Where Did All These Calvinists Come From?

It’s not the Calvinism resurgence I lament, but the amazing pragmatism and worldliness associated with some of it. I basically agree with Peter Master’s critique of the “new calvinsm”.

I have searched my Bible and have not found the “book of Calvin”. I have found and read the book of Romans and many other passages proclaiming the sovereignty of God in all things and the necessity of the Holy Spirit opening hearts and resurrecting dead people. Why anyone continues to refer to Calvin as the author of divine sovereignty remains an enigma. If it is required to name a doctrine after a human being then call it “Paulinism”.

RBurns,

These are the historical categories we are stuck with as much as we wish they didn’t exist. All labels have their liabilities, but they have their practical necessities. The points of Calvinism vis-a-vis Arminianism are short hand for diverse doctrinal interpretations of the doctrine of salvation. We can add pelagianism or semi-pelagianism to the mix. Personally, I don’t like the term Calviinism or Calvinist, but other terms such as biblicist, paulinist, augustinianist are either too vague, open to various interpretations, or have the same identical baggage that you cited in Calvinism.

I would second Peter Masters’ concerns with this new “resurgence.” You can read it here.

If this kind of Calvinism prospers, then genuine biblical piety will be under attack as never before …

… large conferences being described at which the syncretism of worldly, sensation-stirring, high-decibel, rhythmic music, is mixed with Calvinistic doctrine. This gives a clear picture of what New Calvinism is about.

While I think that Masters makes a few good points, comments like:

The author begins by describing the Passion, conference at Atlanta in 2007, where 21,000 young people revelled in contemporary music, and listened to speakers such as John Piper proclaiming Calvinistic sentiments. And this picture is repeated many times through the book – large conferences being described at which the syncretism of worldly, sensation-stirring, high-decibel, rhythmic music, is mixed with Calvinistic doctrine. This gives a clear picture of what New Calvinism is about...

…The new Calvinism with the new Calvinists constantly extol the Puritans, but they do not want to worship or live as they did. (I wonder if Dr. Masters does? -Jay) One of the vaunted new conferences is called Resolved, after Jonathan Edwards’ famous youthful Resolutions (seventy searching undertakings). But the culture of this conference would unquestionably have met with the outright condemnation of that great theologian…

…Most of the well-known preachers who promote and encourage this ‘revival’ of Calvinism (or New Calvinism) have in common the following positions that contradict a genuine Calvinistic (or Puritan) outlook:

1. They have no problem with contemporary charismatic-ethos worship, including extreme, heavy-metal forms.

2. They are soft on separation from worldliness [see endnote 2].

3. They reject the concern for the personal guidance of God in the major decisions of Christians (true sovereignty), thereby striking a death-blow to wholehearted consecration.

4. They hold anti-fourth-commandment views, taking a low view of the Lord’s Day, and so inflicting another blow at a consecrated lifestyle.

Whatever their strengths and achievements (and some of them are brilliant men by any human standard), or whatever their theoretical Calvinism, the poor stand of these preachers on these crucial issues will only encourage a fatally flawed version of Calvinism that will lead people to be increasingly wedded to the world, and to a self-seeking lifestyle.

…Has the new Calvinism come to Britain yet? Alas, yes; one only has to look at the ‘blogs’ of some younger reformed pastors who put themselves forward as mentors and advisers of others. When you look at their ‘favourite films’, and ‘favourite music’ you find them unashamedly naming the leading groups, tracks and entertainment of debased culture, and it is clear that the world is still in their hearts.

…is hardly enough to quantify the “Calvinist Resurgence” in any discernable way. There are a lot of people who are reading and studying Calvin and the Puritans. Many of them would disassociate themselves with the Passion concerts. And there are thousands, I’m sure, who have gone to Passion but who have no knowledge of the Institutes or any other writings in that era.

Anyone who intentionally groups MacArthur, Driscoll, Mahaney and Harris together - Harris hasn’t even written on the Puritans or Calvin! - for the sake of ‘a new Calvinism’ wildly overstates their case. It seems to me that Masters isn’t really as opposed to Calvinism as he is worldliness (which is fine), but don’t slander Calvinists and Reformed brothers in your attack then. Say you hate worldliness, spend the article talking about that, and be done with it. If Masters wants to trot out a new straw-man whipping boy for some ‘two minutes of hate’, then he ought to at least name the group correctly and leave the “Calvinist” label out of it.

That’s what this Arminian says.

Thank you Pastor Harding for your explanation. I understand it. I also think Calvin would be appalled at what we have done with his Biblical position on sovereignty. There is way too much “traditions of men” in various Christian camps. This is one of them. My hope it that we will turn away from such traditions though I don’t expect it til the Lord comes. We are too quick to stake out our “battle” position regardless of what scripture teaches. The enmity among brothers is depressing whether on “Calvinism” or Bible versions. Our Lord must weep over this.

Thanks again for taking the time to respond.

RB

[Jay]

3. They reject the concern for the personal guidance of God in the major decisions of Christians (true sovereignty), thereby striking a death-blow to wholehearted consecration.

Oh my word. Belief in “the dot” view of God’s will is a test of orthodoxy? I know at least one FBBC board member whose orthodoxy I guess I’ll have to re-evaluate (along with my own). I was tempted to say that on the strength of that ridiculous statement, there was no need to read the rest of Masters’s article. Then a desire for fairness compelled me to go ahead and read the rest. Having now read the full article, my initial hunch is confirmed.

*** CAUTION - HUMOR BELOW - THOU SHALT NOT TAKE OFFENSE … ***

RBurns wrote:

Why anyone continues to refer to Calvin as the author of divine sovereignty remains an enigma. If it is required to name a doctrine after a human being then call it “Paulinism”.

If there ever was a guy in church history who would have founded the “Paulinian” school, it would have been Marcion! F.F Bruce wrote Marcion was the only man in the early church who truly understood Paul, and even then he misunderstood him!

*** CAUTION - HUMOR FINISHED - HAST THOU TAKEN OFFENSE … ? ***