Calvinism Series: Calvinism is the Gospel?

Is Calvinism the Gospel? (Part 1)

For a Calvinist, the doctrinal distinctives of Calvinism (the "doctrines of grace") are nothing more or less than the gospel of Jesus Christ found throughout the pages of the New Testament. Charles Spurgeon:

"There is no such thing as preaching Christ and him crucified, unless you preach what...is called Calvinism...It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else."

Despite their equating of Calvinism with the gospel, I have yet to meet a Calvinist who claims to have embraced the five points of Calvinism when he turned in faith to Christ Jesus. Does this mean that they were not really saved before they came to understand and accept Reformed Theology as the gospel? If the five points of Calvinism can be equated with the gospel, which is "the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes (Romans 1:16), why don't we hear Calvinists talking to the unsaved about the 5 points? If the Calvinist version of the doctrines of grace is equivalent to the true gospel, and if believing the true gospel is necessary to salvation, then why is it that most true Calvinists avoid any discussions of these "doctrines of grace" when they are trying to win the lost to faith in Christ? These are important questions that demand an honest, straightforward answer.

To the Galatians, the apostle Paul says:

"I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed." (Galatians 1:6-8)

It is possible, according to Paul, to turn away from the Lord after you have turned to the Lord. The question is this: Is the gospel of Calvinism, or the so-called 5 points of Calvinism, the gospel that Paul preached and that the Galatians believed when they turned to the Lord? We know that Paul was:

"...not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes." (Romans 1:16)

So if the "doctrines of grace" that Calvinism proposes is the gospel, then why did Paul not preach these doctrines if he declared he was not ashamed of the gospel? When you first came to faith in Christ, or came to Christ in faith, did you believe in the 5 points of Calvinism? Or did you simply believe in and personally embrace the truths of Scripture in which we are told that Christ died for our sins and then rose victorious from the grave? As Paul states:

"I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures." (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)

If the gospel you believed in at your conversion was the true gospel of 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, what does that make the five points of Calvinism? Remember that this so-called gospel of Calvinism totally altered your understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ when you converted to Calvinism. Reformed theologian Herman Hoeksema says:

"...for me the truth of the gospel and the Reformed faith are synonymous."

Calvinist David Engelsma:

"Calvinism is the Gospel. Its outstanding doctrines are simply the truths that make up the Gospel."

Calvinist Arthur Constance:

"Calvinism is the Gospel and to teach Calvinism is in fact to preach the Gospel. It is questionable whether a dogmatic theology which is not Calvinistic is truly Christian."

If you're a Calvinist now, WHEN did the truth of the gospel and the Reformed faith become synonymous to you? Odds are it was some time after you at least thought you had received Christ as Lord and Savior. Could you really have been saved believing that which turned out not to be the true gospel after all? If we must believe the gospel to be saved, then are all Calvinists lost between the period when they thought they received Christ as Lord and Savior and when they became convinced of Calvinism?

Lorraine Boettner:

"...we...hold that a full and complete exposition of the Christian system can be given only on the basis of the truth as set forth in the Calvinist system."

Thus, according to Boettner, your Christian system is, at best, only partial and incomplete if it is not in accordance with Calvinism.

Boettner:

"The Bible unfolds a scheme of redemption which is Calvinistic from beginning to end, and these doctrines are taught with such inescapable clearness that the question is settled for all those who accept the Bible as the Word of God."

You either believe that the Bible teaches the Reformed doctrine of redemption, and by extension, the Reformed doctrine of reprobation, or you do not accept the Bible as the Word of God. The Calvinist claims for Reformed Theology go much further than this.

B.B. Warfield:

"...Calvinism is just Christianity...nothing more or less than the hope of the world."

Boettner:

"There is no consistent stopping place between Calvinism and atheism."

Calvinism Series: Intro (4)

Introduction Part 4

All devout believers have a formally agreed upon standard by which to judge and evaluate all doctrines which they claim to be biblical. It is NOT Calvin's "Institutes of the Christian Religion," "The Canons of Dort," The Westminster Confession of Faith," or "The Heidelberg Catechism" that should be the determining facor as to what we believe. It is not Augustine, Calvin, or Edwards that we are to rely upon for our understanding of the truth. Every Christian not only has the right, but the RESPONSIBILITY to personally search the Scriptures to discern what they mean by whaty they say:

2 Timothy 2:15-17
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 16 But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. 17 And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort,
2 Peter 1:19-20
And so we have the prophetic word confirmed which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,
Acts 17:11
These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

As Christians, we can and should learn from our spiritual elders, but we are not bound to what they teach unless it passes the objective test of scriptural truth! Calvinists David Steele and Curtis Thomas state:

"The question of supreme importance is not how the system under consideration came to be formulated into five points, or why it was named Calvinism, but rather is it supported by Scripture? The final court of appeal for determining the validity of any theological system is the inspired, authoritative Word of God. If Calvinism can be verified by clear and explicit declaration of Scripture, then it must be received by Christians; if not, it must be rejected."

I couldn't agree more. Loraine Boettner states;

"In all matters of controversy between Christians, the Scriptures are accepted as the highest court of appeal."

Charles Hodge:

"It is the duty of every theologian to subordinate his theories to the Bible, and teach not what seems to him to be true or reasonable, but simply what the Bible teaches."

According to the former two quotes, I would wholeheartedly agree with Calvinists as to how to evaluate a theological system or any of the distinctive of that system. This principle can be stated: All Christians are obligated to believe and embrace all views that agree with the teaching of Scripture. Conversely, if the distinctives of a theological system are found to be in conflict with the teaching of God's holy and infallible Word, that system or the errant distinctives of that system ought to be rejected.

With all my heart, I embrace the grace of God and the fundamental and foundational truth that salvation is by grace and grace alone.

Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Unbelievers are absolutely and utterly dependent upon the grace of God to SAVE them. Believers are absolutely and utterly dependent upon the grace of God to SUSTAIN them.

Reformed Theology misrepresents God's saving grace in order that it may appear to correspond and conform to the equally disturbing "Reformed views" of sovereignty and predestination. For example, for those in a hopeless "caste" of humanity (I call it a "caste" because in societal "classes", there is the potential that one can change their class...however, in a caste, one is completely bound by that caste, unable to change from one caste to another) that Calvinists call the reprobate, Reformed Theology denies even the existence of a grace intended to save them. The Calvinist will rightly say that it is not the fault of the GRACE of God that many people cannot be saved. Calvinists wrongly say or suggest that it is the GOD of grace Himself that is ultimately responsible for the plight of the reprobate. Blaming God for the damnation of those who end up in hell is either explicit or implicit in all forms of authentic Calvinism.

For most Christians, even without a fully developed and systematically stated alternative to Calvinism, a simple and unbiased comparison of what Calvinism teaches with what Scriptures says is sufficient to raise all kinds of theological red flags. Take any important passage directly addressing the doctrine of salvation. Read it carefully, keeping in mind the immediate and greater contextual considerations. Then on a piece of paper, write down what you think the meaning of that passage is (outside the lens of whatever system of theology you adhere to). Then look at what Calvin and other Reformed teachers have to say about the same passage. It is highly unlikely that you will be able to see what they see unless and until they show it to you. Even then, they may have to be very persuasive and do some theological twisting of the Scriptures to get you to agree with them.

Ravi Zacharias on a Mormon in the White House

Internationally renowned Christian apologist and theologian Ravi Zacharias raised a bit of controversy in evangelical circles back in November of 2004 when he accepted an invitation to speak at the Mormon Tabernacle in Salt Lake City, UT. He chose for his subject “The Exclusivity and Sufficiency of Jesus Christ.” When asked recently if he were at all concerned about the potential for a Mormon becoming president in the person of Mitt Romney, Ravi replied:

"What we want is a politician who will understand the basic Judeo-Christian world view, and on the basis of that the moral laws of this nation are framed, and then run this country with the excellence of that which is recognized in a pluralistic society: the freedom to believe or to disbelieve, and the moral framework with which this was conducted: the sanctity of every individual life.

If we are looking for a minister to run this country just look back and see what havoc sometimes has happened when the church got aligned totally with the state. That’s not what we want. We want political leadership that is wise, political leadership that frames itself on the moral framework of God and recognizing that you cannot dictate political ideaology to all of humanity. That’s why Jesus refused to run for office, that was not what his mission was about. His mission was to change hearts.

But as you look back at the book of Kings and Chronicles you see one difference between every king: either they followed the Lord with their whole heart and blessing came; or they turned their backs upon God and then the entailments were there. And that’s what will happen to this country.

Would we rather have someone who is a total secularist? Is that what people are asking for? Are we looking for someone who would run this the way he would run a bishoprick or something? I think we should ask the hard questions of everybody, be it Mitt Romney or anyone else and see if the framework of the value of human life and the moral framework of the Judeo-Christian world view, (which is the only moral framework under which this country could have been framed. It was not framed under a Hindu framework. It was not framed under a Muslim framework, not framed under a Buddhist or a naturalistic framework) that we are all created equal, that liberty and justice and all of those terms that I’ve given only make sense within the Judeo-Christian world view.

Created? Equal? Naturalism does not tell us we are equal. Naturalism does not tell us we are created. Liberty? Islam does not believe in the total liberty of the individual. Equal? Hinduism believes in the caste system. The Judeo-Christian world view is the only world view that could frame this country. And so I think as we elect, we go before God and see out of the candidates who will be the best one to represent the values and at the same time be a good leader for the country whose first responsibility should be to protect its citizens.

This is a great country and the challenges we face are immense to a point where this country could be totally mangled with the onslaught of a rabid atheism ala Christopher Hitchens, Samuel Harris, Richard Dawkins, those kinds of vociferous, acerbic writers in our time who would like to strip the notion of God completely from our culture. For Sam Harris to actually say if he had a magic wand to eradicate religion or eradicate rape, he would eradicate religion tells you the kind of mindset, and his book is in the top ten bestseller list of the New York Times. There’s a rabid atheism out there and there’s a rabid Islamic extremism out there and the secularism combined with that. I’ve responded to Sam Harris in a book which will be released in the early part of next year. I’ve said to him basically his choice is not going to be between religion and secularism. His choice is going to be between Islam and Christianity. Secularism has no staying power and has proven itself in Europe today. Europe is on the decline and on the demise and it’s only a matter of time before Islam would take a foothold there unless the Christian world view reemerges."

Calvinism Series: Intro (3)

Introduction (Part 3)

The doctrinal differences that divide equally sincere and devout believers on both sides of the Calvinist controversy are substantial and serious. This series I'm doing on Calvinism should not be interpreted as a personal attack on anyone. It is only that, having delved in Calvinism myself, I've seen how the doctrines pose a distortion of Scripture (as a whole). As John MacArthur states:

"Is it inherently unkind or condemnatory to say someone else's view is errant? Not if one has biblical authority for saying so. In fact, to remain silent and allow error to go unexposed and uncorrected is an abdication of the elder's role (Titus 1:9). The apostle Paul publicly called Peter a hypocrite for compromising biblical principles (Galatians 2:11-15). To disagree with or critique someone's published views does not constitute a personal attack. If the Church cannot tolerate polemic dialogue between opposing views--especially if Christian leaders cannot be held accountable for whether their teaching is biblical--then error will have free reign."

If I am right in my assessment of Calvinism relative to the Reformed doctrines of redemption and reprobation, it is my scriptural and spiritual obligation to defend the truth of Scripture. Calvinism is a challenge to all Christians everywhere who believe God has a saving love for and saving interest in all of mankind:
John 3:16 "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."
John 6:40 "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.”
1 Timothy 2:4 "[God] who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."
2 Peter 3:9 "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."

In Reformed Theology, God's redemptive love is not only minimized but also outright denied to untold millions of desperately lost souls. Within the Reformed doctrine of limited atonement, the very cross of Christ is theologically robbed of all value for countless millions of people who desperately need the forgiveness and cleansing that can only come from the Savior's precious blood:
1 Peter 1:18-19 "knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."

Even those Calvinists who believe God loves all people have redefined that love, in their thinking and theology, to exclude any kind of saving grace for some of the people they say God loves. We can take John 3:16 and 6:40 at face value or we can allow Calvinism to devalue, in our thinking and theology, the wonderful truth contained and conveyed in this and many other precious, important, and powerful passages of Scripture. One cannot do both.

So much of the energy expended by Calvinists, energy that could and should be spent winning the lost to the Savior, is spent trying to win non-Calvinist Christians into the Reformed faith. National organizations and nationally-syndicated radio programs have been established to aggressively challenge the views of any Christian or Christian church that does not agree with the distinctive doctrines of Calvinism, no matter what their commitment to the essentials of the historic and orthodox Christian faith is. Some Calvinists see themselves as Calvinists fighting for the hearts and minds of the greater Evangelical Christian community. The saved trying to save the saved instead of the lost? They desire to liberate non-Calvinist Christians from a Reformed-free faith. They actually view and treat many of the most dearly held convictions of non-Calvinist Evangelicals as symptomatic of a spiritual and theological disease, of which Reformed Theology is supposedly the cure.

Why doe Calvinists want non-Calvinists to become Calvinists? One reason is that Calvinism is by nature evangelistically sterile. Thus, for Calvinist churches to grow, they need to bring non-Calvinists into the Reformed faith. Calvinism as a system of theology is not all that encouraging to evangelism and Calvinists are typically not all that interested in winning the lost to Christ.

Many leading advocates for the Calvinist cause are convinced that only Calvinists believe in and embrace the doctrines of grace. It cannot be reasonably denied that Calvinists hold to a distinctive definition of grace. Whether or not they are right in the way they define grace is an altogether different matter. Loraine Boettner boasts:

"The doctrine that men are saved only through the unmerited love and grace of God finds its full and honest expression only in the doctrines of Calvinism."

Does this mean that non-Reformed Christians embrace only a partial and dishonest doctrine of salvation? Such claims call for a critical examination and evaluation of Calvinism in light of Scripture. If you're a Calvinist, can you objectively listen to the scripturally based arguments and evidence against Reformed theology? If you can, I believe it likely that you will discover that Calvinism is in serious conflict with the truth of God's Word on a number of important matters related to the great and gracious saving work of God.

Calvinism series: Intro (2)

For the sake of simplicity, I will henceforth title the "why i'm not a calvinist anymore" series the "calvinism series" and will number the parts with the (#).

Introduction (Part 2)

Despite formal denials from some Calvinists and documents such as The Westminster Confession of Faith, John Calvin and the system of theology he championed does, "...assert that God is, in himself, the cause and author of sin..." (taken from a partial quote by John Milton). According to Calvin, it is all happening according to the perfect plan and purpose of God. Everything is as it should be. All Evangelicals would agree that God is ultimately going to have His Way. Of that, there should be no doubt. But, can we trace moral evil back to God in the same we can good things? As far as Calvin was concerned, even the first sin and its terrible consequences were orchestrated by God.

Calvin:
"God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it...some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of those ends, we say that he has been predestined to life or death."

The key to understanding Calvin is not only in the words "predestined to" but in the words "created for."

Calvin:
"God...arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death..."

Only if you understand and agree with these statements of John Calvin can it be correctly said that you are a true Calvinist, because all 5 points of Calvinist doctrine inevitably stem from this idea (unconditional election). You do not have to agree with everything that Calvin said or taught to be a Calvinist, but in order to be a true Calvinist, you do have to understand and agree with the central tenets and doctrinal distinctives of the Reformed faith.

Calvinist scholar John Feinberg:
"Sometimes it would be easier not to be a Calvinist...Calvinists hold views that appear at the very least counterintuitive. This is especially so with respect to Calvinist accounts of God's sovereign control in relation to human freedom and moral responsibility for evil. If Calvinists are right about divine sovereignty, there seems to be little room for human freedom. If freedom goes, so does human responsibility for sin. If Calvinists are right, it appears that God decides that there will be sin and evil in our world, maybe even brings it about that there is such evil, and yet, He is not morally responsible for any of it. We are. If this is Calvinism's God, Calvinism seems not only intellectually but also religiously bankrupt. Who would worship this God?"

Despite what Feinburg concedes, he still believes that Calvinism is the "portrayal of God" found in Scripture. How this can be, if what he says about Calvinism is true, is difficult for me to fathom.

Feinburg:
"Unfortunately, some Calvinists, because of their understanding of God's sovereignty, have denied that humans are free. YEt some of those Calvinists maintain that we are morally responsible for our sin, while God, who decreed our sin, is not morally accountable. When asked how this can be true, they respond that it is a paradox..."

Are these conflicts in Calvinism really only a "paradox" or are they hopeless contradictions? Is Calvinism compatible with Scripture? While it is not possible for a theological system to be self-contradictory AND true, it is possible for it to be internally consistent and NOT true or not true to Scripture. As will be proven in later parts of this series, Calvinism is both contradictory AND unscriptural.

I use the terms Calvinism and the Reformed faith interchangeably because, for all practical purposes, they are one and the same label.

Paul Enns:
"To speak of Calvinism is to speak of the Reformed faith. The term Reformed is today basically synonymous with Calvinism and distinguishes the Calvinist churches..."

The promotion of the Calvinist doctrine of predestination is promotion of the Calvinist doctrines of salvation and damnation. To say that many Calvinists are extremely zealous in their committment to win non-Calvinists over to the Reformed version of the Christian faith is definitely an understatement (as to why Calvinists ARE zealous in this regard will be discussed more fully in the next part of this series). Believing they are doing all non-Calvinists a favor by winning them over to Calvinism, many Calvinists have become proselytizers for the Reformed faith.

There is a widespread view among Calvinists that all non-Calvinist Evangelicals are Arminian in their theological convictions. I admit that I'm neither a Calvinist NOR an Armenian, thus I should not be labeled as being such...but I will touch on this issue a little later.

Calvinism amounts to Theistic Fatalism. A Theistic Fatalist believes that a personal God unconditionally determines where individuals go when they die, that is, whether they go to heaven or hell.

Wayne Grudem:
"By fatalism is meant a system in which human choices and human decisions really do not make any difference. In fatalism, no matter what we do, things are going to turn out as they have been previously ordained. Therefore, it is futile to try and influence the outcome of events or the outcome of our lives by putting forth any effort or making any significant choices, because these will not make any difference anyway."

The truth is, some Calvinists do not want non-Calvinists to know the full implications of Calvinism until after they have become committed Calvinists.

Lorraine Boettner explains one of the reasons behind the reluctance of some Calvinists to initially lay it all out on the table early on:
"In preaching to...those who are just beginning the Christian life...At that early stage little need be said about the deeper truths which relate to God's part. As in the study of Mathematics we do not begin with algebra and calculus but with the simple problems of arithmetic..."

The "deeper truths" to which Boettner refers to here are the distinctive doctrines of Calvinism. Some Calvinists are not only less than totally up-front, but they are not even being altogether honest with the non-Calvinists they are targeting. In the promotion of doctrines, what is held back or not expressed can be very misleading. Many Calvinists, when promoting Reformed Theology to a potential convert to Calvinism, typically limit the discussion to those features that SEEM positive to the uninitiated. However, it is what they DO NOT tell you that you really need to know in order to make a truly informed decision.

Calvinism undermines the scriptural doctrine of salvation:
1 Timothy 2:3-4 "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."
2 Peter 3:8-9 "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."
Isaiah 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other."
and ect...

Again, I will get into more scriptural detail in later parts.

Reformed Theology represents a serious threat to at least some of the people for whom that salvation was provided by Christ's death on the cross:
1 John 2:2 "And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."
1 Timothy 2:5-6 "For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time"
Hebrews 2:9 "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone."

The salvation that is provided is also the salvation that is offered to them in a truly scriptural proclamation of the gospel of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ:
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 "Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures."