The Epitome of Confusion

this was done by a bother in the lord on facebook by the name of, Evan Wheeler. 

 A man by the name of Dr. John R. Rice wrote a Q&A article on predestination while at the end claiming “the more you read from the people who make up a false doctrine, the more you will be confused.” His article was the epitome of the average pastor, confused about the doctrines of grace and lordship salvation, attempting to speak out against it. Dr. Rice goes through the five points of Calvinism very briefly. While only quoting verses that support his position he did not care to even present the opposing sides position, which could have easily explained away the few verses he used to support his interpretation. This brand of dishonesty only leads to a further level of ignorance by setting the example that by picking and choosing parts of the Bible we can ultimately prove any other interpretation wrong. This is not how the early church nor scholars handle the Holy Scriptures.

         Also keep in mind that this particular newspaper is not very friendly with the Calvinist interpretation, as on the back of the paper was a flyer titled, “Hyper Calvinism Exposed” while at the bottom read “Calvinism is not the “friend” of the church…come arm yourself with Bible knowledge to battle Satan’s tool.” I think this did well enough to expose how ignorant or arrogant the editors and advertisers of this paper really are.

            In the preface to his article Dr. Rice states regarding the confusion of predestination, “You can settle the issue, if you find some clear statements of Scripture that cannot be denied on which to base the whole doctrine.” What Dr. Rice is plainly stating is that if we see anything that seems to support our particular view then it must be true. While saying this he also implies that someone is denying passages of Scripture. During his attempt to tackle Total Depravity he makes a dishonest, common mistake that many “Arminian” teachers make. He first does not state the opposing side’s argument which shows that he only wants to assert a particular interpretation instead of being fair by presenting the arguments of both sides and letting the Scriptures speak for itself. This shows that he must not be confident in his position if he resorts to censoring the other side.

“Man is a sinner, but Jesus Christ “was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Every man in the whole world has a call toward God, a pull toward God. In John 12:32, Jesus says, “And if I, be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” So everybody in the world, no matter how wicked, has a call and could be saved. It is true that “no man can come to me, except that Father which hath sent me draw him” (6:44), but the Lord has already stated that every sinner in the world is drawn and called.” (Sword of the Lord, 3000#, pg.8 “Questions Answered by Dr. John R. Rice”)

            Notice how he tries to explain away John 6:44 by using John 12:32, even though chapter 6 comes before chapter 12. The deadly mistake Mr. Rice makes is by combining the two verses to try and prove that every single individual is drawn by the Father. Specifically, he forgets or ignores the rest of John 6:44, “And I will raise him up on the last day.” Those who are drawn will be lifted up, so the Dr. is actually teaching universalism by attempting to reconcile John 6:44 with 12:32.

            In Dr. Rice’s attempt to explain away unconditional election, he defines foreknowledge as God’s omniscience instead of the correct definition of the verb.

            “This says “Foreknow” not “foredetermine,” as some have made it up to be.”

            As we can see, he does not understand the opposing sides argument which is possibly why he does not gibe the opportunity for comparison. Dr. Rice, oblivious to the implications of his own interpretation of Romans 8, states,

            “It is silly for anybody to say that God meant foredetermination, meaning that certain people have to go to Hell and certain people have to go to Heaven. This is a dishonest use of Scripture”

            He himself is blind to what he is teaching, because if God only predestines those who believe, it therefore leaves the rest to Hell. His position would then be that God knows who is going to Hell, yet creates them anyways. But, ask the Dr. this and I’m sure he would whole heartily disagree. Unsurprisingly Mr. Rice quotes 2 Peter 3:9 in support of unlimited atonement, yet quoting it as if it referred to every individual instead of the given context. He then quotes 1 John 2:2 and states,

            “There is no way to understand Scripture but by believing what it plainly says,”

            So when Paul call’s his audience “children” is he talking to actual children? What about in 2 Corinthians 5:1, do we literally have a house or is this a metaphor? This is where the “plainly says” logic takes us. What Dr. Rice is saying is that if the verse supports his theology without an exegesis, then that is what it “plainly says”. But, when confronted by verses like John 6:44, this isn’t plain enough.

            As if the article were enough to be the epitome of misunderstood and poorly exegeted passages, he quotes 1 Timothy 2:4 to top off the section on unlimited atonement, stating,

            “No honest interpretation of these Scriptures could mean anything but that God wants every sinner saved,”

            By swapping “all men” with “all sinners” we get the idea of the bias Mr. Rice brings to the table. By this article I am convinced that Dr. John R. Rice is either being very dishonest or is simply greatly confused and unlearned on the matter of Reformed theology and proper Biblical scholarship. I encourage all who read this to learn how NOT to read and interpret the Scriptures. Consistency and context are key to understanding the Word of God and properly handling it with respect.