A friend of mine likes to remind me that in the free offer of the gospel, God isn’t play-acting. God doesn’t make a show of extending the offer of salvation to sinners when, in reality, He has withheld any possibility of them being saved. Perhaps this summarizes the conflict over Calvinism better than any other illustration.

The “I” in the TULIP represents “Irresistible Grace,” which has been described as the difference between God’s “external” call and His “internal” call. Some have modified the adjective “irresistible” to “effectual.” However, the teaching itself is fairly consistent among Calvinists.

In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The external call (which is made to all without distinction) can be, and often is, rejected; whereas the internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion. By means of this special call the Spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ. He is not limited in His work of applying salvation by man’s will, nor is He dependent upon man’s cooperation for success. The Spirit graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ. God’s grace, therefore, is invincible; it never fails to result in the salvation of those to whom it is extended. (https://www.fivesolas.com/cal_arm.htm)

In his online lecture on Irresistible Grace, R.C. Sproul acknowledges the problems with the term “irresistible.”

Now beloved, the history of the human race is the history of relentless resistance by human beings to the sweetness of the grace of God. What is meant by irresistible grace is not what the word suggests, that it’s incapable of being resisted. Indeed, we are capable of resisting God’s grace, and we do resist God’s grace. But the idea here is that in spite of our natural resistance to the grace of God that God’s grace is so powerful that it has the capacity to overcome our natural resistance to it. That’s why I prefer the term effectual grace rather than irresistible grace because this grace that is irresistible effects what God intends to effect by it.

And in Chosen by God, Sproul says,

Calvinism does not teach and never has taught that God brings people kicking and screaming into the kingdom or has ever excluded anyone who wanted to be there. Remember that the cardinal point of the Reformed doctrine of predestination rests on the biblical teaching of man’s spiritual death. Natural man does not want Christ. He will only want Christ if God plants a desire for Christ in his heart. Once that desire is planted, those who come to Christ do not come kicking and screaming against their wills. They come because they want to come. They now desire Jesus. They rush to the Savior. The whole point of irresistible grace is that rebirth quickens someone to spiritual life in such a way that Jesus is now seen in his irresistible sweetness. Jesus is irresistible to those who have been made alive to the things of God. (Chosen by God, pp. 122-123)

I will admit that I have often thought of my coming to faith in Christ this way – that Christ was, in a certain sense, irresistible to me, that I found His grace irresistible when I finally embraced Him as my Savior. I would guess that believers who fought His saving call ferociously would agree that eventually, after long resistance, they found that they were powerless to resist any further.

So, I don’t deny that there is an element of irresistibility to God’s saving grace, at least from the believer’s perspective. I recognize that God does something special in the hearts of those sinners who believe in Jesus. The sinner doesn’t get any credit for responding in faith to the saving grace of God proclaimed in the gospel. All the glory belongs to God alone, who has effectually called us to salvation. And that glory and credit isn’t the same kind of thing as an athlete who, after scoring the winning touchdown, kneels down in the end zone and points at the sky. We don’t give God the glory. He gets all the glory.

My objection to the Calvinist doctrine of “Irresistible Grace” or “Effectual Grace” fits with the objection I have raised on the other points in the TULIP. These doctrines obscure the paradox. They attempt to resolve the mystery of God’s grace in a way that man can comprehend. I will gladly confess that I don’t understand the interaction between our free will and God’s exhaustive sovereignty. I don’t think we can find words or illustrations that explain the relationship satisfactorily. And that doesn’t bother me. I don’t need an airtight system that professes to resolve all the questions. I think that is Paul’s conclusion as well.

For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen. (Romans 11:30-36)

I agree with Sproul that “God’s grace is so powerful that it has the capacity to overcome our natural resistance to it.” But, in order to maintain their system, I find that men like Sproul must also insist that God extends the internal call of the gospel only to the elect. As a case in point, Sproul denies the idea of “prevenient grace” – that God gives all people enough grace to respond to Jesus.

What good is prevenient grace if offered outwardly to spiritually dead creatures?

On the other hand, if prevenient grace refers to something that God does within the heart of fallen man, then we must ask why it is not always effectual. Why is it that some fallen creatures choose to cooperate with prevenient grace and others choose not to? Doesn’t everyone get the same amount?

Think of it this way, in personal terms. If you are a Christian you are surely aware of other people who are not Christians. Why is it that you have chosen Christ and they have not? Why did you say yes to prevenient grace while they said no? Was it because you were more righteous than they were? If so, then indeed you have something in which to boast. Was that greater righteousness something you achieved on your own or was it the gift of God? If it was something you achieved, then at the bottom line your salvation depends on your own righteousness. If the righteousness was a gift, then why didn’t God give the same gift to everybody? (Chosen by God, pp. 123-124)

Again, Calvinism treats saving grace as an either/or proposition – either saving grace is effectual, or it is prevenient. But the Bible teaches this as a both/and proposition – God extends the saving call to all men, and some men hear it and receive it.

For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, (Titus 2:11)

Let’s pause to consider that verse for a moment. Paul says that this saving grace – “salvation” is an adjective modifying grace – “hath appeared” – that is, it has illuminated all men; it has shined upon them (Louw-Nida). “Hath appeared” is in the indicative mood, pointing to the reality – not the potential – of its appearance. Saving grace (as I understand it, Paul uses the adjective in an attributive restrictive sense, so he is being precise about the kind of grace he means) illuminates all men, shines upon all men, teaching them their responsibility towards God. Nor is this the only place where this sort of thing is claimed in Scripture.

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might (subjunctive, so potential, not reality) believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. (John 1:6-9)

Again, pause to consider what is said here. The light of Jesus Christ proclaimed in our faithful gospel witness exposes God’s saving grace so that men can believe. God doesn’t send us to proclaim the gospel, and He has withheld the one element that would result in our salvation. He isn’t like a crafty aunt who leaves out the one ingredient that makes her recipe great when sharing her favorite recipe. He doesn’t give you the 500-piece puzzle with a centerpiece missing. In every faithful gospel witness, God’s saving grace accompanies that witness so that the hearer can be saved if he responds in faith. If he is not saved, it isn’t because God didn’t extend enough grace, or the necessary grace, for him to believe. It is his fault, not God’s.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (Romans 1:16)

If God doesn’t extend the saving call to every man, then the command to evangelize the world is a scam, busy work designed to demonstrate grace that God doesn’t have. The Bible says otherwise. Some receive God’s saving grace in vain, and some even fail of the grace of God.

We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. (2 Corinthians 6:1)

Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; (Hebrews 12:15)

God doesn’t lose any He has saved. This leaves one option – that grace’s effectual call is made to all men and that some hear it and believe. Those who reject it will be damned for rejecting it, not because the grace of God that shined on them wasn’t effectual grace or because God extended an external call but not an internal call.

Again, this is the mystery of grace – the interaction between God’s sovereignty and our free will. I oppose drawing lines that Scripture doesn’t draw. The mystery of godliness defies human logic and our capacity for understanding. We should be OK with this.

With this in mind, I want to agree with a passage Douglas Wilson includes in his defense of Calvinism in Easy Chairs, Hard Words. Wilson has often repeated the analogy of the author of a play. If we take Macbeth as an example, Shakespeare isn’t responsible for the murder of King Duncan, even though Shakespeare wrote the play, and therefore caused Macbeth and Lady Macbeth to carry out the murder. Nobody would put Shakespeare on trial. He created the characters, and the characters committed the crime.

Wilson’s book is a fictitious conversation between a young man trying to grasp the doctrines of grace and a Calvinist pastor (Martin) trying to teach them. Hopefully, that will explain some of the way this is expressed.

“I would ask this: if the finite Shakespeare can produce, by his will, fictional characters who have all the freedom necessary for their ‘level of existence,’ then why cannot the infinite God create real individuals, with real free agency, without surrendering His control?”

“You are saying that because God’s resources are infinitely greater than Shakespeare’s, He has the power to write history and create characters who have true freedom.”

“Yes… without having His characters write the play.”

“I don‘t get it.”

Martin laughed, and leaned forward. “Neither do I.”

“Now I don’t get that. If you don’t get it, why do you believe it?”

“Because I was told to. This is not truth presented to me by some explorer, or scientist. It was revealed in the Bible. If it had not been, I would not have to believe it. God does not demand that I understand Him, or understand all His relations to His creation. And I don’t understand Him.”

“But you do believe Him… ?”

Martin smiled. “I do believe Him.”(p. 51)

It is, admittedly, an imperfect illustration, but it gets to the core of my objection to these airtight lines – which Wilson himself probably draws. God is able to create people with real freedom, and at the same time, God is able to maintain His sovereign control of everything. If I understood that, I would be God. But this I know. God has extended His saving grace to all men so that no man can blame God if they hear and do not believe. God isn’t head-faking when He commissions us to preach the gospel to every creature. But those who believe have God alone to thank for their response to the gospel. All the glory, all the praise, belongs to Him.

Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it. (Hebrews 4:1-2)