The doctrines of grace, summarized into five points at the Synod of Dordt in response to the five “remonstrances” of Arminianism, form the basis of what the Bible teaches concerning man’s sinful nature and God’s sovereign ability to save. Yet Christians holding these truths have been criticized as being disciples of John Calvin rather than of Jesus Christ, applying the label “Calvinist” in a way that negatively implies a departure from biblical Christianity. By using Calvin’s name instead of interacting with the ideas Calvin put forward, the critics of “Calvinism” divert attention from the underlying biblical truths and place the focus on Calvin, as if anyone who confesses to be a Calvinist is simply a blind follower of a dead theologian whose ideas are now obsolete.
Resulting from the negativity attached to Calvin’s name, Christians who agree with Calvin’s teachings are sometimes reluctant to admit that they share his convictions. Understanding this phenomenon, the great Baptist preacher Charles Haddon Spurgeon identified the problem at the heart of the critics’ arguments: the teachings of Calvin were not simply his creation, but were taught centuries earlier by Augustine and even earlier by the apostle Paul and Jesus Christ.
Speaking of this, Spurgeon said, “We only use the term ‘Calvinism’ for shortness. That doctrine which is called ‘Calvinism’ did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church. We use the term then, not because we impute an extraordinary importance to Calvin’s having taught these doctrines. We would be just as willing to call them by any other name, if we could find one which would be better understood, and which on the whole would be as consistent with the fact. ... The old truths that Calvin and Augustine preached is the truth that I preach today or else I would be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine.”
As the story in John 6 reminds us, those who proclaim the “rough edges” of God’s sovereignty are not popular. The greatest evangelist who ever lived, Jesus Christ, lost most of his listeners when he reminded them that the Holy Spirit must act before anyone can have faith. After claiming that his body and blood gives eternal life, Jesus said, “Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” The apostle John adds, parenthetically, “For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.” Jesus concludes, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” (John 6:61-65 ESV) Notice the response of the crowd: “After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him.” (John 6:66 ESV)
It is not surprising to see the doctrines of grace bringing the same reaction throughout the history of the Christian church as they did in Jesus’ day. It is not Calvin whom the critics of Calvinism have a problem with, it is the scandalous nature of God’s sovereign grace.
It’s a conundrum that there are those who violently repudiate God’s sovereign grace, His right to choose whom He would save. Who better to determine my eternal destiny than the omniscient God? Me, with my finite ability to reason corrupted by my sinful nature?
Just askin’
I have noticed that those who espouse mans free will to choose salvation become very concerned about those billions who will be lost if salvation is left totally in God’s hands but never evince the same concern over the billions lost due to their free will decision to reject salvation. Is it because they feel that those who choose against salvation are so sinful that they deserve it? If this is the case do they feel then that those who choose salvation are less sinful, somehow spiritually superior? Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t free will advocates acknowledge some ‘assistance’ from the Holy Spirit. If this is true how do they explain the inability of the Holy Spirit to effectively assist those who reject salvation? In fact, given the assistance of the omnipotent Holy Spirit, how could any be lost? Does the Holy Spirit refuse to give additional assistance to the hardcases? Is God than choosing whom He will save?
In general people refrain from attributing merit, or superiority to themselves, and I think that this is one of the reasons why they are not comfortable when somebody develops the concept of God’s sovereign grace. When people experience God’s grace they want to be faithful to God’s true character, and also to the nature of God’s grace, but when they see where these things lead, that these things clash with previous cherished ideas, they try to keep both their previous conceptions (before conversion) and also be faithful to God’s revelation about his grace. And when, for example, Jonvil or others bring these questions on the table, they feel the tension and there are mind games to ease the cognitive dissonance, and labeling the whole understanding as Calvinism is a way to ease the dissonance.
It’s a conundrum that there are those who violently repudiate God’s sovereign grace, His right to choose whom He would save. Who better to determine my eternal destiny than the omniscient God? Me, with my finite ability to reason corrupted by my sinful nature?
I couldn’t agree more John.....
We are currently having a study session at our church (between Sunday morning services) on the subject of “Other World Religions”. There is a common theme running through the various religions that we have studied so far which I find obvious and unavoidable. I’d like to share my thoughts here if I may…
We humans are above all else “comfort” seekers! We don’t like to be uncomfortable. And we especially don’t like to be made uncomfortable by the actions of others or their beliefs! When we are made to feel uncomfortable, our natural reaction is to throw up our guard, resist the change that has made us uncomfortable, put some distance between us and the anxiety source, or even lash out at the source!
This naturalistic behavior and response characteristic covers a full spectrum of discomfort sources. At the low end, such as when a person opens an outside door and lets the bitter cold air into our space. We don’t’ like it, but we generally understand and accept it (unless they leave the door open too long. ). At the high end of the human solace seeking spectrum are our religious beliefs. Woe to him who challenges my established doctrine and the faith system with which I’ve become so comfortable. Hey! I’m warm and safe in my belief system! So don’t you dare open the door and let the bitter cold into my space! Even if it might be a scriptural truth that is sour to me, what right do you have to make me uneasy! For example, as Greg mentioned above, look at what happened to the early disciples:
John 6:60-66 (NIV) 60On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?” 61Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you? 62What if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before! 63The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life. 64Yet there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him.”
66From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.
“This is hard teaching. Who can accept it?” Was the “teaching” made hard by the discomfort of the message? Were not the disciples “grumbling” because the message caused anxiety for them? The Lord responded: “Does this offend you?” In other words, is it not possible that they were offended by the discomfort of the truth? Then Christ mentions: “The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing.” Is it not primarily the “flesh” that seeks comfort? Does not scripture tell us over and over again to: (my paraphrase) “feed the spirit” and to “deny the flesh” And finally, was the anxiety caused by the “teaching” just too great for those failed disciples who: “turned back and no longer followed him.”? Too many can not be comfortable with the dictum of: “By grace alone.” They insist on finding comfort in the addition of their own efforts (works) and thereby do great injury the gift of grace given through the crucified Christ!
Genesis 3:6 (NIV) When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.
Was Eve uncomfortable with the idea that God knew something that she didn’t know? Was it her pride that prompted her to seek comfort by knowing what only God knew about good and evil? It all comes down to the self-serving, prideful nature of mankind! I aspire to the following message from Joshua:
Joshua 24:15 (NIV) 15 But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served beyond the Euphrates, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD.”
By the grace of God an Amorite I shall NOT be!
During a recent visit my beloved SDA brother asked me: “Are you a Calvinist?” Of course I gave him a fervent “No” and continued to discuss with his wife how salvation through perfection was not scriptural. I now wish I would have had the presence of mind to have responded: “No, I don’t follow Calvin, I follow Christ!”
Thanks Greg for the reminder of what Spurgeon said on this topic. Sorry I have been gone so long from here, and I have missed some good discussions. Life has been extremely busy.
Spurgeon wrote:
“We only use the term ‘Calvinism’ for shortness. That doctrine which is called ‘Calvinism’ did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church. We use the term then, not because we impute an extraordinary importance to Calvin’s having taught these doctrines. We would be just as willing to call them by any other name, if we could find one which would be better understood, and which on the whole would be as consistent with the fact. ... The old truths that Calvin and Augustine preached is the truth that I preach today or else I would be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is possible that it is better to refer to these glorious doctrines of grace by other names than Calvinism. People automatically get on the defensive when Calvin’s name is brought up. Of course, it is always the distortions of Calvinism that are always set up as a straw man to knock down. It is very helpful to read Spurgeon’s entire sermon on Calvinism. There will always be a new appreciation of these glorious doctrines when Spurgeon brings out the Biblical teaching so clear.
Spurgeon was instrumental in leading many people to Christ without any altar calls. It is significant that his ministry is more powerful now than ever before with the arrival of the Internet. Interestingly, Charles Spurgeon was probably the first to employ colporteurs (literature evangelists) in England. In addition to sales commissions, he kindly shared this royalty income with his colporteurs as well. I understand he had more than 70 colporteurs at one time. They sold his books plus Bibles door-to-door. Truly, he was the Prince of Preachers!
Im still not sure where I stand on the Calvinism-Arminianism spectrum. Due to my Arminian upbrining that is where I am leaning, but neither am I what could be considered a critic of Calvinism. From my standpoint Im really not sure one has to be a critic of one if they hold to the other… Neither am I sure the two are completely mutually exclusive, one way I look at it is both sides could almost balance out the excesses, or the tendency to extreme error of the other. (I.E Hyper Calvinism or Pelagianism) Im not sure if that makes any sense to anyone, Its really my attempt to verbalize a brainstorm that ive been having the past couple days. Any thoughts, opinions, accusations of heresy etc.. J/K
Sorry so long in answering not only on this thread, but on others.
It is important to have a proper balance between two extremes. The Bible teaches both God’s absolute sovereignty and human responsibility for our actions and choices.
I really like your spirit and attitude in these discussions. You are actually very close to correct in your views on this, but with the caveat, that I am finding that when people study this issue, and realize that God is the one that is responsible for not only choosing us for salvation but keeping us safe and secure as well, then, a new chapter will be opened in the Christian life, and the song “Amazing Grace” will have even more meaning.
Extreme Calvinism is not Calvinism. There are many Arminians who are truly saved the same way that Calvinists are saved.
In the SDA church and in liberal protestantism, Wesleyan Arminianism has logically led to several other heresies such as denial of the substitutionary atonement and open theism.
These issues would not be important, except I think it is quite clear that Jesus and the apostles thought these ideas were very important, or otherwise, why would Jesus preach as he did in John 6, or Paul write the book of Ephesians in the way that he did?
Chiapet, thanks for being here and your kind words about this site are much appreciated.
Extreme Calvinism is not Calvinism. There are many Arminians who are truly saved the same way that Calvinists are saved.
I think that is really what I was getting at. Its not really whether one is a calvinist or an arminian, but whether one trusts Christ as his only source of salvation. Any belief system (I think) no matter how close to correct it is, (for I believe no man made belief system is completely correct, we humans will have a lot to learn in heaven) can lead one into error if they do not understand it and take one aspect of it at the expense of the others, perhaps that is what Adventism has done. I believe those issues are very important as well, especially the issue of making continued sanctification contingent on eternal security instead of the result of it. It is not neccessary for it, but the result of it, but then neither is it nonexistent in the life of a true believer. I don’t know what camp that puts me in, but then I dont really care. I trust Jesus to save me...which is the real important part!
The following link provides an excellent article on the Holy Spirit by the late Edwin H. Palmer who also authored the classic, 132-page, study guide entitled, ”The Five Points of Calvinism.” Here is a brief quote about some interesting nuggets in Church History:
In the year 1054 Christendom was split into the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. Although there were many underlying factors, a stone of stumbling was that Eastern Christians believed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, whereas the Western churches confessed with the Council of Toledo (589) that the Spirit proceeds from the Father “and the Son” (filioque; that is, and from the son, the term that symbolized the difference). As a result of these differences the East separated from the West and today the Eastern church has a membership of over 160 million. Thus this doctrine does have enormous practical effects, and if it had not been formulated by the Church Fathers fifteen hundred years ago, it could be a burning issue today, affecting our church lives. Therefore, we must be grateful for the knowledge that the Holy Spirit has given us on this matter.
Collin Hansen’s new book, ”Young, Restless, Reformed: A Journalist’s Journey with theNew Calvinists” is now available. Collin Hansen is one of the editors of Christianity Today. Collin rightly notes that young people today are craving the Transcendent God, perhaps as a reaction to a steady diet of “buddy Jesus in youth group.” I have just ordered this book through my local bookstore (Amazon.com carries it as well).
It is most delightful to see a resurgence of young people attracted to a high view of God and Scripture. I understand that Collin tells the conversion story of a young Seventh-day Adventist as he embraced and experienced the doctrines of grace after listening to sermons by John Piper. The Passion Conferences, well represented by young people, have been a remarkable success throughout America. I am eagerly looking forward to reading this new book.
Dennis, you’ll be interested to know that the opening chapter describes a young Adventist who became a convicted Calvinist, and as a result, he found it increasingly difficult to pursue his studies at Southern Adventist University. I’ll leave the rest of the story for you to read.
Thanks for wetting my appetite to read this new book. Sounds like a very interesting and inspiring book. Truly, books are like friends. We can’t have too many good ones.
Thanks Dennis and Greg for the heads up on this book.
Many former SDAs and former pentecostals, and other former Arminians and Pelagians are coming to the full truth of what the gospel really is. I can’t wait to read this book.
It is great that there are young people who are tired of all the “fluff” of seeker sensitive Christianity, and want to get into the true meat of God’s Word.
It will be great to get back to a discussion of the heart of the gospel . The first one to read this book can give us a book review!
). At the high end of the human solace seeking spectrum are our religious beliefs. Woe to him who challenges my established doctrine and the faith system with which I’ve become so comfortable. Hey! I’m warm and safe in my belief system! So don’t you dare open the door and let the bitter cold into my space! Even if it might be a scriptural truth that is sour to me, what right do you have to make me uneasy! For example, as Greg mentioned above, look at what happened to the early disciples:
