BibleHelp.org . . . Do They Need Bible Help?

In the section “Salvation is offered to the WORLD,” Bronson attempts to show that every time the word kosmos is used in reference to salvation, it means everybody. This section brings us to the best known verse of the Bible. This verse is the infamous John 3:16.

1 There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, "Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him." 3 Jesus answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." 4 Nicodemus said to Him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?" 5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God…” (John 3:1-5)

16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.“ (John 3:16-19)

There is an important part of the context that is always left out when John 3:16 is used to rebut Calvinism—the person to whom Jesus is speaking. That would be Nicodemus, a Pharisee!  Pharisees were worse than their average Jewish counterparts when it came to prejudice. Jews—and Pharisees even more so—did not like Samaritans or Gentiles. Therefore for Jesus to day “God so loved the world” was a striking statement to Nicodemus! Nicodemus thought that the Jews were the loved and chosen of God, not those other misfits of human beings--namely the Gentiles and the Samaritans.

In the given context, the most illuminating definition of the word kosmos (world) is nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues. The best word is humanity. It is to be understood in terms of race, nationality, and ethnicity. Moreover, most every time the world world is used in the Bible, there are explicit or implicit exceptions. For example, in John 15:19, Jesus tells the disciples:

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

First, this choice of Jesus is obviously not service, but rather salvation! Second, read below… (the blue and bolded emphases are mine)

John 3:16 (“For God so loved the world”) is another example of the problems Selective Salvationists have when reinterpreting the word “world.” They say the word “world” is only referring to the elect. However, this interpretation causes problems in the surrounding verses. In verses 16-19, the word “world” is used five times. Verse 19 says, “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men love darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil.” Here, the word “world” cannot be referring to only the elect; it has to be referring to the whole world. (Bronson, Does "All" Mean All)

Here we have another strawman. Most Calvinists do not think the most eminent meaning of kosmos in John 3:16 is elect. If Christ’s main goal was to communicate elect to Nicodemus, then He would have used eklektos. We hold that the eminent meaning of kosmos to Nicodemus in John 3:16-19 is nations. On the other hand, interpreting world to mean everybody robs from the power of the context. Bronson erroneously seems to think that because world is used five times in three verses (John 3:16-19), it must mean everybody! That is nothing more than a hasty generalization. In John 15:19, the same word world (kosmos) is used five times in one verse! Yet, not in one single case does world refer to everybody in this verse. The context confines world to just unbelievers! 

Look up the rest of the verses in the world section and see them in context. Only a couple can credibly mean everybody. You often see that world’s meaning may shift within the context of a single verse! World may mean everything, it may mean all believers, it may mean all unbelievers, or it may mean everybody. You must look at the context!

In the section “Salvation is offered to EVERY person,” simply read his descriptions and you will see that everybody usually has an explicit exception. You have everyone who believes, everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord, everyone who listens to the Father.

I do need to make one more point, Bronson should just stay away from John 6. In this section he lists John 6:40 and 6:45. I quoted 6:40 in a earlier post to demonstrate the context of 6:37, and 6:37 specifically says that “The ones who the Father has given me will come to me…” 6:39 says “of all He has given Me I should lose nothing but raise it up in the last day.” So, who will be the ones who see the Son and believe in Him? Those given to Christ by the Father! Later in verse 44, Jesus explicitly says that the Father will impel and lead those He has given Christ—those whom Christ will raise up in the last day—to come to Christ. Those who are not given to Christ cannot come, nor will they be compelled to come.

44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

According to Strong’s, draw (helkuo) means

1. to draw, drag off
2. metaph., to draw by inward power, lead, impel

Furthermore, Jesus repeats Himself in verse 65 and uses stronger language…

65 And He said, "Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father."

As you can see, the ability to come to Christ in faith and repentance is a gift of God, which is not given to everyone. This is apparent in verse 66, which is the response of his “disciples” to Christ’s bold claim…

66 From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.

Therefore, both 6:40 and 6:45 must be interpreted in the light of its context—the very thing Bronson says to do but he himself consistently does not!

I am going to skip a few sections, simply for times sake. Most of the verses listed are repeats of the same mistakes noted in this and previous posts.

I want to address the section “Verses that show God is no respecter of persons.” This very title is yet another strawman. Calvinists also believe that “God is no respecter of persons.” If Bronson had an ounce of understanding of Reformed Theology, he would know that the doctrine of Unconditional Election has nothing to do with respect, but everything to do with grace. There is no merit, attribute, or quality—nothing—about a person that causes God to choose him out of respect. God does so out of mercy, grace, and love!

Bronson consistently (in several chapters) portrays what Calvinists believe to be an issue of grace in to be an issue of partiality. Partiality implies that God favors men of particular qualities, but with grace, God's favor is acknowledged to be undeserved.

In another part of the book, he gives a list of verses showing “God does not show partiality.” Many of these verses have the wording “God does not show favoritism.” What on earth are these verses saying? Is not grace an unmerited favor? If you take Bronson’s view interpretation of "God does not show favoritism", then God has shut the doors of heaven and open wide the pits of hell—for God cannot show no favoritism at all, not even to those who accept him. I say this on purpose, for if God shows favor to those who believe in Jesus by means of their own choice, then God show favoritism to those who possess the spiritual wherewithal to accept Christ. Bronson's theology is guilty of the same charge--and no strawman is necessary to demonstrate it.

What do the verse mean, then? Let’s look at Acts 10:34 and Romans 2:11, for example…

34 Then Peter opened his mouth and said: "In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. 35 But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him…” (Acts 10:34)    

5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6 who "will render to each one according to his deeds": 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; 8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath, 9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; 10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God. (Romans 2:5-11)

I want to supplement Acts 10:34 with Acts 11:15-18, when Peter was recounting what happened in Cornelius’ house in Acts 10:34…

15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, 'John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' 17 If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?" 18 When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life."

In these two verse listings, Romans 2:11 and Acts 10:34, the “shows no partiality" demonstrates that God does not show favoritism to particular people groups…not individuals. Moreover, look at the language of verse 18. Again, repentance must be granted by God!

This is all the time I'm going to spend on these "300 verses." Pretty much all of them make the same mistakes as previously noted. If you have a question about a particular one, feel free to post a response and either Jim, Chad, or myself will get back to you.

The next section of verses is titled “Salvation is offered to WHOEVER believes.” In most of these verses, whoever refers to the one who responds to the gospel, not to the one who is merely offered salvation. Moreover, the title “Salvation is offered to WHOEVER believes” contradicts his position. Whoever believes is not all men--It necessarily means a smaller subset of all men. It is also important to note that salvation is not merely offered to whoever believes, it is given!

Remember, he is attempting to refute “selective salvation.” However, many of his verse listings are in contexts that support election rather than rebut it. Yes, whoever believes in Christ obtains salvation, but who is whoever? Why do some “acknowledge the Son”, “enter the gate”, “believe in Christ”, “live by the truth”, “drink of the eternal fountain”, etc, and others do not? The answer is given in the contexts of verses he lists in this section, John 10:1-30 and John 6:35-40, 44, 65. (Bronson cites John 10:9 and John 6:37, 53, 54, and 56)

1 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. 2 But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 And when he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 Yet they will by no means follow a stranger, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers." 6 Jesus used this illustration, but they did not understand the things which He spoke to them. 7 Then Jesus said to them again, "Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly. 11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. 12 But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. 13 The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. 15 As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. 17 Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father."

19 Therefore there was a division again among the Jews because of these sayings. 20 And many of them said, "He has a demon and is mad. Why do you listen to Him?" 21 Others said, "These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?"

22 Now it was the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem, and it was winter. 23 And Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon's porch. 24 Then the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, "How long do You keep us in doubt? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly." 25 Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father's name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. 30 I and My Father are one." (John 10:1-30)

John 10 is the parable of the sheep, the Door, and the Shepherd. In this parable, those who enter the sheepfold any other way than the Door is a “thief and robber.” They came before Christ professing to be the Christ, but they did not lead the sheep astray, because the sheep know the voice of the Shepherd. When Christ claims “I am the door,” he is claiming to be the means to eternal life. When Christ claims to be the “good Shepherd,” He is shows that He is the one who finds the lost sheep, leads them through the Door, saves them and gives them eternal life. He lays down his life for the sheep.

Many say that the sheep represent believers, but that does not fit the illustration. People don’t transform to sheep when they pass through the door, for they already are sheep who know his voice and are called by name before they are led through the door by the Shepherd. In verse 16 Jesus says:

16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. (John 10:16)

He is referring to people of other nations at this point. Samaritans, Greeks, Romans, to ends of the earth. They have not yet heard the gospel, but they are sheep, and they will know the truth of the gospel call when they hear it, for they will know the voice of the Shepherd. But, not everyone is a sheep.

26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. (John 10:36)

This is rather profound and bold statement on Jesus' part. He tells the Jews that do not believe because (gk. ὅτι) they are not sheep--implying that those who do believe do so because they are of his sheep.

It can be concluded no other way that that the sheep in this parable refer to the elect--rather than mere believers. In fact, this is one of the most commonly used passages by Reformed theologians to draw up the doctrine of election. It covers many aspects of the Reformed faith. This parable makes it clear that those who do not respond to the call of the Shepherd are not sheep. These do not have a desire to believe in Christ…and never will.

Why do some "enter the gate" of John 10:9? Because they are sheep. For they must be called by the Shepherd, know his voice, and follow his leading him through the gate into the sheepfold.

John 6:37 – “Whoever comes to me I will never drive away.”

Honestly, this is one of the worst abuses of context in the entire list of "about 300 verses."

35 And Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day..."

44 "...No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up in the last day. (John 6:35-40, 44)

He didn’t even sum up the entire verse. Those given to Jesus in election will by all means come to Christ, and Christ will not cast them aside! You have to be given to Christ by the Father in order to come to Christ! “The one who comes to me” will be one who has been given to Christ by the Father in election! What else could it be but election? Jesus will neither lose him nor cast him aside, and He will give them everlasting life and raise them up in the last day.

Read the passage again, for each sentence connects to the previous verses. In verse 35, we have those who come to Christ. In verse 37, Jesus notes that those who come were given to Jesus by the Father. In fact, all of those given to Christ of the Father will come and will never be cast aside. In verse 39, Jesus indicates that it is the will of the Father that those given to Christ, the ones who will come and never be cast aside, will never be lost but raised up in the last day. In verse 40, those who will be raised up are the ones who see the Son and believe in Him--thus indicating that the ones who will believe in the Son are the ones given to Christ by the Father. In verse 42, the ones who will be raised up in the last day will be drawn by the Father--referring to the same ones given to Christ by the Father. Without that drawing, one cannot come to Christ.

The contexts of both John 6 and John 10 demonstrate that the whoever in Bronson's citations is a sheep who knows the voice of the Shepherd and was given to Christ by the Father. This is the reason and prerequisite as to why one believes and repent.

This is a continuation of the section of verses titled "Salvation is offered to ALL men." See Part 1 for the first few verses in this section.

Note: Bronson repeats the same verses in several of the sections, and several of the verses are along the same lines of reasoning--even when they are in other sections. I will not discuss any duplicate of a verse in another section.

Acts 17:30 – “God commands all people everywhere to repent.”

29 Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising. 30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent. (Acts 17:29-30)

This is the first verse that is truly of verbal offering of salvation. The verse sits towards the end of Paul's sermon in Athens, when he proclaimed "THE UNKNOWN GOD" to the Greeks. Paul is telling these Greeks that God essentially left them in ignorance (resulting in the idolatry mentioned in verse 29) during in the centuries past, but now the message of the cross has come to the Gentiles--and God commands you to repent. In the past, the Greeks had no opportunity to even hear the truth, but now they are hearing the truth and ought to accept it.

I have a few questions for Bronson: Why did God leave the Gentiles in ignorance for so long? Why did God begin to command the Gentile to repent at the time of Paul? Second, just because God commands a man to do something, does that mean he has the ability to do it? God also commanded us to keep the Ten Commandments--something that is impossible for men to do. What makes the command to repent any different? Why do some respond and others don't? See Acts 13:48 for an answer to this question:

48 Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48)

Is not the gospel a spiritually discerned message delivered effectively only by the Spirit of God? Are not spiritual things folly and nonsense to the natural man? (John 16:7-15, 1 Corinthians 1:18, 2:13-16) How can a perishing person stop thinking that the message of the cross is foolishness without a regenerative, creative work on God’s part in the heart of that person? This I would like to know from Bronson.

The point is that it is a logical fallacy to say that just because God commands a man to do something doesn't mean that man has the capacity in his corrupt state to do it.

Isaiah 45:22 – “Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth.” To rebut the proposition that all in this context means everybody, I need only to quote the context. Much of Isaiah concerns the return of the Jews to the promised land from captivity. The Jews were scattered all over the known world when this was written. This book was written by a Jew to his Jewish brothers. This context is also a prophecy of Christ, and verse 23 is quoted by Paul in Philippians 2. The blue highlight shows who “All you ends of the earth” is.

20 "Assemble yourselves and come; Draw near together, You who have escaped from the nations. They have no knowledge, Who carry the wood of their carved image, And pray to a god that cannot save. 211 Tell and bring forth your case; Yes, let them take counsel together. Who has declared this from ancient time? Who has told it from that time? Have not I, the Lord? And there is no other God besides Me, A just God and a Savior; There is none besides Me. 22 "Look to Me, and be saved, All you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other. 233 I have sworn by Myself; The word has gone out of My mouth in righteousness, And shall not return, That to Me every knee shall bow, Every tongue shall take an oath. 24 He shall say, 'Surely in the Lord I have righteousness and strength. To Him men shall come, And all shall be ashamed Who are incensed against Him. 25 In the Lord all the descendants of Israel Shall be justified, and shall glory.' "

John 1:12 – Bronson’s description of this verse is “To all who receive Him … become the children of God.” This verse also does not show that “salvation is offered to ALL men.” Again, I will quote the verse and its context.

11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:11-13)

Even his description illustrates that all does not mean every single man, woman, and child. It says “as many as receive him” and “those who believe in His name” were given the “right to become children of God.” Thus this all is limited to those who are believers.

This is also true for many other verses in his listings. Whenever you have phrasing in like manner of "Anyone who believes", "All that believe", or "whoever calls upon the name of the Lord", the "all" is qualified by the clause that follows. The question is this: why do some believe and others don't?

Verse 13 shows these who receive him are those who are born of God, not blood (family or nationality), the will of the flesh (by one’s own choice), nor the will of man (by other men’s desire). It could be credibly argued that “of God” signifies “by God’s will.” Therefore, it is easily concluded that God is the reason some receive the Word and believe in His name.

John 12:32 – “When I am lifted up, I will draw all men to myself.” Look up this verse in a NASB, KJV, or NKJV Bible, and you will see that the word men is italicized. The NIV (the translation Bronson uses) does not italicize this. Formal equivalence translations (word-for-word) typically indicate words that were not in the original text by italicizing them. They are added for clarity. From the context, the words peoples or nations could rightly be substituted.

A few verse earlier, Phillip and Andrew had come to Jesus because Greeks (John 12:20) had come to the Passover feast to worship, and these Greeks, GENTILES, were asking to see Jesus. Remember, Jews didn’t have much likings for those measly Gentile barbarians.

Luke 2:10 – “The angels said to the shepherds that the good news is for all men.” This is a bum translation and summary. Any good translation will substitute “all men” with “all people.” The Greek word for “people” does not mean everybody. Here is Strong’s definition of the Greek work laos:

1. a people, people group, tribe, nation, all those who are of the same stock and language
2. of a great part of the population gathered together anywhere

The best understanding of people in the verse is nations! Moreover, shepherds were right above tax collectors and Samaritans in the social hierarchy of ancient Judea—which means they were not considered to be worthy of God’s favor by the "real" Jews. This is important to note, because it further qualifies the term laos: this gospel reaches to people of all walks of life, regardless or race, nationality, or class.

Romans 8:32 – This one is just silly. Here is the setting of the verse, and I am going to bold the words that demonstrate that all is limited by the context.

28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.

29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things? 33 Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. (Romans 8:28-33)

God “delivered Him up for us all.” This does not show that the word all in Romans 8:32 refers to those offered salvation, but rather those who have been foreknown and ordained to it and gained it. It refers to the current and future heirs of salvation, not every man, woman, and child. It even says “us all” not just “all!”

Romans 3:22-24 – Bronson’s description is “righteousness comes to all who believe” Where is the offering of salvation in this verse? Again, all refers to the possessors of salvation, not those offered. For verses 23 and 24, Bronson gives this summary, "All have sinned ... and are justified." All have sinned, but not all are justified, only the ones who have faith in Jesus! (Rom 3:26) Such a poorly written summary might lead one to believe that Bronson could be a universalist--which he is not. Here is the context:

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:19-26)

Titus 2:11 – “Salvation has appeared to all men.” This is a bad summary of this verse. I will quote its context to clarify.

11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, 12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works. (Titus 2:11-14)

Semantically, it is the grace that appeared, not salvation. If verse 11 were taken alone, then my argument for Acts 17:30 and John 1:12 can be used here too. Yes, grace may appear before all men, but why do some respond and other don’t? However, that argument is not needed. Though it may appear before all, it affects only a “special people.” (vs.14) The Greek word rendered “special” in verse 14 is indicative of being “chosen for possession.”

Next: "Salvation is offered to WHOEVER believes"

In the section of the book titled, "What does the Bible Say?", Bronson lists (more like bombards us with) "about 300" verses that refute the Reformed position.

Before I begin to discuss these verses, I must discuss several of Bronson's methods of argument. First, he constantly uses pejorative (strong language appealing to emotion) phrasing intended to bias the reader against his opponents position. The appeal is to feeling and emotion, not exegesis and reason. For Example, “Selective Salvation” is a termed used primarily by antagonists of Calvinism. Thus, “selective salvation” is itself an abuse of logic by using prejudicial language. The uninformed reader will be inclined to turn away from accepting election by the strong negative connotation of the term “selective salvation.” In fact, I intentionally used prejudicial language above in calling Bronson an antagonist, because it sure sounds worse than opponent. I wanted to demonstrate the strength of emotion in argument, but emotion has little to do with logic. Emotion also does not make an argument more biblical. One must learn to see through this.

Second, Bronson seeks--especially in this section of the book--to win by intimidation or brute force. The point of listing 300 verses is simply to intimidate is his reader towards his position: "300 verses against Calvinism? Calvinism must be wrong." I honestly felt like I was in a Bill Gothard seminar, constantly being bombarded with new information without having time to process and scrutinize the information I just heard.

Regardless of our personal feelings on the subject of selective salvation, we are bound to accept whatever the Bible teaches. As a result, our next logical step is to look at the Bible and see what it has to say concerning this subject.

…A verse should always be studied in the light of its context. The surrounding verses should always be included in your studies…The NIV Bible was used when making the descriptions for most of the verses.

Any Calvinist will agree with what Bronson says here. We are to worship God for how he truly is—as revealed by the Bible. Indeed, we should logically consult the Bible to form our opinion on any doctrine. However, what follows these excerpts is far from logical. Listing 300 verses without the "light of its context" is by no means a refutation of his opponent--and it seems a bit hypocritical on his part. Sure, Bronson tells us, "As I stated earlier, the purpose of the list was to provide you a tool to help you in your research, it was not intended to be a substitute for your research." Who has the time to research 300 verses? Essentially, this seems like lip service to serious Bible study--what he's apparently saying is this: "300 verses can't be wrong." Several of his listings were in the middle of passages cited by his opponents to support Calvinism! (listings John 6, John 10, and Romans 8) Others were simply poor summaries.

He grouped these verses in sections, and I would like to address each section, if time permits, making note of the most significant listings.

---

Salvation is offered to ALL men

1 Timothy 4:10 – “God is the savior of all men” (Bronson’s description of the verse) Here is the verse in its entirety…

10 For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. (1 Timothy 4:10)

What does Paul mean when he says that God is the "Savior of all men"? This comment is in passing, like 2 Peter 3:9, so it is difficult to place this passage in context. This is--in my opinion--the best verse that Bronson can use. However, his interpretation isn't the only plausible one.

It seems this verse is refuting Particular Redemption. However, this verse is by no means an offer of salvation to all men. There is no mention at all of the offering of salvation in this verse. Moreover, is God the Savior of a man who has died without Him? How can one be the savior of someone he has not saved? The title of savior is reserved for the person who has saved someone, respective to the person who was saved. Thus, who can all men be referring to? Is Jesus the Savior of those in hell?

It is possible that this verse is communicating that God is the Savior of all men who have and will believe? To answer this question, one must interpret this verse using the exegesis of more detailed passages. Let the clear Scripture interpret the obscure passages.

1 Timothy 2:1-6 – “God wants all men to be saved” “Jesus gave himself as a ransom for all men” “We are to pray for all men” (Bronson’s descriptions)

1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time, (1 Timothy 2:1-6)

First, see James White's explanation for this passage here. (Look all the way down.) He notes the context that "all men" is qualified: "for kings and all who are in authority." James tells us that Paul is stressing that God's want to also save men in authority, not just the poor and obscure Christians.

Second, This citing is in the wrong section, because, yet again, there is no offering of salvation mentioned anywhere in this passage.

For argument's sake, let's grant that this passage could mean that God wants literally every person to be saved. We still have a significant question that must be answered by opponents of Calvinism. If God wants all men to be saved, but all are not, why is this so? By his nature, God is omnipotent and can accomplish whatever pleases him. (Job 23:13, 42:1-2; Psalm 115:3; Psalm 135:6; Isaiah 46:10) Therefore, it is obvious that God considers something else to be more important than everyone being saved, for if that were the highest priority and pleasure of God, it would be accomplished. What was that something? Free will? Can a biblical case be made for this? I'd like to see one verse that explicitly states that man's free will is more important to God than anything else.

I beg to offer that God’s glory is God’s greatest priority and desire in creation. This overrides his desire for all to be saved--if such a desire even exists (See James White's explanation linked above). When a rebellious sinner is cast into hell, God is glorified. Does He not demonstrate righteousness and holiness when He punishes sin? Is that not demonstrating His character? Is that not just? Be careful here. To say that God is not glorified in punishing sin diminishes the glory of Christ’s work on the cross, for at the cross, God demonstrated holiness and righteousness in punishing Christ for the sin of the world. See the next passage!

2 Corinthians 5:15 – “Jesus dies for all” The context of this verse shows that it better supports the Calvinist position than Bronson’s. Here is the passage in which this verse is set.

14 For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died; 15 and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again. 16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new. 18 Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God. 21 For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. (2 Corinthians 5:14-21)

Verse 20 vaguely shows an offering of salvation, not 15. However, the overall message of this passage is summarized in verse 14, “that if One died for all, then all died.” This passage is expressing the necessity of the Atonement of Christ in the salvation of men. The fact that Christ died on the behalf of sinners is itself a testimony to the total depravity of man! If the One died on man’s behalf, then man is surely dead in his current state. For even if one man could meet the righteous standards of God, then Christ’s death of was worthless, meaningless, and unnecessary. (Galatians 2:21) By the power of His resurrection, some sinners are quickened and made alive, (vs. 17, cf. Eph 2:1-10) and thus are new creatures, having been reconciled to God. (vs.18-20, Eph 2:11-22)

Now, let’s look at the meaning of the words all and world in the context of this passage. In verse 19, Paul states, “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.” Now, if world means everybody in this context, then everybody will not have their sins imputed to them! What then is the need for hell? This is the danger in pigeonholing the terms all and world to mean everyone in every case the words are used--it leads to incoherent interpretations.

Doesn’t it make more sense to say that world in this context means world of believers? That is the all for whom Christ death’s does any work! Even non-Calvinists admit that the atonement of Christ is of no value for the unbeliever; that is why hell exists.

2 Peter 3:9 – His description says this: “God does not want any to perish but wants all to come to repentance.” Conveniently, he does not summarize the entire verse in his description (as he also does with many others), so I will quote it with its context. You have to read both above and below this verse to understand what Peter is communicating. Remember, I am doing what Bronson said to do: studying the verse in light of its context.

1 Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), 2 that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior,

3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation." 5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. (2 Peter 3:1-10)

You can see from the context that Peter is discussing the return of Christ. The black bolded text above has nothing to do with salvation being “offered to all men.” In fact the verse tells us that the Lord is waiting for “all to come to repentance” before He fulfills the promise of His return. Therefore, what does all mean in this context? Does it mean every single individual on earth? Of course not! According to Revelation, until the very last day before Christ’s return, there will be a vast multitude of people who scoff and reject Christ. Therefore, if all means “everybody,” we can logically conclude that Christ will never return, and thus does not fulfill his promises. The scoffers are right.

The context demonstrates that Christ is being patient until the last person chosen and foreknown for salvation comes to repentance, and then He will return. Peter’s audience knew what he meant in 2 Peter 3:9, for in 1 Peter 1:1-2 (the opening of the first epistle, implicitly mentioned in verse 1), Peter refers to the saints as the “elect according to the foreknowledge of God.”

I will finish this section in part 2.

SideBar: My name is Brent Railey, (excuse my necessary shameless plug) and when I saw that Jim was discussing Michael Bronson's work on this blog, I had to contact him. A friend of mine gave me a PDF versions of this book about a year and half ago, and I did some work discussing Bronson's views. Over the next few days, I will be re-posting this work from my original blog--with some revisions, of course.

---

Bronson’s description of the TULIP demonstrates that, although researching this issue for "several years", his understanding of Calvinism is not quite representative of historic Calvinism. Bronson had misrepresented the traditional Reformed positions in other parts of the book, so I wanted to see his understanding of the most common way of Presenting Calvinism, TULIP. TULIP is the best summary of the Reformed faith when it is described correctly. All of the bolded emphases are mine except the titles. These excerpts can be found here.

Total Depravity

When man fell, sin permeated every part of his personality. This includes his thinking, emotions, and will. Total depravity does not mean he is necessarily intensely sinful, it only means that sin has encompassed his entire being. The unregenerate (unsaved) man is dead in his sins. Without the power of the Holy Spirit, the natural man is blind and deaf to the message of the gospel. Man will never seek God on his own; he will never have a desire for God or righteousness. This is why Total Depravity has also been called “Total Inability.” Since man is totally incapable of seeking God, he will never find salvation through Jesus Christ on his own. The only time a person seeks this salvation is when God inserts a “desire for God” in his heart.

This is a good description of Total Depravity, the T in TULIP. Just note the bolded text, because you will see the first strawman in just a moment, because Bronson seems to forget later that Calvinists believe that “man will never seek god on his own; he will never have a desire for God or righteousness.”

Unconditional Election

Unconditional Election is the doctrine that states God has chosen who will get saved and who will be damned for eternity. This selection is not based upon the condition of the person’s heart or any of his merits. A person’s humility, love of God, and desire for righteousness are not part of this selection. This selection is also not based on God looking into the future and seeing who “will accept” the offer of the gospel. God has elected some for glory and others for damnation. This election is based solely upon the counsel of His own will. His selection of the elect was done long before the universe was ever created.

Let the strawmen march (or crumble with no support)! It may seem that Bronson is reiterating the fact that Calvinist beliefs state that "a person's humility, love of God, and desire for righteousness" do not exist--but he is not. If you read the rest of the book, it is clear that Bronson believes that these qualities exist in the unbeliever.

He is correct in saying that Calvinists believe that God’s choice of a person to salvation is not based upon many merit or quality of that person. However, Bronson does not seem to understand that in Reformed doctrine, God’s unconditional election is necessary due to man’s total depravity, because he writes (assuming that these qualities actually exists in unbelievers), “A person’s humility, love of God, and desire for righteousness are not part of this selection.” The wording of this paragraph is meant to incline the reader against Calvinism. Essentially, this is what he trying to get the reader to think: "Calvinists believe that God won't choose someone even if he loves Him? I don't want to believe in a God like that."

However, if Bronson were to be fair, he would indicate the logical progression from Total Depravity to the necessity of Unconditional Election. Tell me, Bronson, if mankind is totally depraved, how can man desire righteousness, love God, or be humble? The doctrine of total depravity states clearly and precisely that there is no unbeliever who has those characteristics, therefore it is impossible within Reformed theology for “humility, love of God, and desire for righteousness” be criteria for election because they do not exist in men. When Total Depravity is taken into consideration when discussing Unconditional Election, the emotional sting is removed.

Limited Atonement (Particular Redemption)

God limited His atonement to only those who are the elect. When Jesus died on the cross, He did not die for the sins of the whole world, He died for only those He wanted to go to Heaven. Christ died to atone for the sins of specific sinners. “It is obvious,” (the Calvinists say), “that God did not atone for all men, because not all men are saved.”

He is close in his description of Limited Atonement. However, his bias against Calvinism is clear in the verbiage he uses to describe this doctrine. He didn’t even give it a fair chance. Most evangelicals believe that the effects of Christ’s Atonement are limited. Hardly any evangelicals, Calvinist or not, deny the sufficiency of the Atonement for all sin (the world). The question is this: why are the effects of the Atonement limited? Clearly they are, because not everyone will be saved. Did the limitation come from a decision made by God or by men?

Here is the thrust of Unlimited Atonement (General Redemption): The atonement of Christ provides the means of salvation for everyone, however it actually secures salvation for no one. In a sense, Christ is a door by which men must choose to enter to be saved. Limited Atonement claims that the Atonement provides a means for salvation that is sufficient for everyone, but secures it for the only for the elect. The rest are passed over. The limitation of the effects of the Atonement of Christ was due to a decision made by God in his unconditional election (yet another logical progression) in eternity past. In this sense, Christ is both the door and the rescuer, because men are too blind to see the door.

Note: Each point of TULIP must be discussed in light of the others, not in isolation. Isolation from context is a common method of study in Bronson's work.

Irresistible Grace

The grace that God offers to the elect cannot be refused. God puts into the hearts of the elect an irresistible desire to turn to Him and accept His salvation. This implanted desire is so overpowering that it cannot be resisted or refused. This irresistible desire insures[sic] that everyone who has been elected will go to Heaven. None of the elect will ever go to Hell. The Calvinist says “What a comfort it is to know that the gospel of Christ will penetrate our hard, sinful hearts and wondrously save us through the gracious inward call of the Holy Spirit!” The Calvinist will also say, “This doctrine is a great comfort to the Christian who is witnessing; he knows that he will always be successful. When he is witnessing to a person, he has the assurance that if God wants that person to be saved, he will be saved.”

This is an accurate description of irresistible grace. His bias is not so apparent in this description, and he gives it a fair presentation. I want to make one more point about irresistible grace that I feel is important, and it is not mentioned above. Irresistible Grace stresses the sovereignty of God. In Unconditional Election, God purposes for particular persons to be saved. In irresistible grace, God accomplishes his purposes. His plans can never be thwarted, and there is no such thing a “Plan B” with God.

Perseverance of the Saints

Since God has determined who will get saved and they cannot resist His call, they are unconditionally and eternally secure in that election. Therefore, those who have been chosen to be saved will always stay saved. They cannot resist or lose their salvation. There are no exceptions to the rule. As a result, the Christian has “eternal security.” Since there was nothing a person could do to get saved in the first place, there is nothing he can do to lose his salvation.

Again, this is an accurate description of the doctrine of perseverance. However, I must add some more information, because Bronson does not discuss the perseverance in Perseverance of the Saints, only “eternal security.” Even the faith in Jesus we have as Christians is a God given faith given by God’s grace. (Ephesians 2:8-9, John 6:65) That faith will by all means persevere until the Christian’s death, and that Christian will never, I repeat, never be an apostate of the faith. He may backslide and he will struggle, but he never loses faith and there is always a pattern of growth. Those who do abandon the faith were never saved. (1 John 2:18-19)

Coming Next: Verses that "refute" Calvinism "Selected Salvation."

The Bible says people are going to Hell against God's will. For example, 1 Corinthians 15:34 says, "For there are some who are ignorant of God--I say this to your shame."

Michael Bronson's BibleHelp.org has once again erected a shield of rusty wire as a defense against the biblical doctrine of election. This time he has been reduced to a technique called eisogesis and only quoting part of a verse. Eisogesis is the practice of reading into the text something that is not there. Here is the verse in it's entirety;

33 Do not be deceived: "Bad company ruins good morals." [3] 34 Wake up from your drunken stupor, as is right, and do not go on sinning. For some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame.

In fact a reading of the entirety of chapter 15 will be very helpful in getting a good understanding of verse 34. I think that Mr. Bronson is trying to link this verse to evangelism. This verse says nothing to the subject of evangelism. What this has to do with the doctrine of election is beyond me.

The proper context of this verse must be seen in order to properly understand it. In 1Cor15 the apostle Paul is explaining that Christ did in fact died for our sins according to the scriptures and that he appeared to many as risen from the dead including the 12 and ultimately Paul himself and that this is the doctrine into which the church of Corinth was delivered and believed.

In verse 12 it becomes apparent that some were saying there is no resurrection of the dead. This is the heresy the church of Corinth had apparently fallen into. Paul then goes on to explain that Christ did indeed rise from the dead and that if he did not then they are still in their sins and they are most of all to be pitied; this ending in verse 19.

Starting in verse 20-21 he re-explains the doctrine taught Romans 5; "for as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead." Paul then proceeds to teaching how the return of Christ is to take place further re-enforcing the doctrine of the resurrection ending in verse 28.

Finally he reproves them sharply for "being baptized in the name of a dead man", points out that the resurrection is the very reason that his own life is always in danger and that that is what his ministry is all about. Verses 33&34 are nothing more than an exhortation to break fellowship with those who are spreading the corrupting doctrine that denies the resurrection and "awake to righteousness"(translated awake from your drunken stupor in the ESV). The comment that some are ignorant of God has nothing to do with evangelism, but is rather a rebuke to strip the Corinthians of their spiritual pride. "I say this to your shame" shows the shame that the Corinthian's bear for their laziness in being led from the truth into gnostic heresy.

The rest of the chapter Paul then encourages them by reminding them that the resurrection is their guarantee of victory and eternal life and that we are victorious because "God gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."(vs 57)

This passage has nothing whatsoever to do with people going to hell against God's will. It is a flimsy attempt to decry the doctrine of election.

Eph 1:3-8
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us [2] for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known [3] to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

Welcome, to anyone who is visiting here for the first time. The post at the bottom of the blog explains a little bit of why Chad and Jim are writing to clear up some of the misrepresentations found on BibleHelp.org. We welcome everyone to join in the coversation, and have invited Michael Bronson (from BibleHelp.org) to converse with us as well. Since his site does not allow the posting of feedback that disagrees with the author, we've invited Michael to participate here.

Here are a few more nuggets of confusion found on this page of Michael's website. Calvinism (selective salvation as it's called on BibleHelp.org) apparently can not be true because . . .

• "Selective Salvationists say God 'hates' all of the non-elect". Not true. The mainstream Calvinist position is that God loves all of His creation including the non-elect, but has a special love for the elect. Verify that this is the mainstream position by reading The Difficult Doctrine of God's Love by DA Carson, or The God Who Loves by John MacArthur. The sermons of Charles Spurgeon (at Spurgeon.org) are also worth noting. Whereas there are some Calvinists that believe God is without love for the non-elect, it is simply wrong to imply that this is what all Calvinists believe, that is far from being the case.

• "There are many evil and sinful things going on in the world. Do we really want to say God forcibly made people commit these heinous acts?" Are you really intending to teach that God has relinquished control over evil events? Was it not His intended plan for the greatest evil act ever, the Cross? Calvinists do not believe that God is the author of evil, but there are numerous biblical examples demonstrating that God decrees evil events, and controls them through secondary causes. He works these things out for His own glory, as He did in Genesis 50:20.

• "If selective salvation were true, parental influence should not increase or decrease a child's chance of becoming a Christian". Why? Godly parents are often the means that God uses to reach out to and save children.

• "The Bible says our surroundings can greatly influence our eternal destiny". Then can you honestly say that God has given everyone an equal chance at salvation? Does everyone on earth get the same amount of grace, or is it true instead that God has mercy on whom He has mercy?

Elsewhere, Michael Bronson from BibleHelp.org says:

"It has taken me several years to write this section on selective salvation. I didn't write it to 'set people straight'."

It's amazing that someone could have spent years on something which appears to have overlooked the initial step of understanding what Calvinists actually believe.

"Rather, I wrote it because of my concern for the lost. If this doctrine is true, then everyone who is supposed to go to Heaven will make it to Heaven. If, however, this doctrine is false, then there are billions of people needlessly going to Hell. Think about it; if you really believed everyone who is supposed to go to Heaven will make it there, would you give and live sacrificially to help reach the world for Christ?"

If it is God's truth, and you have spent years crusading against it, should that not be a concern? If it is false, you say that there are "people needlessly going to hell". The implication here is that someone who actually believes in election will not "sacrificially help to reach the world for Christ". But this defies history. Some of the greatest evangelists, missionaries, and martyrs have believed this doctrine. Ask me for a list of names, and I'll be glad to provide it. Earlier on this page you say "make sure you use the Bible as your final authority". Yes, lets do that shall we? The "no evangelism" claim above, and much of the philosophical points being made on BibleHelp.org, are empty rhetoric. For more background on Calvinism and evangelism, read 7 reasons why Calvinists evangelize, also see a listing of the most noteworthy Calvinists in church history and how they believed (and preached) the free offer of the Gospel.

If selective salvation were true, you would expect an even distribution of Christians all over the world. In contrast to this, we find areas with very high concentrations of Christians and other areas with very low concentrations of Christians.

O.K. this one's just plain wacky. This argument is so laughable I'm not even sure where to begin. I'll just leave this one open for your comments. Can anyone out there tell me why the doctrine of Election according to Calvinism should necessitate the above conclusion? Election does not in any way require a statistical equilibrium of those who do and do not believe.

This argument actually argues against Mr. Bronson's position. Equal distribution of Christians all over the world would in point of fact be a more tenable position if salvation were a matter of the law of averages mediating who would and would not believe. This is really more of a position you might expect a Deist to hold. Even then, the argument is a pretty good stretch not taking into account any number of variables which may or may not hinder someone choosing to believe. Just in case you don't think that Michael Bronson really said this, see it for yourself - here.

Acts 13:48 And when the gentiles heard this they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.