Claim. The three Pauline verses cited for absolute predestination (Rom 8:29-30; Rom 9:15-16; Rom 9:21) and the Jacob-Esau favoritism narrative all admit a conditional reading once the human portion of responsibility is supplied. John Calvin’s absolute-predestination doctrine errs by ignoring this portion.
Elaboration. dp-4-elucidation-of-biblical-verses-which-support-the-doctrine-of-absolute-predestination reads each text:
- Rom 8:29-30 (foreknew → predestined → called → justified → glorified) — calling is God’s act; justification and glorification depend on the called person completing his responsibility. Paul omits the human-portion step but does not deny it.
- Rom 9:15-16 (“not upon man’s will… but upon God’s mercy”) — speaks to God’s right to choose whom to call, not to the chosen person’s role once called.
- Rom 9:21 (potter/clay) — applies to fallen humanity’s status as “refuse”; once fallen, humans have no standing to complain how God treats them. Does not entail unconditional individual predestination.
- Jacob-Esau (Rom 9:11-13) — God’s love and hatred were positional (Cain-Abel restoration positions), not arbitrary individual favoritism. Esau later rose by submitting to Jacob; Jacob would have fallen had he failed.
The chapter names Calvin explicitly: “People such as John Calvin have propounded the doctrine of absolute and complete predestination… They were ignorant of the true relationship between God’s portion of responsibility and the human portion of responsibility.”
Significance. DP’s most explicit anti-Reformed apologetic at the exegetical level. The strategy is to insert the human-portion footnote Paul allegedly assumed but did not state.
See also. dp-popular-acclaim-conditional-on-fulfilled-responsibility · dp-two-kinds-of-prophecies-reflect-human-portion-of-responsibility.