But that does not prove Calvinism false. Chat believes that doctrine can develop. But historically:
- the early church generally (near universally) sounded more synergistic,
- more conditional,
- and more focused on perseverance and obedience.
The strongest historical continuity with the early Greek fathers is probably found in Eastern Orthodox theology rather than classic Calvinism, according to ChatGPT.
My concluding comments
I trust that you readily see that the doctrine of Original Sin is the foundation on which Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and other Reformers built their house of cards. If you pay close attention to what is spoken and written today, it too rests on the presupposition of the truth of Original Sin, and all that entails.
That is why I spent this much time examining this presupposition. If Original Sin is not true, accurate, and Biblical, then most of what we inherited as essential Christian truth is equally false and must be rethought.
Let us return to this foundational ladder that we reviewed earlier. In classic Reformed/Calvinist theology, the “Order of Salvation” is called the Ordo Salutis (“order of salvation”). Some, not all, Calvinists phrase it slightly differently, but the standard sequence usually looks something like this, with my 4 additions in bold type starting the steps that necessarily follow if one believes in Original Sin/Guilt:
- Adam’s Original Sin, Original Guilt passed on to all humanity
- All people are born sinners who can only sin (sin nature) until God regenerates us.
- and all of us are unable to obey God and do good, and understand spiritual truth.
- Our will is enslaved and not free.
- Predestination / Election. God alone determines who will be saved and who will be lost.
- Effectual Calling. God’s election brings His call.
- Regeneration (new birth). God alone saves. We contribute nothing to it.
- Conversion (faith and repentance)
- Justification
- Adoption
- Sanctification
- Perseverance of the Saints. This is unconditional.
- Glorification
Ongoing sin in the life of the elect?
Most Augustinian Calvinists believe that Christians continue to sin daily for the rest of their lives. Evangelicals also believe that Christians continue to sin, and if not daily, believers regularly sin. Why? Because we inherit, from Adam, a sinful nature or inbred sin. And not even the truth of God, the grace of God, and the atonement of Christ are sufficient to completely cleanse his children from ongoing sin. They give us an incredibly weak and inefficient gospel.
All of the steps follow naturally and logically if one believes in the false doctrine of Original Sin. It changes everything of critical importance.
What then is the real Biblical order of salvation?
- We are born able to do as God commands. We are not born sinners who can do nothing but sin.
- Our will is free in a determining sense. Many Christians say our will is weakened in some ways, yet it remains free to choose good or evil, and we are morally responsible.
- We are born suffering many of the consequences of Adam’s sin, but still able to respond to the call of God to repent and believe.
- God convicts and calls all sinners to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.
- The elect of God are those who hear and respond to God’s gracious call by their radical repentance from all sin and faith in Jesus Christ. They are sanctified, justified, adopted, and eventually glorified if they continue to abide in Christ.
- The conditions of our salvation are what we must abide by in order to receive eternal life. Scripture tells us that those who confess and forsake their sins will find mercy.
The following excerpt is from another article I posted to my website titled “The Gospel.”
“Is the gospel;
- God alone saves, or,
- that we save ourselves without God’s assistance and grace, or,
- that both God and we have a part in our own salvation?
The 5-point Calvinist says that God alone saves, and we have no part in it whatsoever. God gets all the credit. But he also gets all the blame for not saving everyone. All of the elect are saved eternally by the decree of God. The non-elect have no power to believe and repent, and God rejected and damned them for His own glory, when He could have just as easily elected them to salvation for his own glory.
The moderate Calvinist and most evangelicals (most of whom are moderate Calvinists, even if they say they are not) claim that we must believe in Christ or have faith in Christ to be saved. That is the only condition that we are responsible for meeting. And that believing or faith in Christ (and sometimes they include the word repentance) doesn’t mean we Christians stop sinning. It might mean we stop a few sins, but certainly not all sins against God. And after we once believe, grace becomes irresistible, and we lose our free will, and are eternally secure. Both of which are tenets of deterministic Calvinism and assure the Christian of eternal salvation even when the Christian dies in an impenitent state.
R. C. Sproul is correct. All those who claim that we have any part in our own salvation are preaching a works-based salvation, even if we evangelicals adamantly deny it. And many moderate Calvinists do, in fact, deny that they are preaching a works-based salvation when they make faith a condition of their salvation. And this is anathema to most evangelicals, although they actually do believe we save ourselves, in part. Are you with me?
Faith without works is dead. Faith without obedience is not a saving faith. Faith without faithfulness is the faith of devils and most of the evangelical church. Faith is a good work and a condition of salvation. It is our part of salvation, and God will not do it for us. Repentance from sin is also our part. Only we can repent of our sins. Don’t listen to those who tell you that God does this for you. God will help you, but you must do it.
Salvation is a gift from God. On that, all Christians agree. But that doesn’t mean there are no conditions to receiving this gift. And this is the hang-up. Most evangelical Christians have been brainwashed into believing that having any conditions attached to salvation means we earn our own salvation, which is a works-based salvation, and God doesn’t get all the glory as He does in five-point Calvinism. But remember this about hyper Calvinism: if God alone (we have no part in it) determines who will and who will not be saved from hell, then God gets all the blame if any people are sent to hell. You can’t have it both ways.
What does the Bible teach?
There are passages in the Bible that declare that God is the author of salvation and that He deserves the credit. Amen. But many passages declare that sinners are also responsible for their own salvation, and that God expects them to fulfill His conditions if they want to be healed, forgiven, pardoned, and saved. Fulfilling the conditions of salvation, in order to receive the gift of God, does not mean that we save ourselves without the grace of God. God is the procuring cause and source of our salvation. He is the “that for the sake of which-causa finalis”, while the conditions of our salvation are the “that not without which-sine qua non.” Satisfying the conditions would accomplish nothing if God had not done His part in making salvation possible.
Think of salvation this way. A man and a woman get married and promise to be faithful to each other for life. But the husband is unfaithful to his wife and commits adultery. In most situations, the wife will never forgive him or stay married to him until he does at least two things. First, he stops the adultery immediately, and second, he promises never to do it again. If he does that, she may stay married to him and give him another chance, even though in the eyes of God, she can divorce him. She rightfully has conditions attached to staying married to her husband. If the marriage is saved, who saved the marriage? Obviously, the wife is the source (procuring cause), but the husband is also part of the salvation of their marriage if he meets the conditions she has laid out. If he refuses, the marriage ends.
Our relationship with God is similar. Sinners have committed spiritual adultery against God. God is willing to give us a second chance if we will stop the adultery. God, in His grace, is kind, compassionate, long-suffering, and willing to pardon us if we will meet His conditions. Does that not make perfect sense? That is the gospel. God is reaching out to sinners who will die in their sins unless they repent and exercise faith in God. God wants all to come to salvation, and He doesn’t want to lose anyone. He wants to be reconciled to all of humanity, and the only reason that will not take place is that some of us refuse to believe Him, trust Him, and stop our spiritual adultery.
A good example of salvation is this parable. A certain young man, by his profligate living, developed a life-threatening illness. The medical doctor told him that if he wants to be healed, he must stop certain activities and take the prescribed medication each day for a number of days to be healed.
How does this story end if the young man has no faith? The young man refused to clean up his behavior and refused to take the medicine as the doctor ordered. It did not take long for the illness to progress, and he fell gravely ill, and shortly thereafter, he died.
How does this story end if the young man has faith? He did as the doctor ordered. He cleaned up his behavior and took the prescription as directed by the doctor. It did not take long for him to see a big improvement in his health. And within a short period of time, he regained his health entirely and was healed from that life-threatening illness.
Who saved this profligate young man? The doctor (God) is primarily responsible for correctly diagnosing his illness and prescribing the appropriate medicine and dosage for his healing. But the young man also healed himself by following the doctor’s orders to stop his risky behavior and by taking the medicine exactly as ordered for the number of days. If the man did not listen to and obey the doctor, he would not be healed and would die. Additionally, the medicine healed the young man. All of these were conditions of his healing: the doctor, the medicine, and his obedience to the doctor’s orders.
This is exactly what Biblical salvation looks like. Yet, many evangelicals will quote Ephesians 2:8-10 and say that this is a works-based salvation when the conditions of healing are met. Do you honestly believe this young man would go around bragging that he healed himself (saved himself) and would not give credit where credit is due? Preposterous.
The gospel is not just good news. It’s great news.” End of excerpt.
Evidence of salvation and ongoing sin
Almost all Christian traditions believe that true Christians will continue to sin regularly throughout their lives. Sinning becomes normalized and expected in direct contradiction to many passages in the Bible, such as 1 John, Romans 6 and 8, Hebrews 6 and 10, Galatians 5, Ephesians 5, and 1 Corinthians 6. And all of this traces back to the errors of Original Sin and the inheritance of a sinful nature from Adam.
The gospel, on the other hand, reveals that sin becomes the rare exception in the life of a genuine Christ follower. And if a true believer does sin, they immediately repent and come clean with God and others as appropriate.
Do you see why it is critically important to have the right foundation? If you start with the errors of Original Sin as taught by Augustine, Luther, Calvin, and many others, everything in the Bible must be reinterpreted according to this presupposition. And you will end up condoning ongoing sin in your life.
But if you don’t start with this false presupposition of Original Sin, the Bible makes perfect sense.
- Please also refer to my article titled, Original Sin Dogma, for more reasons to reject this false teaching.
