From the conclusion of my “Liberating Romans from Reformed Captivity:” In conclusion, though it may be excessive to call Reformed theology “paganism in sheep’s clothing,” I contend that Calvinism has reordered the pieces of the theological mosaic to present a different picture—one it claims is the only faithful portrayal of God and his ways. Calvinism, at its core, is Augustinianism. Augustine was a brilliant and influential thinker, whose legacy includes both truth and error. . . . It is a theological axiom that polluted headwaters will yield impure streams. Calvinism may well be among the most influential errors in church history. . . . Throughout this work, I have not written with neutrality—for neutrality, in such matters is neither possible nor desirable. I recognize that one can become so enamored with Calvinism that it can do no wrong, or so opposed to it that it can do no right. Yet I have engaged Augustine, Calvin, and the Calvinists in good faith. I trust my interlocutors will do the same. Only those are disqualified who believe there is no truth worth believing or who recognize no truth in the beliefs of others. In all things, we must look to our Lord, who is “full of grace and truth.” May God deliver us from being burdened with truth but devoid of grace. I have argued that the Reformed doctrine of election is not the biblical doctrine. One cannot simultaneously affirm a strict decretal theology and proclaim a gospel for all. One cannot have an unconditional election of some and a gospel for all. One cannot have a limited atonement and a gospel for all. One cannot have an irresistible effectual call and a gospel for all. Paul did not preach a que sera sera gospel—“whatever will be, will be.” Nor did he preach a gospel that insists that “whatever happens has been causally determined by God.” James Daane, himself a Reformed theologian, described the problem starkly: Viewed from the perspective of decretal theology, each event of history is willed by God, is related vertically to the divine determination, and is revelatory of the divine glory. This is God’s sovereignty. Theologians of this tradition urge that God is the ultimate cause and the primary source of sin, that the function of the proclamation of the gospel is to make some men ripe for judgment; that God created sin (Gordon Clark); that God takes pleasure in the death of sinners; that preaching is per se a curse for the reprobate; that everything that occurs is a divine wish-fulfillment, for if anything were to occur contrary to what God wills, God would not be sovereign but a godling who had created more world than he can take care of (B. B. Warfield). Some Calvinists may reject aspects of this portrayal [from Daane] but the question is not whether all Calvinists affirm these conclusions—it is whether these conclusions follow from the logic of Calvinism. Regrettably, I believe they do. David Bentley Hart’s verdict on Augustine and his Reformed heirs is both severe and salient: But regarding that part of his intellectual patrimony that has had the widest effect—his understanding of sin, grace, and election—not only do I share the Eastern distaste for (or, frankly, horror at) his conclusions; I am even something of an extremist in that respect. In the whole long, rich history of Christian misreadings of Scripture, none I think has ever been more consequential, more invincibly perennial, or more disastrous. There is a better way. (194-95) amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0FG1KTCK…